ListNook

AGooDone May 1, 2026 +4383

Brave, brave public servants. Now do stocks!

4383

KennyMoose32 May 1, 2026 +1284

Let’s not get hasty, peasant \-US Senators

1284

Khaldara May 1, 2026 +265

And the executive branch.

265

AVGuy42 May 1, 2026 +166

And their immediate family

166

Orion14159 May 1, 2026 +75

And their big donors

75

TheRareWhiteRhino May 1, 2026 +30

Some are trying: A year ago, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) ***reintroduced*** their bill to prohibit members of Congress from trading individual stocks. The *Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act* would require members, their spouses and their dependent children to place their stocks into a qualified blind trust or divest the holding. https://www.kelly.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/kelly-ossoff-reintroduce-congressional-stock-trading-ban/ U.S. Senators Ashley Moody (R-FL) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) introduced the bipartisan *Restore Trust in Congress Act,* which would ban stock ownership and trading for members of Congress and their immediate family members. This is companion legislation to the bipartisan bill introduced by U.S. Representatives Chip Roy (R-TX-21) and Seth Magaziner (D-RI-02) in the U.S. House of Representatives, which currently has 126 total cosponsors. To date, 79 representatives–both Democrats and Republicans—have signed a discharge petition filed by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL-13) to bring this bill to the House floor for a vote. The *STOCK Act*–which Senator Gillibrand led to passage in 2012—bars members of Congress from using insider information to buy and sell stocks. Despite this legislation, one in three members of Congress traded stocks or other financial assets from 2019-2021, and at least 3,700 of those trades posed potential conflicts of interest with their legislative responsibilities. The *Restore Trust in Congress Act* would help eliminate these conflicts of interest by prohibiting congressional stock holding and trading entirely. https://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/news/press/release/sens-moody-gillibrand-announce-new-bipartisan-bill-to-ban-congressional-stock-trading/ Michigan Congresswoman Haley Stevens led her colleagues Congressman Derek Tran (CA-45), Congressman Eric Sorensen (D-IL), and Congresswoman Andrea Salinas (OR-06), in introducing the *No Getting Rich in Congress Act,* sweeping legislation to crack down on insider trading in Congress and the White House, restore trust in government, and ensure public service is about serving the American people, not personal profit. http://stevens.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-stevens-introduces-congressional-stock-trading-ban-additional-measures Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil (WI-01) introduced the *Stop Insider Trading Act*. This legislation prohibits Members of Congress, spouses, and dependent children from purchasing publicly traded stocks. The Stop Insider Trading Act also requires public notice 7 days before a lawmaker, spouse, or dependent child may sell a stock. https://cha.house.gov/2026/1/chairman-steil-introduces-legislation-to-ban-congressional-stock-trading While I like some over others, and know some may be introduced just for show, we should all take the opportunity to look at these bills, find what we like and don’t like and send an email to, or even better call, our Congressional representatives and let them know what we think. I know most won’t, but for those that truly care, if we make our are voices loud enough, something may be done to fix this issue. You can find the contact information for your Representative and Senators here: https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

30

AVGuy42 May 1, 2026 +12

I’m very much a carrot and stick kind of guy and agree with the adage that “no one ever went broke underestimating people” I’d like to see a complete overhaul of public service compensation. I’d like to see it done in a way that the job is appealing to most people but the ultra wealthy and even very wealthy are disenticed to the job. I think this can be accomplished by requiring all non-retirement investments and non-material assets be converted into a special US bond that will be set to mature at the end of their term. If they choose to run again that bond could be rolled over or cashed out or partially cashed out. But you can’t just not trade stocks. You can’t own any. Similarly they must resign from all boards. They cannot serve on a board of any company or institution while in office. They cannot be listed as an “advisor” or in any way be in a formal position of authority with any company. Lastly their salaries should be linked to federal median income. I’ll go ahead and say should be 3x median income? TLDR: What I’d like to see built is a system when working people are incentivizes to seek public office but rent seekers are equally disincentivizes. Obviously these are the kinds of ideas that would need to be completely fleshed out in a way that wouldn’t be gamed or otherwise produce unintended consequences. But I think it’s the kind of contextual framing we (the people) should start discussing these matter in.

12

13lueChicken May 1, 2026 +3

I agree, but the very situation that makes this a good idea is also the reason it will never happen. Cesar will never relinquish power.

3

WeirdFrog May 1, 2026 +4

And my axe

4

Bagellord May 1, 2026 +2

Do insider trading laws apply to government employees (rank and file, not elected or appointed)? Something I haven't given any thought to - like if you work for the FDA, you might know about an upcoming drug approval or recall before the general public. Would you be barred from using that knowledge?

2

Acceptable-Bus-2017 May 1, 2026 +218

Just themselves? Not the administration and their friends and family? Or SCOTUS and people that have a lawsuit in the cue that they might decide on?

218

cursedfan May 1, 2026 +48

If they knew what a prediction market was or how to use a phone they wouldn’t have

48

Consistent-Throat130 May 1, 2026 +22

They shouldn't be allowed in office past 75-80% of their constituency's life expectancy. F****** ridiculous that these people get to shape law without having to live in the world they create. > how to use a phone Being the context that triggered my mini-rant

22

agent674253 May 1, 2026 +3

"If they knew what a prediction market was or how to use a phone they wouldn’t have" Correct. I was checking Kalshi a few days ago out of curiosity and one of the items you could bet on was if Congress would vote on something, lets just say, Thursday or Friday. Well, if you are a congress critter that has the power to delay a vote by a day, "Hey, everyone, lets put $x down for Friday and go home early today?"

3

Rogerdodgerbilly May 1, 2026 +27

And term limits you scumbags

27

DuntadaMan May 1, 2026 +23

How about we ban the markets entirely. This is not a thing that needs to exist and it is destroying our world because a rich person with no government ties can still pay to have the outcome they want.

23

rowrbazzle75 May 1, 2026 +10

And crypto.

10

punkasstubabitch May 1, 2026 +4

now let's see them enforce it!

4

bionic_cmdo May 1, 2026 +2

Woah. Woah. Woah. Baby steps. How are they going to make money? They didn't spend all this time and money getting elected for nothing. This is the job where a freshly minted GED representative can become a millionaire in just one term.

2

TheStLouisBluths May 1, 2026 +2

Then how will they make millions of dollars off of their insider information?

2

puppycatisselfish May 1, 2026 +2

Please no not the yachts

2

imaloony8 May 1, 2026 +2

And get rid of Citizens United while you’re at it.

2

peon2 May 1, 2026 +2

They already did with the STOCK act back in 2012. It passed the Senate 96-3 and the House 417-2. But it just made it so instead of investing themselves they simply have their nephew or whoemever do it for them.

2

somekindofdruiddude May 1, 2026 +2

Now do crypto!

2

_Escape_Artist_ May 1, 2026 +1340

I wonder how many of them placed bets that it would pass

1340

Kooolxxx May 1, 2026 +555

You know they're laughing with each other about the headlines this is generating and how it will convince some people they're not doing corrupt things with the information they receive.

555

freedfg May 1, 2026 +179

I mean. Literally all they still have to do is channel through a single person. With stocks half the time it is LITERALLY their spouses. With more direct and provable bets on Kalshi or poly market they just need to clue in a nephew or a golf buddy.

179

ntwiles May 1, 2026 +68

Not only that but there don’t seem to be any actual repercussions, afaik they’re just “not supposed to do it” like it’s on the honor system.

68

TrueStarsense May 1, 2026 +15

This is why public servants should have their privacy rights stripped while in office.

15

colemon1991 May 1, 2026 +4

The funny thing to me is that Congress needs it's own version of IA, staffed from people across multiple agencies and rotated out often enough that no one is playing favorites (looking at you SCOTUS), that would investigate insider trading, bribes, self-reporting requirements, and (my favorite) attendance and voting frequency. You get in trouble for something and you're barred from re-election unless you address it to these people. But they won't do that for the same reason why they won't ban themselves from stock trading.

4

Beepulons May 1, 2026 +9

Remember when the FBI did a sting operation on Congress and managed to convince like half a dozen congressmen to take a bribe, all of whom then went to prison, and Congress' response was to immediately ban the FBI from doing that again?

9

AIU-comment May 1, 2026 +19

This isn't about corruption for them. These betting platforms undermine their ability to literally do their backroom deals. People kill, poison pill, and blow up various agreements of any scale you can think of for personal gain all the time. These betting platforms add an additional layer of self-dealing, sort of like a CEO shorting their own company by purposely tanking a small side deal - and it I hope it's clear for the audience here that there's a reason that of all the white-collar rich white bougie nonsense crimes, all hell breaks loose against insider traitors, I mean traders.

19

fattes May 1, 2026 +4

All parties in congress “now hold the f*** on!”

4

8__D May 1, 2026 +2

One last hurrah for ol times sake

2

secretlypooping May 1, 2026 +2

*spouses of senators not banned from prediction markets

2

[deleted] May 1, 2026 +330

[removed]

330

eeyore134 May 1, 2026 +51

Yeah, they need to ban the apps period. It's ridiculously scammy and obviously just set up for rich people to get richer. The moment someone not in the club hits a big payday they're under investigation, though.

51

eeveecolon3 May 1, 2026 +11

Wasn't some US armyman charged or arrested for betting on the arrest of the one dictator we invaded? Its literally just what you said lol

11

Tzazon May 1, 2026 +538

Can we just ban gambling & sportsbooking apps on mobile devices as well? The rise of gambling in this Country is disgusting and we need more done about it. Instead all the legislation is about making it as accessible as possible.

538

TheGringoDingo May 1, 2026 +143

It’s endemic at this point. I’ve never been on any of those, but I can imagine the ubiquitous nature of the advertising could cause issues for gambling addicts. We banned advertising cigarettes, can congress give a legit and serious why not gambling as well?

143

b_rock01 May 1, 2026 +38

It’s insidious. I had Draft Kings on my phone for a bit. Never big $$ bets, I upload once before football and place small $2-$5 bets at a time for about 2 seasons. I say this to show I’m not a whale, they weren’t raking in any more than maybe $300 total over two years. Last season, I deleted the app and not 3 weeks later a f****** rep called me while I was at work saying they represented the sports book and wanted to know why I haven’t been as active lately. I told him “man, with all the ads I’ve been seeing everywhere, they must have enough money to pay for all the time s**** that they no longer need my charity.” Dude laughed, wished me a good day, and hung up.

38

TheGringoDingo May 1, 2026 +31

That seems like it should be illegal for them to do

31

Ds3_doraymi May 1, 2026 +27

What’s even worse, if you *were* a whale they’ll just throw money at you until you’re addicted again https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2026/03/27/863775.htm “The suit says DraftKings and FanDuel also assigned each man a personal “VIP Host” who communicated with them personally on their mobile phones and enticed them with promotional offers, trips to sporting events, and other gifts. On one occasion, his VIP host sent Thompson a $500 bottle of champagne….According to the complaint, Sage developed and continued to suffer from a severe gambling addiction, resulting in gambling losses of more than $40,000 on DraftKings and more than $130,300 on FanDuel, while Thompson suffered gambling losses of approximately $1,520,000 on FanDuel and approximately $336,000 on DraftKings.”

27

IM_PEAKING May 1, 2026 +23

Imagine a bartender enticing a drunk patron to skip the cab and have another drink, oh and here’s your keys, get home safe.

23

TheGringoDingo May 1, 2026 +4

F*** them, and the horse they rode in on

4

Carittz May 1, 2026 +50

Yeah banning gambling will just drive it back to the criminal underworld. But banning the advertising I think would help kill its growth.

50

TheCryingGrizzlies May 1, 2026 +17

But...it was better before?

17

emaw63 May 1, 2026 +2

Yeah, gambling prohibition genuinely was very good at stopping gambling

2

DuntadaMan May 1, 2026 +11

Oh no gambling will go back to being done in street corners and hidden dens instead ofopenly in boardrooms where the companies that control our legislation can make bets on their own actions.

11

BasroilII May 2, 2026 +2

Let's be fair- the openly in boardrooms stuff existed in the US at least as long as organized crime. But what we wouldn't have is mobile ads, TV ads, and half the internet trying to encourage people to gamble.

2

dawidowmaka May 1, 2026 +32

It's always going to exist, but if we ban it, at least it will be much harder for the average person to succumb to it

32

Georgie_Leech May 1, 2026 +10

Now I just imagining a black market of marketing. "Hey, wanna buy a unskippable ad?"

10

dawidowmaka May 1, 2026 +11

You wouldn't download a prop bet would you?

11

Georgie_Leech May 1, 2026 +2

You step into a seedy warehouse with a cluster of people trading dice- and card-themed shirts back and forth

2

CAPS_LOCK_STUCK_HELP May 1, 2026 +2

you now have to download the apks for shitty mobile gambling apps from shady websites and get a virus with your reward of having the money hovered out of your bank account by a rigged algorithm

2

BasroilII May 2, 2026 +2

From my perspective, it's baffling. Growing up gambling of that nature was illegal in my entire state. It was a huge deal and there were police crackdowns on illegal gambling all the time. Then it feels like I just woke up one day and all the sudden it was everywhere and everyone thinks it's normal.

2

ShrimpieAC May 1, 2026 +34

The problem isn’t really gambling, that’s just a symptom. The problem is the worship of money in this country. It’s disgusting and it corrupts everyone and everything.

34

Bzr21 May 1, 2026 +19

When the blatant and unchecked corruption comes down from the very top - as it does now - THAT is what corrupts the entire system. If Al Capone had somehow become POTUS a century ago - his administration would have been less corrupt than Trump's is now ..

19

eeyore134 May 1, 2026 +5

A lot of mobsters, Al Capone especially, looked out for their communities. Not because they're good people, but they know that it helps to have a positive public image when they're running so many illegal enterprises. He'd not just be less corrupt, we'd probably have some decent social welfare programs and a focus on looking out for the folks at the bottom instead of doing everything they can to hurt and profit off them like Trump and his cronies do.

5

emaw63 May 1, 2026 +3

Gambling is, in and of itself, an addictive and destructive behavior. It needs to be heavily regulated again, because society as a whole is getting a gambling problem due to the fact that it's easily accessible on your smartphone, which is an addictive dopamine machine you carry in your pocket at all times

3

Jdelu May 1, 2026 +6

I think it’s fine to leave it legal, let people do what they want, but I really would like to see a ban on advertising these products.

6

Daktic May 1, 2026 +3

Hard agree. Let’s treat it like drinking.

3

DuntadaMan May 1, 2026 +3

Seriously, this is not a thing that actually benefits us. Just f****** end it.

3

dethmij1 May 1, 2026 +6

I really don't think governments should step in to police morality or ban vices. I don't like gambling and I'm sick of all the sports booking ads polluting sports broadcasts, but if people want to piss away their money gambling that's not my problem and I think they should be free to do so

6

pcpelste May 1, 2026 +51

Ok let’s do the same for individual stocks/securities, and extend it to persons in the other branches of government AND their immediate family members (looking at you, Baron).

51

jamesdmc May 1, 2026 +43

Now do stocks and crypto

43

008Zulu May 1, 2026 +6

Politicians: Now let's not be hasty now!

6

Zachsjs May 1, 2026 +59

Meaningless. They should ban all “prediction markets trading.” It’s blatantly corrosive to society. There’s already so much money being made running it though so it’s hard to imagine anything being done about it.

59

mercistheman May 1, 2026 +43

Because family & associates can do this for them.

43

SpaghettiNCoffee May 1, 2026 +11

Cool, now include any family and associates being banned as well, or it means nothing.

11

grandramble May 1, 2026 +12

this is such an obvious and unambiguous conflict of interest that it seems wild they have to explicitly ban it

12

AmethystApothecary May 1, 2026 +3

If you do not outright ban stuff and close loopholes, corrupt people who rise to the ranks will always abuse it and there will be no legal recourse.

3

brainiac2482 May 1, 2026 +10

I don't trade in predictions but my wife, niece, third cousin twice removed, and all my LLCs do. Unenforceable nonsense. Insider trading was always illegal, yet here they are, rich as ever.

10

The_Human_Event May 1, 2026 +9

All trading should be banned. For them and their families.

9

obalovatyk May 1, 2026 +10

Senators, not their family and friends.

10

Shiyo May 1, 2026 +7

No, the solution is to ban prediction markets or at least consider them gambling.

7

Hillbilly_Boozer May 1, 2026 +8

This just bans the senate. The house is still free to place bets.

8

ZenBreaking May 1, 2026 +6

Don't forget corrupt senators who won't give a shit and make bank cos there's been no blowback for the blatant stock market shorting and manipulation . They have to be seen to be hand wringing and passing legislation that they don't follow and that goes for both sides of the aisle

6

seedless0 May 1, 2026 +7

1. They should ban themselves from stock trading too. 1. They should ban prediction markets entirely.

7

Aluggo May 1, 2026 +6

Ban family and 3rd parties

6

Jablonski1971 May 1, 2026 +6

Cool, now do stock market trading.

6

McLovett325 May 1, 2026 +7

Now ban yourselves from making income outside of your salary and benefits Oh, too scary? Cool then ban stock trading as a decent middle ground

7

NW-McWisconsin May 1, 2026 +6

ALL politicians, Executives, their families and ANYONE who affects outcomes should be banned from all TRADING. PERIOD. If you're worried you'll miss something... Keep your terms short. PERIOD.

6

No_Mercy_4_Potatoes May 1, 2026 +4

They don't need it. They have already got the stock market for their betting. But it's still a good outcome.

4

jonnyb000 May 1, 2026 +5

There’s a catch somewhere.

5

infinitay_ May 1, 2026 +5

I don't get it. Why don't they instead label these _markets_ as what they are - gambling platforms.

5

Ricky_Rocket_ May 1, 2026 +3

Staff, family, etc? This is insider trading for any and all.

3

dhusk May 2, 2026 +3

This is like the fox swearing off chickens while in the hen house.

3

CyberSmith31337 May 1, 2026 +4

They’re just gonna have their spouses/relatives do it instead.

4

Photodan24 May 1, 2026 +3

So they only ban themselves from further insider trading on the prediction markets (not Wall Street) and then pat themselves on the back for it? The United States Congress, ladies and gentlemen.

3

TheDukeofArgyll May 1, 2026 +3

Yeah but what about their accountants

3

THElaytox May 1, 2026 +3

I mean, they passed the STOCK Act back in like 2011 and that did nothing to stop them. More performative nonsense

3

Norph00 May 1, 2026 +3

Aren't all stock markets effectively prediction markets focused on a specific sector (companies future value)?

3

badwolf42 May 1, 2026 +3

Not a law, a rule. One that can be quietly reversed later.

3

misanthrope2327 May 1, 2026 +3

This is honestly shocking. I guess they still have the stock market. And, ya know, their families.

3

TheRabidDeer May 1, 2026 +3

Now that they banned it for themselves, they can ban it for everyone else right?

3

_TheBeerBaron_ May 1, 2026 +3

It means absolutely nothing if it's not enforced.

3

Threke May 1, 2026 +3

Ok, they’ll just tell their wife or kids to bet on their behalf then lol

3

ONE-EYE-OPTIC May 1, 2026 +3

"Hey, honey!! Can you log on and bet on this amazing information I received?"

3

bluemorpho28 May 1, 2026 +3

Uh huh, now do the stock market you performative fucks

3

Narrow-Height9477 May 1, 2026 +3

Now do politician’s families from prediction markets

3

BWWFC May 2, 2026 +3

why dabble in predictions when they have sure policy data driven plays before markets are even made? this is just dumb.

3

LeftHookIsAllGood May 2, 2026 +3

Hey! Why not throw in term limits, required use of the ACA for all those elected and appointed, only Social Security for retirement, and no pay until a fully reconciled budget is passed, you dumb fucks?

3

peeple-pleeser May 1, 2026 +2

But not their friends, family

2

ABC_Dildos_Inc May 1, 2026 +2

Aren't they still allowed to do insider trading?

2

BruceNotLee May 1, 2026 +2

I work in fintech and curse that I am not allowed to trade single ticker stocks(I have no access to insider info) without jumping through hoops while the people with real insider knowledge can trade away. What I can do however is still trade any forex, futures, or ETFs. With the influence and access to insider knowledge high level government positions give, even these could be used in corrupt ways. We should expect anyone at these levels be forced into full public disclosure and time-gated for any transaction over a threshold.

2

Mother_Airline_6276 May 1, 2026 +2

They do fine on insider trading.

2

Spire_Citron May 1, 2026 +2

Kinda shocking this wasn't already inherently illegal for them.

2

suspicious_hyperlink May 1, 2026 +2

Guys, look I banned myself from buying NFTs

2

Zestyclose_Koala_593 May 1, 2026 +2

I mean wont they go the Ohtani route and just have people do it for them?

2

lordfartquar May 1, 2026 +2

Thanks for the puff piece, CNBC, minority stake holder in Kalshi

2

RecipeFunny2154 May 1, 2026 +2

There's honestly no way I'd believe they were doing this magnanimously

2

skullhusker May 1, 2026 +2

Next week, the odds for trump dropping a global killing bomb 1000/1 odds say trump sons

2

HeatWaveToTheCrowd May 1, 2026 +2

Just stick to the stock market. Guaranteed profits

2

5Tygrysow May 1, 2026 +2

Feels like another distraction. They can’t resist money and will always find a way to milk that job.

2

freetherhinoz May 1, 2026 +2

Ban their family members now

2

freetherhinoz May 1, 2026 +2

Or just ban f****** prediction markets

2

Fafnir13 May 1, 2026 +2

Just ban the practice entirely.

2

wafflenova98 May 1, 2026 +2

Why? They refuse to ban insider stock market trading because "nobody does it so what's the point?" and if they don't do that then *why oh why* would they do *this*? So "what's the point?".

2

JackAceHole May 1, 2026 +2

Probably because 90% of them don't know what they are, how they work, and how to fund an account using crypto.

2

muftak3 May 1, 2026 +2

That is what the new trumpira dot gov website will be for.

2

whawkins4 May 1, 2026 +2

Great. Now do stock trading.

2

Gecko99 May 1, 2026 +2

What happens if a senator violates this ban? What happens if someone close to them, like a spouse, profits heavily from a prediction market based on inside information?

2

MugiwarraD May 1, 2026 +2

so just tell ur kid and thats a loop

2

Fantasyfreyaa May 1, 2026 +2

look like the SEC is finally after their ass...this doesn't look good for polymarket, kalshi etc

2

Kermit_the_hog May 1, 2026 +2

How much of the White House staff placed last minute bets on that outcome?

2

JTalbotIV May 1, 2026 +2

Me, who only wants to smoke weed: "I promise I won't smoke crack."

2

Emceesam May 1, 2026 +2

Now do stocks and options.

2

probably-not-Ben May 1, 2026 +2

"We promise to never make billions ever again".

2

secret_squirrels_nut May 1, 2026 +2

gold insurance marble physical hobbies cows squash quickest ghost worm

2

RufusWalker96 May 1, 2026 +2

What about their staff?

2

KingSpork May 1, 2026 +2

And surely this will be enforced… haha sorry I couldn’t say it with a straight face.

2

CTeam19 May 1, 2026 +2

But did they ban their husbands and wives and kids?

2

DocM123 May 1, 2026 +2

Shocked, they actually passed this. Now you need to do it for stocks and property.

2

A_Nonny_Muse May 1, 2026 +2

They weren't the ones doing insider bets. Now ban the executive branch from it.

2

Corpshark May 3, 2026 +2

They will just ask their kids’ roommates’ grandmothers to do it.

2

Joshd30 May 1, 2026 +3

Passing bills that's help no one - that's what Congress does best. Great job 👍

3

CondescendingShitbag May 1, 2026 +1

Good. Now apply it at every level of all 3 branches of government. Government employees and elected representatives should not be allowed to gamble on any kind of government function.

1

buzzonga May 1, 2026 +1

and their families? and their buddies? and their portfolio managers?

1

gargolito May 1, 2026 +1

But not stocks, someone must have lost a few dollars.

1

O-parker May 1, 2026 +1

What about the other grifters and means of.

1

denNISI May 1, 2026 +1

What about the stock puts? What about ETFs? What about betting that Trump is going to TACO?

1

GreyBeardEng May 1, 2026 +1

I really do not expect this to last. Their corruption has been excessive and on display for many years now.

1

xlews_ther1nx May 1, 2026 +1

Kashi isnt betting still i bet

1

digihippie May 1, 2026 +1

I’ll take what are stock options for $100 Alex.

1

dontrike May 1, 2026 +1

Cool, I doubt anyone will actually see any punishments if they do it, but a nice little fake gesture is neat, I suppose.

1

androidfig May 1, 2026 +1

Somehow this will benefit them more than it hinders.

1

meticoolous May 1, 2026 +1

This is good. But god forbid we ban prediction markets though. This is a f****** band-aid to the larger problem that these companies create.

1

DrowningKrown May 1, 2026 +1

These headlines are pissing me off man. It's so disingenuous. Tell me this is banning themselves: > The rule change means Senators are technically barred from betting on the outcomes of specific events, but, beyond internal ethics enforcement like reprimands or censures, there’s nothing the senate can do to punish those who break the rule.

1

WindyCanuck May 1, 2026 +1

STFU….clowns . The fact that this is the type of work they focus on instead of fixing the f****** big issues is mind boggling. “I know we’re at War, the economy is fucked , the planet is burning, AI is quickly creeping into every aspect of our lives ….but hey, we passed a law to limit how much we can grift off you” Do your f****** jobs….

1

jRitter777 May 1, 2026 +1

Does it include their family, associates, friends, and staff?

1

DarkMagician-999 May 1, 2026 +1

They probably betting on that right now before the ban 😂

1

fcatw May 1, 2026 +1

They’ll just pivot to stocks and crypto

1

SuckMyBandAids May 1, 2026 +1

They pasted that fast. why not stocks as well? 🤣😂🤣😂😅

1

TomeThugNHarmony4664 May 1, 2026 +1

I am stunned they went this far

1

Snakend May 1, 2026 +1

Anyone betting in predictive markets are morons. It is a rigged game.

1

ocwilly May 1, 2026 +1

I predict, the GOP senators will trade in prediction markets!!

1

Snoo_50954 May 1, 2026 +1

Howabout banning those completely?

1

SoFloMofo May 1, 2026 +1

So brave even though they couldn’t figure out how to log in.

1

LeadershipBudget744 May 1, 2026 +1

This is good but this feels very performative . Perhaps just do something about how they already unethically enrich themselves

1

d1rTb1ke May 1, 2026 +1

cool, now enforce it by … uh…. herm.

1

Swerve666 May 1, 2026 +1

Cool,cool,cool, now do insider trading.

1

HomeInternational69 May 1, 2026 +1

“*Disclosure: CNBC and Kalshi have a commercial relationship that includes a CNBC minority investment.”* *They’re f****** everywhere*

1

agawl81 May 1, 2026 +1

They’ll just have their wives or grown kids run the account instead.

1

Theo20185 May 1, 2026 +1

I don't see mention of their staff, vendors, or family in the article. If not, this is toothless as any of those could get access to privileged information without the congress person providing it.

1

U.S. senators ban themselves from prediction markets trading

💬 Send a Message

165 Comments