Members of Congress have a hundred ways to enrich themselves, while in Congress and afterward, and most of them are corrupt to some degree. That corruption is bad because it distorts the policymaking process and erodes public trust in the people who should be our statesmen.

But were we to make it impossible for current or former lawmakers to make decent money, then we would be building massive barriers to participation in Congress — limiting Congress to only the very rich, which would make it less representative.

But there are a couple of restrictions we can safely put on Congress. One is a lifetime ban on lobbying contacts by former members. The other is a ban on members of Congress owning and trading individual stocks. Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Matt Gaetz (R-FL), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) have introduced a bill to do the latter.

Their bill would ban members of Congress and their spouses from owning individual securities, derivatives, or tradeable commodities. In effect, members of Congress would have to shift all their investments to broad-based mutual funds. This is a commonsense proposal.

Members of Congress have access to classified information and are supposed to use that information for the good of the country, not their own enrichment. Former Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), now a lobbyist, sold tons of stock right before COVID tanked the markets in 2020. Burr was the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, and so not only did he have access to classified material, the people investigating him couldn’t tell what he had access to, which made an investigation impossible.

Members of Congress also have access to legislative insider information, such as what bills or amendments are going to be proposed and might pass. They also are able, through their oversight of regulatory bodies and the subpoena power, to get other non-public information. If they use this insider information to enrich themselves, they are abusing their power.

What’s worse is that lawmakers might make decisions — on policy or on timing — in order to maximize their investment gains or minimize their losses.

Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House, thinks it’s important that she continue to be able to make money in the stock market.

One understands why Pelosi argues this way, seeing as she has made millions through her political power and connections , not as the reward of participation in a free market. That’s bad and should end.

Yes, it would be a sacrifice for lawmakers if they couldn’t trade stocks — even for those lawmakers who don’t trade on their insider knowledge. To some extent, an honest member of Congress would have fewer rights than an average citizen. That’s fine.

When the public invests you with power to make laws, oversee the government, and investigate private individuals and companies, that is not only a privilege, it is also a burden. It is right and just that you should make sacrifices in order to do your job better. This was my argument for why Trump should unload his hotels and why he shouldn’t tout his daughter’s business: power should be a constraint, not a license.