Josh Hawley (R-MO)
Halting Ownership and Non-Ethical Stock Transactions (HONEST) Act
A Republican bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 294.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
The Halting Ownership and Non-Ethical Stock Transactions (HONEST) Act prohibits the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, along with their spouses and dependent children, from purchasing or selling covered investments. These covered investments include securities, commodities, futures, and digital assets, though certain exclusions like diversified mutual funds and Treasury bills apply. Covered persons must divest these assets by specific deadlines based on when they were sworn into office. The bill also mandates reporting of certain federal payments and establishes civil penalties for noncompliance. Additionally, it introduces a $500 fine for failing to file reports required under the STOCK Act. The act further requires that financial disclosure reports be made available to the public in a searchable and downloadable electronic format.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill improves government transparency by requiring annual compliance certifications and publishing them on a public website.
- Scored +3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit low-income households.
- Scored +3
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit middle-class households.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -2
Would high-income households be better off under this?
This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for high-income households that include Members of Congress and their spouses.
- Scored -2
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for high net worth individuals that include Members of Congress and their spouses.
- Scored -2
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for ultra-high net worth individuals that include Members of Congress and their spouses.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Accountability for Officials: The bill bans the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, as well as their immediate families, from trading covered investments, which includes digital assets and securities (Sec. 13162(a)).
-
Public Transparency: The act requires that financial disclosure and transaction reports be published on official websites in a way that allows the public to search, sort, and download data by criteria like ticker symbol and transaction amount (Sec. 4(a)(B)(ii)).
-
Stricter Penalties for Noncompliance: It establishes civil penalties for those who fail to divest covered investments, set at the greater of the official's monthly pay or 10 percent of the value of the undivested investment (Sec. 13162(g)(2)(B)).
-
STOCK Act Enforcement: The bill adds a specific $500 fine for reporting individuals who fail to file required transaction reports (Sec. 3(a)).
-
Reporting of Federal Payments: Covered persons must report any "covered payment" received from the Federal Government, such as loans, contracts, or grants, to the supervising ethics office (Sec. 13163(f)(2)(B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Burden on Family Members: The restrictions on purchasing and selling covered investments extend to the spouses and dependent children of the covered officials (Sec. 13162(a)(3)).
-
Financial Impact of Forced Divestiture: Covered persons and their families are required to divest covered investments, which may force the sale of assets (Sec. 13163(a)(1)(A)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit African Americans. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit Asian Americans. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit Hispanic Americans. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit low-income households. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit middle-class households. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit Native Americans. Would white Americans be better off under this? — This bill could lead to greater trust in government, which may indirectly benefit White Americans. Would billionaires be better off under this? — This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for billionaires that include Members of Congress and their spouses. Would high-income households be better off under this? — This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for high-income households that include Members of Congress and their spouses. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for high net worth individuals that include Members of Congress and their spouses. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — This bill may be viewed as restricting investment options for ultra-high net worth individuals that include Members of Congress and their spouses.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill improves government transparency by requiring annual compliance certifications and publishing them on a public website. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases federal power by regulating the financial activities of members of Congress.
- 4/28/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/10/2025
- Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Paul with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 294.
- 12/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/30/2025
- Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 4/28/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Catherine Cortez MastoDemocrat · Nevada
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
Bernie MorenoRepublican · Ohio
Jon OssoffDemocrat · Georgia
Gary PetersDemocrat · Michigan