GOP takes aim at Congress' next 'get filthy rich' loophole after stock-trading ban

California Rep. Young Kim Proposes New Rule to Close “Earmark” Loophole for Congressional Self‑Enrichment

A California Republican has unveiled a resolution that would broaden the scope of existing ethics rules, aiming to curb indirect ways lawmakers might enrich themselves through earmarked projects and related property‑value gains. The proposal comes after the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bipartisan bill in July that bars members from trading stocks in companies in which they have a direct financial interest and requires notice before any sale.

The “Stop Congressional Self‑Enrichment” Resolution

Rep. Young Kim, a moderate Republican from the 38th congressional district, said the new resolution would require members seeking earmarks to certify that neither they nor any immediate family member holds a direct or indirect financial stake in the recipient of the funding. She explained that the current House rules already demand that a member and his or her spouse have no financial interest in the earmark recipient, but the proposal would extend that requirement to include spouses, parents, children, and other relatives, as well as “indirect financial interests” such as the potential rise in nearby property values.

“It could be earmarking a nonprofit organization where a member’s spouse sits on the board of directors or board of trustees, so it will indirectly benefit the family. Or it could earmark for a park at, let's say, an apartment building that a member or member’s spouse or member’s children own,” Kim told Fox News Digital. “The days of members thinking ‘I can use the community project funding request or bring in the earmarks for my district and get filthy rich off of it’—those days are numbered.”

Kim emphasized that she is not targeting any specific individual. “And, this is not in any way discouraging members to fight for their districts and bring in the appropriate taxpayer dollars for projects near their districts,” she said. “That is so important … fight for our district, but not at the expense of, you know, enriching I mean, not at the expense of hurting our constituents.”

Why the Push?

Kim cited a surge of public frustration over the wealth that many legislators have accrued while in office. She pointed to the “Bridge to Nowhere” project in Alaska’s Inside Passage—an earmark for an $80‑million road that never materialized—as a classic example of how earmarks can be abused. She also referenced a decade‑long moratorium on the practice that curtailed the most egregious abuses.

The new resolution seeks to address the kinds of indirect benefits that still exist under the current system. “It could be earmarking for a park at, say, an apartment building that a member or member’s spouse or member’s children own,” Kim repeated. “With the federal funds the member brings, you build the park nearby or a community center nearby, it could increase the property value and therefore indirectly benefit the member and their family members. Maybe asking to build a road up to rural land the member owns.”

Past Controversies

The House’s new rule is not the first to draw attention to the intersection of public money and private gain. In 2006, then‑House Speaker Dennis Hastert faced criticism over a $207‑million earmark to build a parkway near a property he owned. In 2023, the Boston Globe reported that Rep. Stephen Lynch, D‑Mass., secured earmarks totaling $3 million for a health center in Boston where his wife was employed, and that $2 million went to a foundation where his wife was an unpaid director. Sen. Tim Kaine, D‑Va., has also been cited for securing earmarks that benefited George Mason University, where his wife served as interim president.

“None of these are new scandals; they’re just manifestations of the same problem,” Kim said. “The House rule that requires members to certify no financial interest is a good start, but the loopholes remain.”

Broader Context

The House’s July stock‑trading ban requires members to give several days’ notice before any stock sale and bars purchases of companies in which they hold a direct interest. The Senate is considering a ban on lawmakers betting on prediction markets. Kim’s resolution is positioned as a “gap closer,” according to her.

Kim noted that technology now makes it easier for the public to see which stocks members buy and sell. “Apps like the ‘Pelosi Stock Tracker’ let retail investors see what members are doing,” she said. “But these tools don’t cover indirect benefits.”

Implications

If the resolution passes, it could tighten the rules governing congressional earmarks and related projects, potentially reducing opportunities for members to gain indirectly from district projects. Critics might argue it could deter legitimate advocacy for constituents’ needs. Proponents say it would restore public trust by ensuring that earmarks are truly for the public interest.

The resolution will be debated in the House’s Ethics Committee before a vote in the full chamber. As of now, no vote has been scheduled.

For Maine voters, the debate underscores a national conversation about the ethics of elected officials and how public funds are allocated. The outcome may shape how legislators in all states can pursue district projects without compromising the public’s confidence.