Here's a funny thing about the stock market: sometimes the people who profit most from a questionable practice are the ones who want to see it end the most. Take Chris Josephs. He co-founded a company called Autopilot, which has millions of dollars under management that does one simple thing: it copies the stock trades of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). It's a business built on the premise that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. But Josephs told MarketDash he's now in favor of banning members of Congress from trading stocks altogether—and he thinks it could happen soon.

Josephs launched the "Pelosi Stock Trader" years ago as a social media project to highlight what he saw as the questionable timing of the Speaker's trades. The feeling, he says, was one of resignation. "If Congress members can trade right in front of us, we're going to join them," Josephs explained. But that same disgust, coupled with growing public awareness, might finally be the thing that kills the practice.

"I think one, the people are sick of it. I think it's essentially getting to that point," Josephs said. "Two, is the midterms and it's a great thing to run on." He predicts that candidates challenging incumbents in the 2026 elections will weaponize trading records. "They're going to come out and say, ‘I support a ban on congressional stock trading.'" That kind of political pressure, he argues, could reignite the push for a ban.

Another reason the time might be ripe is that the existing law, the STOCK Act of 2011, just hasn't done the job. Josephs points out it still allows for a delay in disclosing trades and doesn't stop lawmakers from trading individual stocks in companies they directly oversee. "It just seems like the right time in history with all the distrust going on in society and especially with our governments and our politicians, that in passing this is a massive step towards better trust and transparency from elected officials," he said.

To be clear, Josephs isn't arguing lawmakers should be barred from the markets entirely. The idea is to restrict them to broad, conflict-free instruments. "You just can't buy Raytheon while you're sitting on an armed services committee and watching Iran get bombed," he said, highlighting a real example involving Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) owning RTX Corp (RTX) stock. Telling members of Congress they can only buy things like treasuries and ETFs, he argues, is not an unreasonable ask.

The Devilish Details: Spouses, Kids, and Crypto

Of course, the path to any ban is littered with potential deal-breakers. Josephs says one of the biggest battles will be over who exactly gets banned. Currently, spouses must disclose their trades too. Paul Pelosi, the Speaker's venture capitalist husband, is the prime example here, making the Pelosi household the central case study in whether spousal trading should be allowed.

The current proposal, as Josephs describes it, would ban members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from trading individual stocks (ETFs and mutual funds would still be okay). But there's talk of a potential carve-out. What if a spouse's job depends on trading individual stocks, like Paul Pelosi's? What about politicians' kids who work in wealth management? "This is going to be the biggest divide," Josephs predicts, between an all-or-nothing bill and one with exceptions.

Then there's the digital elephant in the room: cryptocurrency. Josephs notes that current bills and proposals to ban stock trading have no language about banning the trading of assets like Bitcoin (BTC). He suspects crypto is being treated more like owning gold or an ETF—a commodity-like asset rather than a corporate stock. The political landscape makes it tricky, too. With figures like former President Donald Trump being vocally supportive of cryptocurrency, adding a crypto ban to a congressional trading bill might be a bridge too far for getting it passed.

So, we have a man who built a business on congressional trading calling for its end. He sees a perfect storm of public outrage, political opportunism, and a recognition that past reforms failed. The final law, if it comes, will be a messy compromise hammered out over spouses' careers and the definition of an investment. But the core idea—that lawmakers shouldn't be day-trading companies they regulate—might finally have its moment. Sometimes, the people who know a system best are the ones most eager to tear it down.