A resolution to ban senators from prediction markets, sponsored by Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, easily passed the Senate at the end of April. Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images Senators just banned themselves from trading on prediction markets. That's raised the question: Why can't lawmakers do the same with stock trading? Here are the 3 major reasons why a stock trading ban is a much tougher sell for lawmakers. Lawmakers are banning themselves from prediction markets like it's nothing. So why are they still allowing themselves to trade stocks? That question may have crossed your mind after the Senate passed a resolution late last month that instantly banned senators and staff from trading on prediction markets. "Now do the stock market," Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina wrote on X. "Why is this so hard?" It's a question worth exploring. Conventional wisdom has long held that lawmakers struggle to police themselves, and yet the Senate's prediction market ban passed via unanimous consent — meaning any senator could have chosen to object, but none did. And while efforts to ban members of Congress from trading stocks have stalled once again, there's considerable momentum behind prediction market trading bans: There's already chatter about passing a similar resolution in the House, and the White House has already warned staffers to stay away from prediction markets. Here are 3 big reasons why a stock trading ban will likely continue to elude Congress, even as more prediction market bans may be afoot. There are probably very few lawmakers using prediction markets One key reason why banning lawmakers from prediction markets is an easy sell: It's unlikely that many are even using them. While we don't know for sure, given that current ethics rules don't require public officials to disclose event contract purchases, we can make some assumptions based on the facts. For one, Kalshi has said that it automatically bans members of Congress from making accounts on their platform, and that's the platform most readily available to American users. It also simply takes time for people to adopt new things, and prediction markets only became a major phenomenon in 2024. Take cryptocurrency, for example. Like prediction market event contracts, it's a relatively new financial asset, but it's been around for longer and has seen mainstream adoption over the last decade or so. Still, only 10 members of Congress reported significant cryptocurrency holdings last year, according to a report from the Campaign Legal Center. Compare that to stock ownership: A separate report from Campaign Legal Center found that 48% of members of Congress reported owning individual stocks, while many more were invested in other widely held investment funds, like mutual funds or ETFs. In fact, just 6% of lawmakers reported having no investment in the stock market whatsoever. People put their wealth into stocks. Prediction markets are about shorter-term bets. So why do so many lawmakers own stocks or ETFs? It's simple: The stock market has long been a key way for people to invest their money. Moving that money around isn't simple, and in many cases, lawmakers have been holding onto those stocks for a long time. In many cases, the stocks are actually held in retirement accounts. That's why stock trading ban proposals have often included provisions allowing members of Congress to continue investing that wealth, whether by requiring lawmakers to place their stocks in a blind trust or continuing to allow investments in widely held funds. House Republicans' most recent stock trading proposal goes even further, allowing lawmakers to hold onto their existing stocks in order not to dissuade potential candidates from running for office. Event contracts, on the other hand, aren't really a great place to park your money for years. While some prediction markets on platforms like Kalshi or Polymarket may run for a year or longer, many exist for just days or even hours. That means anyone involved in those markets is actively trading, rather than making a long-term investment. The insider trading risks are clearer in prediction markets There's also the simple fact that with prediction markets, the risks of insider trading are much higher. Prediction market companies host all kinds of markets on government actions that lawmakers are involved in, including the probability and length of government shutdowns, the outcome of elections, and even what lawmakers may say in a given speech. In each of those instances, lawmakers and the people around them have non-public information that clearly and directly affects the outcome of those markets. When it comes to stock trading, the risks are still there, but in a far more diffuse way. Lawmakers might purchase a stock right before a major world event sends the stock price soaring, or they might sell it before an event that averts a loss. One example of this: When some lawmakers made stock trades as the markets soared up and down around President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff announcement in April 2025. In each of those instances, it wasn't clear that anyone had advance knowledge of what exactly the tariff levels would be, or precisely what effect they would have on stock prices. Read the original article on Business Insider