John Hickenlooper, the junior senator from Colorado, has left management of his stock portfolio to a third party to avoid conflicts of interest since he became mayor of Denver in 2003. But since being elected to the U.S. Senate, his investments have raised the kind of conflict-of-interest questions that are behind efforts to establish stronger investment rules for members of Congress.

In recent weeks, political opponents and groups that track congressional stock trades have scrutinizedinvestments made by the Democrat, who is running for a second term. Hickenlooper’s trust purchased stock in Eaton Corporation, a power management company that could be affected by oversight from the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He also purchased stock in Uber Technologies, a transportation technology company that could be affected by oversight from the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Image

Hickenlooper sits on both committees. But his purchases are not considered a conflict of interest under the standards for congressional stock trading.

Hickenlooper’s stock portfolio is managed by a blind trust, according to his office, so he isn’t involved in the day-to-day purchasing and selling decisions. But the senator owns stock in companies potentially influenced by the committees he sits on, and he’s not blind to his ownership of those stocks, since they must be publicly reported in financial disclosures. He confirmed to NOTUS in February that he is aware of his Uber stock ownership. This creates the potential that decisions he makes on the committees could be influenced, or have the appearance of being influenced, by personal financial interests.

A spokesperson for Hickenlooper said he and his work in the Senate have no influence in decisions made by the trust, and that he finds out about purchases and sales made on his behalf only once they are reported. His team declined to share details about who specifically manages his trust and what type of blind trust it is.

Not an ethical gold standard

Blind trusts are used to create separation between a public official and their financial assets to avoid the appearance of a conflict between personal interests and public duty.

The term “blind trust” is “thrown about very easily” when talking about congressional stock trading, according to Cynthia Brown, senior ethics counsel for nonprofit ethics watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW. But the trusts many members of Congress place their assets in do not meet all the standards of “what a real blind trust is for legal purposes,” Brown said.

Image

There are not many regulations around blind trusts for members of Congress, according to Andrew Barton, program manager at Colorado Common Cause. The use of a blind trust is a step in the right direction, he said, but members can still be aware of what stocks they own “even if you’re not the one ultimately in control of them.”

“It doesn’t really get rid of the fundamental concern around using your power and influence … in order to boost the industry that you have a personal interest in,” Barton said.

It’s not hard to have a blind trust that “you ultimately still have a lot of managerial position and capacity in,” Barton said. He said he wouldn’t characterize a blind trust as “the ethical gold standard for elected officials’ stock trading.”

“I still think the best course of action would just be the actual congressional stock trading ban,” Barton said.

A 2022 New York Times investigation found that 97 members of Congress from both parties, including Hickenlooper, traded stock in companies influenced by their committee assignments. Former Representative Ed Perlmutter, a Democrat, was the only other Coloradan on the list.

Image

More recently, CNN found in February that 10 senators, including Hickenlooper, traded stock in companies affected by their committee assignments within the previous year.

Government watchdog and ethics organizations generally oppose congressional stock trading overall, as members of Congress have access to information not available to the public because of their roles in Washington, D.C. Organizations including the Campaign Legal Center and CREW have voiced support for the Restore Trust in Congress Act, which is an outright ban, as opposed to other proposals that can create loopholes for stock trading.

There’s been more attention on the issue since President Donald Trump urged members of Congress to pass the Stop Insider Trading Act during his State of the Union address last month. Trump himself has consistently uses the presidency for his own personal profit.

That legislation does not ban members of Congress from trading stock, and seven good government advocacy groups wrote to Congress in February urging them to reject the Stop Insider Trading Act.

“Passing SITA would serve to hide insider trading, not stop it, leading to more of the exact same problems — issues that have again drawn public attention in 2026,” the letter said.

Outright ban on stocks

Colorado’s Democrats in the House, as well as Republican U.S. Representative Lauren Boebert, a Windsor Republican, sponsor a measure that would outright ban any stock ownership for members of Congress. It would require the divestment of stocks even if they are in a blind trust. Another measure under consideration would require the same of executive branch officials, too.

“Coloradans deserve elected officials who work for them, not their own interests,” U.S. Representative Jason Crow, an Aurora Democrat, said in a statement. “Cleaning up corruption, including banning stock trading for Members of Congress, will begin to restore trust in government.”

U.S. Representative Diana DeGette, a Denver Democrat, said in a statement that no public officials, including the president and vice president, “should be able to use their public service to enrich themselves.”

A spokesperson for U.S. Representative Brittany Pettersen, a Lakewood Democrat, said she is open to different approaches to restricting congressional stock trading. She sponsors two measures that would ban ownership and one that would allow for the use of blind trusts.

Colorado’s senators both sponsor a measure that would require members of Congress to place all of their stocks into a qualified blind trust. That measure is led by U.S. Senators Mark Kelly of Arizona and Jon Ossoff of Georgia — two of only five senators to file qualified blind trust financial disclosures since 2021.

Qualified blind trusts must be approved by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics. Financial disclosure requirements are also different for a qualified blind trust. Investments in a qualified blind trust don’t need to be reported in the same way as other purchases and sales, which members disclose through “periodic transaction reports.” Other requirements around who can run the trust and how they communicate with the owner intend to further insulate the assets and buy and sell decisions from the public official.

U.S. Senator Michael Bennet’s stock portfolio is in a trust managed by “an independent third party,” according to a spokesperson. The Colorado Democrat believes “no elected official should be able to profit off of their office, and has been a strong and consistent advocate of prohibiting Members from trading individual stocks or using their position for self-enrichment.”

The trusts Bennet and Hickenlooper use for their stocks are not listed as qualified blind trusts in Senate financial disclosures.

STOCK Act ‘ineffective’

Brown, with CREW, said her organization favors full divestment of stocks for members of Congress. Even if someone else is in control of a member’s assets, the member knows what went into the trust initially.

“They still would have a sense that certain actions they may take officially (e.g. votes on legislation) could positively or negatively affect the value of their holdings because they do not know the timeline of when those assets will be sold,” Brown said in a statement. “In other words, the member could take actions that reflect what they know is in the blind trust with the hope that the stocks haven’t been sold off yet.”

There were no restrictions on congressional stock trading in place until the 2012 STOCK Act implemented monthly disclosure requirements for trades over $1,000. The Campaign Legal Center, which backed the STOCK Act, has since described it as ineffective.

Members of Congress charged with violating the act are charged a fine of only $200. No lawmaker has ever been prosecuted under the STOCK Act.

Several U.S. senators faced scrutiny in 2020 after selling stock holdings right before a major stock market crash at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some who made those sales were included in a briefing about the virus and how it would impact the economy. Many said their stocks were managed by a blind trust. No charges were filed following a U.S. Department of Justice investigation.

A 2025 study from the University of California San Diego’s Rady School of Management found that U.S. citizens who learned how members of Congress do on the stock market were more likely to view Congress as corrupt and self-serving and less legitimate, regardless of whether they profited from their investments.