“Do as I say, not as I do.”
It’s a phrase most of us learned in childhood, usually delivered by a frustrated parent or teacher caught in their own hypocrisy. But today, this age-old adage has become the unofficial motto of Washington, D.C.
From multimillion-dollar stock trades involving no-bid government contractors to hefty cash prizes handed out to high-ranking federal officials, the gap between the rules imposed on everyday Americans and the privileges enjoyed by our political elite has never been wider.
The latest battleground in this ongoing saga? A fiery exchange between Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Dr. Anthony Fauci, which has sparked a renewed conversation about accountability, loopholes, and ethics in federal government.
The Fauci Hearing and the “No Cash Prizes for Bureaucrats Act”
The tension boiled over during a recent Senate hearing where Sen. Hawley squared off against Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).
During the hearing, Hawley targeted Fauci over reports that the longtime public servant received over $1 million in cash prizes and awards during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hawley accused Fauci of exploiting existing legal loopholes. While federal laws technically prohibit government employees from soliciting rewards or cash prizes for their official duties, critics argue that clever categorization and exemptions have allowed top-tier bureaucrats to cash in anyway.
To combat this, Hawley introduced the “No Cash Prizes for Bureaucrats Act” on Thursday, aimed squarely at closing these loopholes and banning federal employees from accepting lucrative cash awards.
While the bill addresses a glaring conflict of interest, it also opens up a much larger, more uncomfortable Pandora’s box for Washington: If we are finally questioning cash prizes for bureaucrats, when are we going to address the elephant in the room—lawmakers trading stocks?
The Bigger Hypocrisy: Congressional Stock Trading and No-Bid Contracts
While executive branch bureaucrats are walking away with cash awards, members of the legislative branch are playing an even more lucrative game: trading individual stocks, sometimes in companies that directly benefit from legislation they write, fund, or oversee.
Even more egregious is the practice of lawmakers—or their spouses—profiting from no-bid government contractors.
Imagine a scenario where a private defense or pharmaceutical contractor receives a massive, taxpayer-funded, no-bid contract determined by a federal agency. Now imagine members of Congress sitting on relevant oversight committees owning stock in that very same company.
- Is it insider trading? Legally, it often skates by in a gray area.
- Is it a conflict of interest? Absolutely.
For years, bipartisan efforts to ban congressional stock trading have stalled, repeatedly watered down or blocked by leadership from both sides of the aisle. Despite overwhelming public support—with polls consistently showing that a vast majority of voters want lawmakers banned from playing the stock market—Congress has proven remarkably reluctant to police itself.
Why Accountability in Government Matters
When the people writing the laws are seemingly exempt from the ethical constraints applied to the rest of the workforce, public trust erodes.
- Erosion of Public Trust: Trust in federal institutions is at historic lows. When citizens see bureaucrats receiving millions in awards while inflation squeezes households, or watch politicians beat the stock market using insider knowledge, faith in democracy takes a direct hit.
- Perverse Incentives: When financial gain is tied to bureaucratic decisions or legislative favoritism, the primary motivation shifts from public service to personal enrichment.
- The “Two-Tiered” Reality: There is a distinct set of rules for ordinary federal employees (and private sector workers) and another set for the political elite. While a mid-level federal worker can be fired or heavily penalized for accepting a minor gift, top officials can rake in six-figure cash prizes and multi-million-dollar stock portfolios without facing real consequences.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Sen. Hawley’s proposed No Cash Prizes for Bureaucrats Act is a step in the direction of transparency, but it is far from a complete solution. True reform requires a holistic approach to ethics in Washington, one that must include:
- A Total Ban on Congressional Stock Trading: Lawmakers should be restricted to broad index funds or blind trusts during their time in office. Public service should not be a vehicle for personal day-trading.
- Stricter Oversight of Contractors: No-bid government contracts need greater transparency to ensure that politicians and high-ranking bureaucrats do not hold financial stakes in the companies winning these windfalls.
- Closing All Loopholes on Gifts and Awards: Whether it’s cash prizes for bureaucrats or speaking fees for politicians, public servants should be barred from monetizing their government positions.
The Bottom Line
Washington is quick to point fingers, pass performative legislation, and hold dramatic hearings for the cameras. But until Congress is willing to apply the same strict standards to themselves that they demand of everyone else, the “do as I say, not as I do” culture will continue to define American politics.
It’s time to close the loopholes—not just for bureaucrats, but for Capitol Hill, too.