A lot of people already own stocks, so banning lawmakers from doing the same seems like it singles them out. My opponent probably has a fair point about conflicts, but I just feel like disclosure is enough, not a total ban. I am not sure how to argue it better.

The other side makes a fair point that maybe some rule is needed here, and honestly I am not sure how to push back on that. My gut says a ban just feels like too much, since owning stocks is pretty normal, and I will leave it at that.

[No submission - Time expired]