Al Green
Al Green has represented Texas's 9th District since 2005 and serves on the House Financial Services Committee, where he is Ranking Member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee. Public trackers (MarketBeat, Quiver) show no disclosed individual-stock trading under the STOCK Act; his reported assets are described as mutual funds, bonds, and conservative holdings, and his substantial net worth (estimated ~$5-10M) largely predates Congress, reflecting his prior career as an attorney and justice of the peace. His sole financial-sector donor concentration sits alongside his committee seat (correlation, not proof of self-dealing), and his House attendance is roughly average (about 2% missed votes lifetime). The only ethics matters of record are a 2021 House Ethics report tied to a protest arrest (not financial) and a 2007-2017 personal dispute with a former staffer resolved without any monetary payment; no campaign-fund personal-use or revolving-door findings surfaced.
Public record
- In Congress since
- 2005
- Committees
- Homeland Security
Financial Services - Missed votes, 119th Congress
- 0.7% (5 of 674; median member 1.9%)
- Campaign money, 2025–26 cycle
- $1.7M raised · 5% from PACs & committees · $85K cash on hand FEC ↗
The stock-trading ban
H.R. 7008 bans new stock purchases by members, spouses and dependents; it doesn't force sales of existing holdings. The Senate vote was on the version paired with the SAVE Act, which is why no Democrat voted yes. Full breakdown →
Disclosed stock trades
No periodic transaction reports on file since 2024. That's the norm: most members don't trade individual stocks, or hold them in blind trusts and diversified funds.
Amounts are the ranges members must report, not exact values. The STOCK Act requires a report within 45 days of a trade; "late" counts days past that deadline, measured to the filing date.
How the score breaks down
Sources behind this score: 2 data aggregator · 4 reference database · 2 official record. Score = weighted average of the components that have data; the 2 without sourced evidence are excluded, never counted against the member. Methodology →
Right of reply
Is something here wrong or missing context? Members and their staff can send a correction or a statement. Statements are published on this page in full, and corrections go in the public log. Email corrections@greederboard.com.