Frank D. Lucas
Frank D. Lucas (R-OK), one of the longest-serving members of the Oklahoma delegation, holds wealth concentrated in farmland and oil-and-gas royalties rather than securities; public trackers and reporting show no evidence of individual-stock STOCK Act trading, so the highest-weighted self-dealing metric scores zero. His median net worth grew from about $1 million in 2008 to roughly $2.6 million by 2024, but much of that increase is attributed to inherited farmland (acquired after his mother's 2020 death) now producing oil-and-gas royalties, which is non-tenure-driven and not scored as enrichment. As a senior member of the Financial Services, Science, and former Agriculture committees, his donor base concentrates in finance and agribusiness sectors, creating correlation-not-proof influence exposure but no documented quid pro quo. No campaign-fund personal-use findings, family-lobbying ties, or notable absenteeism surfaced; his lifetime missed-vote rate (~2.9%) is modestly above the chamber median. Overall the record is comparatively clean.
Public record
- In Congress since
- 1993
- Committees
- Agriculture
Financial Services - Missed votes, 119th Congress
- 1.6% (11 of 674; median member 1.9%)
- Campaign money, 2025–26 cycle
- $907K raised · 74% from PACs & committees · $533K 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: 3 news reporting · 1 data aggregator · 4 reference database · 1 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.