Margaret Wood Hassan
Senator Maggie Hassan (D-NH) presents a generally clean public accountability record. Her disclosed portfolio (estimated $2.3M-$7.2M net worth, ~$3.9M trackable) consists of mutual funds, ETFs (TIP, VUG), annuities, and bank deposits rather than individual stocks, with much of the wealth attributable to her husband and predating her Senate tenure; no individual-stock STOCK Act trading or reporting violations were found. She maintains an excellent voting attendance record (33 of 3,787 votes missed, 0.9%, better than the Senate median). No reported instances of campaign/leadership-PAC personal-use abuse, family lobbying tied to her office, or staff-to-lobbyist scandals surfaced in available public records. Industry donor concentrations (women's issues, health/medical, lawyers) are typical for her profile and reflect correlation rather than proof of any improper influence.
Public record
- In Congress since
- 2017
- Committees
- Joint Economic Committee (Ranking Member)
Finance
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Veterans' Affairs - Missed votes, 119th Congress
- 1.5% (14 of 915; median member 1.9%)
- Campaign money, 2025–26 cycle
- $2.5M raised · 22% from PACs & committees · $1.7M 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: 4 data aggregator · 3 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.