49 full committees · 1339 seats

Which jurisdictions the money actually comes from

Every committee here is mapped to the industries it writes law for. This page asks the question one level above the leaderboard: not "is this member worth following" but whose remit is the signal coming from. Armed Services and Financial Services are not equally informative, and pooling them hides that.

Full committees

23 house · 5 joint · 21 senate

With an industry remit

15 oversee no industry at all

Enough data to score

10+ settled decisions

With tracked members

at least one seat on the roster

Subcommittees

181

inherited jurisdiction only

The jurisdiction weighting does not predict returns. Each committee carries a hand-assigned 0–1 score for how much market-moving information a seat plausibly exposes a member to. Correlated against what trading under that jurisdiction actually returned, across the 23 committees with enough data, it comes out at r = +0.13 — close enough to zero to treat as nothing. The best is House Ways and Means at +16.4% on a weight of 0.95; the worst is House Science, Space, and Technology at -11.6% on 0.65. The weight is an editorial judgement about access, and this is the number that says it should not be read as a forecast.

All chambers House Senate Joint

Ranked by what trading inside the remit returned

Showing 5 joint committees. The counters above describe all 49, both chambers.

Committee	Chamber	Access weight	Seats	Tracked members	In-remit decisions	Alpha 12m	Hit rate	Disclosed volume
Taxation financialshealthcareindustrials most traded: JNJ, UPS, FDX, PYPL, OSK, CAT	Joint	0.90	10	2	38	+3.6%	43%	$1.1M
Joint Economic Committee financials most traded: GS, BRK.B, NDAQ, C, MSCI, JPM	Joint	0.45	20	3	45	-2.9%	49%	$197.9K
Security and Cooperation in Europe defenseenergy most traded: XOM, DVN, GE, RTX, EOG	Joint	0.30	9	4	6	too few	—	$27.1K

These rows do not add up, on purpose. A member sits on several committees at once, so a Lockheed Martin purchase by someone on both Armed Services and Appropriations is in remit for both and is counted under both. The columns answer "what happened under this jurisdiction", not "which committee gets the credit" — there is no way to split a single trade between two seats, and pretending otherwise would be an invented number.

Alpha is withheld below 10 settled decisions. A mean over four trades is noise, and printing it next to a mean over four hundred invites exactly the wrong comparison. Decisions are counted once each: a member who buys the same stock on the same day across four accounts made one judgement, not four. Dollar volume still counts every line, because that duplication is real money.

Committees with no industry jurisdiction

These 2 oversee procedure, conduct or the institution itself rather than any sector of the economy. Nothing can ever be "in remit" for them, so they never contribute a trade to the strategy — a structural fact about what they do, not missing data. They still count toward a member's access score, where breadth of assignment matters.

Committee	Chamber	Access weight	Seats	Tracked members	Subcommittees
Library	Joint	0.10	10	1	—
Printing	Joint	0.10	10	1	—

How to read this page

Access weight is a 0–1 editorial judgement of how much market-moving non-public information a seat plausibly exposes a member to — built from which industries the committee legislates for, whether it receives classified or pre-release briefings, and whether it directs federal spending. It is an input to a member's access score. As the correlation above shows, it is not a return forecast, and the page says so rather than quietly hoping nobody checks.

In-remit decisions counts purchases by anyone holding the seat where the traded company's industry overlaps the committee's jurisdiction — all seat-holders, not only tracked members, so the figure describes the committee rather than the roster.

Subcommittees are inherited detail. All 181 of them copy their parent's jurisdiction, and every subcommittee member also holds the parent seat, so no member's remit would change if they were deleted. They are shown on each committee's page because they are genuine assignments, and they feed a small breadth bonus in the access score — arguably a measure of workload rather than access, since they confer no new jurisdiction.

Buying inside your own jurisdiction is legal, and is often just expertise. Nothing here alleges otherwise.