Democrat Chris Pappas has made ethics and transparency a centerpiece of his U.S. Senate campaign.
“While they're cashing in, I'm fighting to ban stock trading,†Pappas says in a campaign ad.
He touts his support for the Restore Trust in Congress Act, for example, legislation that would ban members of Congress from trading stocks and profiting from public service. He helped introduce the TRUST in Congress Act, which would require members of Congress and their immediate families to place certain investments in blind trusts.
But at the same time Pappas has been positioning himself as a good-government reformer, he has been involved in a very public ethical conflict that critics call problematic.
Pappas serves on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which writes the federal rules governing ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft. His husband, Vann Bentley, is a policy executive at Uber.
According to Pappas' financial disclosures, the couple holds between $150,000 and $350,000 in Uber stock received as part of Bentley's compensation, along with a smaller stake in Amazon, where Bentley previously lobbied.
In May, Pappas voted to advance federal legislation that would strip sexual assault victims of the right to sue ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft over harm caused by their drivers. It was part of the BUILD America 250 Act, a sweeping five-year surface transportation bill.
Under current law, when an Uber driver rapes, gropes, or otherwise harms a passenger, that passenger can sue not only the driver but Uber itself — the company that recruited the driver, ran the background check, and put him on the road.
During the markup, Rep. Vince Fong (R-Calif.) offered an amendment shielding ride-hailing companies from certain lawsuits over harm caused by their drivers — a long-sought industry priority. The amendment passed 35-30, largely along party lines. Pappas voted no, joining all but one of the committee's Democrats.
But when the entire bill came before the committee, it passed 62-2 with Pappas' support.
Defenders say Pappas' vote against the Uber-supported amendment shows he is putting ethics ahead of self-interest. Republicans disagree, pointing out that Pappas knew the amendment would pass with or without his vote.
“Chris Pappas voted for the bill to become law. Everything else is just performative,†said Samantha Cantrell of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
The vote is not a violation of House rules. Members are not barred from sitting on committees that oversee a spouse's employer, nor are they required to recuse themselves from broad legislation affecting an industry in which they hold a financial interest.
The harder question for Pappas is not about any single vote. It is whether a lawmaker who has staked his reputation on rooting out conflicts should participate in ride-hailing matters at all while his household's finances are tied to the outcome — the kind of standing entanglement his own reform rhetoric targets.
Pappas has argued that his stock-trading legislation is aimed at lawmakers trading on inside information, a different matter from equity a spouse receives as compensation. Whether that distinction satisfies the standard he has publicly demanded of others is the crux of the story.
Pappas would not respond to questions from NHJournal.
Adding to the scrutiny, Pappas' financial disclosures have been filed late. His office began requesting filing extensions in 2023, around the time of his marriage to Bentley and the emergence of the Uber holdings — a timeline that transparency advocates say invites questions, even absent any finding of wrongdoing.
And this is not the first time Pappas' conduct has collided with his ethics message. During a 2020 WMUR debate, Republican challenger Matt Mowers said Pappas had been dating a corporate lobbyist for Amazon while casting votes on legislation the company lobbied on. Pappas denied it live on television, calling the charge outrageous.
The next day, however, he confirmed it was true: He had been dating Bentley, then an Amazon lobbyist, and had voted on Amazon-related legislation. But, he argued, the relationship was neither illegal nor improper, and he had broken no rules.
The renewed focus on Pappas' ethics is not organic. One Nation, an issue advocacy group aligned with Senate Republican leadership, has reserved roughly $6 million in New Hampshire, including an ad resurfacing the 2020 exchange. Other news outlets, including the Washington Free Beacon, have shone a spotlight on Pappas' role as a transportation regulator and the husband of an Uber lobbyist.
Former Sen. John Sununu, Pappas' likely GOP opponent, has publicly called the arrangement a potential conflict of interest.
The facts are not in dispute: a committee seat with jurisdiction over an industry, six figures in that industry's stock, a spouse in its executive ranks and a candidate who asks voters to hold Washington to a higher ethical standard. On the one direct test, his vote went against his family's financial interest.
What voters make of the rest — the standing conflict, the late filings and a history of denying, then admitting, an inconvenient truth — is an open question in the race.
