Conservative lawmakers are fighting tooth and nail to retain their right to trade stocks while in office.

The caucus turned out in staunch opposition Wednesday to Republican Senator Josh Hawley’s proposed stock trading ban, causing a significant stir in the upper chamber after the White House flagged the bill as a bad idea.

In order to gain Democratic support and advance the motion through the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Hawley agreed to include text within the bill that would additionally subject Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance to the parameters of the ban, just as members of Congress would be. But the White House’s Office of Legislative Affairs, and the executive branch’s Senate allies, were not in favor.

Senator Ron Johnson torched the effort as “legislative demagoguery,” claiming Wednesday that banning lawmakers and their spouses from trading stocks would “make it very unattractive for people to run for office.”

“I have no idea what we’re voting for,” said Senator Bernie Moreno. “I have not read the mountains of paper that are sitting in front of me.”

At one point, Senator Rick Scott condemned the effort as “disgusting,” accusing Hawley of denigrating billionaires. But Hawley, seated next to Scott, had a firm response.

“I don’t mind anyone being rich, I mind people getting rich while they’re here and trading stocks,” the Missouri senator said.

Committee Chair Rand Paul similarly opposed the bill, positing that any such ban would have made it impossible for Trump to be president. The Kentucky lawmaker admitted that he had scheduled a vote on the bill in a quiet quid pro quo: “To get two bills that I want passed through without being beleaguered by amendments,” he said in an interview with Axios.

The White House, meanwhile, argued that its opposition to Hawley’s bill had little to do with its contents.

“This was a last-minute deal struck to include the Executive Branch equities without touching base with the White House to discuss potential Article II concerns,” a White House official told Axios. “Any pause comes purely from potential Article II infringement, not the Congressional ban.”