On March 20, Republican U.S. Sen. Todd Young announced he is supporting two bills placing new restrictions on stock trading by members of Congress: the Restore Trust in Congress Act and the Stop Insider Trading Act.
Neither would cover President Donald J. Trump and his immediate family.
“I’ve heard from many Hoosiers who are rightly concerned about those serving in Congress unfairly profiting from their positions,” Young said. “I fully support a ban on stock trading by members of Congress.”
Between Jan. 6 and the end of March, Trump purchased $680,000 in Eli Lilly and Co. stock. According to federal ethics disclosures released May 14, seven purchases of the Indianapolis-based pharmaceutical giant’s stock were made on the president’s behalf.
“During that period, and just afterward, several Trump administration initiatives ultimately benefited Lilly,” observed Darius Tahir, an analyst for the Kaiser Family Foundation.
The conflicts of interest go far beyond Eli Lilly. On Jan. 6, Trump purchased between $500,000 and $1 million of Nvidia stock. A week later, the Commerce Department announced permission for Nvidia to sell microchips to China. Its stock value increased 4%.
In early March, Trump urged the American public to “go out and buy” Dell computers to support the domestic industry. Its shares soared 14.6% to a record of $263.99. This followed a massive $6.25 billion donation from Michael and Susan Dell to “Trump Accounts.”
Trump bought between $65,000 and $150,000 worth of Palantir stock just days before the company landed a billion-dollar contract with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Trump purchased stock in the Taser manufacturer Axon before Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced a $200 million contract.
In all these cases, the value of these stocks increased following actions by the Trump administration. In modern nomenclature, such cause-and-effect activity would be called “insider trading.” If it were you, Martha Stewart or me caught in the act, investigators from the Securities and Exchange Commission would be asking questions.
This past summer, David Kirkpatrick of The New Yorker tallied how much wealth Trump and his immediate family had accumulated since retaking office in January 2025, totaling $3.4 billion. By February, he estimated it to be $4 billion.
And then the boldest move of all: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced earlier this week that a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS for leaking Trump’s tax returns was agreed in exchange for a $1.77 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to compensate targets of federal government “lawfare.” Trump will choose members of this committee. There is no transparency or public information. If Congress doesn’t step in with its power of the purse, Trump could fund a secret paramilitary.
If you’re one of the 28 Hoosiers who were prosecuted for the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol insurrection instigated by Trump, just step in line for a taxpayer handout.
This “agreement” also prohibits the IRS from auditing Trump or his family … ever.
Is there precedent for such a fund? Yes. On June 1, 1933, the “Fund of German Trade and Industry” was created, administered by Martin Bormann in the name of Fuhrer Adolph Hitler. This slush fund was used to bail out the Nazi Party and compensate the SA Stormtroopers.
The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board called it an “astounding precedent.”
Indiana’s Republican congressional delegation was customarily mute when it came to reacting to these alarming events and unprecedented grift that would make Presidents U.S. Grant and Warren G. Harding blush.
Throughout our history, Hoosiers have had a long and distinct track record in expressing revulsion to corruption and scandal.
A year after Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon D.C. Stephenson won unprecedented power by taking over the Indiana Republican Party, electing Edward Jackson governor and filling the General Assembly with Klansmen. Stephenson’s 1925 homicide conviction in Noblesville started a dramatic reduction in the KKK’s demographic footprint — dropping from more than 300,000 to a fraction of that by 1928.
After President Richard M. Nixon resigned in August 1974 over fallout from the Watergate scandal, Hoosier voters stepped up, jettisoning five Hoosier Republican congressmen — including Rep. William Bray (grandfather of Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray) that November.
In 1980, following the indictment and conviction of a second consecutive Senate president, the late Sen. Robert D. Garton was elevated and responded with a series of new chamber rules, including a new ethics law. According to his papers archived at Indiana University, Garton made the integrity of the process a central goal, along with consistency in its management.
There hasn’t been sitting Indiana state senator indicted since.
In August 2004, the Indiana Supreme Court threw out the results of the 2003 East Chicago mayoral primary election following the “Sidewalk Six” scandal, where city improvements were made in exchange for votes. Justice Robert D. Rucker, an East Chicago native and ally to Mayor Robert Pastrick, provided the crucial deciding vote in a 3-2 decision.
While Trump continues to set astounding precedents, the choice for Republicans could not be more stark. Are they going to man up to their constitutional power of the purse and serve as a check and balance? Or will they be viewed in history as accomplices to a runaway president?
Brian A. Howey is an opinion columnist for State Affairs Indiana and the founder of Howey Politics Indiana. His writing offers analysis and opinion shaped by decades of experience covering Indiana politics. Email him at howey@stateaffairs.com.
This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: Howey: In face of epic corruption, checks or accomplices? | OPINION
Reporting by Brian Howey, Columnist / Evansville Courier & Press
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
