Todd Young
Senator Todd Young (R-IN) presents an unusually clean financial-conduct profile. Disclosures show effectively no individual-stock holdings or STOCK Act trades; his assets are limited to a state retirement fund and small bank accounts, and trackers estimate his net worth near zero or negative, largely due to debt, so there is no evidence of net-worth enrichment beyond salary. As a senator on Commerce and Foreign Relations, he led the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act, and securities, defense and tech interests appear among his donors; this represents correlation between industry support and his legislative agenda, not proof of any quid pro quo. No public records were found indicating campaign-fund personal use, family lobbying tied to his office, or fundraising-driven absenteeism, and his missed-vote rate (about 1.5% lifetime) is better than the Senate median.
Public record
- In Congress since
- 2011
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Finance
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence - Missed votes, 119th Congress
- 0.9% (8 of 915; median member 1.9%)
- Campaign money, 2025–26 cycle
- $4.4M raised · 15% from PACs & committees · $7.2M 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: 2 data aggregator · 5 reference database · 1 news reporting · 1 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.