63 Comments
User's avatar
Reldas's avatar

Thanks for keeping track of how corrupt our lawmakers are on both sides. I'm glad The Bulwark is holding them accountable because literally no one else is.

Expand full comment
Denise Wallace's avatar

I agree with you. It must be so tempting with insider info. Members of Congress should be banned from trading.

Expand full comment
ktb8402799's avatar

Its all an unseemly and gross looking, otherwise known as the appearance of corruption. The corrosive effect of that appearance on public trust and standing of the government is reason enough to impose significant legal restrictions on stock trading by members of congress. That said, its important to recognize that the appearance of corruption and actual corruption are not the same thing, and not all acts of corruption are created equal. The only example listed there that looks like its possibly an act of true corruption is MTG and the trades she made immediately before Trump announced his delay, the timing of which suggests she was engaged in insider trading and an act of true corruption.

These distinctions are important, because overbroad condemnations of corruption that treat mere appearances and petty acts as equal to serious corruption wrongly brings everyone down to the same level as the most corrupt official and ultimately inures to the benefit of the worst of the worst actors, the most corrupt of the corrupt get off easier than they should when everyone is perceived to be on the same level. Making sure that doesn't happen and distinctions can be clearly made between what is and isn't corrupt is also another excellent reason for reforms that prevent these unseemly appearances by prohibiting congressional stock trades to begin with, but until that happens its up to us members of the public to understand and draw these distinctions ourselves.

Expand full comment
Charles Thacher's avatar

Trump, Speaker Johnson and other MAGAns have consistently said that the proposed Medicaid work requirements are justified because so many "able-bodied slackers" who could work are just sitting at home collecting Medicaid. Really? How do these people support themselves? All they can do with Medicaid is to get their health care costs paid for. They can't use it to pay rent, buy food or gasoline, or pay for any other daily necessities that are required just to be alive. The argument is idiotic, even to the uninformed and unintelligent, yet its proponents are never challenged on that point.

Expand full comment
Kentuckistan's avatar

Basically a single adult is living on less than $25,000 a year without access to any employer provided insurance, but no, nobody is signing up for that or getting away with anything if they're in that category

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

But he's a good Christian. And, he probably thinks Jesus was a fool for healing the lazy, good for nothing cripple at the pool of Bathesda. Or maybe he thinks the sick should just pray for good health and wait to be healed.

Expand full comment
Oldandintheway's avatar

America has always had a capitalist economic system, with fringes of corruption. Now we have a corrupt system that incentives fraud and manipulation.

The main mission of the Trump 47 administration is to take our money in as many ways possible, and give it to a select few. All the rest -- Harvard, immigrants, tariffs, and the Executive Orders are all just smoke to cover up the bribes, graft, extortion, and corruption.

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

You are 100% right. How can people not see that. His supporters are either benefitting from his tax scams or stupid to realize they are being played.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

I read an article on Trump’s outrageous grifting at The Free Press. The MAGA commenters were simply refusing to believe it. “Leftist lies” — they called it.

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

Crazy.

Expand full comment
Elizabeth de Laperouse's avatar

I wish more time was being spent on the cost of not addressing climate. No one knows how the world will react to rising temperatures but there will be a cost and we all will pay that in one form or another.

Expand full comment
Jenn Z's avatar

I second this suggestion! It's as if we are magically no longer in a climate crisis. Sammy Roth of the Los Angeles Times reports regularly on climate, but I rarely see anything about it anyplace else.

Expand full comment
Keith Wresch's avatar

Hi Elizabeth you may want to check out Daniel Swain who is a climate scientist and has a YouTube channel where he regularly posts ‘office hours’ and interviews. You can find him at www.youtube.com/@WeatherWest

Expand full comment
DanceThisMessAround's avatar

He's the best!

https://weatherwest.com, mainly covers West Coast, but not always. And I like to read the comments as well, weather peeps battling it out on the models.

Expand full comment
Keith Wresch's avatar

Yes, I have learned a lot from his blog. He also keeps a pretty strict no politics policy on the blog.

Expand full comment
DanceThisMessAround's avatar

Top notch!

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

They are Christians and this global warming is just a stupid left wing crank.

Expand full comment
David Hofstetter's avatar

The corruption is incredible! I also noticed they are on vacation again! If they had to be on Medicaid, they probably wouldn't meet the work requirements.

Expand full comment
Sumeeta's avatar

I learned this year that most Congressional recesses are actually "district work periods." They are supposed to be spending the time talking to constituents and doing other useful things back in their districts. Most spend the time talking to their biggest donors and no one else. But these are actually prime times to harangue your rep and senators to answer your questions, give you a meeting or hold public events, and otherwise justify out loud to you, their constituent, what they have or haven't been up to in Washington.

If you're into that sort of thing.

Expand full comment
Sue Connaughton's avatar

What about The Big Ugly Bill is not being well covered by the media? That the bill, as passed by the House, automatically triggers a 500B cuts to Medicare in the years 2026-2034. Also buried deep inside the bill is verbiage that would essentially block the federal courts from enforcing contempt charges.

Expand full comment
Kentuckistan's avatar

there's cuts to Obamacare subsidies that will raise premiums for working and middle class people that rely on it to purchase insurance and maintain their household finances

Expand full comment
DanceThisMessAround's avatar

This is why I would love to see discussions on the timing of all these cuts and actions. They are timed so they don't get blamed. This is critical they don't get to win that messaging war.

Expand full comment
Tom Gensemer's avatar

This is such an easy win for Dems to not only propose a ban on trading by any government employee, but to immediately ban their own members from anything other than index funds. It would go a long way towards making their criticism of Trump’s blatant corruption more potent.

Expand full comment
kate blakeman's avatar

The Repubs are still rehashing Biden's cognitive decline. HOw about covering Trump's mental decline? It's front & center and rarely mentioned.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Am I the only one who has trouble with calling people who depend on Medicaid “able body?” And how was it possible that the proposed 6 million people who will be kicked off Medicaid should never been given health care in the first place when Republicans controlled the House for over two years under Biden? What were they doing? Oh yes, looking for dirt on his son Hunter.

Expand full comment
Sumeeta's avatar

Medicaid expansion under the ACA gave Medicaid eligibility to a larger pool of non-disabled, working-age people who, for whatever reason, are just too poor to get care under commercial insurance. Even though subsidized ACA plans have $0 premiums for some people, they still have deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance, whereas Medicaid mostly doesn't.

But the vast majority of adults without disabilities who are on Medicaid are either above retirement age, employed (just still poor), in school, or the unpaid caregiver of someone who is disabled, elderly, or a child.

Expand full comment
Michael Ciota's avatar

A story I’ve been thinking about is really more of an issue: Does the presidential immunity created by the S Ct. Apply to a president’s contempt of court? Yes it’s criminal but there are serious constitutional questions raised if a court is deprived of its major power to enforce its orders. I believe the issue raises a direct constitutional conflict between the court and the president. To my thinking, the court should prevail on the question. We are so close to this conflict but I have heard no discussion anywhere.

Expand full comment
Nurit's avatar

Please stop referring to to House and Senate members with an R after their names as Republicans. THEY ARE NOT! THEY ARE THE REAL RINOs and CINOs (conservatives in name only), as they have left principles, values and moral code behind a long time ago. The REAL, HONEST REPUBLICANS are the like of Liz, Adam, and you - the Bulwark guys ( I include you as well, Tim. And please note - I am neither R nor D, just an independent whose views, values and feelings are the same as yours. As anybody‘s who care about this country, Democracy, the Rule of Law, and Justice.)

Expand full comment
Bluchek Mark's avatar

“This is similar to what Bill Clinton did back in 1996 with welfare reform, basically saying that you cant be a layabout and get welfare.”

Will some intrepid member of the press please call these Bozos out when they repeat BS talking points like this? The Clinton era “welfare reforms” changed Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which didn’t have work requirements, to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) which did. But both programs provided direct benefits to recipients. Medicaid does not. Medicaid pays health care facilities and providers. It won’t pay for rent, groceries, or any other necessities. So this trope about huge numbers of able-bodied people living in their parents’ basements somehow profiting off their Medicaid is BS.

Expand full comment
Mingo's avatar

Finally someone who understands Medicaid is not health insurance but payment to health care providers for services rendered. What happens to the many elderly and disabled people who can't work because they're living in a skilled nursing facility. They're really living it up. It's utter bullshit nonsense.

Expand full comment
Kathy Balles's avatar

Martha Stewart must be steaming somewhere

Expand full comment
Jerry Fletcher's avatar

I consider myself a pretty active trader and some of those numbers are crazy, especially considering the extra hassles and work involved with recording that stuff to comply with their reporting requirements. To some extent, I’d say that the volume of trading showcases that they aren’t maximizing their wealth due to insider trading.

If I had a big juicy insider tip, I’d be making a few big trades off it and not a hundred shrinky dink ones. Of course, they could have corrupt insider knowledge AND be too stupid to correctly take advantage of it.

Expand full comment
max skinner's avatar

Or they think they are camouflaging their activity by making a lot of shrink dink trades instead of a few big ones.

Expand full comment
Jerry Fletcher's avatar

Maybe, but that would be counterproductive because 100 plus trades in a few months timeframe is highly obvious trading that attracts attention. Nancy Pelosi is the master of congressional trading and she's only reported 180 trades in the last decade. But she has crushed average market returns. There are websites where all the reported trades are available for viewing, so you can see exactly what they reported.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Being a Senator or congressman has some nice perks. You get your own parking spot, free hair cuts and insider trading information to enrich yourself.

Expand full comment
Jerome H. Debs II's avatar

I think 47 was rejected by Harvard when he applied to be an undergraduate and this is another instance in a long line of retribution.

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

His youngest son didn't get into Harvard.

Expand full comment