A breach of trust in Minnesota

First City Journal  and then The New York Times published shocking reports in recent days on public assistance fraud in the Land of Lakes. Federal prosecutors say they have uncovered over $1 billion wrongly disbursed so far. The fraud in question has been centered on the rapidly growing Somali community in and around Minneapolis. According to the Times, this public swindle stood out even amid the rampant stealing of government funds that occurred around the country during COVID. One explanation offered by an expert was that Somali refugees came from a country with a corrupt government in which stealing from the government was common.

What forms did the fraud take? One group submitted largely fictitious invoices for having fed tens of thousands of children. Other providers falsely claimed to have served large numbers of homeless people. In still another example, perpetrators of fraud recruited families to certify their children as autistic so as to justify improper government funding. The combined fraud added up to an astonishing bill for taxpayers.

The story has resulted in tremendous negative attention for Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who is seeking a third term of office. Many will remember the governor as Kamala Harris’ running mate on the Democratic ticket in the 2024 presidential election and as the man who debated the Republican nominee J.D. Vance. Some argue the state’s Democrats have been reluctant to question fraud emanating from the Somali community because of the importance that group has developed as a voting bloc for the party. Walz and others, in turn, defend themselves by saying the fraud occurred in a time when the emphasis was on getting money to people in need and that the state had always had a trusting attitude toward public assistance.

Before pressing the issue, it is important to note that all human beings are sinful and that no human group has a monopoly on frauds and scams. When confronted with a massive and trust-wrecking fraud, our first response should not be to conclude that an ethnic group is bad but rather to be reminded that human beings will take advantage and that protections should be used to deter those who would do wrong.

Here, we had a nice confluence of those who would use a narrative in their favor and others who demonstrated political cowardice. The Minnesota officials charged with preventing and punishing fraud feared the charges of racism likely to come from Somalis engaged in the fraud. One group, Feeding Our Future, reportedly threatened Minnesota education officials with charges of racism. Separately, when an attempt was made to bribe a juror, the money was accompanied by a note referring to the evil of racism.

In a country where public debt has become a significant problem, the loss of hundreds of millions or even $1 billion (in a single state) is a matter of great concern. The money, itself, is important as it represents resources taken from working citizens. But there is something still more meaningful in a case such as the one in Minnesota and that is the public trust. When we provide funds to those who are truly in need and who lack the ability to provide for themselves, most of us feel the act is valuable and even compelling in nature. However, there are always alternative uses for money. We can easily envision what could be done whether for ourselves, our family members, our friends, our neighborhoods, our favorite charities, etc., but the call to provide for those in need is an urgent one.

When it turns out that a call for assistance was false in nature, we feel especially betrayed. We see that what we thought was noble and desperately needed was actually used to line the pockets of unscrupulous persons or to gain political favor. That realization is a bitter one. It makes us less willing to trust, less willing to help, and altogether more suspicious and callous.

In a case such as the one in Minnesota, our public servants were responsible to make sure that requests for help were legitimate. It was their job to erect the safeguards, to maintain the integrity of public assistance, and to punish those who set out to deceive. In this particular case, from the governor on down, the failure was a comprehensive one. The temptation will always be to generously dispense while ignoring the necessity of zealously guarding the public trust. One is easy. The other is hard.

The question of the overall size of the state and its public assistance is a separate one, but it is entirely clear that if we are going to engage in major attempts to attack social problems by providing resources, we must demonstrate to citizens that their tax dollars have been carefully stewarded rather than squandered. We need a government that cares as much about “wasting not” as it does about “wanting not.”