Finalizing fraud prevention: Results from committee prompted by Feeding Our Future
The Brief
The House fraud prevention committee wrapped up its 2025 session this week. It produced only one bill that seems likely to pass this year, but Republicans credit it with a culture shift.
Democrats say they already passed a lot of fraud prevention into law during the trifecta, including a pre-award risk assessment for grant recipients.
Creating a statewide Office of Inspector General was a bipartisan priority, but whether it lands under executive or legislative control is still to be determined.
ST. PAUL, Minn. (FOX 9) - The new House fraud prevention committee has wrapped up its work for the year.
How useful it was depends on whom you ask.
Prevention production
2025 goals and bills
It sounds like only one bill originating in the Republican-led committee will make it into law this year, but quite a few bills attempt to address fraud and the GOP says that's because their work helped change the culture.
In the wake of Feeding Our Future and investigations into autism center scams, the GOP started 2025 with a goal that fit into the palm of Rep. Jim Nash.\
"This is the very simple note," said Rep. Nash, (R-Waconia) as he held up his hand. "It's right here. It says 'fraud equals bad.'"
Protecting taxpayers
'More than skin deep'
The House fraud prevention committee is the only one with a Republican majority, but Democrats who served with them say the work is more than skin deep.
"It's easy to say 'fraud is bad', said Rep. Emma Greenman, (DFL-Minneapolis). "That's a bumper sticker. I think actually protecting people and the services that they rely on, protecting taxpayers requires a stack of bills that we have been working through."
What's changing?
Audit report cards
Nash didn't serve on the fraud committee, but he got bipartisan support for his anti-fraud bill requiring report cards from the Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) detailing audit performances by anybody up for a new grant.
"There will be four (new) full-time (auditors) once that bill gets signed into law," Rep. Nash said.
Answering to auditors
Direct complaint
The entire fraud committee also signed a letter emphasizing a complaint the OLA has had since at least 2007 — direct grants from legislators to nonprofits.
Those often get less oversight, and Republicans said they'll address the issue in 2026.
"We will have some sort of a policy bill where any legislative earmarks have to go through a process that includes risk assessment, that includes analyzing 990 and capacity," said Rep. Kristin Robbins, (R-Maple Grove), who chaired the committee.
Democrats say they also want to minimize those direct grants and want them to be better scrutinized — so much so, they already created a pre-award risk assessment during their trifecta.
"That is required right now," said Rep. Dave Pinto, (DFL-St. Paul).
Inspector's office
Who's in control?
One more GOP priority has been to create a statewide Office of Inspector General under legislative control.
That seems likely to happen, but possibly within the executive branch instead of the legislative branch because that's the only way the office can have police powers.
What's next
Republicans plan to keep the fraud committee until around next year, and they say they already have 530 fraud hotline reports to go through before the next session.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Watchdog investigating whether Hegseth aides were asked to delete Signal messages: Report
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon's watchdog is looking into whether any of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's aides were asked to delete Signal messages that may have shared sensitive military information with a reporter, according to two people familiar with the investigation and documents reviewed by The Associated Press. The inspector general's request focuses on how information about the March 15 airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen was shared on the messaging app. This comes as Hegseth is scheduled to testify before Congress next week for the first time since his confirmation hearing. He is likely to face questions under oath not only about his handling of sensitive information but also the wider turmoil at the Pentagon following the departures of several senior aides and an internal investigation over information leaks. Hegseth already has faced questions over the installation of an unsecured internet line in his office that bypassed the Pentagon's security protocols and revelations that he shared details about the military strikes in multiple Signal chats. One of the chats included his wife and brother, while the other included President Donald Trump's top national security officials and inadvertently included The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson had no comment on Friday, citing the pending investigation. The inspector general's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Besides finding out whether anyone was asked to delete Signal messages, the inspector general also is asking some past and current staffers who were with Hegseth on the day of the strikes who posted the information and who had access to his phone, according to the two people familiar with the investigation and the documents reviewed by the AP. The people were not authorized to discuss the investigation and spoke on the condition of anonymity. Democratic lawmakers and a small number of Republicans have said that the information Hegseth posted to the Signal chats before the military jets had reached their targets could have put those pilots' lives at risk and that for any lower-ranking members of the military it would have led to their firing. Hegseth has said none of the information was classified. Multiple current and former military officials have said there is no way details with that specificity, especially before a strike took place, would have been OK to share on an unsecured device. 'I said repeatedly, nobody is texting war plans,' Hegseth told Fox News Channel in April after reporting emerged about the chat that included his family members. 'I look at war plans every day. What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations, for media coordinations and other things. That's what I've said from the beginning.' Trump has made clear that Hegseth continues to have his support, saying during a Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia that the defense secretary 'went through a lot' but 'he's doing really well.' Hegseth has limited his public engagements with the press since the Signal controversy. He has yet to hold a Pentagon press briefing, and his spokesman has briefed reporters there only once. The inspector general is investigating Hegseth at the request of the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Signal is a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications, but it can be hacked and is not approved for carrying classified information. On March 14, one day before the strikes against the Houthis, the Defense Department cautioned personnel about the vulnerability of the app. Trump has said his administration targeted the Houthis over their 'unrelenting campaign of piracy, violence and terrorism.' He has noted the disruption Houthi attacks caused through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, key waterways for energy and cargo shipments between Asia and Europe through Egypt's Suez Canal. The Houthi rebels attacked more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two vessels and killing four sailors, between November 2023 until January this year. Their leadership described the attacks as aimed at ending the Israeli war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Politico
33 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump wants a manufacturing boom. The industry is buckling.
President Donald Trump is vowing to spark a manufacturing boom with tariffs to protect American workers and industry. So far, it's manufacturers that have borne the brunt of the pain. The president's surprise decision to raise tariffs on imported steel and aluminum to 50 percent will hit domestic manufacturing just as a new report shows the industry is already contracting. Uncertainty about where tariff rates will ultimately land — or where they'll be applied — has forced businesses to make hard decisions that could cut into both profits and hiring. And a leading trade group on Thursday called on Trump to give the companies a break on the tariffs. 'For a president who is intent on building U.S. manufacturing, the tariff strategy he's laid out is remarkably short-sighted,' said Gordon Hanson, a Harvard Kennedy School professor whose groundbreaking 2016 research work, 'The China Shock,' was among the first to sound the alarm about the threat to American industry. 'It fails to recognize what modern supply chains look like.' 'Even if you're intent on reshoring parts of manufacturing, you can't do it all,' he said. 'Steel and aluminum are part of that.' If Trump's tariffs fail to result in a manufacturing renaissance — a central focus of his presidential campaign — it could weaken the prospects of a GOP coalition that's increasingly reliant on working-class voters who supported his protectionist trade policies. But as unanticipated tariffs continue to drive up input costs for companies that need steel and aluminum for production, the warning signs emanating from manufacturers are getting louder. An index published this week by the Institute for Supply Management, which tracks manufacturing, slipped for the third straight month in May as companies made plans to scale back production. A quarterly survey conducted by the National Association of Manufacturers reported the steepest drop in optimism since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, with trade uncertainty and raw material costs cited as top concerns. Federal Reserve data this month reported weaker manufacturing output. The manufacturers' association on Thursday urged Trump to develop a 'speed pass' that would allow companies to avoid costly new duties on imported raw materials and components that are essential to U.S. producers. 'The steel and aluminum tariffs are almost custom-made to hurt American manufacturing,' said Ernie Tedeschi, a former top Biden administration economist who's now with the Yale Budget Lab. Trump and top administration officials argue that tariffs will encourage investment in domestic manufacturers, which should lead to better-paying jobs, a more resilient economy and more secure supply chains. Exports climbed in April as the president's tariffs took hold, which contributed to an eye-popping decline in the U.S. trade deficit. Indeed, the overall economy remains solid, and businesses are continuing to hire, according to Friday's jobs report for May. Despite the trade headwinds, employment in the manufacturing sector has remained steady since Trump took office. 'As the president says, if you don't make steel, you can't fight a war. He's protecting that industry and bringing it back,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Senate lawmakers this week. 'You're going to see more steel and aluminum furnaces and mills in the history of this country get built over the next three years.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Trump welcomed the monthly jobs report, posting on Truth Social: 'AMERICA IS HOT! SIX MONTHS AGO IT WAS COLD AS ICE! BORDER IS CLOSED, PRICES ARE DOWN. WAGES ARE UP!' Still, domestic manufacturers who rely on international supply chains for critical steel and aluminum inputs will face tough choices if they want to maintain their profits while keeping output steady. 'Higher costs are expected. Higher input prices. The question is, what do you do with those costs? How much can you pass along to the consumer? How much can you negotiate with your suppliers?' said Andrew Siciliano, a partner at KPMG who leads the consulting firm's trade and customs practice. The challenges posed by the increase in steel and aluminum tariffs are particularly acute because it's far from clear whether domestic suppliers will be able to meet the demands of domestic manufacturers. Almost half the aluminum used in the U.S. last year came from foreign sources, according to federal data, and roughly a quarter of all steel is imported. Either way, 'input costs are going to be higher,' Siciliano said. 'If they pass it on, it could affect demand. If they don't pass it on, it could affect profitability.' That isn't to say manufacturers won't benefit from tariffs in the long term. To the extent that Trump's overall tariff regime limits imports, U.S.-based industrial production could expand to address unmet demand. The Budget Lab's analysis of Trump's tariff regime — which includes the 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum — projects that manufacturing output could grow by 1.3 percent over the next five years if existing import duties are left in place. But Tedeschi cautioned that growth may exclude segments like electronic and semiconductor production — which tend to generate higher incomes for workers. Meanwhile, output in other sectors like construction or agriculture would likely contract. Julia Coronado, founder of MacroPolicy Perspectives, also said the flurry of new import duties may prompt some manufacturers to actually move their manufacturing facilities offshore rather than subject their supply chains and production processes to multiple tariffs. 'If I have to assemble a bunch of parts and inputs, why don't I just don't do that on the Canadian or Mexican side of the border and then pay the tariff on the final good?' she said. An even bigger challenge may involve finding and training workers who can staff up any facilities that reshore. Most Americans work in the service sector and, to the extent tariffs lead to reshoring, those facilities will likely rely heavily on automation, according to economists at the Bank of America Institute. Finding qualified workers in the U.S. is either too difficult or too expensive. 'Whatever manufacturing production comes back to the U.S. will require far fewer jobs than 30 or 40 years ago,' Hanson said. 'It's just the way the world has gone.'
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Who are the United States Supreme Court Justices?
Politics in the United States in recent years have surrounded the position of the president. But that has not changed the American political system. It's still all about checks and balances in the United States, which includes the judicial branch and Supreme Court. That arm of the U.S. government has nine justices seated on the bench, all of which were appointment by presidents at one point or another. Their jobs are for life and the group of nine is led by one chief justice. As of 2025, here is the full list of the nine justices in the United States Supreme Court. Date appointed: Sept. 29, 2005. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 23 1991. Appointed by: President George H. W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Jan. 31, 2006. Appointed by: President George W. Bush. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Aug. 8, 2009. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: Aug. 7, 2010. Appointed by: President Barack Obama. Political affiliation: Democrat. Date appointed: April 10, 2017. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 6, 2018. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: Oct. 27, 2020. Appointed by: President Donald Trump. Political affiliation: Republican. Date appointed: June 30, 2022. Appointed by: President Joe Biden. Political affiliation: Democrat. This article originally appeared on The List Wire: List of United States Supreme Court Justices
