As governor of Minnesota, a report found that Tim Walz supervised a $250 million Coronavirus fraud scandal. Critics claim that the responsibility falls to Walz.
The state’s Feeding Our Future program, which provides meal assistance to hungry children, was linked to the massive fraud. The misappropriated funds were spent on luxury goods and real estate instead.
“How Was it Possible?”
According to Billy Glahn, adjunct policy fellow with Minnesota-based Center of the American Experiment, “At least a quarter billion dollars was stolen by fraudsters.”
Glahn went on to say, “The question, of course, came up: How did the state Department of Education let out $250 million out the door to people who were later convicted of defrauding the program?”
Concerns Raised
Glahn stated, “The legislative auditor took this on as one of her projects and did this report looking at how the department oversaw a single one of these nonprofits involved.”
Since 2022, 70 people have been charged in association with the plan, raising concerns over issues relating to the oversight by the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) during Walz’s tenure.
“Oversight” Report
The “Minnesota Department of Education: Oversight of Feeding Our Future” report reads: “MDE officials told us that the department began to have concerns about Feeding Our Future only after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
“However, we think MDE failed to act on warning signs known to the department prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and prior to the start of the alleged fraud.”
The Role of OLA
A representative for Walz stated, “We appreciate the OLA[Office of the Legislative Auditor]’s work and often agree with them, which is why state agencies have implemented many of their suggestions.”
“There are also times when the OLA’s suggestions don’t apply because the audits come out years after we’ve resolved an issue, they suggest actions that have already been taken, or they evaluate programs that no longer exist.”
“Appointed by Him”
The spokesperson added, “Sometimes, state agencies have expertise and knowledge that the OLA does not, and in those cases we may fundamentally disagree”
“He is the chief executive of the state. All of the people at the Department of Education and the other departments where fraud has taken place were appointed by him,” Billy Glahn concluded.
“Where Does the Buck Stop?”
Glahn stated in relation to responsibility for the fraud, “So he appoints the commissioner, the deputy commissioner, assistant commissioners. They were all appointed by him.”
“They all report to him. And these are the folks whom the legislative auditor has documented failed to do their job. So where does the buck stop?”
“Given a Lot of Money to Democrats”
“It’s been uncovered that a lot of these people who were indicted . . . and their spouses and immediate family members and business partners have given a lot of money to Democrats, to campaign contributions,” Glahn said.
“So, they’re campaign contributors. And then when these nonprofits were having trouble with Department of Education, the Department of Education shut off the money a couple of times and failed, or they didn’t have the courage or convictions, and politicians went to bat for the nonprofits”
Spring Trial
Back in spring of this year, seven individuals were the first to face trial in connection with the fraud. Controversy arose as towards the end of the trial an attempt was made to bribe a juror.
The bribe amounted to $120,000 in cash and was purported to be in exchange for casting a vote to acquit.
Dismissed Juror
Following the incident, the juror was dismissed after they reported the bribery attempt in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
Another juror was dismissed after hearing about the incident from a relative. After the scandal, the jury was sequestered for the remainder of the trial in an attempt to avoid further controversies.
Initial Convictions
From this trial, five were convicted on most charges while two were acquitted from the first seven defendants.
A couple of weeks following this, five people, including three of those from the first trial, were indicted on charges of bribery. Only one of those indicted for bribery has been acquitted of fraud during the trial.
Testifying in His Own Defense
Mukhtar Mohamed Shariff back in May testified in his own defense towards the end of the case, making him the only defendant of the seven to testify in the case.
According to Shariff, he was not involved with preparing the billings, invoices, and meal counts which were reported to the state for reimbursement.
With Walz being catapulted into the national spotlight he is sure to face increased scrutiny over his oversight of the fraud, particularly from Republican opponents.
