Welfare fraud has blue states rushing — to shield the fraudsters

Last week, the FBI raided 22 shady day-care businesses in Minneapolis, Minn., as the federal government expanded its investigation of social-services fraud there.

On Monday, Vice President JD Vance added Columbus, Ohio, to his fraud task force’s agenda in the wake of a new report alleging a billion-dollar Medicaid scam.

Both investigations were spurred by the dogged work of citizen and independent journalists like Nick Shirley in Minneapolis and Luke Rosiak in Columbus, who knocked on doors and interviewed dozens of supposed service providers to uncover the truth about fraudsters who may have bilked the federal government of billions.

And up and down the West Coast, blue-state lawmakers have leaped to respond — by actively working to make it harder for journalists like me to do our jobs and expose fraud connected to day-care centers, hospices, home health care businesses and more.

In California Democrats are pitching AB 2624, dubbed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act,” with claims that it’s a safety measure to protect immigrants and social-service workers from harassment.

But media watchdogs say it, and Democrats’ efforts in other state capitals, constitute a crackdown on the independent and citizen journalists who are exposing fraud in government — and warn that it’s just the start of a trend that could spread nationwide.

Shirley’s independent reporting on empty day cares like the now infamous “Quality Learing Center”  helped expose $9 billion-plus in public funding provided to nonexistent child care centers, food programs and senior services in Minnesota alone.

His work — and its tens of millions of YouTube views — inspired other reporters to hit the streets across multiple states with cameras and stacks of public documents.

California’s law would criminalize the online sharing of photos or personal information of “immigrant service providers” if it’s done for purposes of “harassment.”

But the bill leaves those terms undefined and open-ended.

It aims to shield providers’ home and work addresses while restricting the posting, display, sale or distribution of their personal information or images online if it makes subjects feel threatened or intimidated.

A law like this would expose any investigative journalist to ceaseless accusations of harassment and incitement simply for sharing publicly available information — information that any citizen at home could find for themselves on social media and government websites.

Meanwhile, Democrats in Washington state introduced SB 5926, legislation meant to conceal day-care centers’ addresses and employee identities from public disclosure.

The bill was filed just days after Shirley’s viral reporting broke, as local journalists were launching their own investigations of publicly funded child-care businesses.

The legislative session ended before Democrats could vote it into law — but the state is seeking other ways to hide information relevant to potential fraud probes.

In late April, when Gov. Bob Ferguson awarded $55.8 million in grants to 74 Washington early-learning providers, his office redacted many of their names to “protect sensitive personal information.”

These people are getting public funds, but reporters and citizens can’t verify where their tax dollars are going.

Even the act of entering government buildings is under attack in Washington state — if you’re a journalist who’s not on board with leftist orthodoxy.

State and local governments here have repeatedly barred multiple conservative and independent investigative reporters, myself included, from getting media passes and access.

A state court has ruled that the Washington Capitol Correspondents Association has the right to deny such passes to reporters who advocate for conservative causes — even as left-wing journalists and progressive outlets are routinely granted access.

Oregon Democrats, for their part, passed a bill this year that would have tightened the state’s definition of a “public meeting,” making it easier for state agencies to shield their actions from public view and for lawmakers to hide their communications.

Following public pressure and backlash from journalists and media outlets, Gov. Tina Kotek vetoed the measure.

Investigative stories about government spending are rarely glamorous; few of them rack up millions of YouTube views the way Nick Shirley’s work did.

But they often ferret out initial evidence of much larger scandals.

And government interference will make it harder for independent journalists and citizen watchdogs to verify whether recipients of taxpayer dollars actually exist, trace the links between public funding and political activity, or uncover a range of other abuses.

Democratic lawmakers want to keep critical reporters from reading audits, checking public records or tracing campaign donations.

They want fewer people asking questions, fewer people publishing names, fewer people connecting dots.

Democrats don’t just want those stories killed; they want them never to be found.

Ari Hoffman hosts the “Ari Hoffman Show” on Seattle’s Talk Radio 570 KVI and is the Post Millennial’s West Coast editor.