Trump Defeats Democrats, Scores Major Victory in Anti-Fraud Program Targeting Tim Walz and Others

The House overwhelmingly passed legislation that would give permanent statutory authority to President Donald Trump’s National Fraud Enforcement Division. A total of 139 Democrats joined all 212 Republicans who voted, along with one independent, in supporting the measure on Wednesday, September 16th. The National Fraud Enforcement Division Act passed 352–72, with all 72 opposing votes coming from Democrats. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries was among the Democrats who supported the legislation.

The bill would codify a Justice Department division that the White House first announced in January 2026 and that the Justice Department formally established in April. Its stated mission is to investigate and prosecute fraud against taxpayer dollars and taxpayer-funded programs, while the administration’s original announcement also referenced fraud affecting private citizens. The division has since become part of the administration’s broader effort to pursue large-scale fraud involving federal money. The House vote does not make the division permanent by itself, as the bill must still pass the Senate and be signed by the president.

The division has drawn particular attention because of its role in the administration’s response to the extensive fraud uncovered in Minnesota. Vice President JD Vance referred allegations involving Minnesota Democratic Governor Tim Walz and state Attorney General Keith Ellison to the division earlier this year, seeking a potential criminal investigation into fraud involving federally funded social-services programs. The referral was a request for an investigation rather than a criminal charge. Walz and Ellison have acknowledged that taxpayer money was misused but have accused Republicans of exaggerating the scandal for political purposes.

As Fox News reported, the administration described Minnesota as suffering from a “fraud epidemic” when it announced the new division. Republicans have accused Walz and Ellison of helping create the conditions that allowed fraud to spread through the state’s social-welfare programs. The existing division gives federal officials a centralized structure for examining fraud involving federal money, including funds routed through state-administered programs. If enacted, the legislation would give that division statutory authority rather than leaving it dependent on administrative action.

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland offered what he called “tepid support” for the bill while arguing that the Justice Department has handled fraud cases for decades. The progressive Democrat dismissed the legislation as the “least offensive piece” of the Republican agenda moving through the House. Raskin nevertheless said the National Fraud Enforcement Division’s name and stated mission made sense. His support added to the bipartisan majority that sent the measure through the chamber.

Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey responded to Raskin’s criticism of the legislation. Van Drew described the bill as a “permanent, nonpartisan commitment” to stopping the waste and theft of public money. He said Americans were tired of watching taxpayer funds disappear. Van Drew also rejected the suggestion that corruption had been properly addressed before Trump returned to office.

Rep. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming pointed to the fraud uncovered in Minnesota, saying what had been exposed there was “absolutely criminal in nature” and argued that fraud in Democrat-run cities and states could be considerably larger. Her comments came as federal officials continued examining fraud involving public benefits and federally supported programs. The House measure received support from a majority of voting Democrats as well as every Republican who cast a vote.

Raskin also accused Trump and administration officials of corruption, calling Trump a “pro-fraud president” while criticizing pardons involving white-collar offenders. He acknowledged that he was still supporting Van Drew’s bill despite those attacks. Van Drew declined to continue the broader partisan argument and returned to the legislation before the House. He said lawmakers were taking a division created through administrative action and attempting to “make it law to help the people.”