As employees and stewards of public service spanning many decades, we want to warn the public about Peggy Flanagan. Minnesota cannot afford to get this wrong and elect an official that has a troubled record and contributed greatly to the tragedies affecting Minnesota. Peggy Flanagan has served as Minnesota's lieutenant governor since January 2019. Under Minnesota law, the lieutenant governor serves alongside the governor and has great influence in policies and protecting the ethics and integrity of public service. In our view, Peggy Flanagan is an utter, unsalvageable failure with no redeeming qualities. Peggy Flanagan relies on shock tactics rather than educated statements to distract the public from the fact that she has no real agenda, qualifications, or positive policies for Minnesota or the United States. As public employees, we find it shameful that Peggy Flanagan has used her position to behave like an activist rather than a steward of public good. When evaluating Peggy Flanagan's record, it's important to distinguish between documented findings about state agencies, allegations made by employees or legislators, findings by courts or independent auditors, and evidence linking a particular elected official to specific decisions. We will highlight a couple items... Claim: Minnesota allowed fraud to grow in state-funded programs under Peggy Flanagan's tenure Evidence supporting the claim: This claim has substantial factual support. Federal investigations have uncovered large fraud schemes involving several Minnesota-administered programs, including: - Feeding Our Future - Medicaid-related programs - Child care assistance - Housing stabilization - Numerous Behavioral health services Numerous criminal prosecutions have resulted. Independent reviews and audits have identified weaknesses including: -Insufficient oversight, - Weak internal controls, - Delayed responses to warning signs, - Inadequate documentation, - Grant-management deficiencies. Minnesota only enacted bipartisan anti-fraud legislation and expanded oversight after many of these issues became public. Many fraudulent schemes deliberately concealed their activities, agencies referred numerous cases to law enforcement, additional, mainly perfunctory anti-fraud systems have since been implemented, criminal investigations. Frankly, the Walz–Flanagan administration did not do enough to prevent major fraud schemes in programs administered by Minnesota. Multiple large fraud cases have resulted in federal prosecutions, and independent reviews have identified weaknesses in oversight and internal controls. Claim: Whistleblowers experienced retaliation Evidence supporting the claim: Current and former DHS employees have publicly testified that they experienced retaliation after reporting concerns about fraud or contracting practices. Examples include testimony before congressional and Senate committees describing: - Reassignment of duties, - Dismissal of concerns, - Workplace investigations, - Retaliation by supervisors. These accounts have been reported by multiple news organizations. Claim: Peggy Flanagan personally retaliated against whistleblowers Evidence supporting the claim: A large number of legislators and political critics have asserted that Flanagan participated in meetings with whistleblowers or supported agency leadership's response to employee complaints. These assertions have appeared in congressional hearings, interviews, and political commentary. In particular, at an April 12, 2024 public health equity meeting hosted by the Minnesota Department of Human Services, Peggy Flanagan came onto the stage to publicly denounce whistleblowers as being "losers in mother's basements." This is not only retaliation but also a tactic of dismissal of legitimate concerns and intimidation of staff. Claim: The Walz administration mismanaged DHS Evidence supporting the claim: - Independent audits have criticized aspects of DHS administration, including: - Inadequate grant oversight, - Weak documentation, - Internal control deficiencies, - Failures to follow required procedures. Recent audit findings also raised concerns about document handling during an audit, prompting legislative scrutiny. Claim: Health and Human Services programs were harmed Evidence supporting the claim: It is noted that fraud diverted taxpayer dollars from intended beneficiaries and that weak oversight undermined confidence in public programs. High-profile fraud cases have led to program changes, audits, and increased compliance requirements. The available evidence supports several conclusions: There is strong evidence that Minnesota experienced significant fraud in multiple state-administered programs and that independent audits identified oversight weaknesses. The net effect is that taxpayer dollars are lost to fraud and the vulnerable members of our community are not getting the services they need. Peggy Flanagan markets herself based on Progressive policy positions and has supported positions such as Medicare for All and major immigration reforms, including replacing ICE. However, she has presented exactly no solutions to our current problems where our current health and human services systems are fractured by fraud and there is minimal discussion on how all of her ideas will be funded. Elected officials should bear political responsibility for problems that occur during their administration, even if they were not directly responsible for operational decisions. Peggy Flanagan has taken no responsibility for fraud and instead, has deflected to national politics to distract Minnesotans from the problems that occurred under her. To sum this up, does Peggy Flanagan have the competence to run for Senate? We don't think so. Has Peggy Flanagan done anything to address fraud? Not that we are aware of. Has Peggy Flanagan accepted any accountability for failings that occurred under her tenure? Nope. Does Peggy Flanagan deserve to advance her political career? Not unless we want to drive Minnesota into an abyss. Do we feel safe with Peggy Flanagan in such an influential seat? Absolutely not. We need leadership. Not a failed activist - and certainly not an empty trash bin of leadership that Peggy Flanagan represents.