Local corruption from coast to coast, Part 1
Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan in 2013. Source: Wikimedia Commons
BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT
The latest outrages from the heights of power in DC may get all the headlines, but in an era of incipient American kleptocracy, understanding — and confronting — local corruption is just as important. In this issue and the next, we’re going to be exploring some of our findings from open-source research on corruption in the US at the local and state level, identifying cases across the country in the past year and drawing out some of the patterns we’re seeing. Corruption occurs in different ways in different places, and while individuals from across the political spectrum engage in it, we see different patterns between the major parties. In this issue, we’re going to look at what we term “minor corruption” — theft that doesn’t have much of a political angle — and review some major cases involving Democratic officials. Next time, we’ll cover what we’ve found about GOP corruption, and touch on “strategic corruption” — corruption in America tied to foreign authoritarians, which can show up not just on K Street, but on main street as well.
FEATURE
LOCAL CORRUPTION FROM COAST TO COAST - PART 1
In previous Features of the Kleptocracy in America Report, we’ve laid out why we’re focusing on local corruption, and explored what we mean when we talk about kleptocracy. We’ve also covered the topic of crypto corruption and meme coins, which continue to pop up in the news. We’ve focused a lot of attention on the Trump administration, which has made it very difficult to keep pace with the news cycle. But beyond the beltway, what does corruption in the city halls and statehouses of America look like? Over the last few weeks, we’ve researched recent corruption cases across America, state by state. Over our next two Features, we’re presenting some of our findings. This project is still in its early stages, but a key takeaway is that all but a handful of American states had at least one significant, publicly reported case related to allegations of corruption, broadly defined, in the past year, and over thirty have seen indictments, trials, and, in many cases, convictions. Cases ranged in scale from relatively low-level fraud and embezzlement to scandals involving major public figures that have made national news. In the first Feature of this series, we’ll define what we call “minor corruption”, which can still cost the public millions of dollars. We’ll also look at some of the past year’s major local corruption cases involving Democratic officials (don’t worry – the GOP will follow), describe the patterns we’re seeing, and explore some of the implications. The bottom line: corruption is a problem everywhere in America, and for both parties, but different patterns of corruption — especially between the parties — shape the American political order in important ways at the dawn of Donald Trump's second term.
It’s useful here to restate why we’re focusing on corruption on the ground level. Our thesis is that the current administration is building an incipient kleptocracy – a state where a personalist regime runs the government as a vertically-integrated criminal organization or protection racket organized for the extraction of illicit rents from the public for personal gain. It doesn’t fight official corruption. Rather, it promotes it as a means of both enrichment and control. In such a regime, corruption is systemic. It’s not a bug. It’s a feature. And it serves as the basis of the regime’s wealth and power. The basic power relationship in such a system is a “feudal” quid-pro-quo between patron and client. The patron grants the client the tacit right to extract corrupt rents and otherwise break the law, along with protection from consequences, while the client pledges personal loyalty and political support to the patron.
We’re used to seeing this sort of system in authoritarian states like Russia, Turkey and Hungary, to name three that play an outsized role in American political discourse. In the US, we are now seeing apparent quid-pro-quos emerge in the Trump Justice Department’s dealings with NYC Mayor Eric Adams, as well, some argue, in the Supreme Court’s decision to protect a Republican mayor convicted of bribery in Snyder v. The United States. We’re also potentially seeing it in Trump’s pardons of his loyalists, and most recently, Trump loyalist US Attorney Ed Martin’s refusal to sign off on an arrest warrant for MAGA legislator Cory Mills. These aren’t just one-offs, but a pattern of behavior that we fear is being institutionalized as we speak. We’re far from the first ones to recognize this. The argument we’re making here, though, is that Americans need to focus on local corruption, because the kleptocratic system is going to try to permeate down to the lowest levels of our political system, and official corruption and criminality can create an “attack surface” for the regime to extend the sort of quid-pro-quos described above.
The small fry
High-profile local corruption cases that receive national attention like the Adams affair are highly impactful, But they’re also – mercifully – fairly rare. On the other hand, many of the cases we encountered were what we’d consider minor corruption. These are clear examples of isolated venality – bribes, fraud, and embezzlement – by minor officials, like public employees. These cases are examples of abuse of office, but the main impact is simple theft. The category we’re most interested in is the in-between: scandals implicating powerful local officials, where the negative impact on people’s lives and livelihoods, good governance, and the rule of law is potentially substantial and widespread. They also have a partisan aspect that makes them relevant to national politics, but they are unlikely to receive much attention outside of local media. There have been several such cases covered by the media over the past year.
Cases of alleged minor corruption are quite common. But just because the crimes are minor doesn’t mean that the theft itself is. For instance, a former employee of the South Dakota Department of Social Services is awaiting trial for allegedly stealing $1.7 million in public funds. The fact that a couple were indicted in January in Nebraska for allegedly diverting $4.7 million from an Oglala Sioux tribal office might raise eyebrows about what, exactly, is going on in the Great Plains. A Medicaid fraud case in Minnesota and a West Virginia case in which a former school employee was charged with $3.4 million in theft highlight the potential for diversion of public funds in health care and education, respectively. And then there is the ongoing Feeding Our Future fraud case in Minnesota, named after a nonprofit at the center of a network of individuals and organizations (70 people have been charged) that allegedly diverted an eye-watering $250 million from a pandemic-era federal nutrition program in a sprawling scandal that has involved allegations of juror bribery attempts and witness tampering.
Despite the amounts of money involved, and the attendant costs to the public, we classify the corruption in these cases as minor because it typically involves public employees without much power or non-governmental actors engaging in fraudulent activity. But doesn’t really have a political aspect, in the sense that it doesn’t intersect much with the two-party system. It’s generally simple theft. The Feeding Our Future case is something of an exception because, though it didn’t involve public officials, the titular organization and its head, Aimee Bock – a white woman and the alleged ringleader of the conspiracy – appear to have gained considerable power over a local, largely East African immigrant community through the scheme. Nonetheless, the impacts to public trust can be substantial.
Blue cities in the crosshairs
Then there is the sort of thing we’re most interested in: official corruption, where the nexus of illegality, power, and partisan politics can have major ramifications beyond the amounts of money involved. Again, these cases rarely make headlines outside of local media. Some of these may seem petty on the surface – for instance, the case of a Democratic Boston, MA City Councilor, Tania Fernandes Anderson, with a reported history of troubled campaign finances and questionable ethical practices (including employing her son and sister on her staff) who was indicted last year by federal investigators for allegedly accepting a $7,000 cash bribe. While the transaction in question was quite small, the evidence suggests a worrisome pattern of behavior that could be exploited by a powerful malign actor.
The Fernandes Anderson case bears similarities to a number of federal bribery and corruption cases involving elected Democrats in major city governments in the past year, often involving FBI stings. Such a case brought down Sheng Thao. the first Hmong-American mayor of Oakland, CA, contributing to her removal from office last fall in a recall election bankrolled by tech and hedge fund money. She was the subject of a federal indictment last month. Then there’s former Washington, DC Councilman Trayon White, who was recently expelled from his office after being indicted on bribery charges stemming from an FBI sting. The administration of New Orleans, LA mayor LaToya Cantrell has been dogged by corruption scandals, although, importantly, she herself has not been charged with any crime. Jackson, MS Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumamba is seeking a third term, despite facing corruption charges brought last fall as a result of another FBI sting. Local reporting in Florida has noted how the FBI’s modus operandi in the Jackson case seems modeled on its Tallahassee investigation during Trump’s first term, which brought down a Democratic City Councilor as well as a businessman who was a major local Democratic donor. Then, of course, there’s the Adams case.
When it comes to these cases of alleged corruption involving Democratic officials, a certain pattern emerges: FBI investigations, often stings, of prominent individuals, often Black and almost always people of color, in the governments of major, Democrat-run cities with large Black populations. Notably, these are often in former Confederate states run by white Republicans. There are likely a number of reasons for this – the Democratic base is, after all, disproportionately urban and non-white, and if you’ve ever heard of Tammany Hall, you know that corruption in the party is hardly novel. And there are certainly cases of Democratic state and local officials brought down by federal corruption charges that don’t fit this mold, like former Illinois Speaker of the House Mike Madigan. There are also cases where the feds aren’t involved, such as in Connecticut, where several local Democrats are facing state charges in an election fraud case. That said, it’s hard to avoid the suspicion that racial and/or political animus could be a factor in the targeting of some of these investigations. This shouldn’t be overstated. Targeting public corruption is one of the FBI’s main missions. It’s certainly gone after plenty of Republicans. For all that, it’s also hardly a mainstay of progressive values, with a right-leaning institutional culture and a long history of targeting left-wing activists and civil rights leaders. It also has a new leadership of Trump loyalists. Whether or not animus was a factor in these past cases, they certainly demonstrate how authoritarians at the federal or state level could employ corruption investigations as a political weapon against Democratic leaders. This emphasizes the critical importance for Democrats of demanding ethical compliance from their own party to minimize the attack surface it presents to a hostile and increasingly politicized justice system. We’re far from the first to point out the need for Dems to put their own house in order when it comes to corruption. There’s just no room for error.
In our next issue, we’ll look at patterns of local corruption of the GOP variety, and a specific type of corruption we know a thing or two about that afflicts both parties and that often links local politics not merely to the national, but the global, level: strategic corruption.
WHAT WE’RE FOLLOWING
What we’re reading
We’ve been saying for weeks that America is in danger of falling into outright kleptocracy, but don’t just take it from us. A few recent editorials lay out just how pervasive corruption is about to become. First, there’s a piece by Jacob Silverman in The New Republic that lays out how Trump’s combination of questionable private enterprises (like Truth Social and his crypto ventures), his administration’s gutting of federal regulatory power through DOGE, firings, and executive orders, and efforts to strongarm the private sector into coughing up cash add up to “a new age of bribery, graft, and corruption”.
A Bulwark op-ed by Mona Charen makes a good companion piece, covering much of the same ground but adding historical perspective by outlining America’s corrupt early history and the hard-won fight by reformers in the late 19th century to institute the protections for good governance and rule of law that the administration is now rapidly dismantling.
Then there’s this recent Jonathan Rausch article in the Atlantic, which describes the system Trump is instituting as what Max Weber called “patrimonialism”. That is, the rule of the polity not through bureaucracies, but as an extension of the ruler’s household, which he thought – in the 1920s! – was an antiquated system on its way out. We’ve used the word “feudal” (to the annoyance of medievalists out there) to analogize how the network of relationships underpinning kleptocracies work, and this is a similar, complimentary way of framing it. Rausch similarly notes how this mafia-like system unites the axis of authoritarian regimes around the world – described in Anne Applebaum’s “Autocracy, Inc.” and nicely visualized in the cover of a new Economist article – and suggests that Trump might be about to displace Russian President Vladimir Putin as the “capo di tutti capi” of this alliance. Finally he points out the weakness of this sort of regime: corruption.
DC Throughline
We’ll keep this one brief this week. Amidst recent events, from Trump’s attempted strongarming of Ukraine to JAG officer firings – plus the news that the Trump administration’s claim that the State Department’s $400 million line item for armored Teslas was just a Biden admin holdover (which we reported) may not be true – one stands out to us: the arc of the head of the US Attorney’s Office for DC, Ed Martin. He described his office in an X post on Monday as “President Trumps’ [sic] lawyers” who are “standing against entities like the [Associated Press] who refuse to put America first”. As if to put a point on this, the DC Metropolitan Police (MPD) disclosed to a local news station Monday that Martin had refused to sign off on an arrest warrant for Florida GOP rep and Trump ally Cory Mills, under MPD investigation for an alleged assault on a young woman. Then, the SEC paused its civil fraud case, ongoing since 2023, against Justin Sun, a Chinese crypto billionaire, to explore settlement talks. In December, Sun purchased $30 million in tokens from World Liberty Financial, the Trump crypto project.
National Roundup
New Jersey
Norcross case dismissed: Wednesday, in a 100-page decision, a New Jersey Superior Court judge dismissed a major racketeering indictment against a number of co-defendants, chief among them George Norcross, an insurance executive and former member of the Democratic National Committee who is regarded as one of the most powerful figures in New Jersey politics. This is despite never having held elected office. NJ AG Matthew Platkin, also a Democrat and reputed to harbor political ambitions, is expected to appeal.
Georgia
Mayor faces fraud charges: The mayor of the tiny town of Pearson, Robert Johnson, is facing over 25 charges related to abuse of office, local outlets reported earlier this month. Charges include taking kickbacks, bribing other officials, and forging documents to get an inmate out of prison.
Tennessee
Former GOP house speaker on trial: Local media reported in January that lawmakers have been subpoenaed to testify in the ongoing federal corruption trial of former Tennessee Speaker of the House, GOP Rep Glen Casada, and his chief of staff, in a corruption case that has already resulted in the conviction of another GOP state rep.
Michigan
Former GOP house speaker (a different one) on trial: Local outlets are following the trial of former GOP rep Lee Chatfield, who was charged last year with 13 state felony charges related to alleged abuse of a nonprofit for personal expenses and alleged kickbacks. The probe that resulted in the charges was started by allegations of sexual assault from his former sister-in-law. However, insufficient evidence was found to pursue those allegations, according to the state Attorney General.
Oklahoma
Former Sheriff gets Can-Am, plea deal: In January, local media reported that former Pittsburg County Sheriff, Republican Chris Morris, had agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor embezzlement charges in exchange for the dropping of state felony charges. Morris, who days earlier resigned from an office to which he’d been reelected the past year, after his indictment, which he claimed was “election interference”, was in trouble for an alleged scheme in which he purchased a UTV from a local dealership. He then allegedly traded it back for a new one – and then used the Sheriff’s Office to buy the first one back.
Colorado
Small-town former police chief, mayor guilty of embezzlement: In January, local media reported that the former police chief, fire chief, and mayor of Lakeside pled guilty to embezzlement on charges related to sale of public vehicles to his daughter at below-market prices.
Idaho
Expanding AG power to investigate cities for corruption: Last month, local media reported on debates being held in the Idaho Senate about HB 6, a bill which passed the House of Representatives last year that would expand the Attorney General’s power to investigate city officials for corruption. The debate centered on whether this move would undermine the authority of county officials and increase the possibility of politicized investigations. Progress on the bill seems to have stalled, giving way to other legislative priorities like reinstating the firing squad as a means of execution.
Wyoming
Working group looks at Cowboy State’s Wild West regulatory environment: Like Delaware, Wyoming has a reputation for a business-friendly – or excessively loose, depending on who you ask – regulatory environment. Local outlets reported last month that state lawmakers are considering a series of bills to address it. The bills have been proposed by a special working group established last spring, shortly before the Secretary of State dissolved three Wyoming legal entities flagged by the FBI as fundraising instruments for North Korea.