Two years after stepping down as Minnesota's attorney general, Mike Hatch has inserted himself into another controversy, renewing speculation at the Capitol that he continues to cast a long shadow over the office and his successor and protégé, Lori Swanson.
Legislators, lawyers and lobbyists noticed something missing this year when they revived their push for a state false claims act, which would financially reward whistleblowers who expose fraud. The state attorney general's office, which had long lobbied for the measure, was now suddenly silent.
"I am stunned with the absence of support from you or your office, despite my repeated requests," Brian Wojtalewicz, a state trial lawyers association official, wrote Swanson last month.
Swanson never responded -- but Hatch, her predecessor, did. The move immediately raised eyebrows, though Hatch and Swanson said the former attorney general was merely providing his opinions given his expertise on the subject.
In an e-mail response to Star Tribune questions, Hatch said he became involved in this year's debate because legislators, lobbyists and clients had sought his advice and because "people around the Capitol were frequently mentioning my name as the 'godfather' of the False Claims Act."
Nonetheless, in a letter to Wojtalewicz, Hatch surprised advocates of the measure by picking apart the proposed legislation, noting it might be too costly, even though he had pushed for a state false claims act as attorney general.
Hatch, saying he wasn't speaking for Swanson, also wrote disparagingly of the two DFL legislators who are chief authors of the proposal this year, saying that as lawyers they might "profit from the legislation." One of the two, Rep. Steve Simon, DFL-St. Louis Park, said he would leave it to others to decide whether Hatch's criticism was tied to Simon's push last year for the legislative auditor to conduct an inquiry into the attorney general's office. At the time, Swanson was under fire from some staff members over allegations of intimidation related to an effort to unionize her office.
For nearly half a year after Swanson succeeded him in 2007, Hatch remained on the attorney general's staff, fueling criticism of what some saw as his excessive influence. The latest episode is raising more questions.
"When somebody writes a letter to the attorney general," said Simon, Swanson's office should respond "instead of dispatching a friend or ally outside of the office."
Ben Wogsland, a spokesman for Swanson, said that Hatch, as the "inventor" of a state false claims act, was a logical choice to review the legislation. Hatch, he said, "has nothing to do with this office."
Swanson, for her part, did not send a representative to a recent House hearing on the proposal. Her office also was not present when two other House panels approved the legislation earlier this year. Rep. Gene Pelowski, DFL-Winona, chairman of one panel, said that he was disappointed by the absence but that Swanson later called to apologize.
The legislative saga now threatens to jeopardize the proposal and has advocates scratching their heads.
Whistleblower bill
At its core, the legislation would impose civil penalties on anyone who makes false claims to a state or local government. The attorney general's office would have 60 days to choose whether to intervene after a whistleblower claim is made. If the attorney general intervened, a whistleblower would get at least 15 percent of the money recovered; if the office did not intervene, a whistleblower could get as much as 30 percent.
Legislative researchers said nearly two dozen states have adopted such legislation. "The chief law enforcement officer for the state of Minnesota ought to be finding ways to make this bill successful," said Sen. Ron Latz, DFL-St. Louis Park, the chief Senate author.
Wogsland said that Swanson's office did generally support the bill, but added: "We have been in contact with the Legislature on this bill ... [but] it's not our initiative."
Hatch's letter has, however, energized the legislation's opponents. Lawmakers, pointing to the state's $4.6 billion projected budget deficit, said they were also concerned with Swanson's private estimates that it could cost her office as much as $7 million to implement, an amount she has since lowered to $4 million over a two-year period. Advocates of the bill said the attorney general's office had never until this year argued that it would cost taxpayers.
"There's never been anyone here from the attorney general's office going, 'Whoa, this is a great idea,'" said David Feinwachs, the general counsel for the Minnesota Hospital Association, a leading opponent of the bill. "When you look at who's for it -- lawyers are for it."
Motives questioned
In his e-mail response to questions, Hatch said he supports a false claims act but had not advised Swanson on the legislation.
Simon and Latz said they were particularly incensed over Hatch's charge that as lawyers they stood to gain financially by the legal claims the legislation would encourage.
In his letter to Wojtalewicz, Hatch took particular aim at Simon, saying he was "a member of [the Robins Kaplan] law firm ... that would perhaps profit more than any other from the passage of such a law."
Simon was also at the forefront of last year's call for a legislative auditor's inquiry into the attorney general's office, saying he wanted the auditor to pursue allegations that attorneys in the office were being pressured to begin investigations that had no merit, file lawsuits prematurely and file incorrect information in affidavits.
The controversy gained steam a month later when Rep. Debra Hilstrom, DFL-Brooklyn Center, who was working in Hatch's law office, sent an e-mail quoting Hatch as saying Simon should be made to explain why he was involuntarily transferred by Swanson while he worked for her.
"This was an [attorney general's] initiative in 2004 and 2005 and 2006 and 2007 and 2008," Simon said of the proposal. "The people in the Legislature who really matter on this bill, they know the score here."
Mike Kaszuba • 612-673-4388
