Readers Write: Fraud, data centers, Trump administration, Farm Aid 40

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Like many others, I am saddened, angered and outraged by the rampant fraud in our state (“1st charge filed in autism fraud plot,” Sept. 25). Those who should have been in charge of preventing this abuse seem to be totally bereft of any self-awareness or accountability. How difficult is it to discern that tens of thousands of meals may not have been served out of tiny storefronts? Nothing was suspected with the proliferating housing program being operated out of dilapidated storefronts or rundown office buildings? The belated response from Gov. Tim Walz is to add another layer of government bureaucracy. Simply pitiful, in my opinion.

John Chapman, Victoria

•••

The Star Tribune headline “1st charge filed in autism fraud plot” describes a sad commentary of how our aid programs have disintegrated into chaos and fraud. And now attorney Ryan Pacyga, representing Asha Farhan Hassan, charged with wire fraud, makes a somewhat amusing but altogether too cavalier statement. He says in part, “She did real work. But after some time, fraud began to happen.” What, as though fraud came as a surprise?

Hassan did work, all right; lots of thought, planning and execution for this debacle to take place over years. The work was in recruiting families in the Somali community to enroll in the program when children did not have autism, paying kickbacks to parents, employing uncredentialed family members as “behavioral technicians” and billing for transportation services.

Earl Faulkner Sr., Edina

•••

As more and more fraud is coming to light and being uncovered in Minnesota by acting U.S. District Attorney Joe Thompson (a whopping billion dollars) under Walz’s leadership, I think Thompson could give him a good run for governor in our upcoming election. Just sayin’.

Craig B. Larson, Lino Lakes

Andy Wilke’s counterpoint (“Let facts, not fear, guide the data center debate,” Strib Voices, Sept. 19) attempts to gloss over the concerted efforts by cities like North Mankato to game Minnesota’s environmental review laws. His reassurance that there is a “robust” and “public” process is incorrect. In North Mankato, the developer, hiding behind a nondisclosure agreement, requested an AUAR, an environmental review of the property being considered for development. When the city of North Mankato voted to accept that environmental review, it agreed to the energy, water and other parameters set down in it. Any future developer would require no further environmental review for permitting or building. Wilke is mistaken in believing that the public would have any further environmental control.

Communities across the country have seen the same playbook. Data center developers demand secrecy, city officials accommodate it, and North Mankato residents who should have had the opportunity to have their say on a data center development were kept in the dark. In the entire 600-page AUAR, the term “data center” was never used.

A lawsuit like the one brought by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy is now an essential step to re-establish a fair, rigorous and transparent review process for a potential data center in North Mankato. And if data center developers can meet Minnesota’s fair and transparent standards, they shouldn’t need an NDA to hide behind in the first place.

Tom Hagen, North Mankato, Minn.

•••

I have always been proud of our state for its strong positive position on environmental progress. I don’t want to see our hard-won goals fall by the wayside. I don’t want to see anti-science “carbon capture” facilities burning trash and biomass, contributing to rolling back our progress on eliminating fossil fuels. I don’t want to see artificial intelligence data centers, an industry that prides itself on eliminating jobs, deplete our water table and push our energy bills through the roof.

Kathryn Kenney-Peterson, Winona, Minn.

The Big Beautiful Bill cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by $186 billion over 10 years. Currently there are 41.7 million Americans receiving SNAP each month. Since Ronald Reagan was president, the federal government has published reports on our country’s rate of food insecurity, until now! The current administration has decided that the last report on U.S. food insecurity will be issued next month. The reason given for stopping the report is that the information is being “politicized.” Let’s see, the administration deleted a study on the Department of Justice website showing that more mass shootings were being done by right-wing extremists. Before that his administration tried to take down the database that articulated where the government was spending taxpayer dollars.

Take down informational websites seems to be the new playbook for this president. This latest cancellation of the U.S. food insecurity report is cruel by all accounts. In Minnesota 440,000 people are currently receiving SNAP benefits, including 152,000 children and 72,000 seniors. These are low-income families, seniors and the disabled who just do not have enough money for food. The cruelty of cutting food subsidies to those who need it most in order to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy is immoral. Now canceling the report that articulates food insecurity in this country and how many of our citizens are suffering from it is despicable. Will all of these individuals be any less hungry because there will no longer be public reporting?

Jan McCarthy, Eden Prairie

•••

Gary Brisbin, Fridley

•••

Headlines appearing in the Strib of recent days include “EPA scientists told to not publish studies” (Sept. 21) and “After cuts to food stamps, U.S. to stop measuring food insecurity” (Sept. 22). In a democracy, they say that one may be entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts. Who would know this better than an aspiring dictator? Keeping the public in the dark is vital to any junta.

As citizens and taxpayers who choose democracy, this is unacceptable. As workers, investors and entrepreneurs who value free enterprise and a capitalist system, this is unacceptable. A level playing field and access to information that we have paid for with our tax dollars is essential, regardless of whether the information is flattering to our leaders or not. It is up to each one of us to let our elected officials — most notably the chief executive —where we stand.

Gregory Olson, Eden Prairie