Expansion of Maryland Anti-Fraud Law Blocked At the Goal Line By Knaves

by Brian J. Markovitz
April 11th, 2014

"Death of the fraudster" by Georg Auer Hohensalzburg

Are you a Marylander?

Do you want your hard earned tax money going to companies who are defrauding the Maryland state government?

Probably not.

But, if you don't mind companies who contract with the Maryland state government who fraudulently take taxpayer funds, then Monday, April 7, 2014, the last day of the legislative session, was a great day for you.

On that day, the Maryland False Claims Act Amendment, HB 867, which passed the Maryland House of Delegates, was just about to make it through to a final vote on the Maryland Senate floor when it was postponed.  This delay killed the bill for another year.  This postponement was evidently orchestrated in last minute, backroom deals that are the all-too-familiar, stereotypical control of our country’s legislative bodies by special interest groups.

Currently, Maryland law only covers fraudulently taken health care funds, such as Medicaid.  This allows the state to recover illegally taken health care funds and subjects healthcare contractors who fraudulently obtain Maryland funds to penalties and damages.  House Bill 867’s enactment would have allowed the state to recover and penalize fraud on all of Maryland’s funds in the same manner, not just healthcare.

In theory, everyone should be against fraud.  Pope Francis, for instance, recently took a seriously hardline on people who steal from the government, implying by quoting Jesus that they be thrown in the sea with a stone around their neck.  President Abraham Lincoln came up with the idea for the federal law (aka “Lincoln’s Law”) in 1863 that House Bill 867 essentially duplicated.  The Federal False Claims Act even has bipartisan support in Congress, a rarity today.  So, what could be wrong with treating fraudulent non-healthcare contractors like fraudulent healthcare contractors?  Somehow stopping the stealing of taxpayer money is bad for business. Of course, this is true if your business is illegally obtaining and performing contracts with the State of Maryland.

What opponent groups fail to explain is that unreported and unrecovered fraud hurts, not only taxpayers, but honest businesses too who are at a competitive disadvantage by following the law.  As Jonathan Swift wrote in Gulliver’s Travels:

They [the Lilliputians] look upon fraud as a greater crime than theft, and therefore seldom fail to punish it with death; for they allege that care and vigilance, with a very common understanding, may preserve a man’s goods from thieves, but honesty has no defence against superior cunning; and, since it is necessary that there should be a perpetual intercourse of buying and selling, and dealing upon credit, where fraud is permitted and connived at, or has no law to punish it, the honest dealer is always undone, and the knave gets the advantage.

In Gulliver’s Travels, Lemuel Gulliver explains that he tried to defend a Lilliputian’s fraudulent actions to the state (“the emperor”) but realizing that there was no legitimate defense felt “heartily ashamed.”  While we can expect no such self-reflection by the special interests who support and are funded by the “knaves,” hopefully, the average citizen, like the little Lilliputians can make a push to enact a “law to punish” fraud next session.

Click here to get your state senator’s contact information. To see if they voted to kill the bill (a “yea” being bad), go here.

Brian Markovitz is a principal in the firm’s Labor and Employment and Civil Litigation practice groups who focuses primarily on helping victims who have suffered severe injustice in the workplace. He represents individuals throughout Maryland, the Washington D.C. area and across the country in complex employment litigation and appellate matters involving wrongful termination, retaliation by employers in response to reporting fraud or misconduct and discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age and sexual orientation. 

Contact Brian Markovitz

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.


The JGL Law Blog is made available by the Firm and/or the law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law. The JGL Law Blog is not designed to and does not provide specific legal advice. Use of, or comments on, this Blog does not create an Attorney Client Relationship with the Firm or any of the authors of the Blog Posts.

This blog is for general informational purposes only. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA is a law firm and some of the information on the blog relates to legal topics. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA does not offer or dispense legal advice through this blog or by e-mails directed to or from this site. By using the blog, the reader agrees that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between the reader and Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA or its attorneys. The blog is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your state. The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While the blog is revised on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed at or through the blog are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. The JGL Law Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service in Circular 230, we inform you that any tax advice contained on this site (including any links provided) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.