President Trump plans to name Vice President JD Vance as chairman of a new White House anti-fraud task force targeting welfare abuses in California and other states, according to multiple sources familiar with the planning.

Task Force Leadership Structure

Trump intends to sign an executive order within days officially establishing the task force with Vance at the helm, signaling the administration’s commitment to combating fraud. Andrew Ferguson, current chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, will serve as vice chairman while maintaining his consumer protection duties. Ferguson will oversee the task force’s daily operations and coordinate between agencies to ensure effective fraud detection and prevention efforts.

Colin McDonald, nominated by Trump for a newly created fraud investigator position at the Justice Department, will report directly to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. Despite his Justice Department role, McDonald will work closely with both Vance and Ferguson to coordinate investigations across federal agencies. This arrangement creates a direct line between the White House and Justice Department fraud investigations.

Political Concerns and Opposition

The task force structure has already drawn criticism from Democrats and government watchdog groups who worry about potential political interference in investigations. Critics express concern that the White House could pressure McDonald to target Trump’s political opponents rather than focusing solely on legitimate fraud cases. The arrangement blurs traditional lines between executive branch political leadership and law enforcement activities, raising questions about prosecutorial independence.

What This Means

The anti-fraud initiative represents a significant expansion of federal oversight into state welfare programs, particularly in California. By placing the Vice President in charge, Trump demonstrates the priority level assigned to combating government fraud. The task force will likely face legal challenges and political resistance from targeted states, setting up potential constitutional battles over federal versus state authority in welfare administration and oversight.