U.S. lawmakers are asking the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into thousands of suspicious comments supporting a proposal to expand access to private equity and other alternative investments in Americans' retirement plans. The lawmakers are also asking officials at the Department of Labor, which proposed the modifications to retirement policy, to look into the matter.

The issue came to light in a Bloomberg investigation that found that nearly 12,000 comments submitted to the DOL showed signs of being fabricated in a fake show of support for the proposal.

Some people whose names appear in the comment record for the proposal told Bloomberg that they hadn't made any such submissions. Other comments were submitted in the names of deceased people. Most of the submissions in support of the rule didn't include identifying information such as the commenter's city or email address.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and Reps. Bobby Scott (D., Va.) and Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) have sent letters to the heads of the Justice Department, FBI, and Labor Department, as well as the DOL's inspector general asking for investigations.

"This is incredibly concerning," the lawmakers wrote to Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel. "As you know, federal law prohibits knowingly making any materially false statement or representation in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch."

The Justice Department and the Labor Department didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the lawmakers' calls for investigations. The FBI declined to comment.

The DOL's proposal, issued in March, has received more than 47,000 comments, most of which oppose the measure. As is typical in high-profile rule-making proceedings, many of the comments are form letters. Groups that support or oppose a measure commonly orchestrate campaigns to flood the agency proposing a regulation with comments reflecting their position.

But those submissions come from real people who presumably agree with the sentiment of the comments they file. The nearly 12,000 comments Bloomberg flagged appear to be fabrications, filed in the guise of people who had nothing to do with the submission, if they are even still living.

The proposal, which followed from an executive order issued by President Donald Trump in 2025, would offer a legal safe harbor for retirement plan fiduciaries to include alternative assets such as private equity, private credit, real estate, and cryptocurrencies as long as they acted prudently in making those investment decisions. Supporters say the measure will broaden access to asset classes with substantial upsides. Critics counter that many of the assets in question are risky, opaque, and carry high fees, making them a poor fit for the typical American's retirement plan.

Bloomberg identified five templates among the suspect submissions supporting the proposal, including the argument that expanding access to investments would boost small businesses and the broader economy.

A comment purportedly submitted by Lyngrid Rawlings, who according to Bloomberg died in 2024, reads in part:

"Democratizing 401(k) access to private markets would unlock additional capital to be invested in U.S. businesses, supercharging the economy. The proposed rule could ultimately enable small businesses to receive more capital to invest in their operations and create more jobs in local communities."

The lawmakers, who oppose the alternative-investment proposal, are asking the Labor Department's inspector general to audit the comments received on the proposal. They are also asking Keith Sonderling, the department's acting secretary, a series of questions, including whether anyone from DOL or the Trump administration had any involvement in the comment-submission process.

"This reporting is incredibly concerning and raises legitimate questions about whether DOL's public comment process for agency rulemakings has been corrupted during the Trump administration," they wrote. "The reporting also magnifies the lack of verifiable public support for DOL's proposed rule, representing yet another reason why it should be withdrawn."

Write to advisor.editors@barrons.com