The article explains it fairly well. If the government takes no action after receiving information about fraud in one of its programs, the individual citizen/employee that brought the information is allowed to sue on behalf of the feds and himself. If the suit finds that fraud was committed, the individual gets a large portion of the recovery. The procedure is designed to 1) encourage reporting of fraud by individual/employees, and 2) prod the feds into prosecuting the cases.
What happens in many cases, is that the fraud allegation is only partially documented, the feds don’t proceed, and then law firms specializing in these cases pounce like hungry wolves, get complete discovery and fashion huge multi-million dollar cases. It sometimes is almost fraud in itself.
What you describe sounds like something we don’t need. What we do need though is timely, relevant and effective congressional oversight of agencies and individuals that ignore valid claims of fraud. A lot of people don’t understand what is valid and a lot of other people use that as an excuse to ignore what they don’t want to see. I don’t see any new or changed law preventing either thing.
Election frauds also?