Under the Spending Clause, Congress may impose a means of ensuring its funds, collected through taxation, are spent on the general welfare.
Pursuant to both the Spending Power and the Necessary and Proper Clause.
From this case: this principle was used to uphold a federal statute imposing criminal penalties for bribery of any organization receiving over $10,000/yr in federal funding.
A nexus between the bribe itself and federal money was not required.
A lack of specific connection does not eliminate the federal interest in ensuring recipients of federal funding are trustworthy
Money is "fungible;"Congress wants to ensure that government money is not "frittered away."
Problem with this case: If money is fungible, as SCOTUS reasons, then is this not an expansion of Congress's powers?