[House Prints 119-12]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress }
2d Session } COMMITTEE PRINT CP: 119-12
======================================================================
FULL COMMITTEE BUSINESS MEETING
MARK-UP OF SEVERAL BILLS
for the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 18, 2026
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov, oversight.house.gov, or docs.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-305 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
Jim Jordan, Ohio Robert Garcia, California, Ranking
Mike Turner, Ohio Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Michael Cloud, Texas Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Gary Palmer, Alabama Ro Khanna, California
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Pete Sessions, Texas Shontel Brown, Ohio
Andy Biggs, Arizona Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
Nancy Mace, South Carolina Maxwell Frost, Florida
Pat Fallon, Texas Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Byron Donalds, Florida Greg Casar, Texas
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Jasmine Crockett, Texas
William Timmons, South Carolina Emily Randall, Washington
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Yassamin Ansari, Arizona
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Wesley Bell, Missouri
Nick Langworthy, New York Lateefah Simon, California
Eric Burlison, Missouri Dave Min, California
Elijah Crane, Arizona Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Brian Jack, Georgia Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
John McGuire, Virginia
Brandon Gill, Texas
Vacancy
------
Mark Marin, Staff Director
James Rust, Deputy Staff Director
Ryan Giachetti, Deputy General Counsel and Parliamentarian
Christian Hoehner, Policy Director
Duncan Wright, Deputy Director of Policy
Alexandra Kilduff, Research Assistant
Mallory Cogar, Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5074
Robert Edmonson, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
BILLS CONSIDERED
Page
H.R. 2766, Special District Fairness And Accessibility Act
Bill Discussed................................................... 1
H.R. 6916, Federal Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act of
2025
Bill Discussed................................................... 5
H.R. 428, Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of 2025
Bill Discussed................................................... 8
H.R. 1722, Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025
Bill Discussed................................................... 9
H.R. 4642, Fiscal Contingency Preparedness Act of 2025
Bill Discussed................................................... 11
H.R. 2069, Stop Secret Spending Act of 2025
Bill Discussed................................................... 13
H.R. 7934, Settlement Agreement Information Database Act of 2026
Bill Discussed................................................... 15
H.R. 5525, Stop D.C. Capital Authoritarian Motorvehicle
Enforcement and Restoration Of Autonomy (CAMERA) Act
Bill Discussed................................................... 18
H.R. 6399, To Direct the United States Postal Service to
Designate a Single, Unique Zip Code for Highland City, Utah
Bill Discussed................................................... 25
H.R. 6247, Postal Naming Measure
Measure Discussed................................................ 29
INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
* Press Release in Opposition to H.R. 5525 from Mayor Bowser;
submitted by Rep. Norton.
* Article, WJLA, ``D.C. Issues Record $1 Billion in Traffic and
Parking Tickets, AAA calls it `predatory' ''; submitted by Rep.
Biggs.
* Article, carscoops, ``Just One Washington D.C. Camera Pulled
In Nearly $10 Million Last Year''; submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Article, NYP, ``Taxpayers On Hook for $163 Billion Worth of
Project Overruns, Including Controversial Fed Renovations'';
submitted by Rep. Biggs.
* Coalition Letter in Support of H.R. 4642; submitted by Rep.
Comer.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 2069, from Center for Procurement
Advocacy; submitted by Rep. Comer.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 428, 1722, 2069, 4642, 7934, from
National Taxpayers Union; submitted by Rep. Comer.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 6399, from Highland City Mayor and
Council; submitted by Rep. Comer.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 6399, from Utah County Commission;
submitted by Rep. Comer.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 2766, from National Special
Districts Association; submitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Letter in Support of H.R. 2766, from North Texas Municipal
Water District; submitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Letter in Opposition to H.R. 5525, from D.C. Council;
submitted by Rep. Norton.
* List of Current Agency Settlement Databases; submitted by
Rep. Palmer.
* Article, D.C. Policy Center, ``Predominately Black
Neighborhoods in D.C. Bear the Brunt of Automated Traffic
Enforcement''; submitted by Rep. Perry.
The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.
FULL COMMITTEE BUSINESS MEETING
MARK-UP OF SEVERAL BILLS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 2026
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
HVC-210, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Hon. James Comer
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Comer, Jordan, Turner, Gosar,
Foxx, Grothman, Cloud, Palmer, Higgins, Sessions, Biggs,
Fallon, Donalds, Perry, Timmons, Burchett, Boebert, Burlison,
Crane, Jack, McGuire, Gill, Garcia, Norton, Lynch, Khanna,
Mfume, Brown, Stansbury, Frost, Lee, Casar, Randall,
Subramanyam, Ansari, Bell, Simon, Min, Walkinshaw, Pressley,
and Tlaib.
Chairman Comer. The Committee will please come to order. A
quorum is present.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 5(b) and House Rule XI, Clause
2, the Chair may postpone further proceedings today on the
question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an
amendment on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are
ordered.
The Committee will continue to use the electronic system
for recorded votes and amendments and passage of the bills
before the Committee. Of course, should any problems arise,
which I do not anticipate, we will immediately transition to
traditional roll call votes. Any procedural or motion-related
votes during today's markup will be dispensed with by a
traditional roll call vote.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 2766, the Special
District Fairness and Accessibility Act. The clerk will please
designate the bill.
H.R. 2766, SPECIAL DISTRICT FAIRNESS
AND ACCESSIBILITY ACT
The Clerk. H.R. 2766, the Special District Fairness and
Accessibility Act, a bill to require the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget to issue guidance to agencies
requiring special districts to be recognized as local
government for the purposes of Federal financial assistance
determinations.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of substitute. The clerk will please designate the
amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 2766 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for a statement on the
bill and the amendment.
Today, we have an opportunity to address an issue affecting
Americans across the country. Many Americans receive essential
services through special districts, which are units of local
government authorized under state law to deliver specific
services to communities. There are approximately 35,000 special
districts across the country in every state. Some examples of
special districts includes ambulance service districts,
drainage districts, emergency service boards, and flood control
districts. These special districts provide critical services to
mostly rural communities across the Nation.
OMB already recognizes special districts as units of local
government similar to townships or villages, yet special
districts often struggle to compete for or have access to
Federal funding. The Special District Fairness and
Accessibility Act works to solve this problem by ensuring that
special districts are on equal footing with other units of
local government. The bill requires the Office of Management
and Budget to issue guidance to Federal agencies emphasizing
how special districts should be recognized as a unit of local
government. This legislation is supported by the National
Special Districts Coalition.
I want to thank Representative Pat Fallon from Texas for
his work in developing this important bipartisan bill, and I
urge my colleagues to support. I now recognize the Ranking
Member for his opening statement.
Mr. Garcia. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I know we have a bunch of
bipartisan bills today, so I want to thank you for your work
and collaboration. I support, of course, this bipartisan bill.
As a former Mayor, I know how important it is for local
governments to have access to Federal funding, and a critical
part of local government is special districts. We had a bunch
in the community I represented and, of course, across the State
of California.
Now, there are roughly 35,000 special districts across the
United States. They help deliver wastewater treatment, fire
protection, and many other critical services to millions of
Americans, including the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of
Southern California, of which is critically important for my
community. Now, unfortunately, special districts sometimes face
challenges when trying to access and compete for Federal
funding due to certain technical and process problems. This
bill would make it easier for special districts to access
Federal funds, and for that, we support this bill, and I yield
back.
Chairman Comer. The Ranking Member yields back. We are
going to pause for a moment. Representative Fallon is en route.
They said he is running, and for those of you who do not know,
Pat Fallon played football for Lou Holtz at Notre Dame, so I
assume he is in excellent physical condition still.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Comer. So, we are going to yield now, once he
catches his breath, to the sponsor of the bill, the gentleman
from Texas.
Mr. Fallon. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and as a point of
personal privilege, we buried Coach Holtz, Monday, and I want
to take just ten seconds to share with everyone. You want to
talk about somebody that loved this country, loved this
republic, born in humble beginnings, taught all 1,500 of his
players what love is, and love is doing your best and uplifting
everyone around you because there is a distinct difference
between being ambitious and striving for excellence. When you
strive for excellence, you bring everybody up, and he did that,
and you could see it in how many players were at that funeral
yesterday, hundreds of us. And even due to all the weather and
flight cancellations and go-arounds, and it was a beautiful
thing and a tribute to Coach Holtz, and he is a dynamic force
that will be sincerely missed. And I know for a fact I would
not be here representing nearly 800,000 Americans had I not
crossed his path. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I begin, I would like to enter two documents into
the record. First, a letter of support for the National Special
Districts Association.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and second is a letter
of support from the North Texas Municipal Water District.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Chairman. Special districts are a
unit of local government that deliver specialized services to a
specific community. There are many in the State of Texas and,
really, all over the country. For example, a special district
in Texas, for instance, includes water control and improvement
districts, hospital districts, crime control and prevention
districts, and sports and community venue districts. There are
35,000 of these nationwide, including, as I mentioned, 3,300 in
the State of Texas. California has approximately 3,000,
Colorado about 3,200, Illinois, about the same at 3,200. Every
state in our union has special districts and numerous
communities that greatly rely on them.
They are beneficial to all Americans, and particularly the
rural parts of the country, special purpose districts can
provide emergency response and utility services. In urban
areas, special districts can provide vital infrastructure or
educational services. These districts are given significant
powers, including the power to acquire, purchase, sell, or
lease real or personal property, sue and be sued, impose and
collect taxes, issue bonds, borrow money, and contract with
other entities. However, they struggle to access Federal
funding, and this bill changes that.
H.R. 2766 would establish the first-ever formal, federally
recognized definition for ``special districts.'' Additionally,
it directs the Office of Management and Budget to issue
guidance to Federal agencies requiring special districts to be
recognized as local government, which they are, and which would
clarify how special districts are eligible to receive Federal
assistance. This does not guarantee that they are going to get
it. It puts them on equal footing as a county, a school
district, the city, et cetera.
And to be clear, this bill does not increase government
spending, nor does it create additional Federal funding
programs. It simply allows these vital types of local
governments to have a chance to receive funding with already
existing Federal programs. It merely lets them compete for
them, that other local governments have access to, and it gives
them the proverbial seat at the table. I encourage my
colleagues to support this commonsense bipartisan legislation
that benefits special districts and, by extension, all
Americans. And I think, Mr. Chairman, if we pass this, you will
all feel better about yourselves. Thank you very much, and I
yield.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. Ms. Randall?
Ms. Randall. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. What many of our
neighbors already know is that a lot of the government services
that we rely on every day are provided by what are known as
special districts. As my colleagues have mentioned, they
provide water, and broadband internet, fire and EMS services,
electricity, libraries, hospitals, conservation programs like
rain barrels and rain garden planning to conserve water and
countless other services, and are especially important in rural
communities like the one I represent.
For example, I represent six public utility districts, all
of whom are very eager to see this policy pass. Our Planned
Unit Development (PUD)s make sure families and businesses can
literally keep the lights on. They make sure rural areas of the
Olympic Peninsula have reliable broadband access so that folks
can attend telehealth appointments and start their businesses.
And they are taking steps to harden the infrastructure and make
it more resilient in the face of worsening storms, flooding,
wildfires, atmospheric rivers, like the one my district is
experiencing as we speak.
But while they tirelessly carry out this integral work,
they are ineligible to apply for many Federal programs because
of the lack of definition for special districts in Federal law,
and by providing this definition, we can help these critical
government programs operate. We can ensure that folks have
access to, you know, library resources, like the bookmobiles in
rural communities, that folks can have access to broadband
that, you know, has the service that they rely on. We can make
sure that folks are able to have electricity that is reliable
as well, and that our firefighters are able to respond to house
fires, and so much more.
So, I am a proud sponsor of the Special Districts Grant
Accessibility Act and will be happily voting for this bill in
Committee and on the House Floor. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentlelady yields back. Any further
request to speak?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes
having it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 2766, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Request a roll call.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered. As previously
announced, further proceedings on the question will be
postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 6916, the Federal
Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act of 2025.
The clerk will please designate the bill.
H.R. 6916, FEDERAL PROGRAM INTEGRITY
AND FRAUD PREVENTION ACT OF 2025
The Clerk. H.R. 6916, the Federal Program Integrity and
Fraud Prevention Act of 2025, a bill to amend Title 41 United
States Code to identify individuals who commit certain Federal
felonies, implicating Federal programs as an excluded source on
the system for award management exclusions list, and for other
purposes.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute. The clerk will please designate the
amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 6916 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
I support the Federal Program Integrity and Fraud
Prevention Act of 2025. The Federal Government pays a
significant amount to contractors for services needed to help
agencies fulfill their missions. Receiving a contract, grant,
loan, or other form of Federal assistance is a privilege.
However, there are individuals who use it as an opportunity to
defraud the government. This bill closes a glaring loophole by
prohibiting individuals convicted of certain felonies in
connection with an agency contract, grant, loan, or other
financial assistance from receiving Federal awards.
Under H.R. 6916, fraudsters will no longer be allowed to
get rich from taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. This bill also
promotes transparency by requiring these individuals to be
listed on the System For Awards Management Exclusion List, thus
ensuring that Federal agencies know who these individuals are
before awarding a contract or grant. This Committee has
investigated fraud extensively, and we have seen that as long
as fraudsters are successful in obtaining contracts and Federal
financial assistance, they will continue to do so. We need more
proactive tools to prevent these individuals from taking
advantage of these loopholes that allow them to continue to get
rich on the taxpayers' dime.
I applaud the efforts of Representative Keith Self and
Emily Randall for leading this bill in the House and bringing
it before this Committee. I encourage my colleagues to support
this bipartisan, commonsense bill, and I now recognize the
Ranking Member for his statement.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you. I also want to thank the authors of
the bill. I particularly want to thank, of course,
Representative Randall for her work on this legislation,
another real commonsense piece of legislation. I want to
support this bill.
One of our most important responsibilities, of course, on
this Committee, is ensuring that the taxes paid by hard-working
Americans are spent wisely by their government. This bill would
protect American tax dollars from being misused by bad actors
by preventing individuals and companies convicted of certain
crimes, including fraud related to the Federal funds, theft of
government funds, or bribery tied to Federal funds, from
receiving Federal contracts and grants. If you break the law as
it relates to fraud and abuse of government, you should not
benefit from Federal contracts. It is as simple as that, and I
want to urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill.
Chairman Comer. The Ranking Member yields back. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Biggs. Are you seeking recognition? No.
Mr. Biggs. Not yet.
Chairman Comer. Okay. Ms. Randall?
Ms. Randall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
scheduling this bill for a markup. I am really glad to see my
legislation with Representative Self on the list of bills that
Oversight is considering today.
We have sat through many hearings in this Committee where
my colleagues on the other side have pointed fingers at
Democratically led cities and states, while ignoring what is
happening in their own backyards and failing to come to the
table with real solutions. And instead of political theater,
our constituents, our neighbors, deserve us to be spending time
discussing and enacting proven, vetted solutions to the actual
instances of fraud where there are well-documented patterns of
behavior. We should not be giving people committing fraud more
government contracts.
The Federal Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act is
that commonsense legislation to disrupt and end patterns of
fraud and prevent misuse of taxpayer dollars. This bill was
developed in conjunction with the Inspectors General, who do
the important work of rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse
across the Federal Government every day. The IGs come across
hundreds of instances where individuals were convicted of fraud
related to Federal Government programs and were still eligible
to apply for and receive Federal contracts. It is, frankly,
irresponsible and negligent for individuals convicted of fraud
to be able to receive taxpayer funds and possibly misuse them
again.
While under current law, agencies can debar specific
individuals from being eligible, this can be a long, tedious,
and bureaucratic process to navigate, especially if we are
talking about the need to do this for hundreds of individuals
perpetrating fraud. Anecdotally, I have been told it can take
upwards of 20 hours to prepare a suspension debarment package--
it is the technical term--for someone who has been convicted of
fraud. The Inspectors General carry out the investigation and
do referrals to agency suspension and debarment officials, who
then determines whether they take action to prevent a given
individual from being eligible to apply for Federal funds. Many
of these officials have small staffs, smaller over this last
year, making it easy for a backlog to develop.
A study by Inspectors General showed that of 550 felony
fraud convictions involving pandemic Federal program funds over
a three year period, more than 95 percent of those convicted
were not suspended or debarred from doing business from the
government. So, if we are doing the math, that is over 10,000
hours of work that we will save our Inspectors General through
this bipartisan bill to automatically deem individuals
convicted of fraud ineligible for government contracts for
minimum of three years. Each hour we give back to the IGs is
more time they can spend addressing other instances and
allegations of fraud.
And I am grateful for the leadership of the Inspectors
General, who raised the prevalence of this issue, who told us
about the problems that they are facing, and who helped us
develop this bill so that it actually solves the fraud problems
that they are facing and is not just another example of
political theater. Thank you, Representative Self, for your
partnership on this bill, and I urge all my colleagues to
support it. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. Any further debate on the bill?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed, signify by saying no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it. The amendment is agreed to.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Oh, wait.
Mr. Biggs. Oh, yes, yes, yes.
Chairman Comer. The question is now on favorably reporting
H.R. 6916, as amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does the gentleman from
Arizona seek recognition?
Mr. Biggs. I would seek a roll call vote.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered. As previously
announced, further proceedings on the question will be
postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 428, the Bonuses
for Cost-Cutters Act of 2025.
The clerk will please designate the bill.
H.R. 428, BONUSES FOR COST-CUTTERS ACT OF 2025
The Clerk. H.R. 428, the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of
2025, a bill to amend Title V, United States Code, to enhance
the authority under which Federal agencies may pay cash awards
to employees for making cost-saving disclosures, and for other
purposes.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of substitute.
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 428 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
I support the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters and Fraud Preventers
Act, which expands incentives for Federal employees to identify
and disclose waste and abuse before American taxpayer dollars
are spent. Federal employees are the best positioned to catch
wasteful spending, but without incentives to disclose such
spending, they may not speak up. That is why Congress created
cash awards in 1981 to encourage employees to take action. This
program was so successful that it was made permanent just over
a decade later.
The use of these authorities has resulted in creative ideas
coming from agency employees themselves, saving millions of
taxpayer dollars over the years. Such cost-saving ideas have
included allowing veterans to use otherwise safe discarded
medicine, eliminating wasteful printing of the Federal
Register, and much more, and now Congress can do more to expand
the cost-saving potential of these authorities. H.R. 428, as
amended, increases incentives for Federal employees by allowing
cash awards for reporting wasteful spending and improper
payments before funds go out the door. As we have heard over
and over again, the best way to recover misspent taxpayer
dollars is not to misspend them in the first place. I support
this initiative, which preserves Congress' constitutional role
in the appropriations process and helps reduce wasteful
spending.
I thank Representative Fleischmann from Tennessee for
bringing these reforms to our Committee and for working with us
to further improve the bill. I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation, and I now recognize the Ranking Member.
Mr. Garcia. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I also support this
legislation. The bill would save American taxpayers money by
encouraging public servants to identify cost savings in Federal
programs and would increase an existing award program cap of
$10,000 up to $20,000. Employees who eliminate waste, fraud,
and abuse would qualify for cash awards for their efforts.
Again, this is a good piece of legislation, and it is a
thoughtful way of putting the American people first as it
relates to spending our tax dollars. I urge my colleagues to
support this bill, and I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The Ranking Member yields back. I would
like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter
of support, dated March 18 [sic], from the National Taxpayers
Union endorsing H.R. 428, Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act; H.R.
1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act; H.R. 2069, the Stop
Secret Spending Act; H.R. 4642, the Fiscal Contingency
Preparedness Act, and H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement
Information Data base Act.
Without objection, so ordered.
Do any Members seek recognition on H.R. 428?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 428, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does Mr. Biggs seek
recognition?
Mr. Biggs. Roll call vote, please, sir.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs
from Arizona. As previously announced, further proceedings on
the question will be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 1722, the Billion
Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025. The clerk will please designate
the bill.
H.R. 1722, BILLION DOLLAR BOONDOGGLE ACT OF 2025
The Clerk. H.R. 1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of
2025, a bill to require an annual report of taxpayer funded
projects that are over budget and behind schedule.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute. The clerk will please designate the
amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 1722 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purpose of further amendment.
I recognize myself for 5 minutes for the purpose of making
a statement on the bill.
Congress must ensure that every taxpayer dollar is spent
efficiently. Each year, the Government Accountability Office
reports government projects that are above cost projection or
behind schedule. Such projects include Federal Information
Technology programs and National Nuclear Security
Administration projects. However, there are likely additional
government boondoggles flying under the radar, falling years
behind in schedule, running billions of dollars over budget.
The Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act will keep policymakers
and the public better informed about government-funded projects
that are significantly behind schedule or over budget. We
cannot fix what we do not know is broken. The bill directs
agencies to report on projects that are more than five years
behind schedule or have expenditures that are at least $1
billion more than the original cost estimate. Agencies must
also provide an explanation for the delay in the project's
completion or an increase in its cost. The Office of Management
and Budget is then required under the bill to submit an annual
report to Congress summarizing these troubled Federal projects.
Congress has a duty to oversee the Federal Government's
inefficiency and waste. This bill informs policymakers and
allows Congress to address failing government projects before
further taxpayer dollars are misused.
A similar bill passed the House in the 118th Congress, and
the identical Senate bill, sponsored by Senator Ernst from
Iowa, just recently passed the Senate this past December. I
want to thank Representatives Miller-Meeks and Ansari for their
work on the House companion bill. It is time to get this bill
sent to the President's desk. I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation, and I now recognize the Ranking Member.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this
legislation, which is also co-led by Representative Ansari.
Now, Congress has a duty to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent
efficiently, transparently, and with real accountability for
results. We know this bill would require that Congress be
notified of any project that is more than five years behind
schedule or a billion dollars over budget, and it will help
Congress perform critical oversight roles on behalf of the
American public. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and
I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. Any Member seek
recognition? The Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, I support this bill. Right now,
taxpayers are on the hook for more than $163 billion worth of
cost overruns, and this will be a great attack on that, and, I
mean, there are some specific ones. We think of the California
High Speed Rail line that has jumped in costs, an additional
project in Boston that went from $400 million to $1.4 billion.
And so, Mr. Chairman, I support this and ask that you allow
into the record a piece called, ``Taxpayers on the Hook for
$163 Billion Worth of Project Overruns, Including Controversial
Fed Renovations.''
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you.
Chairman Comer. Any other Members seek recognition?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 1722, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does the gentleman from
Arizona seek recognition?
Mr. Biggs. Request a roll call.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs
from Arizona. As previously announced, further proceedings on
the question will be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 4642, the Fiscal
Contingency Preparedness Act. The clerk will please designate
the bill.
H.R. 4642, FISCAL CONTINGENCY PREPAREDNESS ACT OF 2025
The Clerk. H.R. 4642, the Fiscal Contingency Preparedness
Act, a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury, in
coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget, to examine the ability of the Federal Government to
respond to potential fiscal shocks, and for other purposes.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute.
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 4642 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for a statement on the
bill and the amendment.
H.R. 4642 is a sound, commonsense bill that will increase
transparency and help Congress and the executive branch be
better prepared for future national emergencies. As we all
know, the United States is $38 trillion in debt, and that debt
is growing. Much of America's debt stems from Congress' and the
Executives' responses to the country's last two major crises:
the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. In
response to each emergency, Federal spending drastically
increased, and that spending massively increased our national
debt. For all we know, another major crisis is around the
corner, and we cannot afford to respond with the same lack of
fiscal irresponsibility. Harder choices than ever may have to
be made. This bill will help us be better prepared.
For the first time, it will require that the Department of
the Treasury, in its annual fiscal report to Congress, to
examine and inform Congress of the fiscal risk and impacts of a
Federal response to a wide range of potential national and
international crises. Armed with that knowledge, Congress and
the executive branch will be better positioned and know ahead
of time how much fiscal flexibility they will have to respond
to such a crisis if and when it comes. As a result, they will
be better able to take prudent measures in advance to help make
more fiscal space available to address the crisis. As Chairman
of this Committee, I hope that includes eliminating every last
bit of waste, fraud, and abuse out of our Federal spending so
taxpayer resources are preserved to respond to taxpayers'
genuine needs.
Importantly, Treasury must examine and report on these
issues in coordination with the Office of Management and
Budget, and as an additional safeguard to assure accuracy, the
bill requires the Government Accountability Office to review
Treasury's methodology and report its findings to the House and
Senate Budget Committees. I want to thank Representative Ben
Cline from Virginia and Representative Jared Golden for their
leadership on this issue and bringing this bill to
consideration. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan
legislation, and I recognize the Ranking Member for his
statement.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this
legislation as well. When I was Mayor and the COVID-19 pandemic
hit, along with the horrific shock to the country, the pandemic
spilled to our economy, hit our city's budget and our ability
to deliver critical services. Now, we learned lessons, and
among them is that we must always be prepared. Disasters
happen. They are going to continue to happen, whether it is
economic depressions, a crisis around energy, a pandemic, or a
natural disaster. Now, this would help ensure that we are
prepared to respond to economic recessions, pandemics, cyber-
attacks, and more. We must and can be ready for anything.
As this bill moves to the Floor, I want to be clear that,
as we have learned from the pandemic and other disasters,
responding to these incidents means making sure that we have
strong programs in place to protect the American people and to
provide help when we need it. We should not be using fiscal
disaster readiness as an excuse to push through cuts, which
leave us more vulnerable. I urge my colleagues to support the
bill in front of us, and I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. I ask unanimous
consent to enter into the record statements of support from the
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Americans for
Prosperity, National Taxpayers Union Foundation, Tax
Foundation, Millennial Debt Foundation, Economic Policy
Innovation Center, Cato Institute, Concord Action, R Street
Institute, Peterson Solutions Fund, Bipartisan Policy Action
Center, Progressive Policy Institute, and the Problem Solvers
Caucus, endorsing H.R. 4642, the Fiscal Contingency
Preparedness Act.
Without objection, so ordered.
Do any Members seek recognition on the bill?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on in favorably reporting H.R. 4642, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does the gentleman from
Arizona seek recognition?
Mr. Biggs. Request a roll call.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs. As
previously announced, further proceeding on the question will
be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 2069, the Stop
Secret Spending Act of 2025. The clerk will please designate
the bill.
H.R. 2069, STOP SECRET SPENDING ACT OF 2025
The Clerk. H.R. 2069, the Stop Secret Spending Act of 2025,
a bill to amend the Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act of 2006 to ensure that other transaction
agreements are reported to USAspending.gov, and for other
purposes.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute.
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 2069 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
I support the Stop Spending Act of 2025, which requires
Federal agencies to report complete and accurate information to
USAspending.gov on how they spend congressionally appropriated
funds. Since 2006, agencies have been required to be more
transparent with how they are spending taxpayer dollars. The
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, as later
amended by the DATA Act of 2014, established USAspending.gov, a
public data base of all government spending. Transparency in
government spending is critical because it assures the American
people that agencies are using their hard-earned money
appropriately. In short, transparency helps build trust in
government.
Unfortunately, over the years, we have found that there are
gaps in what gets reported to USAspending.gov. Increasingly,
Federal agencies have used spending authorities known as other
transaction agreements, or OTAs. OTAs are not subject to
certain Federal acquisition laws and requirements and, most
importantly, are not required to be reported to USAspending.gov
under current law. The GAO has found that agencies use
different methods to report the billions of dollars in spending
related to OTAs. However, this reporting has been inconsistent,
and it is unknown if this information is even complete. That
means we do not have full transparency over how billions of
dollars are spent by Federal agencies. The Stop Secret Spending
Act corrects this issue by requiring OTA spending to be
reported to USAspending.gov.
The bill also requires agencies report annually on types of
funding that previously were unreported for a variety of
exemptions. Agencies will need to report the amounts and the
reasons why these appropriated dollars were not reported. This
provides more transparency to the public and allows all of us
to hold agencies accountable. Last, this bill restores the
requirement for agency Inspectors General to review the
entirety of data submitted to USAspending.gov to ensure that it
is complete and accurate. Transparency does not mean anything
if the spending information that gets reported is not complete
or accurate.
I thank Representatives Barry Moore from Alabama and Jimmy
Panetta for leading this bill in the House of Representatives.
I urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense,
bipartisan bill, and I yield to the Ranking Member.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also support this
bill. The American people work hard to make ends meet,
particularly with costs skyrocketing and failed policies, both
at home and abroad. The American people deserve to know how the
Federal Government is spending their money. This bill would
increase transparency on how taxpayer dollars are spent by
requiring agencies to report each year on Federal spending that
is not currently disclosed on USAspending.gov. I urge my
colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. I ask unanimous
consent to enter to the record a letter from the Center for
Procurement Advocacy, dated March 16, 2026, endorsing H.R.
2069, the Stop Secret Spending Act.
Without objection, so ordered.
Do any Members seek recognition to speak on the bill?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 2069, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does the gentleman from
Arizona seek recognition?
Mr. Biggs. Request a roll call.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs. As
previously announced, further proceedings on the question will
be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 7934, the
Settlement Agreement Information Data base Act of 2026. The
clerk will please designate the bill.
H.R. 7934, SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
INFORMATION DATABASE ACT OF 2026
The Clerk. H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information
Data base Act, a bill to amend Chapter 3 of Title V, United
States Code, to require the publication of settlement
agreements, and for other purposes.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute.
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 7934 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purpose of further amendment.
I am going to yield to the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Palmer,
but before I do, Gary, when Pat Fallon came in, I announced to
the world that he played college football at Notre Dame for a
famous coach, Lou Holtz. And I feel like I need to recognize
and announce to the world, if they did not already know, you
played college football at Alabama for another famous coach,
Bear Bryant. If I played college football, I would say that in
every opening statement about myself, but I did not.
Mr. Palmer. Before Lou Holtz went to Notre Dame, he was the
head coach at Arkansas, and we played them for the national
championship.
Chairman Comer. Yes.
Mr. Palmer. And beat them. And Lou Holtz told me this
himself. He said when Coach Bryant walked across the field at
the end of the game, he said, ``Lou, that is the best game we
played all year,'' and Coach Holtz said, ``Well, I am just glad
I was there to see it.''
[Laughter.]
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes the sponsor of the
bill, Mr. Palmer.
Mr. Palmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Federal
Government's duty to serve the public interest relies on
transparency and accountability to all its citizens. Due to
poor recordkeeping, however, it is impossible for Congress and
the public to determine the comprehensive impact of Federal
settlement agreements and consent decrees. States,
municipalities, industry stakeholders, and taxpayers are often
directly affected by the terms of these agreements, but are
prevented from accessing the details of these settlements and
decrees. I personally encountered this problem as far back as
2008 when I worked at a think tank. Federal courts, agencies,
and state and local municipalities were unable to identify the
number of consent decrees Alabama was legally bound to enforce.
We were told the cases were only filed by case name or number,
and accordingly, it would be impossible to retrieve Alabama-
specific cases.
Currently, most of the public's access to Federal
settlement information is based on individual agency
discretion, and information usually is issued in the form of a
press release. Worse yet, there are no uniform standards for
internal or public recordkeeping across Federal Agencies. In
some cases, heads of agencies will also declare a settlement to
be confidential and seal the contents without providing any
explanation. It is, therefore, impossible for the public to
determine the comprehensive costs and outcomes of Federal
settlement agreements. The bipartisan Settlement Agreement
Information Data base Act, or SAID Act, will address this
problem.
The bill establishes a centralized and electronic data base
of settlement agreements entered into by Federal Agencies.
Basic information about settlement agreements already collected
by Federal Agencies, such as payments and dates, will be
searchable for the public online through this data base. This
will include agreements that impose payment obligations of $10
million or more to a settling party entered into after January
2015. In circumstances where the terms of an agreement or
decree are deemed confidential, the bill requires agency heads
to issue a written public statement justifying the
nondisclosure.
H.R. 7934 provides long-overdue transparency and
accountability standards to Federal settlement agreements and
consent decrees. I thank my friend and colleague, Mr. Mfume,
for his leadership in joining me as co-lead for this bipartisan
SAID Act. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I
yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. I recognize the
Ranking Member.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also support this
bill. This bill, as we know, would create a data base of
settlement agreements entered into by Federal agencies with the
victims of violations of Federal, civil, or criminal law. Heads
of agencies would be required to submit details about the types
of settlement agreements they have entered to, the parties who
are involved, and specific violations and any amounts paid.
This is good for transparency and accessibility of the public.
I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. I recognize
myself for 5 minutes.
H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information Data base
Act is a commonsense measure that increases transparency and
enhances public participation in government policymaking.
Transparency and public participation are vital to ensure the
public's continued trust in our government. But for years, they
have been undermined by Federal Agencies that have entered into
legally binding settlement agreements and consent decrees in
litigation over government action. These agreements and decrees
typically result from secret negotiations with activist
plaintiffs that diminish transparency and essentially prevent
the public from participating in important policy decisions.
It is currently impossible for Congress and the public to
determine the comprehensive impact of these settlement
agreements and consent decrees on state and local governments
and private sector entities that must follow mandates the
settlements and decrees require. The burdens imposed can be
difficult to see and understand, but state and local
governments, industry stakeholders, and taxpayers can be
directly affected for years by these settlements and decrees,
even though they were unable to provide input. This legislation
seeks to correct that problem.
The bill requires Federal agencies to publish information
regarding settlement agreements and consent decrees on a
publicly available electronic data base. Under the bill's
requirements, these agency data bases will include dates,
payments, attorney fee awards, and a list of state and local
governments identified by the agreements and decrees.
Currently, agencies typically release such information at their
discretion and often publicize only facts that reflect
favorably upon the agency. Furthermore, the terms to which
agencies agree are often deemed confidential. This bill
requires an agency head to submit annual reports to Congress
and make publicly available information stating the basis for
maintaining confidentiality, allowing for additional scrutiny.
This will increase the transparency of the Federal Government
and shine a much-needed light on settlement agreements and
consent decrees into which government agencies enter.
I again want to thank the sponsor of the bill,
Representative Palmer, for his longstanding leadership on this
issue, and Representative Mfume for helping push these reforms
in this Committee. I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation.
Do any other Members seek recognition? Ms. Ansari.
Ms. Ansari. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I will discuss H.R.
1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025. It is one of
the previous bills.
Chairman Comer. Okay.
Ms. Ansari. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to see this
bill that I am co-leading with Congresswoman Miller-Meeks being
considered in this markup. H.R. 1722, the Billion Dollar
Boondoggle Act, is a sensible bipartisan measure to do what
DOGE and Elon Musk were unable to: hold the Federal Government
accountable for projects that are way behind schedule and over
budget. Specifically, our bill would require the public
disclosure of every taxpayer-funded project that is $1 billion
or more over budget or five years or more behind schedule.
Under this Administration, we have children and family
having their Medicaid, SNAP, and other essential programs
ripped away. We all deserve to know what the Federal Government
is spending funds on instead and if those dollars are going to
good use. And it is not just this Administration. For years,
both Democrats and Republicans have criticized the Federal
Government for wasting taxpayer dollars on costly and delayed
projects that have to go through mountains of red tape to get
approved. Although the corruption throughout the Federal
Government right now is stunning and unprecedented, this is
truly a long-lasting issue that we need to deal with. That is
why this bill previously passed out of this Committee, and I
hope it will again.
I support H.R. 1722 because it would immediately inform the
public about the scale, scope, and extent of bloated projects
in the Federal Government and expose corruption within the
Trump Administration. I want to again thank my co-lead
Congresswoman Miller-Meeks, for her work on this bill, and I
yield back. Thank you.
Chairman Comer. Any further Members seek recognition?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of the substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 7934, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. For what purpose does Mr. Biggs seek
recognition?
Mr. Biggs. I request a roll call.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs. As
previously announced, further proceedings on the question will
be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 5525, the Stop D.C.
Capital Authoritarian Motorvehicle Enforcement and Restoration
of Autonomy, or CAMERA Act. The clerk will please designate the
bill.
H.R. 5525, STOP D.C. CAPITAL AUTHORITARIAN
MOTORVEHICLE ENFORCEMENT
AND RESTORATION OF AUTONOMY (CAMERA) ACT
The Clerk. H.R. 5525, the Stop D.C. CAMERA Act, a bill to
repeal the authority of the District of Columbia to use
automated traffic enforcement systems and to erect signage
prohibiting right turns at red traffic signals.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute. The clerk will please designate the
amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 5525 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Perry from
Pennsylvania.
Mr. Perry. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill simply
repeals local D.C. laws relating to automated traffic
enforcement, as well as the D.C. Mayor's authorization to use
traffic enforcement systems and issue fines with these cameras.
In turn, the bill prohibits Washington, D.C. from operating its
traffic enforcement camera program and, two, repeals D.C. law
currently prohibiting drivers from making right turns on red.
And be clear, I said ``operating.'' They are actually not
really operating. These are two companies that they have
contracted with: one, Verra Mobility out of Mesa, Arizona; and
the other one, Hayden AI Technologies out of San Francisco,
California. So, the city is fleecing its residents and
everybody that visits D.C., and folks in Arizona and San
Francisco are making a boatload of money on it.
The residents and commuters of Washington are both sick and
tired of being fleeced for hundreds of dollars of petty
automated traffic fines, all in the name of alleged safety.
With thousands of drivers commuting across the District daily,
it is no wonder that the city relies on 536, and counting,
total traffic enforcement cameras across 5-and-a-half square
miles, which generate millions of dollars of revenues from the
people that can likely least afford it.
According to public traffic data, D.C. traffic fatalities
for 2023 were 52 and 2024 were 52, with the highest they have
been since 2007, which was 54. So, it is not getting safer out
there, folks. Despite a drop in traffic fatalities for 2025 and
the D.C. Mayor's fabricated Vision Zero camera plan to increase
pedestrian safety, anyone with common sense can see there is
zero correlation between these fatality figures and the
hundreds of cameras installed in the district over more than 25
years.
A study by the National Highway Traffic and Safety
Administration found that only .2 percent of all nationwide
road fatalities from 1982 to 1992 occurred at an intersection
permitting a right turn on red. In 2020, insurance provider,
AAA, deemed the city's enforcement of moving violation and
parking tickets as predatory. And to this day, city data
showing how these cameras have made drivers safe is, quite
frankly, nonexistent. They do not provide any data. Meanwhile,
a 2025 Consumer Affairs ranking placed Washington, D.C. in
first place for the worst traffic in the United States, with
D.C. having the longest average commute time in the country--
33-and-a-half minutes--and the second longest average commute
time in the country--6 hours and 35 minutes behind Los Angeles,
ladies and gentlemen, 5-and-a-half miles of Washington, D.C. To
put that in perspective, a typical D.C. commuter spends 72
hours a year of their lives lost in traffic in D.C.
According to the D.C. Chief Financial Officer, the city
generated $139.5 million from automated traffic enforcement in
Fiscal Year 2023, $213 million in Fiscal Year 2024, and $267
million in 2025, as the suspiciously sensitive, seldomly
recalibrated cameras issue speeding tickets for $100 to $500
depending on speed over the limit and road type. Additionally,
the District's red light camera program fines drivers $150 for
a signal pass, $100 for no right on red, and $100 for failing
to stop before a right on a red, even if there is no sign, no
signage, but you still get fined and nobody is there.
In 2025 alone, the city issued 3,160,690 total tickets,
with its total issued fines coming in at $366.3 million. More
than $100 million of these fines were issued in just six months
of the year, with more than 80 percent of the tickets being
issued to out-of-state drivers. How convenient. It is called
taxation without representation, folks.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Perry. As is, these automated cameras are expected to
yield over $1 billion between 2024 and 2028, with revenue
declining over time as people find out where they are.
Additionally, as of May 2024, drivers owed nearly $1.3 billion
in fines and penalties to the district.
In September, this Committee successfully passed two
amendments with bipartisan support, striking all D.C. Code
language permitting the city to install the use of traffic
cameras and instituting a right turn on red ban that began in
2025, in January.
I express my support of the Chairman's ANS to the bill, and
my goal is to bring driving autonomy back to the District, not
only for the people that live there, but for people that visit.
These cameras are a shameless money grab that continuously
deter tourists, aggravate commuters, and attack and defraud
local residents with hundreds of dollars in fines. I urge
support of passage of the bill, and I yield the balance, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you. I just want to, again, I think
something that is really important, and we continue to bring
this up in this Committee, is that the District have the
ability to govern themselves. I oppose this bill, which again,
another attack on the 700,000 D.C. residents and on democratic
principles. Now, I have strong opinions as a former Mayor on
these types of cameras, and I think they can be debated, I
think, in a way that is reasonable and responsible in different
cities and in different communities. I will agree that they can
also be misused in many cases, and I have seen that happen in
cities and communities. At the same time, I believe that the
decisions for the District should be left to the District and
the community.
D.C.'s locally elected officials are accountable to D.C.
residents, and local leaders should be empowered to address
local matters without Congress continuously interfering. We
should honestly be focused on ways that we can ensure the
support that they need, that the District needs. That should be
our focus, not continuously repealing bills as it relates to
D.C. traffic laws, criminal justice laws, and other laws
continue to be in front of us today. Again, I will say it
again, if we should be considering anything, it should be
statehood for the District at this moment. I urge my colleagues
to oppose H.R. 5525.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. Before I
recognize Mr. Higgins, Mr. Perry, do you have a UC?
Mr. Perry. Yes, I just want to enter into the record, if I
could please, Mr. Chairman, this article from the D.C. Policy
Center entitled, ``Predominantly Black Neighborhoods in D.C.
Bear the Brunt of Automated Traffic Enforcement.''
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Higgins from Louisiana.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate my
colleague, Representative Perry, for introducing this bill. Mr.
Chairman, I oppose all camera-based traffic code enforcement,
so wherever I have opportunity to vote against it, I will, to
oppose it, I will.
There is a huge difference, Mr. Chairman, between traffic
camera surveillance of intersections, which are incredibly
valuable for investigating vehicle crashes and solving crimes,
identifying vehicles involved in high-speed pursuits or in
criminal behavior, identifying vehicles fleeing from criminal
scenes. There are many, many circumstances where the
technologies of cameras mounted throughout a municipality or a
jurisdictional authority can be very helpful. So, that is a
huge difference from traffic code enforcement. That is,
essentially, remote enforcement of alleged traffic violations
and issuance of fines.
That is wrong. We should oppose it across the board. It
does not reflect even the basic standards of law enforcement
professionalism. Whatever side of the aisle you are on, you
would seek a responsible and accountable interaction between a
professional certified law enforcement officer and a citizen,
in this case, a vehicle operator, was alleged to have committed
some violation. So, a traffic enforcement camera removes the
observation, there is no initial observation by a post-
certified police officer. There is no personal interaction
between that observing police officer and the vehicle operator.
There is remote enforcement, and the recipient of that fine
really has no option other than to just pay the fine. They say
that you have an option, but you really do not because it is an
incredible intrusion upon your life to have to go show up at a
court. If you are actually working, young man, it is an
incredible intrusion on your life to actually show up in court
at some city that you visited and you receive an automated
traffic ticket from.
How would my fellow citizens feel if a police officer pulls
you over, he turns on his lights, you pull over, and instead of
walking to your passenger window and knocking on the window,
and you put the window down a little bit these days--that is
what is cool--and you just say, good afternoon, sir or madam, I
am Captain Clay Higgins, St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office.
The reason I stopped you is because you weaved two times over
into the other lane. I want to make sure you are okay. You okay
to drive? But instead of an interaction that might start off
like that, you have no interaction. The police officer pulls
you over and you sit there, and he just walks up to your car
and, like, sticks a citation to your windshield and leaves. How
would you feel about that because that is what is happening
with these traffic cameras.
So, it is impossible to support the long-held principles
that we pursue regarding professional and community
interactions between law enforcement and the citizens that we
intend to serve, it is impossible to support those principles
and support automated traffic camera enforcement and fining of
the citizenry. So, I appreciate the bill being brought. I would
like the chance to vote against this stuff. I yield.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. The Chair
recognizes Ms. Norton from Washington, D.C.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I strongly oppose this
undemocratic and paternalistic bill, which would repeal two
traffic laws enacted by the District of Columbia. Today's
markup is the third markup this Congress of a bill that would
interfere with these two laws. Last year, this Committee passed
a bill that would, among other things, repeal these two laws,
and the House Committee on Appropriations passed a bill that
would prohibit D.C. from using local funds to carry out these
two laws. Over the past five years, the sponsor of this bill
has tried repeatedly to repeal or block these two laws as well
as another D.C. traffic law, but he is not the first Republican
to try to repeal D.C.'s automatic traffic enforcement law.
Republicans have been trying to repeal that law since 2014.
The 700,000 District residents, the majority of whom are Black
and Brown, are capable and worthy of governing themselves. If
residents do not like how the members of the D.C. Council vote,
residents can vote them out of office. That is democracy. If
D.C. residents do not like how Members of Congress vote on
local D.C. matters, residents cannot vote them out of office.
That is the antithesis of democracy.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record statements
opposing this bill from D.C. Mayor and 12 members of the D.C.
Council.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Ms. Norton. The substance of this bill should be irrelevant
since there is never justification for Congress to legislate on
local matters, but I will discuss it.
D.C. is not unique in either using automated traffic
enforcement or prohibiting turning right on red light. For
example, automatic traffic enforcement is used by hundreds of
jurisdictions in about half the states, both red and blue,
including in the home states of both the Chairman and sponsors
of this bill. According to an automated enforcement program
checklist issued by the Governors Highway Safety Association,
Advocates for Highway and Automobile Traffic Safety, AAA, and
the National Safety Automatic Enforcement, enforcement is an
effective tool to make roads safer.
D.C. residents have all the obligations of American
citizenship, including paying Federal taxes, serving on juries,
and registering with the Selective Service, yet Congress denies
them full local self-government and voting representation in
Congress. The only solution to this undemocratic treatment is
to grant D.C. statehood. Congress has the authority to admit
D.C. as a state. D.C.'s statehood bill, H.R. 51, would reduce
the size of the Federal District from 68 square miles to two
square miles, consisting of the White House, the Capitol, the
Supreme Court, and the National Mall. This residential and
commercial area of D.C. would be a new state. I urge Members to
vote no on H.R. 5525. Free D.C. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair
recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I associate myself with
the statements of Mr. Higgins and Mr. Perry. While I do not
dispute that there are many times that traffic, that you can
have a speed trap with police officers, just like you can have
one with cameras, to raise revenue as opposed to necessarily
making sure that traffic moves freely and safely. That is not
what this is about, though. I mean, this is about 547 automated
traffic cameras that bring in hundreds of millions of dollars a
year, and as one report has noted, that generates more money
than alcohol, cigarette, motor vehicle, fuel, and estate taxes,
and all revenue from licenses and permits and personal property
taxes combined. That is why they do this. It is not for safety,
and it is a problem. And it is one of the reasons that in my
home state, I have opposed every use and actually sponsored and
was able to get laws taking down photo radar enforcement. So, I
could not get it done completely, but we got it significantly
done on any state highway in Arizona.
Mr. Chairman, I urge people to vote yes on this, and I
would submit for the record a couple of articles, one called
``Just One Washington, D.C. Camera Alone Pulled in Nearly $10
Million Last Year;'' and another one, ``D.C. Issues Record $1
Billion in Traffic and Parking Tickets. AAA Calls it
Predatory.''
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Biggs. Yield back.
Chairman Comer. Yield back. Ms. Randall.
Ms. Randall. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to start by
saying that I strongly support D.C. statehood and have
consistently opposed any bills infringing on D.C. home rule,
and I will continue to do so. That being said, I also want to
be clear that I have serious reservations about how traffic
cameras across the country are being operated. In Washington
State, my home state, there have been reports that ICE and
Border Patrol are accessing Flock Safety camera data without
authorization and without local agencies' awareness. I do not
think we have seen any sort of public accounting from Flock on
how and why that data was shared, or from ICE and Border Patrol
on why they access that data and what they used it for. The law
that would be repealed by this bill authorizes automatic
traffic enforcement for moving infractions, such as running red
lights, speeding, running stop signs, and it is my
understanding that those cameras are not operated by Flock.
I plan to vote against this D.C. Stop CAMERA Act because I
support D.C. home rule and because I believe that Congress
should take a systematic nationwide approach to how we address
this issue and not dictate special rules for one city that no
other city is subject to. But I would like to see this
Committee have a serious conversation about the weaponization
of traffic camera data and investigate the misuse of this data.
It seems like I have colleagues across the dais who also have a
concern with traffic camera data more broadly and may have a
meaningful discussion. We need to put serious data privacy and
civil rights restrictions in place to prevent future abuses,
but I will be voting no on this bill. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. Yield back. I recognize the Ranking Member.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you. Obviously, I made my comments, but I
just was compelled to just add to Representative Randall. I
just want to, for the record also, just note that I share the
same concerns. And so, I strongly support D.C. having their
ability to rule themselves and to pass laws that benefit their
residents, and I will continue to be consistent on that. But I
just want to uplift some of the comments from my colleagues in
the Majority that I also share deep concerns about camera
technology, the way it is used.
Having served as Mayor and worked with our own police
department, I think we had challenges with these types of
cameras. We actually removed them in our city when I was Mayor.
We began a process of removing these cameras from the community
because of the concerns, and we worked with law enforcement in
that process. I am proud of that. And so, if there are
additional conversations that can happen in this Committee as
it relates to some standards, as it relates to this type of
data sharing, I would welcome that as well.
Chairman Comer. Yield back. I recognize myself.
I support the Perry bill, and I will be happy to yield any
additional time to Mr. Perry, the sponsor of the bill, if he
wants it.
Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I just want to reiterate
again that 80 percent of the fines go to people from out of
town, out of state, if you want to call it that, even though
D.C. is not a state. Where do the people that come from across
the country to their Nation's Capital, where do they get a vote
on the D.C. Council, on D.C. leadership, and on the cameras? As
my colleague, Mr. Higgins, a respected law enforcement officer,
opined, once you leave town, you are not going to fly back, you
are not going to drive back to pay a hundred-dollar fine. You
are just going to pay it, which is why this is done. This is
done to raise revenue. It has nothing to do with safety.
As I said before, there are two companies on the West
Coast, essentially, that are running this operation for
Washington, D.C., and everybody is making money except the
people that are being fleeced, whether they live in town or out
of town. You know, we certainly support D.C.'s ability to
govern themselves, but, unfortunately, in this case, what they
are doing is fleecing everybody that comes to Washington, D.C.,
and we do not support that. We also do not support the fleecing
of their residents for which they do not want to raise taxes
for the programs which they want to impose, and that is their
business, I suppose. But let us just open this up and make it
very clear to everybody that you are being charged a tax one
way or the other to pay for these programs, and of course, you
are not voting for that tax. They do not want to have to vote
for that because voters will not like that, so they just
collect the tax, you know, unfairly and unequally through,
like, no right turn on red. There is not even a sign there.
Like, people come from, you know, other states, if there is a
sign there, I am sure they would be happy to comply, but you do
not know that you are not allowed to turn right on red, and, of
course, there is no safety infraction there in most of the
intersections.
So, look, if D.C. can govern itself appropriately, the
Federal Government by Constitution will butt out. But as you
all know, especially residents from D.C., the Constitution is
very clear about who is supposed to be governing D.C., and so
this is absolutely appropriate and in accordance with the law.
You might not like that law. You might not like the
Constitution of the United States. We have a process for
changing it, and I would encourage those who do not like those
things to go ahead and engage in that process. But until then,
we are going to make sure that we are looking out for the
citizens of the United States of America and the citizens of
D.C., whether the D.C. Government wants to do that or not. And
I will yield the balance back to the Chairman.
Chairman Comer. And I conclude. Any Members seeking further
debate?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the question is now on the
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it. The amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 5525, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Garcia. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote has been ordered by Ranking
Member Garcia. As previously announced, further proceedings on
the question will be postponed.
Our next item for consideration is H.R. 6399, to direct the
United States Postal Service to designate a single, unique Code
for Highland City, Utah. The clerk will please designate the
bill.
H.R. 6399, TO DIRECT THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
TO DESIGNATE A SINGLE, UNIQUE ZIP CODE
FOR HIGHLAND CITY, UTAH
The Clerk. H.R. 6399, a bill to direct the United States
Postal Service to designate a single, unique ZIP Code for
Highland City, Utah.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the bill shall be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute.
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 6399 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I recognize myself for 5 minutes for a statement on the
bill.
H.R. 6399 designates a single unique ZIP Code for Highland
City, Utah. H.R. 6399 will designate a ZIP Code for the city
and is the product of Representative Kennedy's advocacy.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter
of support from Mayor and City Council of Highland City
requesting the unique ZIP Code designation established by this
bill.
I now recognize the Ranking Member if he--he does not seek
recognition. Any Member seek recognition?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. I also want to enter into the record or ask
unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from Utah
County Commission in support of H.R. 6399.
Without objection, so ordered.
Seeing no further request to speak, the question is now on
the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it. The amendment is agreed to.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6399, as
amended.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Recorded vote, please.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered by Mr. Biggs. As
previously announced, further proceedings on the question will
be postponed.
Pursuant to the previous order, the Committee stands in
recess subject to the call of the Chair--oh, but before we
stand in recess, the Chair recognizes Mr. Palmer.
Mr. Palmer. Mr. Chairman, I request to enter a document
into the record, a list of current agency settlement data
bases.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Again, pursuant to the previous order, the Committee stands
in recess, subject of the call of the Chair. We plan to
reconvene to vote on all of these bills at 2:30 sharp.
The Committee is in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman Comer. The Committee will reconvene. The Committee
will come back to order, if I could have everybody's attention.
The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 2766. Members
will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The
clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 2766.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. We are going to keep the first vote open a
minute. I know we got Mr. Palmer walking in. Hopefully after
this first one, we will rock and roll. We have got Mr. Jack
walking in. This is on 2766.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members voted?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 32. The
nays are 8.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6916.
Members will record their votes using the electronic voting
system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting
H.R. 6916.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 38. The
nays are 2.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 428.
Members will record their votes using the electronic system.
The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R.
428.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 40. The
nays are zero.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 1722.
Members will record their votes using the electronic voting
system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting
H.R. 1722.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 39. The
nays are zero.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4642. Members
will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The
clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 4642.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
Okay. We are waiting on--oh, we are good now.
Any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, the clerk will report the vote
total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 39. The
nay is one.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 2069.
Members will record their votes using the electronic voting
system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting
H.R. 2069.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 40. The
nays are zero.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 7934.
Members will record their votes using the electronic voting
system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting
H.R. 7934.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded?
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded?
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 40. The
nays are zero.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it. The bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 5525.
Members will record their votes using the electronic voting
system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting
H.R. 5525.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 21. The
nays are 19.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6399.
Members will record their votes using electronic voting system.
The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R.
6399.
[Voting.]
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded who wish to
be recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The clerk will close the vote and report
the vote total.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 40. The
nays are zero.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered
favorably reported.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
H.R. 6247, POSTAL NAMING MEASURE
Pursuant to notice, I now call up the following postal
naming bill, H.R. 6247, which was distributed in advance on
this markup.
Without objection, the bill is considered read.
If any Member would like to speak on the measure, they may
do so now. Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today, we honor a man
who was an integral part of Arizona Public Service for almost
four decades. Mayor Ed Honea was a bedrock of the Marana
community and helped shape how it thrives today. Ed was first
elected Mayor of Marana in 1995 and again in 2005, but his
service to Arizona and his country began long before that.
During the Vietnam War, Ed answered the call to serve his
country by being a proud member of the United States Navy
Seabees. After the war, he remained a lifelong member of the
Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 5990.
When he returned to civilian life, Ed continued his service
in other ways. In fact, Ed was so eager to help his community,
he took on multiple roles at once. At the same time that Ed was
Mayor, he was working as a contractor for the United States
Postal Service in Marana. He worked there for 29 years before
retiring in 2007. While Ed is known as a giant in Marana, his
public service actually extended throughout Southern Arizona.
He was the 2014 Chair of the Pima Association of Government, a
Chairman of the Regional Transportation Authority, and held
various leadership positions with the Arizona League of Cities
and Towns.
His leadership helped bring together and improve the
communities throughout the whole state. Even in death, Ed is
still bringing positive impact on the community he so valiantly
served. A year after his death, the Marana Aquatic and
Recreation Center opened. This project was championed by Ed
during his tenure as Mayor. Additionally, Ed was a driving
force in the Marana Food Bank and Community Resource Center
that will continue to serve Marana families for years to come.
And in everything Ed did, he always kept his deep faith in his
family as his guiding light.
Given the everlasting impact Ed has had on Marana, and
particularly his years of service in the post office, it is
more than fitting that we name this location after a man who
dedicated his life to helping others and improving life for
Arizonans. He was not just successful, he was significant.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. Any other
Members wish to speak on the bill?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. The question is now on favorably reporting
H.R. 6247.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed say no.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have
it, and the bill is favorably reported.
The motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
Pursuant to House Rule XI, Clause 2, I ask that Committee
Members have the right to file with the clerk of the Committee
supplemental, additional, Minority, and dissenting views.
Without objection.
Additionally, the staff is authorized to make necessary
technical and conforming changes to the Committee print,
subject to the approval of the Minority.
Without objection, so ordered.
If there is no further business before this Committee,
without objection, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:55 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]