[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 98 (Wednesday, June 10, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H4071-H4075]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    STOPPING FRAUDULENT PAYMENTS ACT

  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1345, I call 
up the bill (H.R. 8464) to amend title 31, United States Code, to 
authorize pausing and segmenting payments, and for other purposes, and 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1345, the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform, printed in the bill, is adopted, and 
the bill, as amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 8464

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Stopping Fraudulent Payments 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO PAUSE PAYMENTS FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND 
                   CORRECTIVE ACTION.

       (a) Treasury Payment Voucher Waiver Authority.--
       (1) Amendment.--Subchapter II of chapter 33 of title 31, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 3337. Authority to pause payments for further review 
       and corrective action

       ``(a) Agency Obligation to Pause Disbursement Requests for 
     Corrective Action.--The head of an agency shall take a 
     corrective action to temporarily delay, condition, or segment 
     a disbursement request before the certification of a payment 
     voucher under section 3325 if, as determined by an official 
     designated by the head of the agency, the agency--
       ``(1) has sufficient reason to determine that the payment 
     presents an elevated risk of fraud based on a fraud-risk 
     indicator or an improper payment resulting in financial loss 
     to the Government as estimated under the requirements of 
     section 3352 in accordance with the statutorily-defined 
     eligibility requirements or other legally-established 
     condition of the program for a payee to be eligible to 
     receive payment;
       ``(2) has sufficient reason to determine, based on a 
     notification by the relevant State or local government 
     official in the case of a payment from Federal funds 
     disbursed by a State or local government under a State-
     administered and federally-funded program, that the payment 
     presents an elevated risk of fraud based on a fraud-risk 
     indicator or an improper payment resulting in financial loss 
     to the Government as estimated under the requirements of 
     section 3352 in accordance with the statutorily-defined 
     eligibility requirements or other legally-established 
     condition of the program for a payee to be eligible to 
     receive payment; or
       ``(3) has been notified of an order from the Secretary of 
     the Treasury described under subsection (b).
       ``(b) Treasury Obligation to Return Payment Voucher and 
     Issue Corrective Action Order.--Except where otherwise 
     required by

[[Page H4072]]

     law, the Secretary shall promptly notify the relevant 
     certifying official of an order to return a certified payment 
     voucher submitted to a disbursing official under section 3325 
     and issue a corrective action order to the head of an agency 
     not later than 2 days after the Secretary makes a 
     determination that in accordance with the statutorily-defined 
     eligibility requirements or other legally-established 
     condition of the program for a payee to be eligible to 
     receive payment that such payment presents an elevated risk 
     of fraud based on a fraud-risk indicator or an improper 
     payment resulting in financial loss to the Government based 
     on an output of the Do Not Pay system under section 3354.
       ``(c) Agency Documentation and Time-limited Corrective 
     Action.--An action taken by the head of an agency under 
     subsection (a) shall--
       ``(1) be based on an objective, documented fraud-risk 
     indicator;
       ``(2) be narrowly applied to the portion of the payment 
     presenting the elevated risk; and
       ``(3) be limited in duration to the minimum period 
     necessary, as determined by the head of the agency, to verify 
     eligibility of the payee or accuracy of the payment per any 
     program requirement associated with the payment or as 
     stipulated under law.
       ``(d) Payee Notification and Time Limit of Paused 
     Disbursement Requests.--With respect to a disbursement 
     request that has been delayed, conditioned, or segmented 
     pursuant to subsection (a) or a payment voucher that is 
     returned pursuant subsection (b), the head of the agency 
     shall take the following actions:
       ``(1) Promptly provide to the payee (not later than 2 days 
     after a determination under subsection (a) or a notification 
     to the agency under subsection (b)), as appropriate, and for 
     a case in which the payment from Federal funds disbursed by a 
     State or local government under a State-administered and 
     federally-funded program also provides to such relevant State 
     or local government official, a notification that--
       ``(A) a disbursement has been temporarily paused, 
     conditioned, or segmented;
       ``(B) identifies the nature of the fraud-risk indicator or 
     improper payment relied upon by the agency to make the 
     corrective action determination under subsection (a) or 
     notification to the agency under subsection (b); and
       ``(C) outlines the process for the corrective action review 
     period.
       ``(2) Use a process tailored to the specific requirements 
     and design of the agency program for a payee, or the State or 
     local government described under paragraph (1), to contest 
     any factual inaccuracy or provide clarifying information 
     during the corrective action review period.
       ``(3) Issue such payment not later than 30 days after a 
     determination to take a corrective action is made by the head 
     of the agency under subsection (a) or the agency was notified 
     by the Secretary under subsection (b) of a corrective action 
     order, but not later than 7 days after the date on which the 
     payee contests the corrective action under the process 
     established pursuant to paragraph (2), if the head of the 
     agency determines that the payment does not present an 
     elevated risk of fraud or an improper payment resulting in 
     financial loss to the Government.
       ``(e) Segmentation of Low-risk Payments.--To the maximum 
     extent practicable, the head of each agency shall allow a 
     routine, historically consistent payment amount to proceed 
     while temporarily holding an anomalous, unusually large, or 
     high-risk portion of a payment, or class of payments, pending 
     review and resolution of an agency corrective action 
     determination under subsection (a) or a corrective action 
     order under subsection (b).
       ``(f) Exemptions for Law Enforcement Activities.--The head 
     of an agency, in consultation with the Secretary and the 
     Attorney General, may waive any provision in this section on 
     a case-by-case basis if notified of or instructed by a 
     Federal law enforcement authority, including an agency 
     Inspector General, that the action will jeopardize an active 
     criminal investigation or legal proceeding related to an 
     effort to defraud the Federal Government or violate sections 
     3729 through 3733 of title 31 (commonly known as the `False 
     Claims Act').
       ``(g) Limitation of Liability.--No officer or employee of 
     the Federal Government shall be personally liable for an 
     action taken in good faith under this section. An action 
     taken under this section may not constitute a final 
     determination of eligibility, liability, or wrongdoing on the 
     part of a payee.
       ``(h) Rule of Construction for Program Authorizing 
     Statute.--Nothing in this section may be construed to 
     supersede any other provision of law with respect to any 
     statute that authorizes the payment or program the payment is 
     made under.
       ``(i) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, 
     the Secretary, in consultation with the Director, shall issue 
     regulations and establish procedures to administer the 
     requirements of this section that shall be published in the 
     Federal Register that, at a minimum, specify the following:
       ``(1) The minimum seniority of an agency official 
     designated under subsection (a) authorized to make a 
     determination to issue a corrective action.
       ``(2) The procedures by which the Secretary of the Treasury 
     will use the Do Not Pay system under section 3354 to make a 
     determination under subsection (b) in accordance with the 
     statutorily-defined eligibility requirements or other 
     legally-established condition of a program for a payee to be 
     eligible to receive payment.
       ``(3) The procedure for an agency to dispute an order to 
     return a certified payment voucher and appeal a related 
     corrective action order under subsection (b) to the Fiscal 
     Assistant Secretary, which shall at a minimum include a 
     requirement for the agency to receive a response not later 
     than five days after making such a dispute or appeal to the 
     Department of the Treasury.
       ``(4) The minimum information requirements of a 
     notification required under subsection (d)(1).
       ``(j) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget.
       ``(2) Fraud-risk indicator.--The term `fraud-risk 
     indicator' means an objective data point or analytic signal 
     that indicates an anomalous payment pattern or increase in 
     the volume of a payment amount, a verified data mismatch, 
     network or behavioral anomaly, or match identified by the Do 
     Not Pay system under section 3354 and any payment, account, 
     or payee validation program or service administered by the 
     Secretary that would result in financial loss to the 
     Government.
       ``(3) Routine, historically consistent payment amount.--The 
     term `routine, historically consistent payment amount' means 
     a payment amount that is consistent with previous payment 
     history of the payee, established program use patterns, or 
     other objective benchmarks determined by the certifying 
     agency.
       ``(4) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of the Treasury.''.
       (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 33 of title 31, United States Codes, is 
     amended by inserting after the item for section 3336 the 
     following:

``3337. Authority to pause payments for further review and corrective 
              action.''.
       (b) Requirements and Authorities of Payment Disbursing 
     Officials.--Paragraph (3) of section 3325(a) of title 31, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``, compliance with an order to pause a 
     payment pursuant to section 3337(b),'' after ``except for the 
     correctness of computations on a voucher''; and
       (2) by striking ``,,'' and inserting a comma.
       (c) Relief of Accountable Officers.--Section 3527 of title 
     31, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting after ``the loss or 
     deficiency was not the result of an illegal or incorrect 
     payment'' the following: ``, or was made as a result of a 
     good faith effort to comply with the requirements of section 
     3337''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii), by inserting after ``the 
     loss or deficiency was not the result of an illegal or 
     incorrect payment'' the following: ``, or was made as a 
     result of a good faith effort to comply with the requirements 
     of section 3337''.
       (d) Requirements and Authorities of Payment Certifying 
     Officials.--Subsection (a) of section 3528 of title 31, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4)(C), by striking ``; and'' and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following
       ``(6) complying with an order to take a corrective action 
     to temporarily delay, condition, or segment a disbursement 
     request pursuant to section 3337.''.
       (e) Relief of Certifying Officials.--Subsection (b)(1) of 
     section 3528 of title 31, United States Code--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``; or'' and inserting 
     a semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (B)(iii), by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by inserting at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) the certification was made as a result of a good 
     faith effort to comply with the requirements of section 
     3337.''.
       (f) Report on Results of Payments Paused for Further Review 
     and Corrective Action.--Not later than 18 months after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, 
     the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit to the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee on 
     Oversight and Government Reform of the House of 
     Representatives, a report on the following:
       (1) The total number of orders to return a certified 
     payment voucher submitted to a disbursing official under 
     section 3325 of title 31, United States Code, and corrective 
     action orders issued to the head of an agency under the 
     authorities provided by section 3337(b) of such title, as 
     added by this section.
       (2) The percentage of such payments that are issued by the 
     agency, including by successful contestations filed by the 
     recipient or payee with the agency, and recommendations to 
     mitigate such errors in the fraud-risk indicators of the 
     Department of the Treasury in the future.
       (3) The total savings to the Federal Government in payments 
     determined to be fraudulent or result in financial loss to 
     the Government under the authorities provided by subsections 
     (a) and (b) of section 3337 of title 31, United States Code, 
     as added by this section.
       (4) Any necessary policy, regulatory, or legislative 
     recommendations related to the authorities and requirements 
     under section of section 3337 of title 31, United States 
     Code, as added by this section, or other relevant law.
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debated for 1 
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform or their 
respective designees.

[[Page H4073]]

  The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer) and the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Walkinshaw) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer).
  General Leave
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, we are facing a national emergency of fraud in Federal 
programs that is impacting every American.
  According to the Government Accountability Office, the Federal 
Government is estimated to lose between $233 billion and $521 billion 
annually to fraud across all Federal programs and operations.
  Earlier this week, we exposed how criminals stole $9 billion in 
Minnesota's social services programs while senior State officials, 
including Governor Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison, did 
absolutely nothing to stop it.

                              {time}  1240

  This is just the tip of the iceberg. Whether in Minnesota, 
California's hospice system, or Medicaid waiver programs in Ohio or New 
York, one thing is clear: Fraudsters will keep stealing taxpayer 
dollars until they are stopped.
  Taxpayers bear the burden, while vulnerable Americans, the very 
people these programs are meant to help, are harmed.
  The Trump administration has taken decisive action to combat waste, 
fraud, and abuse by establishing the White House Task Force to 
eliminate fraud.
  Just this week, Vice President Vance referred our findings on 
Minnesota's rampant fraud to the Department of Justice for 
investigation.
  Congress must take further action to stop fraud before it happens.
  The Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act adds critical safeguards to 
ensure Federal payments go to the right recipient in the right amount 
before funds are awarded or disbursed.
  Federal law currently lacks a governmentwide requirement to verify 
payments and prevent fraud across Federal financial assistance and 
public benefit programs.
  Even when payments show elevated fraud risks, the Treasury Department 
cannot stop it. It is required to process the payments agencies 
request.
  Under current law, agencies can issue payments despite flags received 
from Treasury's Do Not Pay system or other tools that might indicate an 
elevated risk of fraud.
  H.R. 8464 addresses the status quo by requiring agencies to conduct 
fraud prevention activities prior to issuing payment requests. The bill 
gives Treasury the authority to halt and return payments flagged for 
fraud risk so agencies can review and correct them before issued.
  Agencies would be required to quickly review and resolve payments 
flagged for elevated risk of fraud unless otherwise mandated by law.
  This provides additional assurance to the American taxpayer that 
money is being paid to the right recipient and for the right amount 
while preserving the ownership of a program's administration within the 
appropriate Federal agency as authorized by law.
  This bill also helps agencies and the American public understand when 
a legitimate recipient's identity is being stolen and used for 
fraudulent activities by criminals.
  Lastly, to help Congress oversee progress made in addressing payments 
with elevated fraud risk, Treasury will summarize the number of 
returned payments, corrective outcome, and associated cost savings 
achieved under the requirements of this bill. This ensures Congress has 
regular oversight of these reforms.
  The commonsense reforms outlined in this bill will protect taxpayer 
dollars from being stolen by fraudsters while maintaining the integrity 
of Federal programs.
  Madam Speaker, I call on each of my House colleagues to support H.R. 
8464 to protect taxpayer dollars from falling into the hands of 
criminals and fraudsters.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, fighting and preventing fraud should be a bipartisan 
issue, and preventing the misuse of government funds should be a 
priority shared by Democrats and Republicans alike.
  When fraudsters successfully target government dollars, they steal 
from taxpayers, deprive our most vulnerable neighbors of lifesaving 
services, and undermine the public's trust in government.
  We know that it is difficult to fight fraud and certainly difficult, 
if not impossible, to claw back payments after they have been delivered 
to a fraudster. There is no doubt the Federal Government must do more 
to address this problem.
  That is why Oversight Committee Democrats have supported numerous 
antifraud measures, including the Pre-Payment Fraud Prevention and 
Treasury Data Access Act, which seeks to add additional payment 
verification before checks are sent out the door.
  Oversight Committee Democrats and our Democratic colleagues across 
the House will continue to fight waste, fraud, and abuse in the Federal 
Government. However, the bill before us is flawed and does not 
constitute a good-faith effort to detect and prevent fraud.
  H.R. 8464, the Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act, would give the Trump 
administration a blank check to cut off entitlements and grants to any 
entity or individual it disfavors with few guardrails. It would allow 
the Treasury Department to significantly delay funding if it decides 
there is sufficient reason that a payment carries an elevated risk of 
fraud.
  This very broad, loosely defined authority could easily be used to 
target funding to State and local governments, university research 
grants, transportation funding, Pell grants, NIH grants, and even FEMA 
assistance.
  Due to this administration's policies and this Congress' policies, 
Americans are struggling to put food on the table, gas in the tank, and 
to access the healthcare they need. For millions of families, Federal 
assistance, healthcare, food assistance, and Social Security is the 
only thing standing between them and financial ruin.
  This bill threatens to pull that lifeline away by burying legitimate 
payments in vague criteria, red tape, and bureaucratic delays.
  While we are all serious about stopping fraud, I hope, we can't turn 
a blind eye to the political interference and weaponization carried out 
by this administration.
  Just last month, it suspended $1.3 billion in Medicaid payments to 
California, which will harm nearly a million elderly and disabled 
residents.
  Last December, it threatened to withhold SNAP benefits from Colorado 
and Minnesota.
  In January, the Department of Health and Human Services froze $10 
billion in funding for essential needs across five States led by 
Democratic Governors. Meanwhile, not one State led by Republicans has 
been targeted.

  The bill's stated intent is to stop improper payments, which we all 
agree is important. That is why House Democrats supported the Pre-
Payment Fraud Prevention and Treasury Data Access Act earlier this 
week, a bipartisan bill to ensure we check the Do Not Pay list and 
catch improper payments before they go out the door.
  However, the bill we are considering here includes none of those 
safeguards and will endanger millions of Americans who rely on critical 
programs for healthcare, food, and rent.
  The American people want programs that work, not unnecessary red 
tape, delayed payments, and more dysfunction.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, let me translate that 5 minutes of 
gibberish from my colleague.
  They don't care about fraud. When you do find fraud, like we found in 
Minnesota and California, they don't want to cut off the money. They 
want the money to keep going so the fraudsters can stay in business. 
That is why we have to support this bill.

[[Page H4074]]

  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado 
(Ms. Boebert).
  Ms. BOEBERT. Madam Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 8464, the 
Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act.
  This legislation is a commonsense, taxpayer-first bill that finally 
puts an end to the reckless pay-and-chase scam that has drained 
billions from hardworking American families.
  For too long, the Washington bureaucracy has operated like an open 
checkbook for fraudsters. They cut the checks first, ask the questions 
later while American taxpayers foot the bill for waste, abuse, and 
outright theft.
  We have seen it in State administered social services where millions 
vanished into pockets of criminals. Enough is enough.
  H.R. 8464 empowers Federal agencies and the Department of the 
Treasury to pause, condition, or segment suspicious payments before the 
money flies out the door. It uses objective fraud risk indicators from 
the Do Not Pay system and requires any action to be narrow, temporary, 
and focused solely on verifying eligibility. No more blank checks and 
no more playing defense after fraud has already happened.
  I believe in fiscal responsibility, government accountability, and 
protecting every hard-earned dollar from the American people. This bill 
delivers exactly that.
  It shifts the focus from recovery to prevention, saving billions and 
ensuring benefits go to eligible Americans, not scammers and fraud 
rings.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand with taxpayers, stand 
against waste and fraud, and vote ``yes'' on H.R. 8464.

                              {time}  1250

  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Bell).
  Mr. BELL. Madam Speaker, no one in this Chamber disputes that 
improper and fraudulent payments are a serious problem. The question 
before us is not whether to fight fraud; it is how we fight fraud.
  If this bill actually does that--and I will give you a hint: It does 
not. The Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act allows agency officials to 
block payments whenever they have sufficient reason to believe there is 
an elevated risk of fraud.
  This bill sets the standard so low that any administration can use it 
to cut off legitimate recipients before a single fact is even proven.
  As a former prosecutor and public defender in St. Louis, I know 
firsthand what fraud accountability looks like. It starts with 
evidence, not suspicion.
  This bill would allow any administration to stop payments for 
programs it opposes or in States it disfavors, using fraud as a 
pretext, allowing Trump to target States that disagree with him.
  The people who would bear the brunt of payment pauses are the ones 
who cannot absorb it. These are patients on Medicaid, our seniors on 
Social Security, working families relying on SNAP, some of the most 
marginalized of our American brothers and sisters.
  We can fight fraud without handing this administration a blank check 
to weaponize Federal payments.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, I want to address the gentleman from Kentucky who 
described my statement as gibberish. Perhaps to him the details of the 
programs and the legislation are gibberish, but it is not to me.
  I wonder if the gentleman knows how often the Do Not Pay list 
produces a false positive--in other words, how often the Do Not Pay 
list says someone shouldn't get paid when actually they are perfectly 
legitimate.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Comer).
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I know only 4 percent of government 
agencies are utilizing the Do Not Pay list, which--
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I am reclaiming my time.
  Madam Speaker, I will just give one agency, Social Security, an 
agency that has been under assault by this administration. It is 
estimated that 10,000 times a year, Social Security falsely declares 
somebody dead.
  Imagine that. You wake up one morning, and your own government says 
you are dead. It happens oftentimes because States send bad information 
to the Social Security Administration.
  Time after time after time, the IG has recommended that Social 
Security and this body make improvements in that process. They have 
requested additional funding, which this majority has denied, that 
would improve that process and prevent some of those false positives.
  This bill would make a terrible situation for someone falsely 
declared by their government to be dead even worse, because if the 
government says you are dead, you don't get your Social Security 
checks.
  This bill would make an already impossible process, where someone has 
to go call Social Security, get into an office, and try to get an 
appointment with an agency that has been decimated by DOGE--I know that 
my constituents tell me every day that they call Social Security 
offices and can't get anyone to answer the phone because folks have 
been fired and pushed out.
  This bill would further delay at least 10,000 Americans falsely 
declared dead each year from getting their Social Security checks. That 
is just one of the problems.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself an additional 1 minute.
  Madam Speaker, the IRS, 52 percent of the time when they say a return 
is fraudulent, they get it wrong. There are a lot of false positives on 
the Do Not Pay list.
  This bill does nothing to address that situation, to ensure the Do 
Not Pay list is actually getting the fraudsters, not the law-abiding 
Americans who deserve their Social Security checks. It would make it a 
lot harder for all of our constituents to get the money they deserve 
when the government makes a mistake.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, the gentleman eloquently described the Democrat-in-
Washington solution to every problem. Whether it is fraud prevention or 
whatever, it is to hire more government employees and create a bigger 
government bureaucracy.
  This bill that we are debating today keeps the decision of whether or 
not to hold a payment with the agency. The agency ultimately interprets 
the results of Do Not Pay.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Kentucky (Mr. McGarvey).
  Mr. McGARVEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 8464.
  This bill lets the President take away money from anything or anyone 
he doesn't like, as long as he thinks it is merely at risk for fraud. 
We have seen what he thinks is fraud.
  Last year, Donald Trump froze $9 million intended for Serve Kentucky. 
Congress set aside that money for housing, hunger relief, education, 
and disaster relief in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The White House 
called that money waste and fraud. I have seen Serve Kentucky's work 
firsthand. President Trump might not like a program that brings food to 
seniors or new books to kids, but that doesn't make it fraud.

  We know this President uses his power to punish those he does not 
like. He has done it before. He will do it again.
  I agree with my Republican colleagues: No one wants waste or fraud 
from our taxpayer dollars. Congress must take a hard look at waste and 
fraud in our government.
  Let's start with Donald Trump's ballroom. The President destroyed the 
White House and then said: Let me build a gaudy, billion-dollar 
ballroom that looks like it should hold slot machines, not State 
dinners.
  He has been soliciting donations left and right from billionaires, 
tech and tobacco companies, defense contractors, and dozens more 
individuals and companies that do business with and profit from the 
Federal Government and your tax dollars.

[[Page H4075]]

  The American people, all of us, deserve to know who and how much they 
are paying for access to President Trump.
  For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to 
recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, I 
would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill.
  My amendment would prevent this bill from taking effect until the 
White House provides a list of every person who has donated to the 
White House ballroom.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this 
amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion 
to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGARVEY. Madam Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in 
voting for the motion to recommit.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared 
to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALKINSHAW. Madam Speaker, as I have said today, preventing fraud 
should be a priority for all of us, but this bill gives the Department 
of the Treasury far too much arbitrary authority to prevent critical 
Federal assistance from reaching Americans in need in a timely manner.
  I will be happy to work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
support legislation like the eight suspension bills we considered 
earlier this week to combat fraud, but this bill misses the mark.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Madam Speaker, these bills we have debated today, H.R. 8312 and H.R. 
8464, should be considered in the broader context of the committee's 
legislative work on fraud prevention and financial integrity reforms.
  This week, the House has advanced eight bipartisan fraud and program 
integrity reform bills that we originally passed out of the Oversight 
Committee that will safeguard taxpayer dollars from fraudsters and 
cheats.
  Collectively, with the bills advanced in the House this week, the 
Oversight Committee is preventing fraudulent payments from going out 
the door, equipping the Federal workforce to fight fraud, protecting 
taxpayer dollars during national emergencies, reforming agency 
financial leadership roles to improve agency financial performance, and 
launching sweeping oversight work at the Government Accountability 
Office over State administration of federally funded programs.
  These governmentwide fraud prevention reforms are long overdue. They 
will safeguard our constituents' tax dollars and ensure Federal 
programs deliver for citizens who need them the most, as Congress 
intended.
  We must continue to advance bold reforms that meaningfully address 
fraud, and I am proud to say these bills brought before the House this 
week by the Oversight Committee take a meaningful step toward better 
stewardship of taxpayer dollars by protecting them from fraud.
  Madam Speaker, I urge each of my House colleagues to join us in 
supporting H.R. 8464 as we work to protect the hard-earned tax dollars 
of the American people.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1300

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1345, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           motion to recommit

  Mr. McGARVEY. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. McGarvey of Kentucky moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     8464 to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

  The material previously referred to by Mr. McGarvey is as follows:

       Mr. McGarvey moves to recommit the bill H.R. 8464 to the 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, 
     with the following amendment:

       Strike section 2(g) and insert the following:

       (g) Effective Date.--This Act, and the amendments made by 
     this Act, shall not take effect until a list of each person 
     who has donated to the White House Ballroom is made publicly 
     available, including the following information with respect 
     to each such person:
       (1) The amount donated by the person to the White House 
     Ballroom.
       (2) Any Federal contract the person has entered into.
       (3) Any grant awarded to the person.
       (4) Any regulatory matter involving the person.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the 
previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
  The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________