Floor SpeechBipartisan2026-06-08

GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT

Environment

Context

On 2026-06-08, Representative Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA-10) delivered a floor speech titled "GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT" in the House.

Full Text

GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 96 (Monday, June 8, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 96 (Monday, June 8, 2026)] [House] [Pages H3933-H3934] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 8107) to require the establishment of a list identifying program areas and administrative practices presenting the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by States and local governments, as amended. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 8107 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 ``Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act''. SEC. 2. FEDERALLY-FUNDED STATE-ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT. (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and periodically thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress an assessment of program areas and administrative practices that present the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by State and local governments and pass-through entities subject to audit under chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code. (b) Contents.--Each assessment required by subsection (a) shall-- (1) identify program areas and administrative practices at the Federal, State, and local level that present systematic vulnerabilities in the administration of Federal funds by State and local governments, including practices that are more susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments; (2) assess evidence-based best practices and strategies that have strengthened the integrity of Federal funds administered by State and local governments and reduced waste, fraud, and abuse in Federally-funded programs; (3) assess program areas and administrative practices at the Federal, State, and local level that-- (A) have demonstrated effectiveness in mitigating waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments; or (B) have shown limited effectiveness in reducing such risks; (4) identify Federal tools, resources, and technical assistance available to State and local governments and how such tools may be improved to prevent and mitigate the systemic vulnerabilities identified under paragraph (1); and (5) include recommendations to Federal agencies and matters for consideration to Congress to address and improve the program areas and administrative practices identified under paragraph (1), including recommendations to improve eligibility determination and enrollment processes to mitigate risks. (c) Sources.-- (1) Audit and related materials.--In carrying out the preparation of the assessment under subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall rely, to the extent practicable, on existing oversight, audit, and investigative materials to conduct an analysis of Federal funds administrated by State and local governments, which may include-- (A) any finding of a Federal, State, or local auditor, comptroller, treasurer, inspector general, attorney general, or any other similar official with respect to the administration of such funds; (B) any audit required under section 7502 of title 31, United States Code; and (C) any other publicly available Federal, State, or local oversight and program integrity data. (2) Additional materials.--In preparing each assessment required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General may supplement the materials described in paragraph (1) with additional analysis and new audit work, including by drawing on prior and ongoing work, where such materials are insufficient to assess the program areas and administrative practices identified under subsection (b)(1). (d) Form and Methodology.--The Comptroller General shall determine the appropriate form and methodology for preparing and submitting each assessment required by subsection (a). (e) Definitions.--In this section: (1) Improper payment.--The term ``improper payment'' has the meaning given that term in section 3351(4) of title 31, United States Code. (2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given that term in section 6720(a)(4) of title 31, United States Code. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gill) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Subramanyam) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas. general leave Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this measure. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection. Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8107, the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act. The reforms of H.R. 8107 represent a long-overdue step to ensure that Congress is fully informed about fraud risks in Federal programs administered at the State level. This bill requires the Government Accountability Office to assess program areas and administrative practices that present the greatest risk to the integrity of federally funded programs administered by States and local governments. This assessment will bring together the typical program-specific assessments to help Congress and other officials better identify common risks. With this information, Congress can bolster its oversight of agencies' and States' efforts to efficiently mitigate fraud risks, including through payment integrity controls. This legislation will better position Congress to assist Federal agencies and State and local governments to obtain the fraud prevention and investigative resources that they require. [[Page H3934]] I thank my Oversight and Government Reform Committee colleagues Congressmen Ro Khanna and Tim Burchett for championing this helpful legislation that will help lawmakers understand State-level program risks and inform future fraud prevention reforms. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bipartisan and commonsense bill, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 8107, the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State- Administered Programs Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna). Mr. KHANNA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the House taking up the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act. It is a long way of saying that this is a bill to go after fraud. I thank Congressman Tim Burchett for his partnership on this bipartisan legislation. I also thank Chairman Comer; Ranking Member Garcia; Congressman Gill; Congressman Subramanyam; my staff lead, Selene Ceja; and Kevin Fox, my legislative director, for their help in advancing this effort. The bill is straightforward. It directs the Government Accountability Office to conduct an independent review of Federal programs that States administer on behalf of working families. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that every tax dollar reaches the people and communities these programs are intended to serve. To do that, we need facts, data, and evidence. The legislation helps us better understand how these programs operate across States where vulnerabilities may exist, what practices are working, and what improvements Congress should consider to stop fraud. At its core, the bill is about prevention, accountability, and good governance. By directing the GAO to identify effective tools, technical assistance, and proven practices, we can help States strengthen program administration before problems occur, and it applies to all 50 States, so there is no politics in it. The families who rely on these programs deserve services that are efficient, reliable, accessible, and protected. Tackling fraud is not a partisan issue. Congress needs to continue bipartisan, evidence-based efforts to better understand how Federal funds flow through State-administered programs and how we can strengthen those systems. I recognize Congressman Tim Burchett for his extraordinary leadership and partnership here. This bill gives us the information we need to make informed decisions and strengthen the public trust. Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the great gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Burchett). Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your abilities at short stop, as well. I thank Mr. Ro Khanna for his kind words. I have never heard the words ``extraordinary leadership'' attached to the named Tim Burchett before, and I thank the gentleman for that. I thank the gentleman also for including me in this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise, of course, in support of the bipartisan Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State- Administered Programs Act. This bill directs the Comptroller General, or our good friends at the Government Accountability Office, to produce recurring assessments of federally funded State-administered programs. This report will compare trends across States and identify programs and administrative practices most vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse in State and local administration of Federal funds. Every year, approximately $1.1 trillion of taxpayer dollars are administered by State and local governments. The money is administered with little or no oversight from the Federal Government. How many times have we heard that we need to audit those folks? This does just that. By requiring the GAO to monitor and report on trends across Stat

Referenced legislation: HR8107, HR8107

View original source →

GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 96 (Monday, June 8, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 96 (Monday, June 8, 2026)] [House] [Pages H3933-H3934] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERALLY FUNDED STATE- ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS ACT Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 8107) to require the establishment of a list identifying program areas and administrative practices presenting the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by States and local governments, as amended. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 8107 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 ``Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act''. SEC. 2. FEDERALLY-FUNDED STATE-ADMINISTERED PROGRAMS VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT. (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and periodically thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress an assessment of program areas and administrative practices that present the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by State and local governments and pass-through entities subject to audit under chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code. (b) Contents.--Each assessment required by subsection (a) shall-- (1) identify program areas and administrative practices at the Federal, State, and local level that present systematic vulnerabilities in the administration of Federal funds by State and local governments, including practices that are more susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments; (2) assess evidence-based best practices and strategies that have strengthened the integrity of Federal funds administered by State and local governments and reduced waste, fraud, and abuse in Federally-funded programs; (3) assess program areas and administrative practices at the Federal, State, and local level that-- (A) have demonstrated effectiveness in mitigating waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments; or (B) have shown limited effectiveness in reducing such risks; (4) identify Federal tools, resources, and technical assistance available to State and local governments and how such tools may be improved to prevent and mitigate the systemic vulnerabilities identified under paragraph (1); and (5) include recommendations to Federal agencies and matters for consideration to Congress to address and improve the program areas and administrative practices identified under paragraph (1), including recommendations to improve eligibility determination and enrollment processes to mitigate risks. (c) Sources.-- (1) Audit and related materials.--In carrying out the preparation of the assessment under subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall rely, to the extent practicable, on existing oversight, audit, and investigative materials to conduct an analysis of Federal funds administrated by State and local governments, which may include-- (A) any finding of a Federal, State, or local auditor, comptroller, treasurer, inspector general, attorney general, or any other similar official with respect to the administration of such funds; (B) any audit required under section 7502 of title 31, United States Code; and (C) any other publicly available Federal, State, or local oversight and program integrity data. (2) Additional materials.--In preparing each assessment required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General may supplement the materials described in paragraph (1) with additional analysis and new audit work, including by drawing on prior and ongoing work, where such materials are insufficient to assess the program areas and administrative practices identified under subsection (b)(1). (d) Form and Methodology.--The Comptroller General shall determine the appropriate form and methodology for preparing and submitting each assessment required by subsection (a). (e) Definitions.--In this section: (1) Improper payment.--The term ``improper payment'' has the meaning given that term in section 3351(4) of title 31, United States Code. (2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given that term in section 6720(a)(4) of title 31, United States Code. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gill) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Subramanyam) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas. general leave Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this measure. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection. Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8107, the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act. The reforms of H.R. 8107 represent a long-overdue step to ensure that Congress is fully informed about fraud risks in Federal programs administered at the State level. This bill requires the Government Accountability Office to assess program areas and administrative practices that present the greatest risk to the integrity of federally funded programs administered by States and local governments. This assessment will bring together the typical program-specific assessments to help Congress and other officials better identify common risks. With this information, Congress can bolster its oversight of agencies' and States' efforts to efficiently mitigate fraud risks, including through payment integrity controls. This legislation will better position Congress to assist Federal agencies and State and local governments to obtain the fraud prevention and investigative resources that they require. [[Page H3934]] I thank my Oversight and Government Reform Committee colleagues Congressmen Ro Khanna and Tim Burchett for championing this helpful legislation that will help lawmakers understand State-level program risks and inform future fraud prevention reforms. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bipartisan and commonsense bill, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 8107, the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State- Administered Programs Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna). Mr. KHANNA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the House taking up the Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act. It is a long way of saying that this is a bill to go after fraud. I thank Congressman Tim Burchett for his partnership on this bipartisan legislation. I also thank Chairman Comer; Ranking Member Garcia; Congressman Gill; Congressman Subramanyam; my staff lead, Selene Ceja; and Kevin Fox, my legislative director, for their help in advancing this effort. The bill is straightforward. It directs the Government Accountability Office to conduct an independent review of Federal programs that States administer on behalf of working families. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that every tax dollar reaches the people and communities these programs are intended to serve. To do that, we need facts, data, and evidence. The legislation helps us better understand how these programs operate across States where vulnerabilities may exist, what practices are working, and what improvements Congress should consider to stop fraud. At its core, the bill is about prevention, accountability, and good governance. By directing the GAO to identify effective tools, technical assistance, and proven practices, we can help States strengthen program administration before problems occur, and it applies to all 50 States, so there is no politics in it. The families who rely on these programs deserve services that are efficient, reliable, accessible, and protected. Tackling fraud is not a partisan issue. Congress needs to continue bipartisan, evidence-based efforts to better understand how Federal funds flow through State-administered programs and how we can strengthen those systems. I recognize Congressman Tim Burchett for his extraordinary leadership and partnership here. This bill gives us the information we need to make informed decisions and strengthen the public trust. Mr. GILL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the great gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Burchett). Mr. BURCHETT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your abilities at short stop, as well. I thank Mr. Ro Khanna for his kind words. I have never heard the words ``extraordinary leadership'' attached to the named Tim Burchett before, and I thank the gentleman for that. I thank the gentleman also for including me in this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise, of course, in support of the bipartisan Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State- Administered Programs Act. This bill directs the Comptroller General, or our good friends at the Government Accountability Office, to produce recurring assessments of federally funded State-administered programs. This report will compare trends across States and identify programs and administrative practices most vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse in State and local administration of Federal funds. Every year, approximately $1.1 trillion of taxpayer dollars are administered by State and local governments. The money is administered with little or no oversight from the Federal Government. How many times have we heard that we need to audit those folks? This does just that. By requiring the GAO to monitor and report on trends across Stat Referenced legislation: HR8107, HR8107