Skip to main content
GWGovwatch
CongressBillsCommitteesPresidentMoneyPulseMisconductElectionsMap
Donate

Weekly accountability digest

One email a week with new votes, moving bills, and misconduct updates. No spam.

GW

Govwatch. Public data about Congress, in one place, in plain English.

Built with public data. Not affiliated with the U.S. government.

Explore

  • Officials
  • Legislation
  • Committees
  • Congress Pulse
  • Trending Topics
  • Bipartisan Leaderboard
  • Weekly Digest
  • Misconduct
  • Predictions

Learn

  • How Congress Works
  • How a Bill Becomes Law
  • Campaign Finance 101
  • Glossary

Tools

  • My Representatives
  • Compare Members
  • Bill Watchlist
  • Search
  • District Map
  • Follow the Money
  • Watch Live

Site

  • About
  • Contact
  • Corrections
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service

Data Sources

Congress.gov API v3
Bills, members, votesGovInfo API
Floor speeches, reports, bill textFederal Election Commission (FEC)
Campaign financeVoteView (UCLA)
Ideology scores (DW-NOMINATE)GovTrack.us
Misconduct data (CC0)U.S. Census Bureau
District demographics
Support This Project

This site is free. Donations help cover hosting, API fees, and keeping the data fresh.

All data is sourced from official government APIs and public records. This site is for informational purposes only.

© 2026 Govwatch

Press ReleaseNeutral2026-04-21

Neal Fights for Taxpayers, Calls Out Trump’s Pardons for Convicted Fraudsters at Ways and Means Hearing on Medicare Fraud

Richard E. Neal
Richard E. Neal
DMA-1 · Representative
Share:
Healthcare

Context

This press release from Representative Richard E. Neal (D-MA) was published on 2026-04-21 and titled "Neal Fights for Taxpayers, Calls Out Trump’s Pardons for Convicted Fraudsters at Ways and Means Hearing on Medicare Frau". It focuses on healthcare.

Full Text

Neal Fights for Taxpayers, Calls Out Trump’s Pardons for Convicted Fraudsters at Ways and Means Hearing on Medicare Fraud

WATCH HERE “Want to thank our witnesses today for this helpful dialogue. So let me disabuse all in the room today of the following. I m not aware of anybody here who s for fraud. I think that s a pretty safe assumption. Do we need unanimous consent on that or is that just a basic notion that [ ]
View original source →