EFFECT OF WASTE AND FRAUD

On 2026-06-09, Representative David Schweikert (R-AZ-1) delivered a floor speech titled "EFFECT OF WASTE AND FRAUD" in the House.

EFFECT OF WASTE AND FRAUD

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 97 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 97 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026)] [House] [Pages H4048-H4051] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] EFFECT OF WASTE AND FRAUD (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Schweikert of Arizona was recognized for 30 minutes.) Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Speaker, I know it has been a long day for everyone, but I have a couple things to walk through. One of the themes we have had the last couple weeks is waste and fraud. I thought it would be important to actually come here and sort of show what we calculate the math to be, where it comes from, and then something huge. Today was also the issuance of the annual Social Security actuarial report. I have not read the whole thing. I have just gone to the basic tables. I promise you I will read it over the next couple of weeks. I am going to make some commentary. Some of it is going to be based on last year's report, but we also have the CBO analysis and some of the outside groups and where the math doesn't match. But I need all of us to grow up and understand some of the realities out there. This last weekend, I had the joy--I am traveling around the State, running for Governor, because I am [[Page H4049]] leaving this insane--excuse me--this fine place. Some of the folks will come up to you and say things like: Well, if you just got rid of the waste and fraud. Look, it is huge, but I am going to show you some of the charts of what the reality is on the percentage of our spending. From joint economists, our best estimate right now is we are going to borrow $2 trillion this year. My personal number--I am the outlier--is we are going to borrow about $2.2 trillion, but then I am a little more pessimistic. Remember, when we went into this year, we were going to borrow $1.7 trillion or $1.6 trillion. There are some games we play in that, for those who are keeping score, like: Hey, here are student loans. We are going to credit that back because we are not writing them off. Does that actually go on the books as a credit even though there is no cash that comes with it? These are the sorts of things, if you really want to understand government accounting, that will drive you insane. Let's first actually do some stuff on waste and fraud. This is the full kit and caboodle, or whatever colloquialism I can come up with, that estimating government fraud would cover 71 days of borrowing. Now, remember, that is on the assumption that we are borrowing about 7-some-billion dollars a day. Take the high and the low, but this is everything. These are the bad actors from other parts of the world that have figured out how to steal from unemployment by fraud. These are the corporations that found leakage that have actually been able to designate people as sicker than they actually are so they get the risk premiums in some of the programs. It is a stunning amount of money. But if we borrow $2.2 trillion this year, it actually covers about a quarter of our borrowing. But when you start to think about that, it is 71 days if you actually do the mean here. It is a big deal, but it doesn't solve our problems. My frustration is, this place has a habit of saying: We are against waste and fraud. Let's do a piece of legislation. Let's do another analysis of waste and fraud. Let's actually say we condemn fraudsters. Damn it. How many years have some of us worked on just simple concepts? There are these things--what do you call them, Mr. Speaker? Oh, yeah, computers and data. If someone is billing and you have a dozen different organizations billing the same P.O. box, maybe you have hospice fraud. If you have a Social Security number being used over and over and over, maybe there is a problem. If you have data that says: Hey, this person is saying they made $24,000 a year last year so they deserve these credits as our society, but we have data that shows their consumption was $88,000, maybe we should look at this. {time} 2030 We have the systems today that we could have stopped the $2.8 billion of sober living home fraud that basically punished Native Americans in my State with a simple data system. Is that Republican or Democrat? It is just dragging this government into maybe this century of technology instead of doing another resolution. It is like the absurdity of--absolutely, we all vote for it--let's do a balanced budget. Great. Tell me how. I will tell you how to do it. You won't like it, but there is a path to do it. We actually have some math that says if you told me I can balance the budget next year, I can do it. We have to cut almost half of all Federal spending because of the economic effects. Why is it so hard for us to tell the truth about math? Let's actually get ourselves in some real trouble here. All right. This is using the most optimistic number saying, Mr. Speaker, we are going to be able to stomp out every bit of fraud, waste, misalignment, and exploitation in this government. We are going to spend--estimated government fraud is almost 7.8 percent of the outlays for this year. That is a remarkable amount of money. It is remarkable. Do you really think we are going to get all of it? How about if we could get half of it? How about if we could get a third of it? Our economists think we can nail down a third of this waste and fraud if you just take some of the legislation we have worked on for years of the use of data, matching benefits, matching Social Security numbers, matching addresses, matching codes coming out of CMS, matching these things. Why is it so scary? I will tell you, some of the lobbyists marching down the hallways hate this stuff. How many times have I come behind this microphone and say, you know, let me give you an easy, intellectual one to process? We did some analysis almost a year ago--you are a doctor. An MRI scan, an ultrasound, a CT, an x-ray. We think there could have been $25 to $35 billion last year in duplication. You know, you bust up your knee on the ski slope, and you get an MRI. They patch you up, you go home, and a week later before the ortho is about to work, you do it again--why do it again when you can attach that scan to a simple app right here? You put it up on the screen. If it isn't good enough, then redo it. Something as simple as that, that is $350 billion on the outside over 10 years. Why is that scary around here? However, it is. Does it annoy some of the lobbyists? Does it annoy some of the real estate investment trusts that have been putting up MRI centers? Does it annoy the equipment sales? Look, I am sure they are all wonderful people, but if you and I were operating in the real world and not in government, we would be insisting on these things that say we are not taking away benefits, we are using technology. In many ways, I would argue it makes people's lives better, faster, cheaper to stop these duplications. That is in this number we are calling waste and fraud. Understand, when you get the politician in front of you saying: We are going to stomp out waste and fraud, and then they make it sound like it is someone from the other side of the world stealing from us, that is some of it. However, the vast majority that is in these numbers is how we have designed benefits, how we have designed healthcare reimbursements, how we have designed these programs. How do we work with our States, our vendors, all the bureaucracy to actually say let's just do the things that technology now allows us to do to stop the American taxpayers from being bled, being scammed. Now, the number of times I have come behind this microphone and said Social Security trust fund, the Medicare trust fund, a little over 6 years, and I have actually had debates--as a matter of fact, we had some sparring today--where I spoke for a couple moments, and the Democrat who was speaking said: Yes, but illegals pay into Social Security. Yes, but if you actually read the Social Security actuary report, it would have shown you, yes, they are paying into fake Social Security numbers--okay, that is a little money--but the suppression of wages that happen from the millions and millions and millions and millions of people that came across the border in the Biden years is greater than. It is in the tables. I know, it would require reading the Social Security actuary report and maybe pulling out a calculator and doing some math. One of the things that is going on in our country right now, particularly as we arrogantly often say: the lower quartiles of education and labor. Why are they getting poorer? Have you looked at the wage growth numbers of our working class brothers and sisters, particularly those without high skills, where they sell their labor? They are out hanging drywall, and now they are competing with how many potentially millions of people that came across the border during those years that are competing with them selling their labor. That was the great cruelty. I know I am trying to think like an economist. I am just wired that way. I would argue, the morality of prosperity is what we as conservatives believe in, and trying to explain all the horrible things policy wise, our inability to fixate on making people's lives better. We talk about affordability. The fastest way you get affordability is wage growth because to magically start to make prices come down, you have to change systems and supply chains, legalize automation of ports, all the things that the unions and everyone else is going to come lobby and scream at us. Let's actually walk through a couple things that were out there in that Social Security actuary report today and [[Page H4050]] from last year so there is an understanding. I got up here last summer and said my math, my Joint Economic economists on the Republican side, we were guessing about sometime in late, mid-2032. We nailed it. We got the number right. The only controversy right now is