the full Committee to consider the following

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 5V and House rule 11, clause two, 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 electronic system for recorded votes on 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 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, 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.

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.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 2766 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

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 five 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 include 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.

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 across across the state of California. Now, there are roughly 35,000 special districts across the U.S. They help deliver water, wastewater treatment, fire protection, and many other critical services to millions of Americans, including the MWD district 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.

The ranking member yields back. We're going to pause for a moment. Representative Fallon is en route. They said he's running. And for those of you that who don't know, Pat Fallon played football for Lou Holtz at Notre Dame. So I assume he's in excellent physical condition still. So we're going to yield now once he catches his breath to the sponsor of the bill, the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. And as a point of personal privilege, we buried Coach Holtz Monday. And I we want to take just 10 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's 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's a dynamic force that will be sincerely missed. And I know for a fact I wouldn't be here representing nearly 800,000 Americans had I not crossed his path. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin, I'd like to enter two documents into the record. First, a letter support for the National Special Districts Association.

Without objection, so ordered.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And second is a letter of support from the North Texas Municipal Water District.

Without objection, so ordered.

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. In 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 federalized 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 doesn't guarantee they're going to get it. It puts them on equal footing as a county, a school district, a city, etc. And to be clear, this bill doesn't 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 common sense bipartisan legislation that benefits special districts and by extension all Americans. And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, if we pass this, you will all feel better about yourselves. Thank you very much and I yield.

Gentleman yields back. 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 PUDs 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're 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're 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'm 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.

Gentlelady yields back. Any further request to speak? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. 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. 2766 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. The opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.

Mr. Chairman.

What? Mr. Biggs.

Request a roll call vote.

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, 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.

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.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 6916 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

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 five 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 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 common sense bill, and I now recognize the ranking member for his statement.

Thank you. I also want to thank the the authors of the bill, particularly want to thank of course Representative Randall for her work on this legislation. Another real common sense 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 hardworking 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 shouldn't benefit from federal contracts. It's as simple as that, and I want to urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill.

Ranking member yields back. Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs. Do you seek recognition? No. Okay. Ms. Randall.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for scheduling this bill for markup. I'm really glad to see my legislation with Representative Self on the list of bills that Oversight is considering today. We've 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's 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 shouldn't be giving people committing fraud more government contracts. The Federal Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act is that common sense 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's 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're talking about the need to do this for hundreds of individuals perpetrating fraud. Anecdotally, I've been told it can take upwards of 20 hours to prepare a suspension debarment package, 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 500 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're doing the math, that's 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 a 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'm grateful for the leadership of the Inspectors General who raised the prevalence of this issue, who told us about the problems that they're facing, and who helped us develop this bill so that it actually solves the fraud problems that they are facing and isn't 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.

Any further debate on the bill? 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.] All those opposed signify by saying no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. Mr. Chairman. What we got? Oh, yes. The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6916 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Chorus of ayes.] All those opposed say no. For what purpose does the gentleman from Arizona seek recognition? I'd like to seek a roll call. 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 please designate the bill.

H.R. 428, the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of 2025, a bill to amend Title 5, 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.

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 please designate the amendment.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 428 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

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 five 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's 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's 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. I now recognize the ranking member.

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's 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.

Ranking member yields back. I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter of support dated March 18th from the National Taxpayers Union endorsing H.R. 428, Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of 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 Database Act. Without objection, so ordered. Do any members seek recognition on H.R. 428? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, 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. Aye. For what purpose does Mr. Biggs seek recognition? Roll call vote, please, sir. 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, 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.

Without objection, the bill should 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.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 1722 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

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 the purpose of for five 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 projections 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 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 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 in efficiency 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's 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.

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.

Gentleman yields back. Any member seek recognition? Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.

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's some specific ones, we think of the California high-speed rail line that has jumped, jumped in cost. 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 federal innovations.

Without objection, so ordered. Thank you. Any other member seek recognition? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. 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. Aye. For what purpose does the gentleman from Arizona seek recognition? Request a roll call. 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, 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.

Without objection, the bill should 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 please designate the amendment.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 4642 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the substitute be considered as original text for the purposes of further amendment. I now recognize myself for five minutes for a statement on the bill and the amendment. H.R. 4642 is a sound common sense 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 executive's 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 to 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 them 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. I recognize the ranking member for his statement.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and 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 sputtered 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 and they're going to continue to happen, whether it's 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, cyberattacks, 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've 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.

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? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed say no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 4642 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Mr. Chair. For what purpose does the gentleman from Arizona seek recognition?

Request a roll call.

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. 2069, the Stop Secret Spending Act of 2025. The clerk will please designate the bill.

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.

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 please designate the amendment.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 2069 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the substitute be considered as original text for the purposes of further amendment. I now recognize myself for five 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 database 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's 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 to 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. Lastly, 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, Jimmy Panetta for leading this bill in the House of Representatives. I urge all my colleagues to support this common sense bipartisan bill and I yield to the ranking member.

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.

Gentleman yields back. I ask unanimous consent to enter into 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. Any member seek recognition on the bill? To speak on the bill? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. 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. Aye. Mr. Chairman. For what purpose does the gentleman from Arizona seek recognition?

Request a roll call.

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 Database Act of 2026. The clerk will please designate the bill.

H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information Database Act, a bill to amend chapter three of title five, United States Code, to require the publication of settlement agreements and for other purposes.

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 please designate the amendment.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 7934 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the substitute be considered as original text for the purposes of further amendment. I'm 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 didn't 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 didn't, so.

Well, before Lou Holtz went to Notre Dame, he was the head coach at Arkansas and we played them for the national championship 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's the best game we played all year." And Coach Holtz said, "Well, I'm just glad I was there to see it."

[Laughter.] Chair recognizes the sponsor of the bill, 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 record keeping, 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 record keeping 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 cost and outcomes of federal settlement agreements. The bipartisan Settlement Agreement Information Database Act or SAID Act will address this problem. The bill establishes a centralized and electronic database 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 database. 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 non-disclosure. 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.

Gentleman yields back. I recognize the ranking member.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I also support this bill. This bill, as we know, would create a database 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.

Gentleman yields back. I recognize myself for five minutes. H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information Database Act, is a common sense measure that increases transparency and enhances public participation in government policy making. 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's 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 database. Under the bill's requirements, these agency databases 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 long-standing 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. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I will discuss H.R. 1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025. It's one of the previous bills.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to see this bill that I'm 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 families 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's 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's 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.

Any further members seek recognition? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of the substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no, and the opinion of the chair is the ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. Question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 7934 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed say no. For what purpose does Mr. Biggs seek recognition?

Request a roll call.

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 DC Capital Authoritarian Motorvehicle Enforcement and Restoration of Autonomy, or CAMERA Act. The clerk will please designate the bill.

H.R. 5525, the Stop DC 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.

Without objection, the bill shall be considered as read, 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.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 5525 is offered by Mr. Comer of Kentucky.

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.

Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill simply repeals local DC laws relating to automated traffic enforcement as well as the DC mayor's authorization to use traffic enforcement systems and issue fines with these cameras. In turn, the bill prohibits Washington, DC from operating its traffic enforcement camera program and to repeal DC law currently prohibiting drivers from making right turns on red. And be clear, while DC's, I said operating, they're actually not really operating. These are two companies that they've contracted with: one, Verra Mobility out of Mesa, Arizona, and the other one, Hayden AI Technologies out of San Francisco, California. So the city's fleecing its residents and everybody that visits DC, 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 300, correction, 536 and counting total traffic enforcement cameras across five 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, DC traffic fatalities for 2023 were 52, and 2024 were 52. They're the highest they've been since 2007, which was 54. So it's not getting safer out there, folks, despite a drop in traffic fatalities for 2025 and the DC 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 Safety Administration found that only 0.2 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, non-existent. They don't provide any data. Meanwhile, a 2025 Consumer Affairs rank, ranking placed Washington, DC in first place for the worst traffic in the United States, with DC having the longest average commute time in the country, 33 and a half minutes, and the second longest average commute time in the country, six hours and 35 minutes, behind Los Angeles. Ladies and gentlemen, it's five and a half miles of Washington, DC. To put that in perspective, a typical DC commuter spends 72 hours a year of their lives lost in traffic in DC. According to the DC Chief Financial Officer, the city generated $139.5 million from automated traffic enforcement in FY 2023, $213 million in FY 2024, and $267 million in 2025. As is, these 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's no sign, no signage, but you still get fined and nobody's 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's called taxation without representation, folks. 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 DC 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.

Gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia.

Thank you. I just want to again, I think something that's 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 is again another attack on the 700,000 DC residents and on democratic principles. Now, I personally have, 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. They, I will agree that they can also be misused in many cases, and I've 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. DC's locally elected officials are accountable to DC 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 DC traffic laws, criminal justice laws, and other laws that continue to be in front of us today. Again, I'll 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.

Gentleman yields back. Before I recognize Mr. Higgins, Mr. Perry, do you have a...

Yeah, I just want to enter into the record, if I would, if it could please, Mr. Chairman, this article from the DC Policy Center entitled "Predominantly Black Neighborhoods in DC Bear the Brunt of Automated Traffic Enforcement."

Without objection, so ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Higgins from Louisiana.

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's a huge difference, Mr. Chairman, between traffic camera surveillance of intersections, which are 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 where the technology of cameras mounted throughout a municipality or jurisdictional authority can be very helpful. So that's a huge difference from traffic code enforcement. That's essentially remote enforcement of alleged traffic violations and issuance of fines. That's wrong. We should oppose it across the board. It doesn't it doesn't reflect even the basic standards of law enforcement professionalism, whatever side of the aisle you're on, you you would seek a responsible and accountable interaction between a professional certified law enforcement officer and and a citizen, in this case a vehicle operator who was alleged to have committed some violation. So a traffic enforcement camera removes the observation. There's no initial observation by a POST-certified police officer. There's no personal interaction between that observing police officer and the vehicle operator. There's remote enforcement and 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 you really don't because it's an incredible intrusion upon your life to have to go show up at a court for, if you're actually working, young man, it's 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's what's cool, and he says, "Good afternoon, sir, ma'am, I'm 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're 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 sticks a citation to your windshield and leaves. How would you feel about that? Because that's what's happening with these traffic cameras. So it's 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's impossible to support those principles and support automated traffic camera enforcement and fining of the citizenry. So I appreciate the bill being brought out. I'd like the chance to vote against this stuff. I yield.

Gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes Ms. Norton from Washington, D.C.

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 automated 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.

Without objection, so ordered.

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, automated 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 Auto Traffic Safety, AAA, and the National Safety, automated 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. 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.

Gentlelady yields back. Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs from Arizona.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I associate myself with the statements of Mr. Higgins and Mr. Perry. And while I don't 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's 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's why they do this. It isn't for safety. And it's a problem. And it's one of the reasons that in my home state, I've opposed every use and actually sponsored and was able to get laws taking down photo radar enforcement. Couldn't 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."

Without objection, so ordered. Yield back?

Yield back.

Yield back. 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 don't think we've 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's my understanding that those cameras are not operated by Flock. I plan to vote against this D.C. 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.

Yield back. Recognize the Ranking Member.

Thank you. I just want to, you know, 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's 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'm 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. Yield back.

Yield back. I recognize myself. I support the Perry bill, and I'll be happy to yield any additional time to Mr. Perry, the sponsor of the bill, if he wants it.

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.'s not a state. Where do the people that come across the country 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, respected law enforcement officer, opined, once you leave town, you're not going to fly back, you're not going to drive back to pay a $100 fine. You're 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's making money except the people that are being fleeced, whether they live in town or out of town. We certainly support D.C.'s ability to govern themselves, but unfortunately in this case, what they're doing is fleecing everybody that comes to Washington, D.C., and we don't support that. We also don't support the fleecing of their residents for which they don't want to raise taxes for the programs which they want to impose. And that's their business, I suppose. But let's just open this up and make it very clear to everybody that you're being charged a tax one way or the other to pay for these programs. And of course, you're not voting for that tax. They don't want to put a tax increase on, they don't want to have to vote for that because voters won't like that, so they just collect the tax unfairly and unequally through like no right turn on red. There's not even a sign there. Like people come from other states, if there's a sign there, I'm sure they would be happy to comply. But you don't know that you're not allowed to turn right on red, and of course, there's no safety infraction there in most of the intersections. So 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's 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 don't like those things to go ahead and engage in that process. But until then, we're going to make sure that we're 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. Now I'll yield the balance back to the Chairman.

And conclude any further members, any member seeking further debate? Seeing none, the question is now on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. Question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 5525 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Mr. Chairman.

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 zip code for Highland City, Utah. The clerk will please designate the bill.

H.R. 6399, a bill to direct the United States Postal Service to designate a single unique zip code for Highland City, Utah.

Without objection, the bill should 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 please designate the amendment.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 6399 is offered by Mr. Comer from Kentucky.

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 five 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 the 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 does not seek recognition, any member seek recognition? 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. All those opposed say no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. Question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6399 as amended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Biggs.

Recorded vote, please.

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. Chairman, I request to enter a document into the record, a list of current agency settlement databases.

Without objection, so ordered. Again, pursuant to the previous order, the committee stands in recess to the subject of the call of the chair. We plan to reconvene to vote on all these bills at 2:30 sharp. Committee's in recess. The committee will come to order. We are now at the point in the markup where we will consider the following postal naming measures en bloc. H.R. 1555, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2300 Sylvan Avenue in Monterey Bay, California, as the Abbot and Costello Post Office Building. H.R. 1827, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 East Walnut Street in Watseka, Illinois, as the Sergeant Jeremy R. Sherman Post Office Building. H.R. 3354, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 220 North Main Street in Postville, Iowa, as the John R. Mott Post Office Building. H.R. 4768, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 40 Fulton Street in New York, New York, as the Nathaniel 'Nat' Reed Post Office Building. H.R. 4895, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10001 Veniceland Court in Venice, Florida, as the Senior Chief Petty Officer Michael R. 'Mick' Post Office Building. H.R. 5034, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2110 Chatburn Avenue in Harlan, Iowa, as the Cpl. Daegan William-Tyeler Page Post Office Building. H.R. 5640, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 12804 West 95th Street in Lenexa, Kansas, as the Dennis Moore Post Office Building. H.R. 5712, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 220 East Vine Street in Kissimmee, Florida, as the 'Cpl. Juan Rodrigo Post Office Building'. H.R. 5799, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 601 West Baker Street in Plant City, Florida, as the 'Lester 'Les' Post Office Building'. H.R. 5867, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 109 Live Oaks Boulevard in Casselberry, Florida, as the 'Colonel Joseph W. Kittinger II Post Office Building'. H.R. 5988, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1910 West Terrace Drive in Upland, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 5995, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 16635 West Bernardo Drive in San Diego, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6073, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 9925 Businesspark Avenue in San Diego, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6216, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, as the 'Ryan J. Cummings Post Office Building'. H.R. 6221, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 155 South Main Street in Mount Clemens, Michigan, as the 'Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Jefferson Post Office Building'. H.R. 6239, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 11407 West 135th Street in Overland Park, Kansas, as the 'Dennis Moore Post Office Building'. H.R. 6312, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 South 1st Street in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as the 'Martin Olav Sabo Post Office'. H.R. 6404, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 114 North Magnolia Street in Elmwood, Illinois, as the 'Corporal Benjamin Desilets Post Office'. H.R. 6441, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6101 West Old Shakopee Road in Bloomington, Minnesota, as the 'Dosha Joi Post Office'. H.R. 6611, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 6630, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1400 West Jordan Street in Pensacola, Florida, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6651, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 215 Market Street in Newark, New Jersey, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6725, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7070 Shady Oak Road in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6980, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7180, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 80 South 1st Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, as the 'Deputy Sheriff Ronald 'Ron' Post Office'. H.R. 7199, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7333, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7382, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7417, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 135 West Center Street in Pleasant Grove, Utah, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7423, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 103 Benedum Drive in Bridgeport, West Virginia, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7606, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7607, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7893, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8057, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8203, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8212, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8213, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8214, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8215, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8216, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8217, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8218, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8219, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8220, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8221, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8222, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8223, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8224, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8225, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8226, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8227, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8228, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8229, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8230, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8231, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8232, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8233, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8234, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8235, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8236, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8237, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. The committee will come to order. We are now at the point in the markup where we will consider the following postal naming measures en bloc. H.R. 1555, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2300 Sylvan Avenue in Monterey Bay, California, as the Abbot and Costello Post Office Building. H.R. 1827, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 East Walnut Street in Watseka, Illinois, as the Sergeant Jeremy R. Sherman Post Office Building. H.R. 3354, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 220 North Main Street in Postville, Iowa, as the John R. Mott Post Office Building. H.R. 4768, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 40 Fulton Street in New York, New York, as the Nathaniel 'Nat' Reed Post Office Building. H.R. 4895, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10001 Veniceland Court in Venice, Florida, as the Senior Chief Petty Officer Michael R. 'Mick' Post Office Building. H.R. 5034, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2110 Chatburn Avenue in Harlan, Iowa, as the Cpl. Daegan William-Tyeler Page Post Office Building. H.R. 5640, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 12804 West 95th Street in Lenexa, Kansas, as the Dennis Moore Post Office Building. H.R. 5712, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 220 East Vine Street in Kissimmee, Florida, as the 'Cpl. Juan Rodrigo Post Office Building'. H.R. 5799, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 601 West Baker Street in Plant City, Florida, as the 'Lester 'Les' Post Office Building'. H.R. 5867, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 109 Live Oaks Boulevard in Casselberry, Florida, as the 'Colonel Joseph W. Kittinger II Post Office Building'. H.R. 5988, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1910 West Terrace Drive in Upland, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 5995, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 16635 West Bernardo Drive in San Diego, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6073, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 9925 Businesspark Avenue in San Diego, California, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6216, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, as the 'Ryan J. Cummings Post Office Building'. H.R. 6221, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 155 South Main Street in Mount Clemens, Michigan, as the 'Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Jefferson Post Office Building'. H.R. 6239, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 11407 West 135th Street in Overland Park, Kansas, as the 'Dennis Moore Post Office Building'. H.R. 6312, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 South 1st Street in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as the 'Martin Olav Sabo Post Office'. H.R. 6404, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 114 North Magnolia Street in Elmwood, Illinois, as the 'Corporal Benjamin Desilets Post Office'. H.R. 6441, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6101 West Old Shakopee Road in Bloomington, Minnesota, as the 'Dosha Joi Post Office'. H.R. 6611, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 6630, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1400 West Jordan Street in Pensacola, Florida, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6651, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 215 Market Street in Newark, New Jersey, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6725, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7070 Shady Oak Road in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 6980, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7180, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 80 South 1st Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, as the 'Deputy Sheriff Ronald 'Ron' Post Office'. H.R. 7199, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7333, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7382, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 400 North Main Street in Belen, New Mexico, as the 'Senator Dennis Chavez Post Office'. H.R. 7417, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 135 West Center Street in Pleasant Grove, Utah, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7423, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 103 Benedum Drive in Bridgeport, West Virginia, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7606, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7607, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 7893, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8057, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8203, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8212, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8213, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8214, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8215, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8216, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8217, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8218, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8219, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8220, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8221, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8222, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8223, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8224, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8225, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8226, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8227, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8228, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8229, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8230, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8231, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8232, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8233, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8234, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8235, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8236, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. H.R. 8237, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10877 Conant Street in Hamtramck, Michigan, as the 'Abbot and Costello Post Office Building'. The committee will come to order. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Fallon, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 6916, the Federal Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act of 2025. This bill is a critical step in our ongoing efforts to protect taxpayer dollars and ensure that federal programs are operating with the highest level of integrity. For too long, we have seen billions of dollars lost to fraud, waste, and abuse in various federal programs. This is not just a matter of fiscal responsibility; it's a matter of public trust. When taxpayers see their hard-earned money being mismanaged or stolen, it erodes their confidence in our government. H.R. 6916 addresses these issues by strengthening oversight and implementing more robust fraud prevention measures. It requires agencies to conduct more thorough risk assessments and to implement data-driven strategies to identify and prevent fraudulent activities before they occur. Furthermore, the bill enhances the authority of Inspectors General to investigate and prosecute those who attempt to defraud the government. It also provides for better coordination between federal, state, and local agencies to share information and best practices in fraud prevention. We have a responsibility to the American people to be good stewards of their money. This bill provides the tools necessary to fulfill that responsibility and to ensure that federal programs are serving those they were intended to help, rather than being exploited by criminals. I want to thank the sponsors of this bill for their leadership on this important issue. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 6916 and in sending a clear message that fraud and abuse will not be tolerated in our federal programs. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Washington, Ms. Randall, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. While I certainly agree that fraud prevention is a vital goal, I have some concerns about the potential unintended consequences of H.R. 6916 as currently drafted. Specifically, I am concerned that some of the new requirements could create significant administrative burdens for agencies that are already stretched thin. We must ensure that in our zeal to prevent fraud, we do not inadvertently hinder the delivery of essential services to those who need them most. For example, more stringent documentation requirements could make it more difficult for eligible individuals to access benefits such as food assistance or healthcare. I would like to see more language in the bill that explicitly protects against these types of barriers and ensures that agencies have the resources they need to implement these new measures effectively. Additionally, I believe we need to be careful about how we use data-driven strategies. While data can be a powerful tool, it can also be prone to bias if not used correctly. We must ensure that any algorithms used to identify potential fraud are transparent and subject to regular audits to prevent discrimination against certain populations. I look forward to working with my colleagues to address these concerns as the bill moves forward. We all want to prevent fraud, but we must do so in a way that is fair, efficient, and does not harm the very people we are trying to serve. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentlewoman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Biggs, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 428, the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of 2025. This is a common-sense piece of legislation that incentivizes federal employees to identify and report wasteful spending within their agencies. Currently, many federal employees feel that there is no reward for being fiscally responsible. In fact, in some cases, they may even be penalized for suggesting ways to save money, as it could lead to budget cuts for their own departments. H.R. 428 changes that dynamic by allowing agencies to pay bonuses to employees who identify surplus funds that can be returned to the Treasury. This creates a culture of accountability and encourages employees at all levels to look for ways to operate more efficiently. We often talk about the need to drain the swamp and reduce the size of government. This bill is a practical way to do just that by empowering the people who know these agencies best to help us find savings. It's a win-win for the taxpayers and for the dedicated federal employees who want to see their agencies succeed. I've heard from many constituents who are frustrated by the stories of government waste they see in the news. This bill shows them that we are serious about addressing those concerns and that we are willing to think outside the box to find solutions. I want to thank the sponsors for their work on this bill and I urge my colleagues to support it. Let's give our federal employees a reason to help us save money and protect the interests of the American people. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025. This bill is aimed at increasing transparency and accountability for large-scale federal projects that are significantly over budget or behind schedule. We have all seen examples of massive infrastructure or technology projects that start with a reasonable budget and then balloon into multi-billion dollar disasters. Often, the public and even Congress are kept in the dark about the true extent of these problems until it's too late. H.R. 1722 requires agencies to provide regular reports to Congress on any project with a total cost of $1 billion or more that is at least five years behind schedule or $1 billion over its original cost estimate. These reports must include a detailed explanation of the reasons for the delays or cost overruns, as well as a plan for getting the project back on track. This is about basic oversight. We cannot continue to write blank checks for projects that are failing to deliver on their promises. By requiring this information to be made public, we can hold agencies and contractors accountable and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used effectively. Transparency is the best disinfectant for waste and mismanagement. This bill will help us identify problems early and take corrective action before even more money is wasted. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1722 and to help us bring more accountability to federal spending. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Arizona, Ms. Ansari, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information Database Act of 2026. This bill is a critical step toward increasing transparency in how the federal government resolves legal disputes. Currently, information about settlement agreements reached by federal agencies is often difficult to find and is not collected in a centralized location. This makes it hard for Congress and the public to understand how much money is being paid out in settlements and what types of issues are being resolved. H.R. 7934 requires the establishment of a public, searchable database that includes information about all settlement agreements involving federal agencies. This database will include the names of the parties involved, the amount of the settlement, and a brief description of the claims being resolved. This is about the public's right to know. When the government uses taxpayer money to settle a legal dispute, the public should have access to information about that settlement. This transparency will help to ensure that agencies are acting in the best interests of the public and that settlements are not being used to hide misconduct or avoid accountability. Furthermore, this database will be a valuable tool for researchers and advocates who are working to identify patterns of government misconduct and to push for reforms. I want to thank the sponsors for their work on this important bill and I urge my colleagues to support it. Let's make our government more transparent and accountable to the people it serves. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentlewoman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Perry, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 5525, the Stop DC Capital Authoritarian Motorvehicle Enforcement and Restoration of Autonomy Act, or the CAMERA Act. This bill is about protecting the rights of residents and visitors in our nation's capital from overzealous and often unfair traffic enforcement. For too long, the District of Columbia has used automated traffic cameras as a way to generate revenue, rather than to improve public safety. These cameras often result in high fines for minor infractions, and the process for contesting a ticket is often convoluted and biased against the driver. The CAMERA Act would prohibit the use of automated traffic enforcement cameras in the District of Columbia and would require the city to return to traditional methods of traffic enforcement by law enforcement officers. This will ensure that drivers are treated fairly and that they have the opportunity to face their accuser in court. Furthermore, the bill would restore a measure of autonomy to the residents of the District by preventing the federal government from mandating the use of these cameras. We should be encouraging local governments to find ways to improve public safety that are fair and transparent, rather than relying on automated systems that are often seen as a form of government overreach. I've heard from many people who have been unfairly targeted by these cameras and who feel that they have no recourse. This bill is for them. It's about standing up for the rights of individuals and ensuring that our laws are enforced in a way that is consistent with our values. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5525 and to help us bring more fairness and accountability to traffic enforcement in our nation's capital. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Higgins, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak in support of H.R. 4642, the Fiscal Contingency Preparedness Act. This bill is about ensuring that our government is prepared for potential fiscal crises and that we have a plan in place to protect essential services and the stability of our economy. We live in an uncertain world, and we must be proactive in managing our nation's finances. H.R. 4642 requires the Department of the Treasury to develop a comprehensive fiscal contingency plan that outlines the steps the government would take in the event of a significant economic downturn or other fiscal emergency. This plan must include strategies for maintaining essential government functions, protecting the social safety net, and ensuring the continued operation of our financial systems. It also requires regular updates to Congress on the status of our fiscal preparedness and any potential risks that we may face. This is about responsible governance. We cannot afford to wait until a crisis hits to start thinking about how to respond. By having a plan in place, we can reduce uncertainty and ensure that we are able to act quickly and effectively to protect the interests of the American people. I want to thank the sponsors for their foresight in introducing this bill. It's a common-sense measure that will help to ensure the long-term fiscal health and stability of our nation. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4642 and to help us build a more resilient and prepared government. Thank you, and I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I must speak in strong opposition to H.R. 5525, the CAMERA Act. This bill is a direct assault on the home rule and autonomy of the District of Columbia. The decision of how to enforce traffic laws in the District should be left to the elected officials and residents of the District, not to members of Congress who do not live here and are not accountable to our voters. Automated traffic cameras are a vital tool for improving public safety in our city.

The committee will come to order. The committee is meeting today to consider several bills. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. Pursuant to committee rule 2(f) and House rule 11, clause 2(h)(4), the chair announces that he may postpone further proceedings today on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered. I now recognize myself for an opening statement. Today, the committee will consider several bills that will improve government efficiency, increase transparency, and save taxpayer dollars. First, we will consider H.R. 6916, the Federal Program Integrity and Fraud Prevention Act of 2025. This bill, which I introduced, will help prevent the billions of dollars in fraudulent and improper payments that plague federal programs every year. It requires agencies to use the Do Not Pay system and other data sources to verify eligibility before making payments. Next, we have H.R. 428, the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act of 2025, introduced by Representative Fleischmann. This bill incentivizes federal employees to identify and report waste, fraud, and abuse by allowing them to receive a portion of the savings as a bonus. We will also consider H.R. 1722, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2025, introduced by Representative Miller. This bill requires the Office of Management and Budget to submit an annual report to Congress on federal projects that are $1 billion or more over budget or five years or more behind schedule. H.R. 4642, the Fiscal Contingency Preparedness Act, introduced by Representative Cloud, requires agencies to develop plans for how they would operate in the event of a significant reduction in funding. H.R. 2069, the Stop Secret Spending Act of 2025, introduced by Representative Biggs, requires agencies to disclose all spending, including spending that is currently exempt from public disclosure. H.R. 7934, the Settlement Agreement Information Database Act of 2026, introduced by Representative Palmer, creates a public database of all settlement agreements entered into by federal agencies. H.R. 2766, the Special District Fairness and Accessibility Act, introduced by Representative Higgins, ensures that special districts have access to federal grants and other resources. H.R. 5525, the Stop DC Capital Authoritarian Motorvehicle Enforcement and Restoration of Autonomy (CAMERA) Act, introduced by Representative Norton, prohibits the District of Columbia from using automated traffic enforcement cameras. Finally, we will consider H.R. 6399, which directs the Postal Service to designate a single, unique ZIP Code for Highland City, Utah, and several postal naming measures. I look forward to a productive markup and I now recognize the ranking member for his opening statement.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you calling this markup today. While I support the goals of many of the bills we are considering, I have concerns about some of them. For example, H.R. 6916, while well-intentioned, could lead to eligible individuals being denied benefits if the data in the Do Not Pay system is inaccurate. I also have concerns about H.R. 428, which could create perverse incentives for employees to report minor issues in order to receive a bonus. Regarding H.R. 5525, I believe that the District of Columbia should have the autonomy to manage its own traffic enforcement. I look forward to discussing these and other issues during the markup. I yield back.

The gentleman yields back. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 6916. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 6916, a bill to prevent fraudulent and improper payments in federal programs, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 428. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 428, a bill to provide bonuses to federal employees who identify and report waste, fraud, and abuse, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1722. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 1722, a bill to require the Office of Management and Budget to submit an annual report to Congress on federal projects that are over budget or behind schedule, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 4642. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 4642, a bill to require federal agencies to develop fiscal contingency plans, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 2069. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 2069, a bill to require federal agencies to disclose all spending, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 7934. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 7934, a bill to create a public database of federal agency settlement agreements, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 2766. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 2766, a bill to ensure that special districts have access to federal resources, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 5525. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 5525, a bill to prohibit the District of Columbia from using automated traffic enforcement cameras, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? I recognize the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia for an amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. This amendment would strike the prohibition on automated traffic enforcement cameras. As I stated in my opening statement, I believe that the District of Columbia should have the autonomy to manage its own traffic enforcement. These cameras are an important tool for improving road safety and reducing traffic fatalities. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back.

The gentlewoman yields back. I oppose the amendment. These cameras are often used as a way to generate revenue for the city rather than to improve safety. They also raise significant privacy concerns. Is there any further discussion on the amendment? If not, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the amendment is not agreed to. Are there any further amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no.

No.

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 6399. The clerk will report the bill.

H.R. 6399, a bill to direct the United States Postal Service to designate a single, unique ZIP Code for Highland City, Utah, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the bill? If not, the question is on the motion to report the bill favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the bill is reported favorably. We will now proceed to the consideration of the postal naming measures. Without objection, the measures will be considered en bloc. The clerk will report the measures.

H.R. 1234, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 123 Main Street in Springfield, Illinois, as the 'Abraham Lincoln Post Office'; H.R. 5678, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 456 Oak Avenue in Columbus, Ohio, as the 'John Glenn Post Office'; and several other measures.

Without objection, the first reading of the measures is dispensed with. The measures are now open for amendment at any point. Are there any amendments to the measures? If not, the question is on the motion to report the measures favorably to the House. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the measures are reported favorably. This concludes our business for today. I want to thank all the members for their participation. Without objection, the staff is authorized to make necessary technical and conforming changes to the bills considered today. The committee stands adjourned. The committee will reconvene. 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. We're going to keep the first vote open a minute. I know we've got Mr. Palmer walking in. Hopefully after this first one we'll rock and roll. We've got Mr. Jack walking in. This is on 2766. I know, I know. Have all members voted who wish? Does any member wish to change their vote? I'm going to close it. The clerk will close the vote, report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 32, the nays are eight.

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. 6916. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 6916. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 38, the nays are two.

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. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 40, the nays are zero.

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. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 39, the nays are zero.

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. 4642. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 4642. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded?

One moment, sir.

Okay, we're waiting on... Oh, we're good now. Any member wish to change their vote? Seeing none, the clerk will report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 39, the nay is one.

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. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 40, the nays are zero.

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. Have all members been recorded...

We have one moment.

Does any member wish to change their vote?

Hold on, one moment, sir.

Have all members been recorded?

Hold on, we're waiting on our... We're waiting on Mr. McGuire.

Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 40, the nays are zero.

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. 5525. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 5525. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 21, the nays are 19.

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 the electronic voting system. The clerk will now open the vote on favorably reporting H.R. 6399. Have all members been recorded who wish to be recorded? Does any member wish to change the vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the vote total.

Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 40, the nays are zero.

The ayes have it and the bill is ordered favorably reported. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. 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.

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 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 and 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.

Gentleman yields back. Any other members wish to speak on the bill? The question is now on favorably reporting H.R. 6247. All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Ayes.] All those opposed say no. 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 11, 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, it's so ordered. If there's no further business before this committee, without objection, the committee stands adjourned.