diff --git "a/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43756.txt" "b/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43756.txt"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/CHRG-117/CHRG-117hhrg43756.txt"
@@ -0,0 +1,3276 @@
+
+ - THE 2021 GAO HIGH-RISK LIST: BLUEPRINT FOR A SAFER, STRONGER, MORE EFFECTIVE AMERICA
+
+[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
+[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
+
+
+ THE 2021 GAO HIGH-RISK LIST:
+ BLUEPRINT FOR A SAFER, STRONGER,
+ MORE EFFECTIVE AMERICA
+
+=======================================================================
+
+ HEARING
+
+ BEFORE THE
+
+ COMMITTEE ON
+ OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
+ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
+
+ ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
+
+ FIRST SESSION
+
+ __________
+
+ MARCH 2, 2021
+
+ __________
+
+ Serial No. 117-6
+
+ __________
+
+ Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform
+
+[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ Available on: govinfo.gov,
+ oversight.house.gov or
+ docs.house.gov
+
+ __________
+
+
+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
+43-756 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+ COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
+
+ CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Chairwoman
+
+Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of James Comer, Kentucky, Ranking
+ Columbia Minority Member
+Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Jim Jordan, Ohio
+Jim Cooper, Tennessee Paul A. Gosar, Arizona
+Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
+Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois Jody B. Hice, Georgia
+Jamie Raskin, Maryland Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
+Ro Khanna, California Michael Cloud, Texas
+Kweisi Mfume, Maryland Bob Gibbs, Ohio
+Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Clay Higgins, Louisiana
+Rashida Tlaib, Michigan Ralph Norman, South Carolina
+Katie Porter, California Pete Sessions, Texas
+Cori Bush, Missouri Fred Keller, Pennsylvania
+Danny K. Davis, Illinois Andy Biggs, Arizona
+Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Andrew Clyde, Georgia
+Peter Welch, Vermont Nancy Mace, South Carolina
+Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Scott Franklin, Florida
+ Georgia Jake LaTurner, Kansas
+John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Pat Fallon, Texas
+Jackie Speier, California Yvette Herrell, New Mexico
+Robin L. Kelly, Illinois Byron Donalds, Florida
+Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan
+Mark DeSaulnier, California
+Jimmy Gomez, California
+Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
+Vacancy
+
+ David Rapallo, Staff Director
+ Emily Burns, Policy Director
+ Elisa LaNier, Chief Clerk
+
+ Contact Number: 202-225-5051
+
+ Mark Marin, Minority Staff Director
+ ------
+
+ C O N T E N T S
+
+ ----------
+ Page
+Hearing held on March 2, 2021.................................... 1
+
+ Witness
+
+ The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United
+ States, Government Accountability Office
+ Oral Statement............................................... 5
+
+Opening statements and the prepared statement for the witness are
+ available in the U.S. House of Representatives Repository at:
+ docs.house.gov.
+
+ INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
+
+ ----------
+
+ * Letter, Kansas Congressional Delegation; submitted by Rep.
+ LaTurner.
+
+ * Report, Kansas Report on Unemployment Claims and Fraud;
+ submitted by Rep. LaTurner.
+
+ * Letter, IRS Enforcement Letter from 88 Groups to the Biden
+ Administration and Congress; submitted by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.
+
+ * ``Who's Afraid of the IRS? Not Facebook,'' article, Pro
+ Publica; submitted by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.
+
+ * Questions for the Record: to Mr. Dodaro; submitted by Rep.
+ LaTurner.
+
+
+Documents entered into the record during this hearing and
+ Questions for the Record (QFR's) are available at:
+ docs.house.gov.
+
+
+ THE 2021 GAO HIGH-RISK LIST:
+ BLUEPRINT FOR A SAFER, STRONGER,
+ MORE EFFECTIVE AMERICA
+
+ ----------
+
+
+ Tuesday, March 2, 2021
+
+ House of Representatives,
+ Committee on Oversight and Reform,
+ Washington, D.C.
+ The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:39 a.m., in
+room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carolyn B.
+[chairwoman of the committee] presiding.
+ Present: Representatives Norton, Lynch, Cooper, Connolly,
+Krishnamoorthi, Raskin, Khanna, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Porter,
+Bush, Davis, Welch, Johnson, Speier, Kelly, DeSaulnier, Gomez,
+Pressley, Comer, Jordan, Gosar, Foxx, Hice, Grothman, Cloud,
+Gibbs, Higgins, Keller, Sessions, Biggs, Donalds, Herrell,
+LaTurner, Fallon, Clyde, and Franklin.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Welcome, everybody, to today's hybrid
+hearing. Pursuant to House Rules, some members will appear in
+person, and others will appear remotely via Webex. Since some
+members are appearing in person, let me first remind everyone
+that pursuant to the latest guidance from the House attending
+physician, all individuals attending this hearing in person
+must wear a face mask. Members who are not wearing a face mask
+will not be recognized.
+ Let me also make a few reminders for those members
+appearing in person. You will only see members and witnesses
+appearing remotely on the monitor in front of you when they are
+speaking in what is known in Webex as ``active speaker'' or
+``stage view.'' A timer is visible in the room directly in
+front of you.
+ For members appearing remotely, I know you are all familiar
+with Webex by now, but let me remind everyone of a few points.
+ First, you will be able to see each other speaking during
+the hearing whether they are in person or remote as long as you
+have your Webex set to active speaker or stage view. If you
+have any questions about this, please contact staff
+immediately.
+ Second, we have a timer that should be visible on your
+screen when you are in the active speaker with thumbnail.
+Members who wish to pin the timer to their screens should
+contact committee staff for assistance.
+ Third, the House Rules require that we see you. So, please
+have your cameras turned on at all times.
+ Fourth, members appearing remotely who are not recognized
+should remain muted to minimize background noise and feedback.
+ Fifth, I will recognize members verbally, but members
+retain the right to seek recognition verbally. In regular
+order, members will be recognized in seniority order for
+questions.
+ Last, if you want to be recognized outside of regular
+order, you may identify that in several ways. You may use the
+chat function to send a request, you may send an email to the
+majority staff, or you may unmute your mic to seek recognition.
+ Obviously, we do not want people talking over each other.
+So, my preference is that members use the chat function or
+email to facilitate formal verbal recognition. Committee staff
+will ensure that I am made aware of the request, and I will
+recognize you.
+ We will begin the hearing in just a moment when they tell
+me they are ready to begin the live stream.
+ [Pause.]
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The committee will come to order.
+ Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
+recess of the committee at any time.
+ I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
+ The U.S. Government is one of the most complex and
+consequential organizations on Earth. Responsible for serving a
+population of more than 330 million people and adding a new
+person at a rate of every 52 seconds, the Federal Government
+has a mission that is staggering in both breadth and depth.
+ Every two years, the Government Accountability Office
+releases a blueprint for how to better meet this mission. The
+GAO High-Risk List identifies the areas of Federal operations
+most in need of improvement and transformation, complete with
+hundreds of ratings and specific recommendations for how to
+achieve progress. This year's report is titled ``Dedicated
+Leadership Needed to Address Limited Progress in Most High-Risk
+Areas,'' a message that cuts right to the heart of the
+challenge we face.
+ Over the past four years, the objective metrics of the
+High-Risk List shows that the Federal Government improved less
+and regressed more than before the President took office. Of
+the 35 areas that were included on the list, 20 were stagnant,
+five regressed, and two new areas were added. The country now
+strives to recover from an unprecedented pandemic that has
+killed more than 500,000 Americans and reduced the average life
+expectancy by one full year, a toll that falls particularly
+hard on minority populations.
+ Fourteen million Americans lost their jobs in the first
+three months of the pandemic, more than in two years of the
+Great Recession. Ten million are still unemployed, and that
+number doesn't even include the millions of Americans who have
+given up looking for jobs.
+ As this silent war rages on in homes and hospitals, another
+silent battle is being fought in our IT networks by cyber
+attackers intent on stealing our intellectual property and
+undermining our national security. The SolarWinds breach that
+came to light last December as well as escalating targeted
+cyber attacks that have drained millions of dollars from
+struggling hospitals are just two examples of the threats that
+we know about.
+ The economic toll of the pandemic also cuts across multiple
+high-risk areas, draining, draining our ability to react and
+straining our resources and inflicting damage on financial
+regulatory systems that remain dangerously fragmented after the
+last financial crisis.
+ Our frontline healthcare and essential workers are
+traumatized and exhausted, suffering devastation that will
+redefine a generation. They will not forget that the Federal
+Government told them they were on their own when the ICUs
+filled up and the personal protective equipment was nowhere to
+be found. They will not forget the Federal Government put more
+lives at risk by contradicting basic scientific facts. They
+will not forget that the Federal Government used outdated IT
+systems that delayed their economic stimulus checks.
+ I know our Federal Government is better than that. As one
+of our colleagues reminded me a few weeks ago, our Federal
+Government put a man on the Moon. So, setting up a functioning
+system for distributing pandemic relief payments quickly and
+accurately should be entirely attainable.
+ It is attainable, as are the other recommendations in
+today's high-risk report, but it will take dedicated leadership
+to get there and not just by one person. No one person can
+rebuild the broken roads, prevent the next flood, or stop the
+next deadly virus from ravaging our cities and towns. No one
+person can remove the lead from the water, cover payroll costs
+for pandemic-starved small businesses, or save the 136
+Americans who will die of opioid overdoses today.
+ No one person can do all these things, but when we all work
+together as effectively as possible, we can make progress. That
+is the work of Government and the work of today's report.
+ The committee is honored to welcome Gene Dodaro, the
+Comptroller General of the United States and the head of the
+Government Accountability Office. The diligent and thorough
+work undertaken by Mr. Dodaro and his staff of dedicated
+professionals complements the mission of this committee, and we
+are grateful for it.
+ The need for an effective, efficient, functional, and
+responsible Federal Government has never been greater. Congress
+and the executive branch must work together strategically on
+high-risk areas so Federal agencies are in the best position
+possible to restore the health, security, and prosperity of the
+Nation.
+ Comptroller General, thank you for being here today, and I
+look forward to a wide-ranging discussion.
+ Before I recognize the ranking member, I want to make one
+announcement. Mr. Dodaro is testifying in the Senate this
+afternoon at 2:30 p.m., which means we will have to end our
+hearing at 1:30 p.m.
+ With that, I now recognize the distinguished ranking
+member, Mr. Comer, for an opening statement.
+ Mr. Comer. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this very
+important hybrid, bipartisan hearing.
+ And thank you, Comptroller General Dodaro, for your
+appearance here today. I know you are going to have a very long
+day.
+ Today's hearing is exactly what this committee was designed
+to do, explore areas where there are high risks of fraud,
+waste, abuse, and mismanagement of Government resources.
+Congress needs to know what steps we can take to make the high-
+risk programs more efficient and less susceptible to misuse.
+ Taxpayers expect the Government to work for them, but far
+too often, the complexity of the Federal bureaucracy leads to
+risks of inefficiencies and mismanaged resources. I am glad the
+hearing today will shine a light on Federal programs that are
+especially susceptible to such risks, as well as identify
+solutions to ensure that the Government is working for the
+American people.
+ GAO's High-Risk List has informed congressional oversight
+and decisionmaking since its inception in the 1990's. To be
+included on the list, the GAO considers several factors, in
+particular whether the area presents a risk of at least $1
+billion loss, involves public health, safety, national
+security, economic growth, or citizens' rights.
+ The 36 separate areas identified in the 2021 High-Risk List
+are selected by GAO as having both qualitative and quantitative
+risks that present an elevated likelihood of fraud, waste, and
+abuse. Once on the list, the program must demonstrate a
+commitment to progress in five criteria, which GAO clearly
+outlines.
+ Today's hearing should help us better understand these
+recommendations so this committee can use the tools to ensure
+these programs are better managed. The GAO estimates the High-
+Risk List, combined with targeted congressional oversight, is
+responsible for a financial benefit to the Federal Government
+of $575 billion over the last 15 years and approximately $225
+billion since its last high-risk update in 2019. That is over
+half a trillion dollars saved for the U.S. taxpayers over the
+last 15 years.
+ But there remains serious work to be done in addressing
+many of the deficiencies identified on the 2021 High-Risk List.
+In fact, I see this report as a blueprint for congressional
+action needed to make our Government work more efficiently for
+the American people, while managing resources and utilizing our
+tax dollars in the way that the law intends. Because despite
+progress made in multiple high-risk areas since 2019, the news
+is not all good. Only one area met all five criteria for
+removal from this year's High-Risk List, while two new areas
+were added to the list. Some areas regressed, while others did
+not improve in any of the five criteria.
+ There is still a significant amount of work to be done, and
+I have said many times that this committee should be guided by
+its mission to root out waste, fraud, and abuse wherever it may
+be found. I am glad to see the committee finally addressing
+these issues.
+ Since October, committee Republicans have shined a light on
+a $35 million contract to a get out the vote effort in
+California that appears to violate Federal law. Meanwhile, the
+Election Assistance Commissioner Inspector General has taken no
+action. That is exactly why it is important for this committee
+to focus on preventing mismanagement and frivolous spending
+like we are here today. That is our job on this committee.
+ I look forward to hearing from our witness today about ways
+Congress can enhance its oversight and improve the areas
+identified on the High-Risk List to ensure that our Government
+works on behalf of the American people.
+ Again, I thank the chairwoman for holding this important
+hearing, and I yield back the balance of my time.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
+ I would now like to introduce our witness. Today, we will
+hear from the Honorable Gene Dodaro, who is the Comptroller
+General of the United States.
+ The witness will be unmuted so we can swear him in. Please
+raise your right hand.
+ Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to
+give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
+so help you God?
+ [Response.]
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Let the record show that the witness
+answered in the affirmative.
+ Thank you. Without objection, your written statement will
+be part of the record.
+ With that, Comptroller Dodaro, you are now recognized for
+your testimony.
+
+ STATEMENT OF HON. GENE L. DODARO, COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE
+ UNITED STATES, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
+
+ Mr. Dodaro. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Maloney,
+Ranking Member Comer, members of the committee. I'm very
+pleased to have this opportunity to talk about GAO's latest
+high-risk update today.
+ There have been some bright spots and improvement. However,
+our overall conclusion is that there has been limited progress
+in the majority of the high-risk areas. Twenty, as you
+mentioned, Chairwoman Maloney, have remained the same with
+their ratings. Five have regressed.
+ Now on the positive side, seven areas made improvements in
+their ratings. One to the point, as Ranking Member Comer
+mentioned, of coming off the list. That's the defense support
+infrastructure area. They reduced their warehouse, office
+space, properties; reduced their leasing costs, as we
+recommended; taken action to get intergovernmental agreements
+in place to reduce their costs of operating their bases. And so
+we feel comfortable.
+ Now when we take something off the list, that doesn't mean
+it's out of sight. So, we keep an eye on the area to make sure
+that it is, in fact, fixed.
+ And now on the other side of the equation, we're adding two
+new areas to the High-Risk List. The first is the Federal
+Government's efforts to prevent, respond to, and recover from
+drug abuse. Unfortunately, from 2002 to 2019, 800,000 Americans
+have lost their lives to drug overdose. The latest period from
+May 1919 to 1920--May 1920 has the highest recorded number of
+deaths already, on a preliminary basis, of 80,000 people.
+ This area needs greater Federal leadership, attention,
+coordination, and a complete national strategy that's executed
+properly, monitored, and refined going forward to combat this--
+another public health crisis that we're facing in addition to
+the pandemic.
+ Second, we're adding SBA's Emergency Loan Program. Now
+these loan programs have been a tremendous help to small
+businesses across the United States during the pandemic, and I
+want to emphasize that this designation does not detract from
+the good that these programs have done. However, we think, when
+you're spending close to $1 trillion, you also need good
+accountability and transparency. And by those standards, these
+programs have not met that goal.
+ There is need for greater oversight and management for
+program integrity to minimize fraud and to provide better
+accountability to the taxpayer. SBA was unable to get an
+opinion from its financial auditors this past year because they
+couldn't substantiate loan balances and other issues.
+ Now there are a number of existing high-risk areas that I
+want to call your attention to. First is the cybersecurity of
+our Nation. I first designated this a high-risk area across the
+entire Federal Government in 1997. We added critical
+infrastructure protection in 2003. The Federal Government is
+still not operating, in my opinion, at a pace commensurate with
+the evolving serious threats that are presented in this area.
+So, we've put forth a number of recommendations.
+ Second is the Federal workforce. There are critical skill
+gaps. Twenty-two of the high-risk areas are on there in part
+because of skill gap in the programs. And the Federal
+Government is, in my view, not well postured as it needs to be
+to meet 21st century challenges.
+ This committee is very familiar with the high-risk issues
+in the U.S. Postal Service and Census. So, I won't go into
+those in much detail.
+ Limiting the Federal Government's fiscal exposure by
+managing climate risk is a very important issue. The Government
+is an insurer of flood insurance, crop insurance. It is the
+biggest property owner in the United States and land owner. It
+needs to limit disaster aid that's now over $1 trillion--or a
+half trillion dollars since Katrina took place by building
+better resilience in up front.
+ So, the bottom line here is that only 12 of the high-risk
+areas have had leadership met as part of the criteria. So, we
+need much greater leadership on the part of the agencies, OMB,
+and continued oversight and engagement from the Congress. GAO
+is ready to do its part to help.
+ Thank you very much. I'd be happy to answer questions.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Thank you. I recognize myself for five
+minutes for questions.
+ Last Friday, our committee had a hearing on the SolarWinds
+breach and received really frightening testimony about how a
+suspected Russian state actor infiltrated the networks of at
+least nine Federal agencies and over 100 private sector
+companies, stealing their intellectual property, their plans,
+their research. Definitely a national security risk.
+ Our attackers wreaked silent, invisible damage on our
+internal Federal networks for months undetected and would have
+remained undetected for who knows how long if not for the
+discovery by the cybersecurity firm FireEye. The vulnerability
+of Federal and private sector systems, including critical
+infrastructure of the Nation's energy, transportation,
+communications, and financial sector, is absolutely staggering.
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, in the high-risk area of ensuring the
+cybersecurity of the Nation, how many of GAO's recommendations
+currently stand open to secure cybersecurity?
+ You need your mic on.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Since 2010, we've made 3,300 recommendations.
+Seven hundred fifty remain open at this point in time.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. And how many would you describe as
+priority recommendations?
+ Mr. Dodaro. There's about 67 priority recommendations
+remaining open. But I would underscore that all 750 can
+introduce vulnerabilities if not attended to.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. This is unbelievably unacceptable.
+Which of these recommendations would have been most important
+in preventing or responding to the SolarWinds attack?
+ Mr. Dodaro. There were two in particular. One dealing with
+the information technology supply chain. There are best
+practices that could be put in place to address that issue. We
+warned about it before, but we took an in-depth look. None of
+the 23 agencies that we looked at met all the best practice
+criteria. So, we made 145 recommendations across Government to
+better manage IT supply chain issues, which was a key weakness
+exploited during the SolarWinds attack.
+ Second is to--and I'm pleased that Congress has acted on
+this recommendation, which is to place a statutory cyber
+coordinator in the White House that can coordinate activities
+across Government to support the Department of Homeland
+Security, to support OMB, and the agencies in the bridge to
+civilian and military components, along with the National
+Security Council. So, this is--this is an important area. So
+far, that position has not yet been filled, however.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Now if your recommendations had been in
+place, do you think it would have prevented this cyber attack?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, it certainly would have led to an earlier
+discovery of the attack. It's hard to say that, you know, you
+can't have zero assurance. But we would have been better
+postured to detect the attack ourselves, to take quicker
+action, in my opinion.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. In response to your statement, if you
+turn to page 168 of the report, which states--and I quote--
+about the need to coordinate with a cybersecurity professional,
+``In light of the elimination of the White House Cybersecurity
+Coordinator position in May 2018, it had remained unclear what
+official within the executive branch is to ultimately be
+responsible for coordinating the execution of the
+implementation plan and holding Federal agencies accountable
+for the plan's nearly 200 activities moving forward.''
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, GAO's assessment that the Trump
+administration's decision to eliminate the White House
+Cybersecurity Coordinator position, do you believe that that
+made the Nation more vulnerable to cyber attack?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, I'm very pleased that the Congress
+created the position in statute, and I think having the
+position filled will help reduce the Government's
+vulnerability, if effectively implemented and the proper
+leadership provided across Government.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. OK, and I think that the report later
+discusses the attack and stresses that this national cyber
+director needs to be filled. We support that. We passed it
+legislatively. It was removed by the White House, and it has to
+be put forward, a national cyber strategy needing a national
+director focused on all of your recommendations.
+ I want to really point on something that came out of the
+hearing, and that was the need to share information. And I know
+that there has been legislation in calling for the sharing of
+information between the public and private sector on cyber
+attacks. There has been great resistance. Many people don't
+want to share that information. They don't want people to know
+that they had a breach, but this information has to be shared.
+ And I want to know what your assessment would be if we
+required--we have, what, $1.5 trillion a year in Federal
+contracts that go out. That if you receive a Federal contract,
+then you must share that information with Government and the
+private sector so that we can better address attacks to our
+cybersecurity. Would you support that type of legislation
+requiring as part of a Federal contract, if you are receiving
+Federal money for research and you are breached, then you have
+to share that breach with the Federal Government and colleagues
+in the private sector to better combat it?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That type of provision would be very helpful,
+Chairwoman Maloney. I appreciate that.
+ You know, 80 percent of the computing assets in this
+country are in private sector hands. So, we can't effectively
+combat this issue without sharing between the private sector
+and the Government sector. Now there's reluctance to do that
+for liability reasons, for business reasons, but we have to do
+it in a confidential manner, where we can have and share this
+information both from the companies being affected, but also
+from the Government standpoint about threats that they're aware
+of that they should warn the private sector about because they
+have unique resources in Government that the private sector
+doesn't have.
+ But so far, we're not at that point of having enough
+fluidity in the sharing of this information to have an
+integrated, coordinated effort to protect our Nation. And I'm
+hopeful that the Cybersecurity Coordinator can help--once
+that's filled, help build trust and build mechanisms to more
+effectively share this information.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Another thing that came out of that
+hearing was how vast the amount of information they could
+receive from the nine Federal agencies and some of the most
+important businesses in our country, leading businesses and
+leading agencies and technology that is vital for the survival
+of our country. Yet they got into one system and was able to go
+and climb into systems throughout the Government.
+ And it seems to me we should study how you firewall it.
+Maybe the Government should not be connected to a system
+connected to the private sector. In the breaches that I have
+seen, most of them come in through the private sector and into
+Government through a connecting system. And I would like some
+research in that area of how we would firewall off defense,
+energy, areas that are critical to the infrastructure of our
+country.
+ I want to thank you. I have been on this committee many
+years, and one of my favorite hearings is this one, when you
+focus on the needs of what we need to do to make our country
+stronger and more responsive to the people that we serve.
+ With that, I now recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Mr.
+Gosar. You are now recognized, Mr. Gosar.
+ Mr. Hice. Madam Chairwoman? Madam Chairwoman?
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Yes.
+ Mr. Hice. Are we all going to be able to get nine minutes
+of questioning?
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Yes, you can. Mr. Comer has it or
+whoever he designates it to. This is one of the most important
+hearings that we have in our committee. It points out what
+needs to be done to protect our people and to make our country
+stronger, and I am going to be extremely lenient on the
+questions because we have the head here to give us direction,
+and we need to hear his comments and the questions.
+ So, I am going to be very liberal on questioning because we
+need to get these answers. But I have been told to call on Mr.
+Gosar. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Comer. Yes, yes.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. And I will allow him eight minutes if
+he wants, or whatever. Mr. Gosar, you are now recognized.
+ Mr. Gosar. Thank you, Chairwoman.
+ And I totally agree with you. This is one of the most
+important hearings that we have in this committee.
+ We are here to talk about the GAO's 2021 High-Risk List,
+which highlights major agency assets that have been either
+lost, stolen, damaged, wasted, or underutilized. There are a
+lot of programs you can dive into on this report, but there is
+something I want to focus on first.
+ Mr. Dodaro, what if we were to tell you there is a massive
+Government program out there that is ripe` with abuse? This
+program undercuts Americans seeking work in the STEM field by
+allowing businesses to hire foreign workers at a discounted
+rate. This programs allows these discounts by ensuring these
+foreign workers don't have to contribute to FICA, which is the
+Social Security and Medicare taxes.
+ This program also allows those same individuals the ability
+to withdraw from Social Security and Medicare even though they
+don't contribute. As I am sure you are aware, this is extremely
+problematic since Social Security will be insolvent by 2035 and
+Medicare by 2026. Oh, no, I take that back. Now that we have
+new actuarials, Medicare is insolvent by 2024.
+ This program was also not approved by Congress and actually
+doesn't have a cap. Currently, no one knows how many
+individuals are on this program. Do you know of the program I
+am talking about? Because it didn't make it into your report.
+ Mr. Dodaro. I think you're talking about the--there's a
+visa investor program where people can come in and invest?
+ Mr. Gosar. No. The program is called the Optional Practical
+Training Program, also known as the OPT. This program was
+created by a rogue Department of Homeland Security in 2008 and
+has lasting impacts. Not only is this program reprioritizing
+Americans last in regards to Social Security and Medicare, two
+programs they have been paying in their whole lives, but also
+those graduating in the STEM field.
+ Imagine being a young person nowadays going to college.
+Media, society, and even Members of Congress tell youngsters
+the importance of getting a degree in STEM. They go on to say
+how there is a massive shortage, so there is a great window for
+you to build a great career.
+ You spend years completing your degree, and then you hit
+the job market just to be told that since you are an American,
+there are no--they have no interest in hiring you because they
+can hire a foreign worker for less with the same credentials,
+and then less money is charged them. Is it really a mystery
+that the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that for every two
+students graduating with a U.S. STEM degree, only one is
+employed in STEM? And that 32 percent of computer science
+graduates not employed in information technology attributed
+their situation to a lack of available jobs.
+ Mr. Dodaro, I suggest GAO adds this program to its list of
+high-risk programs because, in my opinion and in the opinion of
+many others, this is a program that needs to be highlighted and
+addressed as abusive and ultimately bad for Americans.
+ Shifting gears slightly, Mr. Dodaro, I am hoping that you
+can shed some light on the deficiencies related to the
+Pentagon's financial management. As you are aware, Pentagon
+bookkeeping is notoriously abysmal. In fact, DOD bookkeeping is
+so abysmal that areas within the DOD have been in the high-risk
+report since 1995.
+ These failures are evident and materialize every year when
+DOD inevitably fails in its annual audit. On November 16, 2020,
+the Pentagon announced for the third straight year, it failed
+its financial review. The DOD estimates that it will not be
+able to pass an audit before 2027, or 37 years after it was
+required to do so by law.
+ According to your report, the DOD uses their reporting
+tools to produce reports for high-level decisionmaking and
+reporting based on real-time data contained in its centralized
+data base. This tool enables DOD to produce reports on the
+status of audit findings and its efforts to address audit
+priority areas and material weaknesses.
+ Your report also goes on to say that ``The data base
+information may be inaccurate, unreliable, and incomplete for
+management decisionmaking'' and that ``Without complete and
+reliable information on DOD's audit remediation efforts,
+internal and external stakeholders may not have quality
+information to effectively monitor and measure DOD's
+progress.''
+ Yet every year, Congress fails to hold DOD accountable for
+these deficiencies during the appropriations process. We
+continue to distribute duties and responsibilities to various
+existing positions with less and less authority. While we must
+compete with our adversaries, we cannot ignore these
+deficiencies. In fact, I would argue that these deficiencies
+hinder our efforts to maintain a strategic advantage over our
+adversaries.
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, why is the Pentagon estimating that it will
+not be able to pass an audit before 2027?
+ Mr. Dodaro. One of the reasons, Congressman Gosar, is that
+for many years, I'd say almost 20, 25 years, DOD did not have a
+very good process in place and take this requirement for a
+financial audit very seriously, and Congress waived the
+requirement for them for a number of years in order to get
+their systems in place, which never happened.
+ So, the past three or four years have been the best I've
+seen, and I've been monitoring this the whole 30-year period,
+where DOD is finally serious about having a financial audit
+done. They've corrected 25, 26 percent of all the weaknesses
+that have been identified.
+ So, basically, the reason is they got a very late start.
+Their systems are antiquated. They need to make sure that they
+have more financial management personnel that are qualified and
+trained. That's one of the 22 areas on the list because of the
+need for closing skill gaps. And they need to fix these
+problems and to consolidate and modernize their financial
+systems.
+ My hope is, if this progress is sustained, that they will
+get there ultimately because this is the one area in the
+Federal Government of the 24 largest departments and agencies
+that have never been able to pass the test of an independent
+audit, and it's needed.
+ The other thing I would point out is they're already
+beginning to realize millions of dollars of savings as a result
+of doing the financial audit by identifying property and
+equipment that was not on their books that they can then use
+rather than reorder new equipment. So, it's already having very
+good benefits, and I think that will help sustain the progress.
+ But you're right to point it out, and I think I would
+encourage Congress to keep monitoring the progress there very
+carefully.
+ Mr. Gosar. Is some of the issues in regards to this audit
+sole-sourcing contracts?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I don't know. I will get you an answer for the
+record there. I believe there were competitive--competed. But
+I'm not sure and--but I will find out and get an answer to you.
+ Mr. Gosar. Thank you. Then also in that contract base, is
+it of question, the calibration in regard to Davis Bacon wages?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I don't believe that applies to the financial
+audit, no.
+ Mr. Gosar. But it does to DOD regards to fair and
+compensate contracting, does it not?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, it does in regard to construction
+projects and other things, but I'm not sure it applies to
+professional services. But I'll get you--again, I'll get you a
+more definitive answer on that.
+ Mr. Gosar. OK. One last question. What can we do, as
+Congress, in the Fiscal Year 2022 NDAA to accelerate the
+timeline for a successful Pentagon-wide audit? What can we do
+to put the carrot and the stick so that we actually get that
+compliance?
+ I mean, 25 percent is pretty pathetic. And thank you for at
+least getting that. But I mean, we can't fully understand the
+ramifications unless we have the full information. So, what can
+we do to make your job better?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I think you can continue to ask DOD for their
+plan to modernize their systems to get at the underlying cause
+for the problems and to make sure that Congress gives them
+funding to bring in all the qualified people that they need in
+order to fix these problems. That would--that's the key to
+expediting progress. That's how it's happened across the rest
+of the Federal Government.
+ Mr. Gosar. Isn't it the purpose of the Antideficiency Act
+to do exactly that, that Congress appropriate their funds for
+the specific purpose and that DOD has to spend those funds
+accordingly to that purpose?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. But the Antideficiency Fund makes sure
+that the agencies don't spend more than what Congress gave them
+to. I mean, so it's basically the Empowerment Control Act is
+the one that makes sure that they spend it for the purposes
+that the Congress intended it to do.
+ Now you asked me what Congress could do to help, and I--and
+of something that they could place in the NDAA, and I think it
+is requirements for them to provide good plans for improving
+their systems and to encourage them to have all the qualified
+people they need would be good steps for Congress to take.
+ Mr. Gosar. Thank you. I yield back, Chairwoman.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, is
+recognized. Ms. Norton?
+ Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair. Can you hear me well?
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Yes, we can.
+ Ms. Norton. I appreciate this hearing. I believe we have
+this hearing annually, and this High-Risk List keeps appearing
+before us.
+ I must tell you, Madam Chair, that before being elected to
+Congress, I was a tenured professor of law. I recognize failure
+when I see it. So, I would like to discuss changing our
+approach in at least some ways.
+ As I looked at this list and I considered my own
+responsibilities and the committees on which I serve, I thought
+one way to go with this is to look for win-win opportunities
+when it comes to high-risk areas. And so I looked for such
+areas where you have the same investment because that is going
+to be an issue. Money is always an issue. And the same, time
+and resources.
+ And the reason I am looking at a win-win is because of my
+service on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and
+we have just gotten a bill in the reconciliation package. And
+it is, of course, one of the high-risk areas that I think
+presents us with an opportunity for a win-win.
+ So, my question for Mr. Dodaro is, first as I understand
+it, I believe you have just testified in response to a question
+from one of my colleagues that 80 percent of the--of this issue
+is in private hands. Is that not the case?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. So, in talking about computing, the
+computing assets, yes.
+ Ms. Norton. So, progress in this area hinges really on
+congressional action, the action we take. We in the Congress
+takes. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's part of the issue, but the executive
+branch needs to execute as well and to gain the cooperation of
+the private sector, particularly for critical infrastructure
+protection.
+ Ms. Norton. That is where I want to go, to critical
+infrastructure protection, because the President, President
+Biden, has before us a Build Back Better agenda that would
+invest $2 trillion to improve the Nation's infrastructure and
+surface transportation system. That is of special interest to
+me because of the committee on which I serve. I also know that
+the American Society of Civil Engineers reports that 1 out of
+every 5 miles of highway pavement in the U.S. is in poor
+condition.
+ So, then I looked at infrastructure itself because of my
+interest in that area. That The Build Back Better plan would
+electrify various forms of surface transportation. I think we
+are already beginning to see electric cars or electric
+transportation, surface transportation, here in my own
+district, in the District of Columbia.
+ It would electrify various forms of surface transportation,
+and that would include, of course, the kind of surface
+transportation that is used every day, like commuter trains and
+school buses, transit buses, ferries, passenger vehicles. All
+of that is on the horizon, while allocating flexible Federal
+investments to enable municipalities to install high-rail
+networks and improve existing transit.
+ So, looking forward, Mr. Dodaro, would infrastructure
+improvements create jobs and cut emissions as a prudent
+investment to address multiple high-risk areas all at one time?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I think it's very important that we, as a
+country, invest in our infrastructure. The surface
+transportation infrastructure area has been on our High-Risk
+List for over 13 years. We need to have the type of financing
+and support available for improving surface transportation. In
+the cyber area, we've made recommendations that there need to
+be more investment in the electricity grid and other areas to
+build in better resilience to those areas.
+ So, there's a wide range of needs in the infrastructure
+area. It would directly address some of the areas on the High-
+Risk List and, I think, you know would be most appropriate.
+ Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
+ And there you have it, Madam Chairman--Madam Chair, a win-
+win matter for us to consider, rather than coming back every
+year to repeat our failures.
+ I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. I agree. The gentleman from Georgia,
+Mr. Hice, is recognized for five minutes.
+ Mr. Hice. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ And thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for being here with us again
+today.
+ Isn't it true that there are several programs that have
+been on the list ever since the High-Risk List was implemented
+back in 1990, I believe?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. There are 5 charter members remaining of
+the 14 that were on the list at that point. They're some of the
+biggest programs in the Government--weapon systems acquisition,
+Medicare, for example.
+ Mr. Hice. Right. And not only are those founding members,
+as you say, but we have a lot of other veteran members that
+have been on since the late 1990's or early 2000's as well.
+ Is there any kind of repercussion, such as withholding
+certain amounts of funds, money that they can receive or any
+other type of repercussion for agencies or agency organizations
+that remain on the High-Risk List year after year after year?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Nothing other than what Congress may impose on
+individual areas. For example, the DOD infrastructure support
+area we've taken off the list this time, Congress required
+regular hearings where they had DOD come up. They had GAO
+continue to investigate in it. And Congress stayed on them with
+requirements in the National Defense Authorization Act until it
+was improved.
+ So, congressional oversight and actions. In some cases in
+the past, there's been funds withheld for modernization efforts
+until they develop proper plans and institutions. There's no
+sort of generic----
+ Mr. Hice. I get that, and you are spot on. There is no
+question the role of Government oversight. But I am wondering
+from a legislative perspective to ensure--if there is
+ramifications? Everyone works off incentives. Our free markets
+work off incentives, and where there are incentives to improve,
+people tend to improve. But if there are no incentives to do
+so, then people, organizations--in this case, organizational
+groups stay on the High-Risk List year after year after year.
+ Would there be wisdom in having some sort of incentive
+program or ramifications for these agencies to get off the
+list?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Whatever incentives could be craft--crafted
+would be helpful.
+ Mr. Hice. OK.
+ Mr. Dodaro. But in crafting of them, they'd have to be
+careful because some of them provide essential services to
+people, and you wouldn't want to interfere with Medicare
+payments, you know, for people in need of healthcare----
+ Mr. Hice. Sure.
+ Mr. Dodaro [Continuing]. Inappropriately. But there--so
+you'd have to tailor the incentives, and you know, it'd be
+better if there were positive incentives, but if there are
+incentives that--or the things you want to put in as penalty
+type of things, that has to be carefully crafted.
+ Mr. Hice. Right. And that is a point well taken.
+ But at the end of the day, I mean, don't we have to ask
+ourselves what is the effectiveness of having a High-Risk List
+if there is no incentive for agencies to get off it? I mean,
+what are we ultimately accomplishing? Just it is almost like
+this has become the norm for certain agencies just to be on
+there every year.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, as pointed out earlier, in the last 15
+years, the financial benefits have been over $575 billion. So,
+we've saved--you know, there's been a lot of progress in saving
+some of them money.
+ Mr. Hice. For those agencies that have responded.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, even--even some that are on the list. I
+mean, some of the biggest savings, for example, have come in
+the weapon systems area, where they've reduced the cost growth.
+ Mr. Hice. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And in the Medicaid program by making some of
+the demonstration projects now budget--they're supposed to be
+budget neutral, budget neutral or not. So, that's been $10
+billion.
+ So, a lot of the financial benefits come from programs that
+are still on the list that are making incremental progress.
+They don't come from----
+ Mr. Hice. OK, I get you. But we still have a long ways to
+go, obviously, when looking at all this?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Oh, no, clearly. Yes.
+ Mr. Hice. I am going to try to stay within my five minutes.
+So, let me just ask you this one other question that has really
+been on my mind. Is there any relationship between IT
+modernization and these agencies that stay on the High-Risk
+List? In other words, those that year after year after year are
+on this list, are they also primarily the ones who are failing
+to modernize their IT?
+ Mr. Dodaro. There are clearly cases of that. It's not
+universal. One primary case would be the Veterans
+Administration, both in healthcare, acquisition management, and
+other areas. The DOD financial management area, we just talked
+about. So, there clearly is an interrelationship between a lack
+of ability to modernize. There's a relationship in the high-
+risk areas. These legacy systems are a millstone around the
+neck of the Federal Government from a security standpoint.
+ Mr. Hice. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And many of them are 40, 50 years old, and they
+were never developed with security concerns in place. So,
+there's interrelationship between IT and the cyber areas.
+ Mr. Hice. That may be one area we could look.
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's definitely a fruitful area to pursue,
+Congressman.
+ Mr. Hice. OK. All right. Thank you very much.
+ I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, is recognized. Mr.
+Lynch?
+ Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Madam Chair and to the ranking
+member.
+ Welcome back, Gene. Good to see you. Thank you for your
+great work and for the work of your team.
+ As the chair has said, this hearing is one of the most
+valuable I think for Congress to focus on this High-Risk List,
+and you have really been very helpful in getting us to focus
+when we have got so many issues that are out there that need to
+be addressed.
+ Now DOD in 2020 was slated to spend about $1.8 trillion in
+taxpayer money to acquire about 106 different weapon systems.
+And what really concerned me deeply is that the level of
+vulnerability we have, because these weapon systems are so, so
+complex, and we could talk about, you know, our satellite
+system, the hypersonic weapon systems, the F-35, you know, the
+Aegis Destroyer systems. All of it is heavily dependent on
+software, on cybersecurity in order to optimize the value to
+the warfighter.
+ So, what I am concerned about, and this is especially
+relevant after the SolarWinds hack, you mentioned in your
+report--and I will quote from the Director of Operational Test
+and Evaluation. He said that nearly every warfighting and
+business capability is now software-defined. Simply put, the
+systems, whether it is the missile system or ships or the F-35,
+all of that is dependent and doesn't work if the software
+doesn't work. And we are likely to upgrade a system by
+installing new software than by replacing hardware.
+ However, in your report--and I am thankful for it--your
+most recent high-risk report, the Director also reported that
+the Department ``lacked testing personnel with deep
+cybersecurity expertise.'' The Director also stated that,
+``Without substantial improvements to cybersecurity test and
+evaluation, especially in the workforce, DOD risks lowering the
+overall force readiness and lethality'' of our weapon systems.
+ So, can you talk about that aspect of your report? Because
+I think, look, the costs are completely out of control, and the
+schedules, we are falling years and years behind on some of
+these complex systems. And even the asymmetry of the threat
+environment out there, you know, a handful of good hackers can
+keep thousands of our people on the defensive end busy just
+trying to protect against that small group. So, if you could
+talk about that aspect of your report, I would appreciate it.
+ Thank you.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. A few years ago, we started looking at the
+focus the DOD had on cybersecurity and developing new weapon
+systems, and they really weren't focused on it very well. When
+they did look into it, it showed extraordinary vulnerabilities.
+And so we became concerned. So, we've looked more at it. We
+made some recommendations, and they're gradually improving.
+ But they're not to the point of where they need to be in
+the development of new weapon systems going forward. So, we're
+watching that very carefully. It's very concerning, and this is
+true of many critical functions. Not only the DOD, but in the
+private sector and elsewhere, because most things now, our
+industrial control systems, everything is software dependent or
+connected to the Internet that would have problems. So, this is
+problems that we see as well in the GPS systems.
+ Mr. Lynch. Is this a pipeline problem where we are not
+developing the personnel to do this work, or is it the private
+sector is siphoning away all the good talent with better
+salaries and things like that so that from a personnel
+standpoint we are having a difficult time competing?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, there's definitely that element to
+it, and I'll ask Nick Marinos, our cybersecurity expert who
+looked at the workforce issues. But I think you have multiple
+facets of it. You definitely don't have enough people to
+provide services to both the private sector and the Government.
+So, we need to increase the pipeline. There's no question about
+that.
+ Mr. Lynch. Yes.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And a number of universities now are starting
+to have cybersecurity programs. University of Maryland has one.
+I've met with the professors there. We were actually in the
+classrooms giving case examples in how you could--and we're
+pulling people in from the Government. So, and I work with
+Virginia Tech and some other places.
+ So, we've got to increase the pipeline. We'll never be
+competitive in the Government for services from the private
+sector in this arena. So, we use contractors a lot, which is
+fine, and we're going to have to use contractors to help. But
+the Government has got to have an ability to oversee the
+contractors effectively and to have the patience and the
+discipline necessary to make sure that these areas are attended
+to before they rush into production.
+ That's the biggest problem we've seen is where they want--
+the technology is not mature enough, including cybersecurity,
+but other parts of maturity in the technology before we want to
+rush it into production. So, that's an area where, you know,
+congressional intention is important, but we have to increase
+the size of the workforce in the United States. And whatever
+can be done in that area I think is terribly important.
+ Mr. Lynch. Well, I thank you for your service and your
+assistance in this matter.
+ And Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Gibbs? You are now recognized, Mr.
+Gibbs.
+ Mr. Gibbs. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ And thank you for being here today.
+ Let us talk a little about the Post Office. The Postal
+Service has lost $87 billion over the past 14 fiscal years,
+including $9.2 billion in Fiscal Year 2020. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That sounds about right.
+ Mr. Gibbs. And they expect to lose about $9.7 billion in
+Fiscal Year 2021. Given the serious financial disaster looming
+at the Postal Service--and also their service has, you know,
+just gone to pot--wouldn't you agree that congressional action
+is urgently needed to bring reform and that mere half measures
+and band-aids would be unacceptable?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Absolutely. I have testimoneys dating back
+several years that have Congress needs to urgently act on the
+Postal Service. So, I'd certainly believe it now. I've believed
+it for a while.
+ Mr. Gibbs. If Congress addresses the prefunding of Medicare
+integration, would that be enough to permanently fix the Postal
+Service financial situation, or would it just make the balance
+sheet look better at the time?
+ Mr. Dodaro. It would--it wouldn't fix the underlying
+business model problem, no. It would help alleviate some of the
+current fiscal stress, but not fix the fundamental----
+ Mr. Gibbs. So, we also have to implement operational and
+structural reforms?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Yes, you need structural reforms.
+ Mr. Gibbs. Does your agency suggest any structural reforms
+or----
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Yes.
+ Mr. Gibbs. Can you specify?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, we think--I mean, the fundamental issue
+here is you have a business model that's completely broken.
+It's been disrupted by technology, and that's been accelerated
+by the pandemic. And it accelerated during the global financial
+crisis where first-class mail is dropping, which is where they
+had a competitive advantage, you know? They were basically a
+monopoly from that standpoint.
+ And the Congress has expected them to operate like a
+business, but the model is broken. So, there has to be a
+determination here because nobody wants to give up some of the
+services that the Postal Service is providing--six-day
+delivery, universal coverage, rural area coverage, and other
+areas. And our recommendation, there needs to be an agreement
+within the Congress about what services do you really want, and
+does the model where you have a Postal Service that's supposed
+to operate like a private sector really the model that you
+want? Or do you want something like that, but there's a--
+there's a commitment by the Congress to provide additional
+funding there, too, to have a floor of service required.
+ So, you need to figure out what services you want to
+provide, how you want to pay for them, and then structure a
+governance structure and an organization that fits that on a
+sustainable basis going forward.
+ Mr. Gibbs. Last week, Postmaster General DeJoy testified,
+and of course, he is working on reforms. And one thing I
+questioned--I was concerned about is in their reforms and their
+projections going out I think it was 10 years, they are
+projecting more volume. And what would you think, are they
+going to actually have more volume?
+ Obviously, the economy grows and everything else, but we
+are seeing what is happening in the private sector, the Amazons
+of the world. Do you think it is prudent for them to base their
+projections on a significantly increased volume that they will
+be handling, or is that something they should not be doing?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, I haven't--we haven't looked at
+their projections lately. I'd be happy to do so. But I mean, my
+offhand reaction to that is that you don't want to be overly
+optimistic because in the package area, they have competition.
+And the competition has been moving out, and they rely on the
+post office particularly in rural areas, where it's not cost
+effective. But where it's cost effective, those companies are
+moving in that area and are having services--Amazon and
+others--delivering their own packages and things.
+ Mr. Gibbs. I totally agree with you. There is competition
+in the packages. That is obvious. But I would also argue that
+the competition might even be even greater in the first-class
+postage because of the use of online, Internet. I told him last
+week that I refuse to mail a check in the mail anymore because
+I don't have confidence in the system.
+ And so I think they are going to have more first class is,
+you know----
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, I think you're going to--you have a
+generation now, as the generations age, they're not using mail.
+I mean, even my children don't even check their mail that
+often, you know, because they're using text and they're using
+other things.
+ Mr. Gibbs. I certainly agree, and I made that point. I'm a
+baby boomer, and I look at the millennials and the Generation
+Zs. If I am doing this as a baby boomer trying to not use the
+mail because I don't have confidence anymore, that is why my
+argument about their increased volume and everything else, I
+think that they are maybe singing in the wind.
+ But anyways, appreciate your comments. Thank you.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Sure.
+ Mr. Gibbs. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Cooper, is recognized. Mr.
+Cooper, you are now recognized.
+ Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ Congratulations, Gene, on another superb biennial report.
+ I would like to focus my comments on how we can help you
+humanize that report because, unfortunately, with over 300
+pages, when so much of it is mind-bogglingly complex, the media
+and our constituents back home will miss the fact that your
+report really is a feast for those of us who hate waste, fraud,
+and abuse.
+ So, I want to offer three suggestions as ways we might be
+able to keep this report in the news longer and help the news
+focus more on the details. Because a detail in your report is
+still oftentimes a multibillion dollar, if not a trillion
+dollar, matter.
+ No. 1, I would like to suggest that as great as your report
+is, it is almost too much to swallow all at once. When you were
+talking about $6.6 trillion in annual outlays from the
+Government, that is to say even a small corner of the report
+can be an incredibly large and important area. I don't know if
+there is a way that maybe we could parcel this out over some
+time period so that we have weekly scandal that we could look
+into or weekly waste, fraud, and abuse thing that we could
+attack.
+ No. 2, I noticed in your report that you really don't even
+look at anything smaller than $1 billion in money at risk. And
+that is entirely appropriate for your report, but it seems to
+me that we might be able to farm out some of these areas that
+are smaller than $1 billion but still very much worth pursuing
+so that we could get, I don't know, maybe agency IGs to be held
+responsible for the items under $1 billion. Because for the
+folks back home, cutting things off at anything smaller than $1
+billion as essentially budget dust, that is hard to explain
+back home.
+ My third point is this, and one of the previous questioners
+was getting at it. As good as congressional oversight can be,
+and I am glad that the DOD infrastructure has made some
+improvements, I was heartened to see, for example, that the
+U.S. Army in the National Capital Region in the last 10 years
+has reduced its leasing requirements from 3.9 million square
+feet to only 1 million square feet. That is saving us like half
+a Pentagon just right there, and that is just because we
+tightened up a little bit of the management for one of the
+military services.
+ But I am worried that we need some sort of mechanism like
+maybe freezing the budget of an agency that doesn't respond to
+your request. Because when you mentioned the five charter
+members that have been on your report since the beginning, that
+is pretty embarrassing that we haven't been able to graduate
+those charter members into reformed entities that have taken to
+heart your recommendations and like the Pentagon should have
+done, what, 20, 30 years ago, actually pass an audit.
+ So, these are just three areas I think where we can work
+more effectively together so that we can make your report even
+more effective than it already is because the savings you have
+already achieved are monumental and wonderful, but there is so
+much more that we can do together. So, I just would like your
+comments on my three comments.
+ Thanks.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. First, with regard to the focus of the
+report being broad, we only do this once every two years. And
+what's been done in the past that I found effective is a series
+of hearings that then delve into individual areas in more depth
+over a period of time. Because what we're trying to do when we
+do this at the beginning of each new Congress is to help set
+the oversight agenda for the Congress for the entire two-year
+period.
+ And so, you know, that's still possible to take each of
+these areas and have more hearings on them. Other committees
+have these hearings, the authorizing committees, the
+appropriation committees as well. This committee could pick a
+subset of issues, focus on them in more in-depth work. I've got
+plenty of experts in GAO who can come and testify, get down to
+the real nitty-gritty details in those areas.
+ Second, on the billion dollar cut, that's just for the
+high-risk areas. We look at a lot of programs and activities
+that are below $1 billion in GAO and issue regular reports on
+that. We issue 600 or more reports every year on all facets of
+the Government.
+ Also, it can be less than $1 billion if it has public
+health and safety risk or national security risk or other
+areas. And so the dollar threshold is only one of very many
+factors that we consider in designating them in the other
+areas.
+ The last area that you mentioned I think is important, but
+that's really a policy followed by the Congress, and I think it
+has to be tailored to each individual area that's on the list
+to make sure that the incentives work in a proper way, and we
+don't actually cause people to game the systems, and not fix
+the problem, get around the penalties or incentives that are in
+place. That's been the case in the past, and I think the best
+thing--what I'm going to try to do, Congressman Cooper--and I
+appreciate your comments on the report--is I regularly meet
+with the heads of the agencies once they're confirmed to try to
+get them to focus on these areas.
+ Where I've been successful in that regard, and OMB has been
+engaged. Really, OMB hasn't been engaged over the past few
+years in this area because some of these require resource
+investments to fix as well as other areas. Where OMB is engaged
+and the Congress is engaged on a continual basis, those are the
+ingredients for success and things can come off the list.
+ And one of the reasons some of these areas are on the list,
+like Medicare, is the entitlement programs are on basically
+automatic pilot unless there is a change in the requirements.
+They don't go through--a lot of these programs don't go through
+the annual appropriation process. So, there could be other ways
+of getting at some of these programs.
+ So, I'd be happy to work with the Congress on implementing
+all of your suggestions, more focused attention on individual
+areas, crafting incentives to try to provide positive
+improvement at a quicker pace over time, focusing in on smaller
+areas that may not have the dollars but have, you know, an
+outsized impact on the public and their health and safety.
+ Mr. Cooper. Thanks, Gene.
+ Madam Chair, I yield back. Thanks.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentlewoman from North Carolina, Mrs. Foxx, is recognized for
+five minutes or as much time as she may consume.
+ Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you very
+much for having this hearing.
+ And Mr. Dodaro, we really appreciate you. And I want to
+followup on one comment that our colleague Mr. Cooper brought
+up, and that is I think it is troubling to me and to the
+American people that we don't put groups on the High-Risk List
+until the exposure for loss is at least $1 billion. You know,
+that is a big number for us, but I am glad to hear what you had
+to say about we all know--I think most of us know that you are
+looking at things that have exposure to less than that when you
+are asked to do that.
+ And I certainly appreciate the work that you have done on
+looking at programs that come under the jurisdiction of the
+Education and Labor Committee, and you all have done a great
+job on that. So, I really appreciate what the GAO does. I think
+we all have to remember that we are talking about hard-working
+taxpayer dollars all the time, and I appreciate it.
+ A new addition to the High-Risk List this year is national
+efforts to prevent, respond to, and recover from drug abuse.
+Over the past few years, Congress has authorized billions of
+funding through legislation such as Comprehensive Addiction and
+Recovery Act, CARA, and SUPPORT for Patients and Communities
+Act. Would you say that the billions in resources provided
+these and related legislation is vulnerable to waste, fraud,
+and abuse?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I'd have to go back and take a look at that.
+But which legislation again, Congresswoman?
+ Ms. Foxx. CARA Act and SUPPORT for Patients and Communities
+Act. We have some real concerns on this, and I wonder if you
+looked at how--has GAO looked at where the billions of funding
+Congress has passed to fight the opioid crisis has actually
+been spent? Has anyone asked about that?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, let me ask Ms. Clowers. She's on the line.
+Nikki, do you--are you familiar with these programs?
+ Ms. Clowers. I am. And Representative, we are actually--we
+have ongoing work right now looking at the uses of the opioid
+funding. As you noted, billions have been allocated, and we are
+in the process of studying how those moneys have been used.
+ Ms. Foxx. Yes, and I think in particular because this money
+has been put out in grants to the states and local government,
+we need to expect and demand accountability, like have there
+been fewer overdoses? Are more lives being saved?
+ So, I think too often we never get accountability for these
+funds, and the emphasis, it seems to me, should always be
+there. However, what we are hearing is increasing rates of drug
+overdoses in the 12-month period ending May 2020. So, we have
+no way of knowing, as far as I know, again what the impact has
+been on these grants and maybe what the impact has been from
+COVID.
+ I think there needs to be some emphasis there, too. So, I
+hope you all will be looking at that.
+ Mr. Dodaro. We will. We will. Go ahead Nikki.
+ Ms. Clowers. Yes, ma'am. I am sorry. Yes, ma'am. It is a
+really good point, both in terms of the grants to the state and
+local governments, but also it is across the Federal
+Government, too. There is about a dozen Federal agencies that
+are involved. And so finding--having that transparency and
+visibility is important, and we will bring that to you because,
+as you said, the overdose deaths have increased by May 2020.
+But then also projections in terms of the impact on COVID that
+deaths have increased, overdose deaths have increased to about
+83,000 during the period of last year, which is very
+concerning.
+ Ms. Foxx. And I think, to go back to what you said earlier,
+Mr. Dodaro, that we need to have some feedback from you all on
+what needs to be done to tighten up these programs a little
+bit.
+ I have one more question. As we all know, the Post Office
+is repeatedly on GAO's High-Risk List. The Postal Service is
+not making required payments to fund the postal retiree health
+and pension benefits, and we had a hearing last week with the
+Postmaster General. So, what congressional action do you
+believe is necessary to address this issue? It is very timely
+that you are here to be able to talk about that in conjunction
+with the hearing last week.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, I think, in the short term, the
+Postal Service needs some, you know fiscal help and release.
+And I know there's been discussions about not requiring pre-
+funding anymore. My only caution there is if Congress decides
+to go that way that according to our calculations, the fund
+would only be enough for the next 10 years to pay for the
+retiree healthcare costs, and then there would be a payment of
+our estimate is $7 billion a year that our Postal Service would
+have to come up with to pay on you go basis.
+ So, there may be a compromise between not paying at all and
+paying a more modest amount into the fund so you don't have all
+of a sudden, you know, a $7 billion bill hits you on a year
+down the road. So, we don't want to kick the can down the road
+and have it explode in our face later, and I think so there'd
+be caution on that front.
+ I know there's some discussion about using Medicare program
+that has some options, but there are problems with the
+Medicare. The Medicare hospital trust fund is estimated by
+2024, which isn't that far away, to only have 83 cents to pay
+on the dollar. So, we're shifting part of the problem there,
+where we already have a problem.
+ So, that would help create some room for the Postal
+Service, but they need fundamental reform, as I mentioned
+earlier in my comments to the gentleman, Congressman from Ohio.
+And I think Congress needs to come to grips with that. They're
+not--you can't deal with this with just giving them temporary
+relief and hoping that it's going to go away. It's not going to
+go away. There needs to be more fundamental reform, and you got
+to figure out what the Federal Government wants to contribute
+over time and the model because I'm not sure they could be
+self-sustaining over a long period of time.
+ Ms. Foxx. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. I know they're trying to, and I wish them well.
+But the dynamics are not in their favor long term.
+ Ms. Foxx. Well, when we were in the midst of talking about
+these pension reforms, I asked staff to check with me. Only 22
+percent of the people in the private sector in this country are
+covered by pensions. It just seems very unfair to me to ask the
+taxpayers, who have no pensions themselves, to be paying for
+the pensions of other people who are working for the Government
+or in a quasi-government agency.
+ Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate it very much. I
+yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. I thank the gentlelady for her
+question, and I ask a point of personal clarification.
+ On the Medicare integration portion, it is my understanding
+that the postal people paid into it. They paid into it, and
+they aren't claiming it. And Congress has said they can't claim
+it. Certain people can't claim it.
+ What we were talking about is just allowing the postal
+workers to have the same benefit that every person has, that if
+you pay into Medicare, you are entitled to get your payment
+out. Right now, in our research, the Postal Service had paid
+$35 billion into the Medicare program that their workers were
+not pulling out because they had paid it. So, maybe a study on
+that that clarifies exactly how much have they paid in, and why
+are they not allowed to get Medicare like anyone else in the
+country who pays into it.
+ I now call upon Mr. Connolly. You are now recognized for
+five minutes.
+ Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ And welcome, Mr. Dodaro. It is great to see you again. And
+I do think that this piece of work by GAO is maybe one of the
+most critical pieces of work Congress gets on a routine basis.
+It is an illuminating document. It is a guidepost to what we
+need to be doing in Congress, frankly, to make Government work
+better and certainly, I think, a flashing red light for many
+executive agency heads to understand that they have got
+problems they have got to deal with. And so thank you.
+ I would just note, the gentlelady from North Carolina just
+talked about the unfairness of some pensions being helped by
+tax dollars. I don't think anyone is talking about the postal
+pension program or the healthcare benefits being bailed out by
+tax dollars. I mean, these are dollars paid into those programs
+by hard-working postal workers. And we came up in 2006 with
+this onerous prepayment requirement--again, with postal
+workers' money, not somebody else's money--that has
+unnecessarily burdened the Postal Service with a debt overhang
+that is unique to it. And since Congress created that problem,
+we need to fix it, and that is what we are trying to do with
+postal reform.
+ Mr. Dodaro, could you talk a little bit about one of the
+high-risk items you identified a number of years ago that we
+picked up on and did act on in passing FITARA, which you
+endorsed and followed through on oversight with twice a year
+hearings--we are now about to schedule the 12th such hearing--
+was IT modernization of the Federal Government, a lot of legacy
+systems, lack of investment, and so forth.
+ Where are we on that as a high-risk item today?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, the passage of FITARA by the Congress and
+the continued focus of the FITARA scorecards and the attention
+of, Congressman Connolly, you and other members of this
+committee have helped make progress. It saved billions of
+dollars in data center consolidations. It's also drawn a
+spotlight on the software inventory issue, which is now taken
+out of the scorecard process because so much progress has been
+made in that area.
+ However, there is remaining work to be done. The many
+agency CIOs still don't have the full range of responsibilities
+that are needed to make them a key player at the table,
+oversight over the IT budgets, sway in some of the decisions
+that are made. That's still a problem area that needs attention
+in that area.
+ There is still not fast enough pace on modernization of the
+legacy systems. The Technology Modernization Fund was thought
+to be had more funds in it that could help in that regard, and
+that hasn't--that hasn't been necessarily forthcoming in terms
+of that expectation.
+ So, you really need to reform those legacy systems faster
+for security purposes, for service purposes, and a wide range
+of other areas.
+ Mr. Connolly. So, if I can interrupt you--if I can
+interrupt you, Mr. Dodaro, on that point. And that is why the
+new President recommended $10 billion, $9 billion of which
+would go to the Technology Modernization Fund precisely to
+serve as sort of seed capital and the catalyst to retire those
+legacy systems, some of which are 40 and 50 years old and
+getting pretty creaky. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's my understanding. I'd ask Nick Marinos,
+our IT specialist to comment on that. Nick?
+ Mr. Marinos. Yes that's correct, Congressman Connolly. So,
+ultimately, the benefit of having the Tech Modernization Fund
+gain some additional appropriations would be to give it wider
+reach. So, at the moment, there's only about a dozen projects
+that have been approved. But the benefit of TMF would
+ultimately be to give the Director of OMB the ability to more
+rapidly associate where there are areas that need the funding
+and then agencies to also go through a much faster approval
+process versus what would normally take probably a couple years
+for procurement within their agencies to actually work.
+ Mr. Connolly. And Nick and Mr. Dodaro, just to show the
+direct correlation with COVID-19 relief funding, clearly IT
+plays an integral role in delivering the benefits we are voting
+for. Is that not correct?
+ For example, we asked the SBA back in the spring to
+increase its lending 30-fold in one month. So, we went from a
+$20 billion a year loan portfolio for SBA for small businesses
+for a year, $20 billion, to $600 billion in one month. And its
+IT system, eTrans, could not handle the volume, the demand, and
+the program changes for eligibility and review that Congress
+mandated in the Federal law.
+ We saw a similar pattern in the 60 different IT systems at
+IRS that got overwhelmed with family payments, child support
+payments, as well as doing its job with respect to tax returns.
+And of course, at the state level, it has been a nightmare,
+frankly, because of IT systems being old and legacy laden in
+terms of unemployment insurance benefits.
+ But could you comment just a little bit about that, how the
+pandemic, how TMF is so necessary as part of the COVID-19
+response because we have seen the creakiness and the fractures
+in IT systems that are directly related to the missions for
+which we need them, we depend on?
+ Mr. Dodaro. No, that's absolutely right. I mean, basically,
+there was serious strain on those systems to just conduct
+normal operations. And what we did was we layered on top of
+that, you know, trillions of dollars to be spent in a quick
+period of time, and therefore, it took already-stressed systems
+to the breaking point, to the brink.
+ And so you need some help and relief in those areas. And
+the state unemployment systems are 40 years old in some cases.
+ Mr. Connolly. Yes, yes.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And this is the first time as a country we've
+had unemployment across so many sectors at the same time. Not
+even during the global financial crisis did we have as many
+sectors of the economy affected as we've had with the pandemic.
+And so that's a classic glaring example. SBA is another example
+where they've been unable to provide the services that are
+needed in a short period of time.
+ The Technology Modernization Fund, as Nick alluded to,
+provides a faster vehicle for getting systems in place than
+going through the regular process. That was one of its virtues.
+And so those things can help, particularly in a pandemic.
+ You know, we have the tendency to think . You know, if you
+just--we just throw money at something, it's going to solve it.
+But in order to do it efficiently and effectively, you need IT,
+and you need the people skills in order to do it properly with
+proper accountability and transparency and efficiency.
+ Mr. Connolly. Well, I know you are going to the Senate
+today, and I hope you will take that message to our colleagues
+in the Senate, who thought that the TMF, the Technology
+Management Fund, was unrelated to COVID and at one point zeroed
+it out, to the horror of the chairwoman and myself and my
+ranking member Mr. Hice and I think Mr. Comer as well.
+ So, thank you for that testimony, and thank you, Madam
+Chairwoman, for the indulgence.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
+The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Cloud, is recognized. Mr. Cloud?
+ Mr. Cloud. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
+ Thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for being here.
+ As has been said a number of times, I can't think of a more
+important committee hearing for us to have. I look forward to
+this each time, and appreciate you coming here and presenting
+the findings of your report and thank the chairwoman's latitude
+in giving us room to really address this.
+ You know, I would say the one thing I wish is that we have
+more of these, and that believe your report came out Friday, or
+at least that is when our offices--they were distributed to our
+offices, and so it would be wonderful to have even more time to
+dig into these issues and get down to the details of it.
+Because as you mentioned a number of times, congressional
+action is so important, and we want to make sure we get that
+right and get the details right. And so I appreciate you being
+here.
+ You know, Last time when you met here, I think we were $22
+trillion in debt. We are just about--I checked out the U.S.
+debt clock this morning--about to hit $28 trillion, and that is
+before the $1.9 trillion bill that is working its way through
+Congress right now.
+ And it has also been mentioned when you talk back home
+about to even begin to make the list, you have to be potential
+wasting $1 billion. It has been said years ago I think that you
+spend millions and millions, soon it adds up to real money. We
+are to the point where it is you spend billions and billions,
+sooner or later it adds up to real money. But that is where we
+are.
+ I would note, is debt or interest considered in your
+report?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, I have a special report that I issue every
+year on the fiscal health of the Federal Government. That will
+be coming out in the next month or so. And you know, I
+basically said in that report that our Government is on a long-
+term unsustainable fiscal path.
+ I've called for reforms to how we set the debt ceiling,
+which really doesn't control the debt, and it causes problems
+when it's not raised in time. Because all the debt ceiling does
+is authorize Treasury to borrow the money to pay for the bills
+Congress has already appropriated and the President signed into
+law. And there can be disruptions in the Treasury market and
+increasing cost.
+ But we need to do everything as a country now to deal with
+the COVID-19 healthcare crisis and to deal with our economy and
+get it back in a robust manner. But as soon as that happens,
+we've got to quickly turn our attention to having a plan, which
+I've called for now for four straight years, to deal with our
+long-term problems.
+ There are problems. Our Highway Trust Fund is insolvent
+this year. Congress has been supporting it with other funds.
+It's not self-sustaining, the way it was initially intended.
+There's a gap there of about $195 billion over the next few
+years.
+ I mentioned Medicare. By 2024, only have 83 cents to pay on
+the dollar for the hospital trust fund. And Social Security by
+2031 will only have enough money to pay 75 cents on the dollar.
+ Mr. Cloud. It seems to me, you know, this being a report on
+waste, fraud, and abuse, and the potential thereof, that every
+dollar we spend on interest is wasted. It doesn't go into any
+sort of programs, and of course, interest is about to outpace
+military spending even, and that is totally crowding out any
+sort of discretionary funds that we have.
+ Do you know how many Federal programs exist? This is a--
+this is a number I have been trying to get for a long--do we
+have a hard number?
+ Mr. Dodaro. No. There is not a hard number, and I've been--
+--
+ Mr. Cloud. Are agencies----
+ Mr. Dodaro [Continuing]. Recommending this for years.
+Actually, Congress passed a law that required OMB to develop an
+inventory of programs.
+ Mr. Cloud. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. That law is now about 10 years old, and we
+still don't have an inventory of Federal programs. Now there's
+a Taxpayers Right-To-Know Act that passed recently----
+ Mr. Cloud. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro [Continuing]. That would require them to do
+this. We've given them some advice on how it could be done.
+They've tried it before, but it hasn't worked. They let each
+agency come up with their own list. And so we need a program
+inventory.
+ Mr. Cloud. And our office has presented legislation that
+would implement a Federal sunset commission, for example, that
+would review these. But the first step is counting and figuring
+out how many programs and agencies we have for review.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Right.
+ Mr. Cloud. And it seems like that it is a difficult----
+ Mr. Dodaro. We've done that in some areas, but it takes a
+lot of work. And as soon as you have it, it's outdated.
+ Mr. Cloud. Yes. I want us to talk a little bit more on
+something that Mr. Hice talked about earlier, and that is just
+the general how do we incentivize performance? For example, in
+business, you have built-in incentive for efficiency and
+performance and getting those metrics and advancing those
+metrics. In a bureaucracy, it seems like everything is against
+that.
+ You know, everything--there is no incentive and, actually,
+a disincentive for, if you know if you do something efficiently
+your budget gets cut, and if you do something poorly, then we
+come back to Congress and say we need more money to do it. And
+then just there has been sometimes, unfortunately, a sense in a
+bureaucracy that the administration, whichever administration
+it is, is temporary, the bureaucracy is permanent. We will just
+kind of wait this out, live this out.
+ How do we shift that? What are some recommendations you
+would have for us in being able to deal with nonperformance and
+be able to return, whatever your view, right or left, on the
+issue of just being able to return value to the taxpayer?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, right now, the incentives are reversed.
+When a program is created in the Federal Government, you have
+to take extraordinary measures to stop that program from
+continued funding. There's an assumption that it should be
+continued funding.
+ And so if GAO comes up with an idea or the IGs or somebody
+else, the onus is on us to say you shouldn't fund it at that
+level. The onus ought to be on the agencies to say that the
+program is effective, we've evaluated it, it's meeting its
+objective, and here's when we're done.
+ Most of these programs, not only do we not know the number,
+we don't know whether they're effective or not because they've
+never done program evaluation. Now Congress passed legislation
+recently to go to evidence-based decisionmaking about programs.
+And so it's very important that these program evaluations be
+done to see if they're operating effectively.
+ So, Congress needs to change the--flip the script and
+require a clear record of positive performance to continue
+funding at the same level and not assuming that it will
+continue.
+ Mr. Cloud. Sounds like a good case for a sunset commission
+to me, among other--I have a whole slew of other questions on
+specifics of the different programs, but thank you for the
+indulgence on the time. And hopefully, we will be able to have
+more hearings on the specifics of this list going forward to
+address these.
+ Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Well, all questions can be put into the
+record to get answered later, too.
+ Mr. Cloud. Right. Well, I will do that, but the discussion
+now.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr.
+Raskin, is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Raskin?
+ Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for this
+excellent hearing.
+ I want to talk about climate change, which is not only a
+civilizational emergency, but it is also a fiscal catastrophe.
+America has incurred $1.24 trillion in economic damages since
+2005 through various climate disasters and calamities. We have
+seen millions of acres of forest in California lost to
+wildfire, record drought across the country, record flooding
+across the country, especially in coastal cities, a dramatic
+rise in sea level, millions of climate refugees from around the
+world, record velocity hurricanes, and so on.
+ You call, Mr. Mihm, for a National Climate Strategic Plan.
+You call for prioritizing national climate resiliency projects,
+and you also call for a new pilot program for community climate
+migration. I wonder if you would explain to us what that means?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, I'm going to ask Mr. Gaffigan, who's our
+expert in that area, to respond to that question, Congressman.
+ Mr. Raskin. Sure.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Mark?
+ Mr. Gaffigan. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you,
+Congressman Raskin, for the question.
+ Yes. When we talk about the migration program, there are
+communities throughout the country that are particularly
+vulnerable to climate change. Communities in Alaska, we did a
+recent report, looked at communities in Alaska. Maryland, the
+Eastern Shore and your home state, as well as other parts of
+the country. And there is a need to prioritize the help that we
+can provide these communities and not leave them alone as they
+address these challenges.
+ Mr. Raskin. In 2015, the GAO recommended that the Federal
+Government come up with a plan to provide information to state,
+local, county decisionmakers, as well as private sector
+decisionmakers, to educate people about the dangers of climate
+change and also to promote climate resiliency. I am wondering
+whether that happened, why we need it, and also whether you
+think that such cooperation and information sharing between the
+Federal level and state and county and local level would better
+prepare us for things like the Texas power grid disaster that
+we saw last month because of extreme weather in Texas that
+disrupted the lives of millions of people?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, let me just say, Mark, and I'll turn it
+over to you. Congress passed an important bill that began to
+move in this direction back in the 2018 Disaster Reform
+Recovery Act that required the agency, FEMA, to create a grant
+program with funding for disasters to allow resilience, to be
+building in resilience up front.
+ For years, the Federal Government standard when there was a
+disaster is build back the same as it was before, not better.
+And this would help agencies--or state and local levels and
+others to build more resilience in up front. It's been proven
+that, you know, a dollar spent up there can save $9, $10 later
+on by building resilience in up front.
+ Mr. Raskin. OK. And so that is really my question now, when
+you are calling for prioritizing national government resiliency
+projects, coordination between the Federal level and the state
+and local level for community climate migration and so on, I
+mean, would all of that help us to prepare for things like the
+catastrophe that just took place in Texas where----
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, yes.
+ Mr. Raskin [Continuing]. People's lives were disrupted?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Mark, you want to
+explain a little bit better?
+ Mr. Gaffigan. Sure. I mean the, the information, you asked
+about information, Congressman Raskin, and that has been some
+worked on since 2015, but we have been kind of disappointed
+that there hasn't been this national strategy that could pull
+together that kind of information. We have done some work on
+building resilience that sort of points to three areas the
+Federal Government can help.
+ One is providing incentives. The other is information, but
+also integration. Because not only does this need to be a whole
+of government approach and all levels of government, including
+tribes, but it also needs to be a whole society situation where
+we address this, bringing in----
+ Mr. Raskin. Yes, let me pursue that for one second, Mr.
+Gaffigan, because I think that the COVID-19 crisis, I hope if
+it has taught us nothing else, it is that an invisible and
+silent threat can shut down the country and can traumatize and
+kill lots of our people. Climate change is in the same
+category, isn't it? And don't we need to mobilize the whole
+society to confront this danger?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Absolutely, yes. Yes.
+ Mr. Raskin. And my time is up. So, I will yield back.
+ Mr. Dodaro. I would just say, Congressman, in closing that
+we put that on our list in 2013. We think it's important to
+deal with this to limit the fiscal exposure of the Federal
+Government, and the Government--Federal Government can provide
+leadership, but just like on the drug misuse area, you need to
+have national leadership, but you've got to have all segments
+of the society involved to help.
+ You know, building codes and structures are set at the
+local level. So, if you don't have them involved, the Federal
+Government is going to be limited in what it's going to be able
+to do.
+ Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much. I yield back, Madam Chair.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Higgins, is now recognized. Mr.
+Higgins?
+ Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I thank you,
+ma'am and Ranking Member Comer, for holding today's hearing
+regarding the GAO High-Risk List for 2021. Ensuring oversight
+of Federal programs and American treasure should be a priority
+mission of this committee. Transparency and supervision of
+these programs, while time-consuming, is crucial.
+ Over the last 15 years, oversight of the High-Risk List has
+saved over $575 billion. While large programs are created with
+trillion dollar budgets, this has increased exposure, shall we
+say, to bad actors, Government malfeasance, and unforeseen
+consequences. This is almost predictable when we are dealing
+with this much money. So, so this is an incredibly important
+function, and our oversight should be 100 percent bipartisan.
+And I am sensing that now.
+ And I would like to thank my friend Representative Raskin
+for bringing up climate change, and I invite him to Louisiana,
+where we have a very old saying that if you don't like the
+weather in Louisiana, stick around because it will change.
+Perhaps my constitutionalist friend can visit, and we will have
+an interesting townhall in my district regarding----
+ Mr. Raskin. I am going to take you up on that, Mr. Higgins.
+I would love to join you. Love to.
+ Mr. Higgins. Yes, sir. Always the gentleman you are, good
+sir.
+ Madam Chairwoman, critical programs such as the Census,
+Postal Service, cybersecurity, the SBA programs, PPP and EIDL,
+they should remain the focus for the GAO and Members of
+Congress and this committee. But I would like to focus my time
+and give our Comptroller General an opportunity to respond to
+some questions I have regarding specifically cybersecurity as
+it relates to Government contracts and national security.
+ So, Comptroller General, thank you for being here, and I
+would like you to give us your insight regarding what GAO is
+doing, at what level does vetting take place and your own
+inspections dive deep into cybersecurity-contracted entities
+that deal with protecting us against intellectual property
+theft, malware, and cyber espionage?
+ And I give you a lengthy time to respond here, sir, because
+it is very important. I would like to know. The committee would
+like to know. America's interest is certainly much more heavily
+focused now on cybersecurity, as we should be. So, give us the
+GAO perspective there, please, sir. Intellectual property
+theft, malware, and cyber espionage.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, we raised this issue recently on
+intellectual property, most recently with the pandemic in terms
+of protecting information regarding vaccines development and
+distribution. We had pointed out a lot of problems at HHS, at
+CDC, the National Institutes of Health and others, and urged
+them to correct the problems that they have in place to protect
+the intellectual property around that area.
+ The Government has a responsibility for all its contractors
+to make sure that they have proper safeguards in place in order
+to make sure that the business they're doing with the
+Government and access to the Government systems are protected.
+DOD has just started a computer or cyber maturity model
+accreditation to make sure the contractor systems are up to
+speed. That's in its incipient stages. It needs to be developed
+further.
+ I'd ask our expert in the cyber area, Nick Marinos, to add,
+Congressman, because you're asking a very good question, and
+it's very important. Nick?
+ Mr. Marinos. Yes, Congressman Higgins, I think you raise a
+really important point. The reliance that the Federal
+Government has on contractors to process Government information
+is the only way that we get business done in many ways. And so
+it requires Federal agencies to realize that that is their
+responsibility, that they have to have the capabilities in-
+house to be able to confirm that those contractors and also
+vendors--so it could be the software that is being utilized--
+that they have ways to verify the cybersecurity of those
+products and services.
+ And unfortunately, as this committee last Friday showed
+through its hearing on SolarWinds, you know, our--we are behind
+the eight ball on this, and we continue to be, which is why
+cybersecurity has remained on the High-Risk List for over 20
+years now. The benefits to having some kind of a certification
+process are quite significant because it would allow agencies
+to have a level playing field, kind of understand, you know,
+which contractors have sort of been vetted to sort of clear
+those security requirements.
+ But on the other side, this is also a workforce issue.
+Government agencies not only need to have cyber expertise
+within their security operations center and within their
+technical capabilities, but also within their procurement
+offices. We need to have oversight of those contractors come
+from individuals that are both savvy in understanding how to
+administer contracts and also how to ensure that the
+contractors are adhering to things like security requirements
+as well.
+ Mr. Dodaro. But we're going to be taking, Congressman, a
+closer look at this area because the concern I have is that the
+agencies haven't been able to fix the systems properly that
+they have responsibility for, let alone oversee the
+contractors. So, I think you got a potential double
+vulnerability here that needs to be more deeply investigated.
+ Mr. Higgins. Thank you, sir. I very much appreciate your
+very thorough response.
+ And Madam Chair, I look forward to further discussions on
+this issue, and I yield. Thank you, Madam.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentlelady from California, Ms. Speier, is recognized.
+ Ms. Speier. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ I concur with all of my colleagues that this is one of the
+most important hearings we have every two years.
+ Mr. Dodaro, once again, you are a jewel to the Federal
+service, and I thank you for the almost a generation that you
+have been at GAO.
+ I would like to start off by suggesting something. I want
+to associate myself in particular with members on both sides of
+the aisle, but also specifically the gentleman, my good friend
+from the state of Tennessee, Mr. Cooper. I think that there are
+ways of highlighting your work that would be very effective,
+and I would like to make one recommendation, Madam Chair.
+ There is always low-hanging fruit, and it may not be over
+$1 billion. What if we were to create--and Mr. Dodaro, this is
+where you would come in--a bushel of low-hanging fruit. And I
+just looked it up, and a bushel is 32 quarts. So, if we
+identified 32 programs or fixes that we should make, that could
+be real money, and I would like to recommend that, Madam Chair,
+as something that we could do.
+ As we talk about the SBA, in your report you made reference
+to the fact that there is not a review of loans that are under
+$2 million. Do you think that number should be lowered and we
+should demand that Treasury look at smaller loans?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, I think there should be. Not each
+individual loan. What Treasury said is that they want to look
+at every loan over $2 million. Our view was that SBA needed to
+have some plan on a sampling basis or some risk analysis to go
+in and look at the other loans as well, not each and every one
+of them.
+ And they do have a plan to look at loans under $150,000,
+which is many of the loans are at that level, before they give
+forgiveness for the loan. And so, but we've just gotten their
+plan. We haven't looked at it yet. But it's based upon a risk
+analysis and then a sampling of the loans, from what I
+understand.
+ Dan Garcia-Diaz here is our expert in that area. Dan, do
+you have a comment on that, please? I think you're on mute,
+Dan. Your mic is not working? OK, I'll speak on behalf of Mr.
+Garcia-Diaz. And so, you know, we're going to be----
+ Ms. Speier. I think his microphone is working now.
+ Mr. Garcia-Diaz. My mic is working now, yes.
+ Mr. Dodaro. OK, go ahead.
+ Mr. Garcia-Diaz. Yes. So, there is now plans for both
+automated reviews and manual reviews of the different--at
+different loan levels, and so we are assessing those plans
+right now. But as the Comptroller General pointed out, we don't
+expect a full review of all the loans, but rather to devise a
+process for selecting loans and particularly flagging loans
+that may have some questionable characteristics that might
+further warrant review by SBA.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, I think it's important as far as----
+ Ms. Speier. Could I ask a followup question? Has the SBA
+detailed a clear plan on how to recover funds deemed were
+fraudulently obtained?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Not that we've seen yet. And, I don't believe
+so. But my concern here is that this program has been very
+poorly managed, and we just recently got their oversight that
+we called for last June. Now I can understand in March, you
+know, getting the money out quickly, but you needed to have an
+oversight plan in place soon thereafter.
+ And one of--there's been a lot of fraud in this area, both
+the PPP program and the Economic Injury Disaster Loan program.
+And one of the reasons I think it's important to look at loans
+that are all sizes is that a lot of people committing fraud
+purposely stay at a low level and try to, you know, just hit
+several different times to stay under the radar screen. And you
+have instances of people creating fake businesses that don't
+even exist that are getting the money.
+ And so there have been over 140 different indictments so
+far. About 40-some people have already pleaded guilty. There
+are hundreds of investigations still ongoing. So, there needs
+to be some money.
+ Now they did recover, from what I understand, about $450
+million in the Economic Injury Disaster Loan program. So, the
+IGs and the Justice Department are working together in this
+area as well. So, we're going to be looking at it more
+carefully once we get their plans and can evaluate.
+ Ms. Speier. Well, as they are starting to ask for
+forgiveness, it is really important that we identify the fraud.
+So, I hope that is part of your effort. And my understanding is
+only about a third of the companies that were in the Fortune
+500 list or had the ability to receive capital elsewhere
+actually returned the money. So, two-thirds of them did not.
+ It would be helpful to me in particular, and probably to
+other members of the committee, if we identified those two-
+thirds of the companies that did not and create some kind of
+shaming around it. I know my time has expired, but I think this
+is so ripe for our continuing review this year, Madam Chair,
+that we do that.
+ I just want to ask two final questions. You pointed out
+that--do you agree that gutting the Naval Audit Service and
+having less oversight of these critical programs would be
+moving in the wrong direction? It is my understanding that they
+have actually reduced the number of persons serving in that
+capacity.
+ Mr. Dodaro. I'm not familiar with that situation, but I'd
+be happy to take a look at it. I have been concerned about some
+of the Inspector General functions across Government having
+their independence undermined in a number of cases, and I'll be
+happy to look into that situation and give you my assessment of
+it.
+ Ms. Speier. Comptroller General, I would agree with you. In
+fact, I think many of the Inspector Generals associated with
+the military services do not have the skills at all to provide
+that function. We saw that most recently at Fort Hood, where
+the force IG went down and said everything was great. And then
+an independent committee was sent down, and it did a serious
+review and found that there was gross dereliction of duty.
+ So, I would encourage you to help us define how we should
+maybe change Inspector Generals into civilians within each of
+the services because I don't think they are necessarily serving
+the American people and may be just protecting the various
+services.
+ And finally, let me just ask you, if you haven't, to look
+at the contracts for housing at bases around the country and,
+in fact, around the world. I think these contracts go on for
+decades. There is not accountability.
+ At recent visits to military bases, I have found serious
+problems with lead, asbestos, mold in many of these housing
+settings where our servicemembers and their families are
+living, and it is the equivalent of tenement living, and I
+think it is shameful. So, I hope that you will take some time
+to look at that.
+ Madam Chair, thank you for the accommodation. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady yields back. The
+gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Keller, you are now
+recognized.
+ Mr. Keller. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ This is an important hearing for us to understand which
+programs and agencies need reform to improve their
+effectiveness and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in the best
+interest of the American taxpayer. Pennsylvania's 12th
+congressional District is home to two Federal prisons, USP
+Lewisburg and FCC Allenwood, both of which have been negatively
+impacted by the Bureau of Prisons inmate transfer policies and
+lack of transparency with the American people.
+ We saw this firsthand with the BOP when they refused to
+halt transfers and movement of the roughly 150,000 inmates it
+is charged with securing during the early stages of COVID-19,
+putting corrections officers and inmates at risk of infection
+and causing further community spread. We owe it to our
+outstanding corrections officers, the inmates they secure, and
+the surrounding communities to work with the BOP to improve its
+operations.
+ Mr. Dodaro, in the last five years, the GAO has made 19
+recommendations related to the BOP, of which 16 have yet to be
+addressed. The recommendations are largely centered on
+rectifying the BOP's failure to manage its staff appropriately
+and improve mental health, their failure to plan for new inmate
+wellness programs that reduce recidivism, and failure to
+monitor and evaluate programs which have led to wasting
+taxpayer dollars. Can you say more about your ongoing and
+planned work related to the prison system?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. As you point out rightly, we've been
+concerned about this. We've made a number of recommendations.
+My team just recently met with the head of the Bureau of
+Prisons service, and he announced he's going to create a task
+force within BOP to look at the high-risk issues that we're
+identifying and to begin to address the root causes of the
+problem. So, I was very pleased with his initial response to
+our designation that we are considering putting it on the High-
+Risk List.
+ Our work now is focused on the FIRST STEP Act, where
+Congress required a number of reforms to be put in place, and
+we want to see if those reforms are being implemented properly,
+and that will be the critical determinant as to whether we
+officially add them to the High-Risk List or not.
+ Mr. Keller. So, you don't know whether or not they will be
+added to the list in the upcoming two years? But I guess it
+would be dependent on their performance?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, yes.
+ Mr. Keller. OK.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And we designate, Congressman, people onto the
+list out of the two-year cycle. So, if we finish our work and
+we think that they should be added, we'll add them out of
+cycle.
+ Mr. Keller. Just for the benefit of the people that might
+be watching today's hearing, can you explain a little bit about
+what the High-Risk List is and how an agency or a program gets
+added to it?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Sure. The High-Risk List was created in 1990 as
+a result of some fraud, waste, and abuse issues that had
+surfaced at the HUD, the Housing and Urban Development
+Department. There were some procurement scandals at DOD at that
+time. And Congress came to the GAO, and they said, well, can't
+you identify what these risks are before they get to be crisis
+proportion?
+ And so we developed a list to identify areas in need of
+fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, and we started with 14
+areas. Over time, we've also added areas of--areas that are in
+need of broad-based transformation. In other words, there's
+been circumstances that have changed that they need to make a
+transformation and to develop.
+ For a good example is on oversight of medical products
+where most of our drugs now or ingredients in the drugs are
+made by foreign manufacturers, and FDA was set up for domestic
+production. So, that's an area of needed transformation, and so
+that helped the Congress spur that area.
+ We consider a number of factors, whether it has
+implications for public health, safety, the economy, national
+security, and whether there's a lot of taxpayer dollars at
+risk. Those are the factors to get on the list.
+ Then to get off, you have to show leadership commitment.
+You have to have the capacity, an action plan, monitor your
+efforts, and actually demonstrate some success in lowering the
+risk or fixing the problem to get off.
+ Mr. Keller. OK. Thank you. I appreciate that. We owe it to
+our outstanding corrections officers, the inmates they secure,
+and the surrounding communities to work on the BOP to improve
+their operations.
+ And based upon what you laid out there as far as the risk
+to taxpayers and all the items, in view of what has happened
+since this Congress began, the $1.9 trillion, only 9 percent of
+which is going to actually public health safety. The other 91
+percent is going to Speaker Pelosi's payoffs, one of them being
+a subway in Silicon Valley for $140 million and also $12
+billion going to foreign governments rather than helping the
+American people.
+ In addition to that, we are talking about H.R. 1, which is
+going to take taxpayer dollars and use them to fund elections
+so that more people, more American people will be watching more
+election commercials and so forth at election time. Do you have
+any plans on putting Congress on that list to see what reforms
+could be done?
+ Mr. Dodaro. There are limits to our authority.
+ Mr. Keller. That is unfortunate.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier.[Presiding.] The gentleman's time has
+expired. I will now recognize the gentlelady from Illinois for
+five minutes. Ms. Kelly?
+ Ms. Kelly. Thank the Chair.
+ Mr. Dodaro, I would like to thank you for all the work your
+agency is doing to evaluate our response to the coronavirus
+pandemic. This vital work is helping policymakers at all levels
+of government understand the challenges we face and inform our
+efforts to address them.
+ In that vein, I would like to ask you about a topic that
+many of my Democratic colleagues and I have noted must play a
+critical role in informing our pandemic response data. I am not
+talking about the scientific data that support the
+implementation of public health measures, like mask wearing and
+social distancing, but also the data that helps us to
+understand the people and places hardest hit by COVID-19.
+ Your report today references an earlier GAO report from
+January 2021, which notes that data collection by state and
+local entities, as well as HHS, is ``critical to inform a
+robust national response.'' Can you briefly explain why good
+data is so vital to Federal, state, and local decisionmaking?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, first, this pandemic has laid bare some
+of the frailties of our highly decentralized public health
+system and the need for better data in order to respond to the
+public health outbreaks.
+ First, you need to find out, you know, there wasn't clear
+and complete data on testing. So, you need to know how many
+people were being tested and where. Where there were outbreaks.
+So, how to target assistance to those outbreaks. The
+disproportionate effect that it was having on people of color
+and what exactly was happening in those areas.
+ I'll ask Ms. Clowers to elaborate a little bit further, but
+this is an area where we've quickly noted--and this is a real
+concern going forward. We need to invest in more public health
+surveillance, operations, in order to be efficient and
+effective about our responses. Nikki?
+ Ms. Clowers. Yes, sir. Congresswoman, as the Comptroller
+was saying, the system is fragmented, and so the data is
+collected by different actors at the Federal level, as well as
+state and local. And because of that, they are often using
+different definitions of the data.
+ So, even when there are efforts to collect data from
+different sources, you roll it up, it is incomplete, it is
+inconsistent because we haven't used the same standards. And so
+we have made recommendations to the Government to address this.
+Because to your point, it is critical that we have better data
+so we can spot problems and take the corrective action needed.
+Without the data, we can't make those mid-course corrections.
+ And to the point the Comptroller General made as well,
+COVID has laid bare the disparities in health outcomes that we
+are seeing. And again, we need better data on that. For
+example, right now, in terms of vaccine, vaccines rates, about
+50 percent of all of that data is missing race and ethnicity
+information. We need better data on that so we can better
+target populations to make sure that they are having the right
+access to care and to the vaccines.
+ Ms. Kelly. Your report also notes the need for HHS to have
+strong, clear coordination with states, territorial, and tribal
+governments and the public as we work to distribute and
+administer the vaccines. You reference the agencies'
+responsibility for managing a national evidence-based campaign
+to increase awareness of the safety and efficacy of the
+vaccines, particularly in communities with low vaccination
+rates. Why is this initiative so important, and what can HHS do
+to make sure it is as successful as possible?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Nikki, please?
+ Ms. Clowers. Yes. A critical piece is involving the state
+and local officials. They play a key role in any type of the
+public health measures that we are taking, but also,
+importantly, the vaccination efforts. And that is why we
+recommended in September 2020 that the Federal Government
+needed to develop a distribution strategy which included
+outlining the communication with and obtaining input from state
+and local governments and ensuring that populations are
+reached.
+ You know, it is the local governments that understand their
+communities, their citizens, and can help ensure that we reach
+those populations in getting the vaccine out, getting the word
+out about the vaccine and the benefits of having--of taking the
+vaccine.
+ Ms. Kelly. It does seem like a more comprehensive data
+collection would aid our efforts to understand systemic racial
+disparities in the United States and actually advance reforms
+to achieve health equity.
+ With that, thank you so much to the witnesses and your
+patience, and I yield back.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. I now recognize the gentleman from Arizona,
+Congressman Biggs.
+ Mr. Biggs. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
+ This is at least the third hearing I have participated in
+since coming to Congress related to the GAO's High-Risk List,
+and each year, I see many of the same agencies and programs in
+the report. For example, I served on the House Science, Space,
+and Technology Committee my first two terms. So, I am very
+familiar with the Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated
+Risk Information System, or IRIS, which receives very brief
+mention on pages 31 and 32 of the report.
+ The IRIS program was meant to be a clearinghouse of sorts
+within EPA for consolidating data and reporting on chemical
+toxicity. The problem, though, is that many of the program
+offices within EPA, for example, the Office of Chemical Safety
+and Pollution Prevention and the Office of Water, have already
+been doing their own research and integrating their findings
+with other departments. So, in other words, IRIS is an
+unnecessarily duplicative super-structure.
+ When I chaired the SST Environment Subcommittee, I
+advocated for eliminating IRIS and returning more work to the
+EPA program offices. For those who are curious, I have also
+introduced a bill to achieve this result, H.R. 62, the
+Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act.
+ Going back to the IRIS references in the GAO's High-Risk
+List, the report accurately identifies a major problem with
+IRIS stating that the program did not issue a completed
+chemical assessment between August 2018 and December 2020. The
+report then goes on to suggest that the failure of IRIS was
+rooted in larger faults with EPA because the agency did not
+indicate, and I am quoting here, ``did not indicate how it was
+monitoring its assessment nomination process to ensure it was
+generating quality information about chemical assessment
+needs.''
+ Further, the report suggests EPA ``lacked implementation
+steps and resource information in its strategic plan and
+metrics to determine progress in the IRIS program.''
+ Maybe if EPA were better at monitoring its assessment
+protocols, we would have a better IRIS. That is possible, I
+suppose. But again, I posed a much simpler and more cost-
+effective solution of eliminating IRIS altogether, and that
+speaks to a larger issue I have with the GAO High-Risk List.
+ It doesn't seem to offer many recommendations to fully
+eliminate some problematic programs, even though that course
+may, indeed, be the best option in some cases. Or maybe, quite
+frankly, in many cases.
+ Mr. Dodaro, is there a reluctance on your agency's part to
+make recommendations for the full elimination of consistently
+problematic programs, such as the IRIS program?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Not if we have the evidence necessary to
+support that. We've not looked at the IRIS program in the
+context of what you're mentioning, and let me ask Mr. Gaffigan
+if he has a view on that matter.
+ Mr. Gaffigan. Yes, thank you for your question, Congressman
+Biggs.
+ You know, there are many ways the assessments can be done.
+The current process, as it is set up, allows for a nomination
+process, it did at one point, and for these assessments to be
+done. Our main point is the assessments aren't being done. And
+whether it is done in the program offices or at IRIS, there is
+a need to commit the resources to it.
+ And so, you know, that is an option going forward. The
+bottom line now is the assessments are not getting done.
+Whether it is done by an IRIS program or another alternative,
+as you suggest, those are all viable ways to do it. It is just
+not getting done right now.
+ Mr. Biggs. Thank you. I appreciate the answer to the
+question. And rather than droning on further about the IRIS
+program and its need, I would suggest that as we look forward,
+we might--I would appreciate recommendations such as in the
+IRIS program, which has been so problematic and so duplicative,
+maybe--maybe viewing it from your perspective of whether that
+program should actually be eliminated or go forward.
+ And so I would ask for that request. And then I would just
+say that the IRIS program has been bugging me, actually, as you
+can tell, for about four years now because it is duplicative. I
+think it needs to go away. I think we can accomplish this more
+efficiently. And if resources need to be redrawn there, we can
+do that.
+ And I appreciate your comments, Mr. Dodaro and also Mr.
+Gaffigan. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Congressman. I now recognize the
+gentlelady from Michigan, Ms. Tlaib, for five minutes.
+ Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much.
+ I think it is important to say to my colleagues across the
+aisle, you know, the problem isn't IRIS. The problem is
+Republican refusal to believe in science and take climate
+change seriously. It is no coincidence that the EPA failed to
+do its job under the Trump administration.
+ As you all know, I represent a zip code that is the most
+polluted zip code in the state of Michigan. So, climate change
+is here, and its impacts are becoming more and more devastating
+with each passing year.
+ So, we must stop weighing whether or not we will act on
+climate change by how much money it will cost our Government
+and big corporations and start measuring the substantial
+expense of this country's inaction on climate change on
+communities across the country, especially our black, brown,
+and low-income communities.
+ And we must also focus on detrimental health impacts
+resulting from our reliance on fossil fuels. The child with
+asthma who is forced to miss school because their house is
+surrounded by corporate polluters, and this is a real fact that
+happens in my community. A third of a class will raise their
+hand and say they have asthma.
+ The family who has uprooted everything because of constant
+flooding. That is happening in my community in the Dearborn
+Heights neighborhood. Or the neighborhood block that has been
+completely devastated by respiratory diseases and cancer
+because of dirty air.
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, the Environmental Protection Agency's
+Integrated Risk Information, the IRIS system is supposed to
+assess the health hazard of chemicals in the environment to
+inform all of us so that we can make much more informed
+decisions on our environment policies and regulations to keep
+our communities safe. However, the GAO report states that, and
+I quote, ``EPA's agency-wide strategic plan for fiscal years
+2018 through 2022 does not mention the IRIS program at all.''
+ So, I am wondering, and furthermore, I know the report also
+notes the astonishing fact that the IRIS program had not
+completed a single, not one, chemical risk assessment between
+August 2018 and December 2020. So, Mr. Dodaro, is it fair to
+say that these assessments can literally be life or death for
+communities like mine because they identify chemicals and
+pollutants that pose potential fatal adverse health effects?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Basically, the Government can't take
+informed action without a thorough assessment, now whether it
+comes from IRIS or somewhere else. But I would note, we rated
+the EPA area as an area that regressed because they were
+proposing, the administration had been proposing to cut the
+IRIS budget, but Congress kept reinstating----
+ Ms. Tlaib. By 34 percent. Isn't that correct?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's correct. But Congress reinstated the
+funding, and so that's the reason we didn't rate them down in
+leadership. What we rated down is monitoring and an execution
+area.
+ Mark, do you have any other thoughts you want to mention?
+ Mr. Gaffigan. No, I think that is true. And again, we would
+just like to see the assessments done because they are
+important to everyone's health. And you know, how we do that,
+that can be discussed, and there are good options.
+ The other thing I would mention, Congresswoman Tlaib, is
+the issue of environmental justice. We did a report in 2019
+that pointed out the interagency working group. There are 16
+agencies working on environmental justice issues, and many of
+them had done some individual plans, but we found that the
+plans were not updated. There was a lack of performance
+measures around the issue of environmental justice affecting
+particularly communities of color, and that is a huge need
+going forward.
+ Ms. Tlaib. Yes. I really would urge my colleagues, and this
+is sincere, come visit my district. I have given a number of
+tours, what I call the ``toxic tour.'' Come breathe the air.
+You can smell it in the neighborhoods I represent. Meet your
+fellow Americans that don't have access to running water in the
+richest country on Earth.
+ Come and tell us to the face of, again, your fellow
+Americans and that they are trying to raise their children that
+it is too costly to protect the climate, that it is too costly
+to address climate or environmental toxins and to really combat
+corporate greed that is so interconnected to a lot of these
+decisions that were made by the Trump administration, including
+missing deadlines and so forth.
+ Because that is exactly what our Government says again and
+again and again to residents like mine through these failures
+is that it is OK that they aren't breathing clean air. It is OK
+that their lives are shortened because we are doing nothing on
+these issues.
+ So, I really thank all of you for your report. I know there
+was a number of things I wanted to ask in regards to missing
+deadlines and some of the lack of prioritizing these issues,
+but again, I really appreciate and appreciate the chairwoman's
+intention in making this a critical issue to address. So, I
+really appreciate that.
+ Thank you, and I yield.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you. And the chair now recognizes the
+gentleman from Kansas, Mr. LaTurner, for five minutes.
+ Mr. LaTurner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
+for holding this important hearing to help the committee to
+really focus on its primary mission to investigate, locate, and
+root out all fraud, waste, and abuse from the Federal
+Government, an enormous task already, with expected F.Y. 2021
+budget outlays nearly $6 trillion, but one that has been
+greatly complicated over the past 12 months with soon to be $2
+trillion in new spending for COVID-related and mostly unrelated
+spending.
+ I want to applaud the Comptroller General for his 300-page
+report detailing just how much Congress is failing in this
+central mission of making sure that every hard-earned taxpayer
+dollar is being spent in a responsible and worthwhile manner.
+But this is far from a partisan issue. Both sides have failed
+in cleaning up this mess. We know that during the past 15 years
+alone, this effort by GAO has saved nearly $575 billion,
+including $225 billion just these past two years.
+ I am afraid to even consider what percentage of the total
+Federal budget is lost to waste, fraud, and abuse. I can only
+imagine. Now, more than ever, with new programs created by the
+CARES Act, including the roughly $350 billion Provider Relief
+Fund and the nearly $750 billion Paycheck Protection Program,
+it is critical that Congress and in particular this committee
+work together to ensure these new moneys are going to people
+who have legally demonstrated they are qualified to receive the
+funding.
+ But that is not all. I especially want to touch upon the
+growing unemployment claims fraud scandal that has impacted our
+Nation and, frankly, robbed my home state of Kansas. Last year,
+Congress authorized the expenditure of hundreds of billions of
+dollars for both the Federal pandemic unemployment compensation
+program and the pandemic unemployment assistance program for
+self-employed workers.
+ This dramatic increase in funding has overwhelmed state
+systems, including Kansas, that were wholly unprepared and
+failed to respond to the wave of fraudulent claims after
+several red flags were present and obvious. In Kansas, we lost
+an estimated $600 million in false claims, according to a
+legislative post audit report released last month. That is 24
+percent of claims. This is money we are all likely to never get
+back. Nationwide, the U.S. Department of Labor believes the
+figure is roughly $63 billion during this last year.
+ Madam Chairwoman, I would like to submit the Kansas state
+audit report and a Kansas delegation letter to Governor Kelly
+for the record.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. Without objection.
+ Mr. LaTurner. Thank you.
+ While I understand these are state-run programs, it
+involves billions of Federal taxpayer dollars with language
+requiring certain integrity measures that are put in place. So,
+I would appreciate your perspective on this subject.
+ It is my understanding that the GAO threshold to make the
+High-Risk List is $1 billion. Help me understand why the
+various Federal pandemic unemployment system programs, with an
+estimated fraud level of $63 billion for 2020, didn't make your
+list.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, we considered that, and they're going to
+continue to look at that issue. We haven't had a chance to look
+in depth at it at this point in time, but we will consider it
+as we move forward.
+ Mr. LaTurner. Could you talk about the process of
+consideration and what facts you are bringing to bear in making
+that decision?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, we have work underway looking at the
+system, at what needs to be done in order to fix it. In a lot
+of cases, one of the factors that we consider in putting
+something on the High-Risk List is that GAO has some
+recommendations for how to address that issue. Now given that
+most of these unemployment systems are state by state
+determined in terms of the criteria for looking at them and
+also the factors, so there could be different reasons in each
+state. So, we're going to have to look very carefully at this
+and decide whether we have, after we looked at it carefully,
+have appropriate recommendations to make so that we could point
+to what needs to be done that gets the agencies off the High-
+Risk List.
+ It's not enough to just say there's a big problem, but we
+have to have something that we bring to bear in order to say
+how it should be fixed. And in this case, the fixes are state-
+centric, and so we need to really inform ourselves on how to go
+about this. We typically don't have--make recommendations to
+individual states to fix their systems.
+ Mr. LaTurner. Could you give me--my time is running out.
+Could you give me a timeframe, and are you willing to come back
+to this committee and report any findings? A timeframe for the
+decision?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, I'd have to get back to you on the
+timeframe. I'm not sure exactly where that work stands right
+now, but we'd be happy to come back and talk about it, though.
+I'll provide a timeframe for the record.
+ Mr. LaTurner. Thank you for your time, and thank you, Mr.
+Chairman.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. I thank the gentleman. And I will recognize
+myself at this time. Just want to add my congratulations to a
+job well done, as every year, to you and your staff. Really
+terrific work.
+ On the comments from my friend across the aisle from Texas,
+we would like to work with you and him on the issues of
+incentivizing good performance and performance-based budgeting.
+When I was on the executive board of the National Conference of
+state Legislatures, we did a lot of work with your colleagues,
+or they did, to try to get those best practices. And I will say
+that very successful program here in my district years ago when
+I was a county supervisor, we were actually able to target at-
+risk kids by Census track over time.
+ But the funding and the incentives were given us by
+foundations, and it put us in a position to save quite a bit of
+money now 20, 25 years later to look at what we did and really
+become a national model. So, I would love to work with you on
+that. Incentivizing good performance and reinvesting those cost
+savings are of great interest to me.
+ Specifically, I would like to talk to you about your report
+on the Office of National Drug Control Policy. We know opioids,
+and this committee has done a lot of work in this area, and
+thank the chairwoman for bringing Purdue Pharma and the
+Sacklers here for a memorable hearing just recently. But the
+costs of drug abuse in this country, $600 billion, according to
+NIH, and treatment is--helps us $12, for every $1 spent saves
+us $12.
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, you recognized this before the pandemic,
+but you held off the release of your recommendations, as I
+understand it. Can you talk a little bit about that and the
+context, as your staff has said, in this terrific book that I
+just finished, ``Diseases of Despair,'' about the continued
+increase in diseases of despair--suicide, alcoholism, and drug
+abuse--and not just the human suffering, but the cost to state,
+local government.
+ So, COVID has made a very difficult problem worse. Could
+you talk a little bit about that and then maybe specific
+comments about the previous administration, in my view, really
+poor performance, and the metrics we need to improve the
+National Drug Control Office?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. First, we did designate our intention to
+add it formally to the High-Risk List in March 2020, but we did
+not withhold our recommendations. I mean, we made specific
+recommendations at that point about what needed to be done to
+make the strategy, the national strategy meet all the statutory
+requirements. We felt it was appropriate to not distract from
+the efforts to focus on the pandemic at that point in time. So,
+we didn't withhold the recommendations, just the formal
+designation to add it to the High-Risk List.
+ The pandemic, you know, complicated. We did realize, even
+back last March, that the pandemic was likely going to
+exacerbate some of the underlying problems that lead to drug
+abuse in the first place, which are unemployment, isolation,
+depression, and other things that were happening potentially to
+people who were vulnerable to those type of issues during the
+pandemic or a lockdown period of time. And indeed, some of the
+early data that's available from CDC show an increase in the
+March, April, May timeframe that I referred to earlier, during
+the--the preliminary data on the amount of COVID deaths due to
+overdoses. Not COVID deaths, due to--deaths due to overdoses at
+that point in time.
+ Now some of the things that need to be done that are
+missing is the law calls for a five-year resource plan for each
+area that's required. That hasn't been done yet, and these
+problems are not going to get solved looking at it only a year-
+by-year basis. You need to have a long-term plan.
+ The treatment area, there's only--there's 30 percent of the
+counties in the United States that don't have access to
+substance abuse disorder treatment for people so that there's a
+huge problem there as well. There needs to be more
+coordination. We pointed out where some of the agencies are
+pursuing plans, but it's not clear how their plans contribute
+to the national strategy, and there needs to be more evaluation
+of what's working and what's not working and more engagement
+and coordination with the private sector, state and local
+governments, healthcare providers, law enforcement, and others
+because this is a multifaceted problem.
+ Mr. DeSaulnier. I really appreciate it and look forward to
+continuing the conversation. I do want to mention legislation
+that was passed last session that was spearheaded by our former
+chair Elijah Cummings to help facilitate with the coordination.
+I hope we can work on that, make that successful with this
+administration.
+ Thanks again so much.
+ I would now like to recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin,
+Mr. Grothman, for five minutes.
+ Mr. Grothman. Yes, I would like to talk about the drug
+abuse programs myself again. I wish it was true that you could
+spend $1 and save $12. I always wonder if those studies are
+right on point, you know, that you can spend $1 and save $12.
+ But in any event, over time, seems to me we have spent more
+and more money on drug abuse, at least it seems to me that we
+brag about the amount we are spending. Nevertheless, we still
+are around 80,000 lives lost a year, which is really tragic.
+And I would think, given all the money we are plowing into
+this, that we would begin to make some progress.
+ We all have--or at least I have reasons why I think we are
+not doing a very good job here. But given that we keep throwing
+more dollars at it, are there any programs in the drug abuse
+field that we feel have failed and have eliminated or cut back
+on? Given that we hit records every year in the number of
+people who die, or at least recently we do, I would assume some
+of these programs are failing.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, one of the areas we point out is a lack
+of evaluations in some of these programs. Let me ask Ms.
+Clowers, who's director of our healthcare area, if she wants to
+add anything.
+ Ms. Clowers. I would add two points. In terms of the ONDCP
+strategy that has been put out, this is an area where we have
+pointed out the strategy needs to be improved, that they do
+need performance measures for efforts that are ongoing so we
+can assess whether programs are making progress or making a
+difference.
+ The second point I would mention is that we do have ongoing
+work looking at the different grants that are being provided to
+states to help combat the opioid epidemic, and we will be
+looking to examine what we are getting with those funds.
+ Mr. Grothman. Yes, I mean, it frustrates me because this is
+an issue that I care deeply about. And of course, because
+everybody cares for it, you keep voting for more and more. But
+when you--and I assume there is a lot more money being spent
+today than, say, six or seven years ago, but it seems the
+number of people who die just keeps going up. And part of it
+could be the COVID, but in any event, when you plow this much
+money into a program or programs with a promise that we are
+going to fight this overdose stuff and it keeps going up, is
+anybody ever weeding out the bad programs so we have money left
+for the good program? And you are telling me that doesn't
+happen?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Not as rigorously as it should. That's one of
+the reasons we elevated it to the High-Risk List is to make
+sure that there is more focus on this and there is more
+evaluation of these programs, so we can tell what works and
+what doesn't work and make adjustments to those.
+ Mr. Grothman. Yes. And as far as you know, there are no
+programs that categorically are wiped out for being no good, or
+when we send out the grants, we are not going to send it to
+these programs. It is just kind of up, up, up all the time?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, I'll go back and take a look at that and
+see if there's anything that we've done along those lines, and
+I'll provide an answer for the record.
+ Mr. Grothman. Yes. We have had several programs on the
+High-Risk List since the 1990's, which is concerning. You know,
+when we identify a problem, you would like to think in 30
+years, we would begin to address it.
+ One of those are improper payments to Medicare, and that
+can be wildly expensive, of course, because doctor bills are
+wildly expensive. But it is still on the program 30 years
+later. Can you tell us why it is apparently not addressed or
+not addressed enough to keep it off the list?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Actually, the improper payments are coming down
+in the Medicare area. So, I've been pleased that there's been
+some progress in that area.
+ It's also on the list because of the restructuring and the
+move from paying people for the quantity of services to get the
+quality of healthcare in there as well. So, there are some
+reforms that need to be made. We've made some recommendations
+to the Congress to give authority for recovery auditors to look
+at things prepayment. We've also suggested that CMS more use
+prior authorization before they make payments and to expand--
+they've done this for pilot programs that have been successful.
+Where they've saved money, prevented improper payments, and
+it's not affected the ability of people to get services, that
+they expand that more often.
+ Actually, the bigger problem now is Medicaid improper
+payment. Medicaid improper payments for last year over $85
+billion, compared to $42 billion in Medicare. So, Medicare is
+coming down. It can come down further with implementation of
+our recommendations. Medicare is dramatically increasing--
+Medicaid, rather, excuse me.
+ Mr. Grothman. They are similar programs. Why is Medicaid
+such a bigger problem than Medicare?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, you have a lot of different state
+programs and rules. Each state has their own different Medicaid
+program. Medicare, you have more uniformity across the program,
+and it's run by the Federal Government versus a partnership
+with the individual state programs. We've expanded Medicaid
+quite a bit in the Affordable Care Act and also with the recent
+pandemic. And so the programs are changing quite a bit.
+ One of the reasons it's going up so fast now is that some
+of the states aren't doing enough to enroll providers and make
+sure that the providers that are enrolling are eligible to
+provide services under the program. So, and the managed care
+portion of Medicaid, which started out as a small program, is
+now about half of the spending, and there is still not enough
+scrutiny, in my opinion, over the managed care portion of
+Medicaid.
+ Mr. Grothman. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. [Presiding.] Thank you. The gentlelady
+from California is recognized. Representative Porter?
+ Ms. Porter. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
+ Mr. Dodaro, is it correct that the Federal Government fails
+to collect taxes that it is owed to the tune of about $400
+billion a year?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's correct. That's the gross amount. The
+IRS is--go ahead, please.
+ Ms. Porter. That is the gross amount. And we call this--
+this is often referred to as the ``tax gap,'' but it seems to
+me it is really more like a canyon in terms of the amount of
+money. So, this is one of the charts from your report, and it
+shows the gap right here between the blue, which is what is
+owed, and the green, which is what is collected. And we collect
+about 11 percent of what--of this missing amount.
+ So, what your report shows is that of the $458 billion that
+is this tax gap, after the IRS engages in enforcement, they
+only collect this blue portion, and all of this red portion--
+and that is a lot of zeroes there--$406 billion goes
+uncollected. Based on the GAO studies over the years, has this
+amount, this tax gap, gotten smaller? Are we tackling this
+problem year after year and working on it?
+ Mr. Dodaro. We're not as successful as a government at IRS
+that I'd like to see. The problem is not getting better. It's
+stayed actually about the same over the period of time. There
+are some recommendations----
+ Ms. Porter. So, on average, every year, we fail to collect
+$406 billion?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, they think they'll collect some. The net
+tax gap or what they definitely don't think they collect is
+$381 billion, but you're--it's in the ballpark. So, yes, that's
+true--that's true.
+ Ms. Porter. For a person like me, $381 billion, $400
+billion, it is all just a lot of zeroes that is not being paid.
+I have a question for you. In your GAO high-risk report, you
+say that this is relating to staffing problems. So, has IRS
+been increasing its staffing so that we can collect what we are
+owed as taxpayers?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Staffing has only been going recently up. It's
+been declining over time, and I think they're not back up to
+the 2010 levels yet. Let me ask Mr. Mihm to give you an
+example. But the problem is not just staffing. There are some
+other things that could be done. Chris?
+ Ms. Porter. What are those other things?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I think Congress should regulate, authorize IRS
+to regulate the paid tax preparers, No. 1. Some of the studies
+that we've looked at using their data, in some cases taxpayers'
+accuracy is more accurate than people that use paid tax
+preparers, particularly in the earned income tax credit area.
+ Second, there ought to be more information returns prepared
+so that the IRS could match data. For example, for real estate,
+people that fix up their real eState property, to report that,
+as well as businesses, corporations that have services. They
+can report that data. The IRS could cross-check it to the
+providers to see what they're reporting.
+ Ms. Porter. So, Mr. Dodaro----
+ Mr. Dodaro. There's also--yes.
+ Ms. Porter [Continuing]. I just have a sort of basic
+question. Who benefits from failing to collect taxes that are
+owed?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Only the people that owe them that are not
+paying them.
+ Ms. Porter. So tax cheats, tax underpayers, delinquents,
+that is who is benefiting. Who is being hurt by this failure to
+collect between $381 billion and $406 billion on average a
+year? Who is being hurt?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, the Americans are getting hurt. The
+people that are----
+ Ms. Porter. Americans are getting hurt.
+ Mr. Dodaro. The people that are paying their taxes and the
+other people that aren't paying taxes because they're too
+young, but we're borrowing money to pay for things that they're
+going to have to pay for in their generations ahead. So,
+everybody is getting hurt by it.
+ Ms. Porter. OK. So, everybody is getting hurt at the
+expense of tax cheats or tax frauds who are getting helped.
+ Mr. Dodaro, what is the GAO's motto?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Our motto?
+ Ms. Porter. Mm-hmm.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Accountability, integrity, and reliability is
+our core values.
+ Ms. Porter. OK. On your recent reports, you have this
+slogan, ``A century of nonpartisan fact-based work.'' Does this
+ring a bell?
+ Mr. Dodaro. It does. This is our 100----
+ Ms. Porter. A century of nonpartisan fact-based work. I
+wish that Congress could have that as its motto for even one
+day, much less a century. Does the GAO sell T-shirts with that
+motto, ``A century of nonpartisan fact-based work,'' because I
+would totally buy one of these T-shirts. I would buy them for
+all my family and give the money to the IRS to enforce against
+collecting taxes from people who are cheating the rest of us.
+ With that, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlewoman yields back. I now
+recognize the gentlewoman from New Mexico, Ms. Herrell.
+ Ms. Herrell. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ And thank you so much, Mr. Dodaro, for being here. It is
+incredible, and I kind of want to echo what my colleague have
+said. It is just almost too much for one committee hearing
+because there is so much information. So, I just appreciate all
+of your comments, and if I am redundant, I apologize. I ran to
+vote.
+ But something one of my colleagues was saying earlier,
+there are so many programs, and you had mentioned earlier that
+it is sometimes hard to know exactly how many there are. But
+are there programs that have been funded or happening for years
+and years where maybe we need to take, think about maybe a
+different approach? Think about things outside the box?
+ Maybe like Einstein says if you keep doing the same thing
+over and over and you still get the same results, perhaps it is
+time to change your thought process. And I am wondering, are
+there things that you see that maybe Congress could be doing
+very differently to help either have more accountability or
+more success so that we don't see this number of programs on
+this High-Risk List? Does that make sense?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, yes. Yes, well, we have, as I mentioned,
+just in the tax area, recommendations for Congress to act, to
+give IRS the authority to do this. We have a number of
+recommendations for Congress to act on that we think can be
+helpful in helping resolve these areas.
+ I mentioned that we talked about the Postal Service before.
+There is actually 14 of the high-risk areas that the solution
+to solving that involves congressional action. Surface
+transportation, Postal Service, for example. So, we've
+highlight where Congress needs to act that could act on those
+areas.
+ Now with regard to the programs I mentioned earlier, I
+think Congress ought to insist on having program evaluations
+that demonstrate the success of the program before continuing
+to fund it often at increased levels. So that, I think, would
+be a game changer that I think would get the attention of a
+number of advocates of those programs to really do, you know,
+investigations and evaluations.
+ Ms. Herrell. And I agree with that. And just looking at it
+from the lens of our constituents, it is different. They are
+not in the halls of Congress. They don't hear the conversations
+and even understand always some of the dialog that is taking
+place.
+ And so I can--just to kind of simple it down, I can tell
+you what they will ask me in my district. It will be things
+such as how are we sending money to foreign countries or maybe
+for aid or for different programs, sometimes to not even
+countries that are our allies, when we can see that we have
+possible trouble heading our way with the Highway Trust Fund,
+like you mentioned, or Social Security or Medicaid, you know,
+or even updating the computer systems in the IRS.
+ And I am just asking is this solely resting on the
+shoulders of Congress to do a better job in allocations, or is
+this something that these departmental programs can come
+forward with where we can work collectively? But do you see
+where I am going with this? People don't understand how we are
+sending so much money overseas in some cases, but yet not
+taking care of, say, our infrastructure, the IT, and other
+things that really have a direct impact on some of these
+programs.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, you have two dimensions here. You have
+the President, on behalf of the administration, recommending
+funding for these programs. But the ultimate decision lies with
+Congress as to whether they're going to fund the programs or
+not.
+ Ms. Herrell. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's not, you know, a prerogative of my
+organization. Our job is to advise the Congress and so that
+they can make informed decisions. But those ultimate decisions
+about the policy priorities of the Government rest in Congress'
+hands.
+ Ms. Herrell. Right. And I am just going to shift gears just
+a little bit because I come from a border state, and just can
+you discuss the work of GAO as it relates to drug trafficking
+across our border and areas of improvement your agency found
+the Government needs to make to intercept drugs and improve
+border security? Because I know that has just been issue we
+have been seeing for decades, but just your thoughts on that.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Oh, yes. We've done a lot of work in that area
+and have recommendations. I'd be happy to provide those for the
+record.
+ Ms. Herrell. Great, great. Because it just--what concerns
+me is, obviously, we have this crisis, the drug overdose, all
+over the country. And certainly, we see it in New Mexico, and
+we understand that a lot of drugs, illicit drugs are coming
+through those southern borders, and other ports everywhere. But
+I am thinking that opening the borders might compound this if
+it feels like we are starting to see some improvement on that.
+ But I can see that Congress has a lot of work to do, and
+again, I really appreciate your comments today.
+ And Madam Chair, I wish we had more----
+ Mr. Dodaro. I think the issue there, we need to focus on
+the border and the interdiction of drugs. But we really need to
+work on bringing the demand down. As long as there is demand
+for the product, the product is going to find its way here.
+ Ms. Herrell. Right.
+ Mr. Dodaro. And that's something that we've never been
+successful on in the Government as long as I've been here, and
+I've been here a long time. And that's one of the reasons I
+decided to try elevate it to the High-Risk List to get some
+greater attention on the education and prevention front of this
+thing as well as the interdiction and, of course, treatment
+programs, but we haven't quite found the magic formula to
+balance the dimensions to make any progress in this area.
+ Ms. Herrell. Right. That makes sense, and it does. And I
+appreciate those comments.
+ And Madam Chair, thank you for the additional time, and we
+have our work to do for sure. So, thank you, Madam Chair.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back.
+The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Johnson, is now recognized. Mr.
+Johnson?
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ And Mr. Dodaro, thank you for being here today, and I agree
+fully with you, and I would go further to say that the war on
+drugs has been an abysmal failure in this country. But I want
+to ask you about the FDA. The coronavirus pandemic has put
+immense pressure on all facets of our healthcare system,
+including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which has been
+working, by the way, nonstop to facilitate the approval of
+COVID vaccines and drug therapies. This work has been further
+complicated by drug shortages and inept leadership from the
+previous administration.
+ Drug shortages are not only a serious threat to Americans'
+health and safety, they are also incredibly expensive. In 2019,
+a survey found that drug shortages cost hospitals $360 million
+annually in labor costs alone. Of the 6,000 healthcare
+facilities surveyed, more than half faced at least 20 shortages
+during the six-month study.
+ Today's report highlights the important role the FDA plays
+in addressing drug shortages and why their role is particularly
+important during a global pandemic. Has the problem, sir, of
+drug shortages been more severe or become more severe because
+of the COVID-19 pandemic?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I want to ask Nikki Clowers, the head of our
+healthcare team, to answer that question. Nikki?
+ Ms. Clowers. Yes, I think what the pandemic has done is
+shown the vulnerabilities that we have in our drug supply
+chain. As many--as you probably know, most of our generic drugs
+are manufactured overseas. And so whenever there is a crisis or
+other disruption in the supply chain, that can affect the
+availability of drugs and lead to drug shortages.
+ We have made recommendations to FDA to help them better
+manage drug shortages. It is certainly not only an FDA
+responsibility. It is a shared responsibility, and the private
+sector is involved. But we think there is more that FDA could
+do in terms of using data and trying to forecast where there is
+different drug shortages.
+ We also recently made----
+ Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, let me stop you right there and move
+on.
+ In 2019, the FDA's drug shortages task force put out a
+report to mitigate--on how to mitigate drug strategies. How
+useful were those recommendations in confronting the drug
+shortage challenges posed by the pandemic under the previous
+administration?
+ Ms. Clowers. They were useful in that providing steps that
+both FDA could take as well as the private sector in terms of
+risk management and better contracting.
+ Mr. Johnson. Was the FDA able to take those steps that were
+recommended under the previous----
+ Ms. Clowers. They are taking----
+ Mr. Johnson [Continuing]. Under the previous
+administration?
+ Ms. Clowers. They are in the process of implementing those
+recommendations, and I can report back to you as we get more
+information about the status.
+ Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, I know that you don't want to
+comment about the previous administration. But the FDA was not
+equipped to predict drug shortages caused by former President
+Trump, who incessantly tweeted unproven assertions that certain
+drugs were effective in treating COVID-19. Trump threatened the
+health of hundreds of millions by spreading false information
+about treatments for COVID-19 and creating mass demand for
+drugs that patients with lupus or rheumatoid arthritis relied
+upon.
+ And his assertions led to widespread shortages of those
+medications across the country, and he didn't stop there,
+though. He went further, contacting the FDA and bullying the
+Administrator into issuing an emergency order allowing the use
+of those drugs to treat COVID-19, when, in fact, there was no
+evidence that those drugs were efficacious. These drugs were
+more than just ineffective, they could have potentially caused
+dangerous side effects depending on the patient.
+ Mr. Dodaro, do you think or do you believe--or let me ask
+you this. How did Trump's actions constitute a direct public
+health threat?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, I mean--there--you know, I mean, my
+belief is in science, and I think that the scientists should
+speak out on these issues and that there needs to be
+authoritative scientific underpinning of decisions we've heard.
+ Mr. Johnson. And let me ask you this question. In your
+opinion, do actions taken by the FDA Administrator, pursuant to
+President Trump's order, merit further investigation.
+ Mr. Dodaro. We are actually looking at the political
+influence on FDA and CDC, and we'll be reporting our results to
+the Congress.
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you, and I yield back. Thank you, Madam
+Chair.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentlelady from the great state of New York, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez,
+is now recognized.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Maloney.
+ And thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for coming in front of us today
+and offering your expertise in some of these issues, emerging
+issues that we should be keeping an eye out for.
+ Now you are the Comptroller General of the United States.
+Correct?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's correct.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And you know, for some of my
+constituents in community watching at home, that means, among
+your many other responsibilities, you kind of keep an eye on
+the books for the United States. Would that be fair to say in a
+broader sense?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Books and programs, all Federal activity.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Wonderful. Thank you.
+ So, before I begin, Madam Chairwoman, I would like to ask
+for unanimous consent to submit a Pro Publica article on
+Facebook on enforcing tax law and a letter from 88 national
+organizations urging President Biden and Congress to invest in
+fair enforcement of the tax law to the record.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Without objection.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. Thank you very much.
+ So, Mr. Dodaro, let us talk about taxes. If I was the CEO
+presently of a large international corporation that was founded
+here in the United States and wanted to manipulate my taxes and
+park the profits somewhere else, do you think I would be able
+to get away with that in our current system?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, there's a lot of potential loopholes in
+the current system that can be exploited.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. And you know, actually,
+according to this Pro Publica article, it seems that some
+records have been unearthed, and Sheryl Sandberg wrote in
+April, an April 2008 email that ``My experience is that by not
+having a European center and running everything through the
+U.S., it is costly in terms of taxes.''
+ And Facebook's head of tax actually replied to Sandberg in
+these records that the company needed to find a ``low-tax
+jurisdiction to park profits.'' And it found that jurisdiction
+in Ireland, where its tax rate is near zero.
+ Now why would Facebook, do you think, want to do that?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, there's different tax advantages. I'm
+going to have--Mr. Mihm is our expert in the tax area. I'm
+going to ask him to help comment.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Sure, of course.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Because we've looked at some offshoring kind of
+issues. Chris?
+ Mr. Mihm. Thank you, sir. And yes, ma'am. We have looked at
+offshoring and, as you are suggesting, that there are various
+tax advantages to where major corporations claim that their
+businesses are taking place. And they are fully aware of those
+tax advantages, and they use those to their advantage to
+minimize the amount of taxes that they have to pay.
+ So, that is an important consideration in business
+decisions. Yes, ma'am.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you so much, and I appreciate that
+answer. You know, and I would actually kind of contest this
+term ``tax advantage,'' because it may be an advantage to an
+individual corporation, but we currently have an enormous tax
+gap in the United States. Would you say that that is correct,
+Mr. Dodaro?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's correct.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And so weakened tax enforcement actually
+rigs this economy against workers. It seems as though we are
+starting to see a pattern where the IRS is starting to go a
+little bit more after lower-income people that target the EITC,
+and this is kind of referenced due to the lack of resources
+that the IRS currently has. Would that be fair to say?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, the amount of enforcement efforts and
+auditing of the tax returns has been going down as a
+percentage. I'm not sure what the current mix is.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Yes, and so it seems like companies like
+Facebook have kept billions of dollars in tax breaks through
+tactics like offshore tax evasion. But working families are
+struggling to pay rent, put food on the table, and stay alive.
+And in fact, we are constantly told that we cannot afford
+tuition-free public colleges, expansion of healthcare in the
+United States because we can't afford it.
+ The official estimates peg the national tax gap at $381
+billion per year, but the former Commissioner Charles Rossotti
+estimates that it is now closer to $600 billion.
+ Mr. Dodaro, does any other item on the GAO's High-Risk List
+come anywhere close to having a $600 billion impact on the
+Federal budget?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Not any one single item alone.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. So, this seems to be one of the largest
+areas of having a negative impact on our Federal budget. It is
+tax evasion and other sorts of----
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Yes, there are two others that have
+potential large areas. One is healthcare, improper payments in
+healthcare, which are over $100 billion a year. And the defense
+weapon systems, where there is a portfolio of $1.8 trillion.
+ Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. All right. Thank you very much.
+Appreciate it.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Madam Chair, Madam Chair, would it be possible
+for me to have five minutes before we continue?
+ Chairwoman Maloney. Certainly. We will recess for five
+minutes.
+ [Recess.]
+ Chairwoman Maloney. We're now in session. The gentleman
+from Texas, Mr. Fallon, is recognized for five minutes.
+ Mr. Fallon. Madam Chair, thank you very much.
+ Comptroller General Dodaro, thank you for taking the time.
+It has been a fascinating committee hearing. And thank you for
+the important work that you are doing and the service you are
+providing to our country and our taxpayers.
+ I have got a couple of questions. Medicare has been on the
+High-Risk List for over 30 years, and I am not surprised
+because when I was in the Texas legislature, it was one of the
+things that I learned about was the fraud that we saw just at
+our level in the state and in Texas. And it was, according to
+our Inspector General, in the hundreds of millions of dollars
+provable and potentially and probably in the low billions.
+ And again, that is just Texas. So, I shudder to think what
+the actual costs are when you look at 50 states.
+ So, my first question is, do you share my concern about the
+massive potential and actual fraud that could exist within the
+Medicaid program, Medicare program and the process? And if you
+do, do you have any idea of possibly a ballpark figure of what
+that realistic potential fraud could be across the country?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes. Well, I share your concern about it
+clearly, both for Medicare and Medicaid, all right, in those
+two areas. I do not have a figure for you. It's hard to
+calculate. There are figures on improper payments that are
+made. These are payments that should not have been made or made
+in the wrong amounts.
+ Now they would include--Now any fraud would be an improper
+payment by definition, but not all improper payments are fraud
+because you have to prove an intent and criminality. Last year,
+the amount of improper payments in Medicare and Medicaid
+combined were over $100 billion, all right? But again, that's
+not all fraud, but it's indicative of an issue.
+ And I believe that the amount of improper payments
+estimated for Medicaid is an underestimate. The numbers are
+big.
+ Mr. Fallon. I would also like to share with the committee
+and the other members that when I asked our Inspector General a
+very innocent question, what I thought which was, when someone
+is audited, in this case, Medicaid, what percentage of those
+physicians or the offices that are giving the medical care had
+their billing lowered the next month? And it was 100 percent,
+all of them, which is alarming, obviously, for clear reasons.
+ But the Medicare program has been on the list, as I
+mentioned earlier, year after year for three decades. What
+suggestions, if any, would you have today that we could
+implement to finally hold the Medicare program accountable and,
+as a result, of course, reduce this massive taxpayer theft and
+reform Medicare and Medicaid so that they can actually earn
+their way off the list?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, there's a couple of things. One is we
+think they should expand the prior authorization. They tested
+prior authorizations. This provides greater assurance that you
+are spending the money for a legitimate purpose to a legitimate
+provider for a legitimate medical reason before you spend the
+money. You don't have to worry about trying to get it back
+later.
+ It's been proven in pilot projects, but it hasn't been
+expanded because it will save money and it won't affect the
+services' timeliness or the services to the individual if done
+properly.
+ Second, it's been shown that recovery auditors who actually
+audit some of these things after the fact can audit prepayment
+in some of these areas. That will reduce that issue as well.
+So, those are two recommendations off the bat.
+ The other reason Medicare is on the High-Risk List is that
+it's undergoing a transformation right now to sort of pay
+people for not quantity of services, but the quality of
+services, and that transformation is underway and not anywhere
+near complete. But let me ask Ms. Clowers if she has any other
+recommendations. She's our healthcare head.
+ Mr. Fallon. Yes, thank you. Thank you.
+ Mr. Dodaro. Nikki?
+ Ms. Clowers. Yes. One more recommendation in the Medicare
+area would be for CMS to do more work on their risk adjustment
+scores. That is when we see coding differences between fee-for-
+service, for example, versus then the payments that are made
+under managed care or the Medicare Advantage. We want to make
+sure that those coding differences are taken into account so we
+are not overpaying for the services provided. We have a
+recommendation in that area.
+ And then on the Medicaid front, the Comptroller General has
+also mentioned this a little bit earlier. But in the managed
+care area, there is not a sufficient medical review of the
+payments and services that are made, and we think that area
+needs a great deal of attention as the care that is being
+provided through managed care now accounts for almost half of
+all Medicaid spending.
+ Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
+gentlelady from Missouri, Ms. Bush, is recognized for five
+minutes. Ms. Bush, you are now recognized.
+ Ms. Bush. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ St. Louis and I thank you for convening this hearing today,
+and thank you to Mr. Dodaro for being here.
+ I will ask today for the thousands of people who urgently
+need a voice in this room, the environmental violence of the
+Departments of Energy and Defense has emblazoned my community
+with extremely hazardous radioactive waste. Nothing could fully
+capture what it was like for people to find out that their--
+that nearly everyone from their high school was sick with rare
+cancers or dead. That is real life for people along Coldwater
+Creek in St. Louis.
+ The Department of Energy knew that Coldwater Creek was
+dangerously contaminated in the 1960's. Mr. Dodaro, based on
+what you know about DOE environmental liabilities, would you
+guess that the creek is cleaned up today?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, there hasn't been as much progress as I
+think there needs to be made, and the cost to the Government to
+clean up keeps going up, despite spending billions of dollars,
+because they don't really have a risk-based approach to
+addressing those issues.
+ Ms. Bush. OK well yes. You are right. Yes, it is certainly
+not.
+ The CDC has estimated that as many as 350,000 people in
+North County, my community, have been exposed to radioactive
+waste. The creek runs through the Florissant area and several
+other towns in my district. We are not talking about a distant
+problem. I am in the room, actually. I lived by this creek, and
+the basement of my townhouse would flood with potentially
+radioactive water all the time. My son's room was in that
+basement.
+ Mr. Dodaro, based on what you know about these two
+departments, would you take over the lease at that townhouse,
+or would you take your kids to the nearby playground?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Based on the circumstances that you're
+explaining, I don't think so.
+ Ms. Bush. Well, and I am a nurse. I would never let you do
+it. One day, I opened my door, and there were butterflies,
+dozens, lying on the ground with their wings opened, like
+nothing I had ever seen. I realized something must be very,
+very wrong, but we had no idea what was happening.
+ Most people still don't know what is happening even right
+now. The Army Corps of Engineers is slowly conducting a cleanup
+in St. Louis under the FUSRAP program. They have estimated that
+some black and brown communities won't be cleaned up for 20
+years.
+ Eyewitness accounts state that the Corps and contractors
+like those mentioned in the report have been seen picking
+random houses on a street to test soil without even notifying
+neighbors who are growing gardens. There are still no signs, no
+signs at the creek warning people of the dangers.
+ Mr. Dodaro, would you say that the DOE has enough money to
+post some type of warning signs along the creek that is giving
+people rare cancers or at least what we believe to be causing
+it?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I'll ask--I'll ask Mr. Gaffigan to answer
+further, but DOE has one of the largest budgets in the
+Government. So, I would think they could afford a sign, but
+Mark?
+ Mr. Gaffigan. I would only add the reason we put this on
+the list is because we think this is just the tip of the
+iceberg. We think there are a lot more places like Coldwater
+Creek around the country that need to be identified, and we
+need to figure out to what degree we are going to clean them
+up.
+ Ms. Bush. Thank you. Thank you.
+ The Department of Energy is a ``responsible party'' for
+Coldwater Creek. We have heard that the DOE set aside the
+maximum amount of money, but then deemed it was not all needed.
+My constituents and I, we want to know where does the
+supposedly unneeded money go? Mr. Dodaro?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I'm going to ask Mr. Gaffigan on that one.
+ Ms. Bush. OK.
+ Mr. Gaffigan. Well, we have been critical that DOE has not
+taken a risk-based approach to this, you know, identifying all
+the sites throughout the country and treating it in sort of a
+risk-based approach. And the fact that communities are feeling
+left out is not a good sign.
+ Ms. Bush. No, it is not. Thank you.
+ I have one final question. Mr. Dodaro, if you were me,
+representing hundreds of thousands of people with potential or
+confirmed toxic exposure, what would you do to massively
+expedite DOE?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I mean, I think Congress is empowered to get
+answers from DOE about what their plans are and what they're
+intended to do. So, if I was a Member of Congress, I'd insist
+that they provide answers to the questions to satisfy you about
+what their plans are and what the timeframes are for
+implementing those plans.
+ Ms. Bush. Thank you, Mr. Dodaro. I will be following up
+with further questions, a lot of questions.
+ And I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady yields back. And the
+gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Comer, is now recognized.
+ Mr. Comer. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ And Mr. Dodaro, thank you for your time. I know you have to
+leave, and you have been with us all day and a press conference
+before that. I just wanted to ask a real brief question.
+ Has the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in drug abuse,
+and that is what contributed to the addition of a new area on
+the GAO list and that area being the national efforts to
+prevent, respond to, and recover from drug misuse?
+ Mr. Dodaro. I want to be clear on this. We were going to
+add that area before the pandemic, and we announced our
+intention to do that March 2020. So, it wasn't a result of the
+pandemic that we added the drug misuse area, but the pandemic
+has complicated that issue.
+ Mr. Comer. Isn't it true the number of drug overdoses has
+increased during the pandemic from March to May of--March 2019
+to May 2020?
+ Mr. Dodaro. That's true. That's true.
+ Mr. Comer. Or March 2020 to May 2021, yes?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Yes, right. Right. But if you look at it, we
+have a chart in our report, Congressman, that shows the rate of
+drug increases were going sort of like this. It was, you know,
+on a trajectory. It dropped slightly in 2018, but it bounced
+back in 2019 to go increase again.
+ So, it was on a very disturbing trend pattern before the
+pandemic, and it's apparently likely to get worse once all the
+final data is in going forward.
+ Mr. Comer. So, what do you think the Federal Government's
+response needs to be to this spike in drug abuse?
+ Mr. Dodaro. Well, I think we need to double down on our
+efforts. We need to have a comprehensive national strategy. We
+need to engage--there are 12 different agencies in the Federal
+Government that are considered part of this implementation
+effort. We need to engage the states, localities, and the
+private sector in this area because it affects businesses. It
+affects all parts of our economy.
+ So, we need to really make a concerted effort over time
+with the proper resources and investment in order to arrest
+this disturbing trend.
+ Mr. Comer. Well, I would add to that, in my opinion, that I
+believe taking steps to reopen the economy and getting people
+back to work certainly would seem to help the situation as
+well.
+ But thank you again for being here. I know we have extended
+this meeting beyond the time that we set forth, but I do
+appreciate your service.
+ And Madam Chair, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. And in
+closing, I want to thank the Comptroller for his testimony, his
+service, his report, his press conference earlier today, and I
+know he is testifying shortly before the Senate on the report
+also.
+ I also want to commend my colleagues for participating in
+this important conversation, and without objection, all members
+have five legislative days within which to submit additional
+written questions for the witness--to the chair, which will be
+forwarded to the witness for his response. I ask our witnesses
+to please respond as promptly as you are able to.
+ And this hearing is adjourned.
+ [Whereupon, at 1:51 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
+
+ [all]
+