DOGE subcommittee holds first hearing slamming $36T national debt, as House Republicans declare 'war on waste'
The House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency held its first ever hearing Wednesday, as Republicans criticized the soaring $36 trillion national debt, as well as Democrats' condemnation of Elon Musk's effort to slash waste.
In her opening statement, Chairwoman Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-S.C., said the committee must be "brutally honest about how this massive debt came to be in the first place – it came from Congress and from elected presidential administrations."
"We as Republicans and Democrats can still hold tightly to our beliefs, but we are going to have to let go of funding them in order to save our sinking ship," Greene said. "This is not a time for political theater and partisan attacks. The American people are watching. The legislative branch can't sit on the sidelines. In this subcommittee, we will fight the war on waste shoulder to shoulder with President Trump, Elon Musk and the DOGE team."
Greene said, "enslaving our nation in debt" is one of the "biggest betrayals against the American people's own elected government" and vowed that her subcommittee, operating under the House Oversight Committee, would work with President Donald Trump's newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which is spearheaded by Musk as part of the executive branch.
Doge Slashes Over $100M In Dei Funding At Education Department: 'Win For Every Student'
"The federal government, government employees, and unelected bureaucrats do not live by the same rules as the great American people and private businesses," Greene said. "The federal government's income is the American people's hard-earned tax dollars. Their literal blood, sweat and tears and taxes are collected by law at gunpoint. Don't pay your taxes and you go to jail. The federal government does not have to provide excellent customer service to earn its income. It takes your money whether you like it or not. And federal employees receive their paycheck no matter what."
Read On The Fox News App
The subcommittee's highest ranking Democrat, Rep. Melanie Stanbury of New Mexico, used her opening statement to slam Trump and Musk's efforts, despite agreeing to a bipartisan approach to "digging into the more than $236 billion in improper payments that we see going out the door every single year," as well as "putting into place rigorous oversight and controls to prevent fraud and abuse, and, of course, to go after bad actors."
"We can't just sit here today and pretend like everything is normal and that this is just another hearing on government efficiency," Stanbury said. "Because while we're sitting here, Donald Trump and Elon Musk are recklessly and illegally dismantling the federal government, shuttering federal agencies, firing federal workers, withholding funds vital to the safety and well-being of our communities, and hacking our sensitive data systems."
One of the witnesses, Stephen Whitson of the Foundation for Government Accountability, testified that DOGE's efforts have exposed $59 million paid to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal immigrants, $1.5 million to advance diversity, equity and inclusion in Serbia's workplaces, $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru, $10 million worth of food assistance funneled to al Qaeda and "the list goes on."
"But rather than applauding the work of DOGE, the left has launched a coordinated campaign to try to demonize Mr. Musk with the hope of shifting focus away from the disastrous waste, fraud and abuse that occurred on Biden's watch. But guess what? It's not working," Whitson said.
He shifted to the focus of Wednesday's subcommittee hearing, Medicaid waste and fraud, testifying that more than 80% of improper Medicaid payments are due to eligibility errors, which Congress must address. Whitson testified that one in five dollars spent on Medicaid is improper, and Medicaid fraud and mismanagement is on track to cost U.S. taxpayers $1 trillion in the next 10 years.
'Obama Bros' On Doge: 'Some Of The Stuff We Should've Done'
Whitson also offered Congress three ways to support Trump's DOGE effort. The first is for Congress to strengthen the Medicaid program through legislative action. He testified that both the Biden and Obama administrations issued rules and guidance that made it harder for states to verify eligibility for Medicaid. He said repealing Biden's Medicaid streamlining rule, which restricts eligibility verification that states can perform, would save $164 billion over 10 years.
In a later exchange, Whitson said the Biden-era rule prohibits states from verifying eligibility more than once a year and prohibits in-person or phone call interviews to verify the recipient's identity.
It also opens "lengthy reconsideration periods," opening the door for illegal immigrants to receive benefits.
"A state has to wait at least 90 days" before verifying whether a recipient is an illegal immigrant, Whitson said. "And actually what we're seeing is it's let some states to wait as long as 13 years."
Secondly, Whitson said Congress could help DOGE by "ensuring that entrenched partisan bureaucrats don't stand in the way of reform." To do that, Congress must codify the president's authority "to fire unproductive or insubordinate agency employees as needed," as well as grant the president authority to permanently eliminate vacant positions and consolidate nonessential positions across agencies and departments to help promote efficiency, Whitson said.
"Personnel is policy, and without competent staff to faithfully execute the president's agenda, the DOGE project will fail," he said.
Thirdly, Whitson called on Congress to pass the REINS Act to "make President Trump's DOGE cost-cutting and de-regulatory reforms permanent."
"There's only one big problem with the DOGE effort. Most of its work can be undone by a future president with the stroke of a pen," he said, adding that the REINS Act would "return Article One budgetary power of the purse to Congress while promoting deregulation. It would also help lock in the DOGE reforms and cement President Trump's legacy as the most consequential de-regulatory and cost-cutting president in U.S. history."
At another point in the hearing, Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., played out archived video of former President Bill Clinton in 1997 and former President Barack Obama in 2011 pledging to reduce the federal workforce and close hundreds of government offices outside of Washington. Obama spoke in 2011 of his administration's "Campaign to Cut Waste," saying at the time, "We thought that it was entirely appropriate for our governments and our agencies to try to root out waste, large and small, in a systematic way." From the Oval Office, Obama added that "a lot of the action is in Congress and legislative, but in the meantime, we don't need to wait for Congress in order to, do something about wasteful spending that's out there."
Burlison said the video was meant to "remind my Democratic friends at a point in which you once had the majority of the American people on your side."Original article source: DOGE subcommittee holds first hearing slamming $36T national debt, as House Republicans declare 'war on waste'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
35 minutes ago
2 women marry in Mexico's embassy in Guatemala fueling a debate over same-sex marriage
GUATEMALA CITY -- Two Mexican women were married inside the grounds of Mexico's embassy in Guatemala on Friday, sparking anger in a nation that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage and debate over diplomatic sovereignty. The ceremony held in the embassy gardens was intended to celebrate Pride Month, which is celebrated every June, and the consulate said the marriage marked a step toward inclusion, respect and equality for all. "We celebrate love without borders," wrote the embassy in a post on the social media platform X. 'This is the first civil wedding of a same-sex couple at the Embassy of Mexico in Guatemala. It's a right granted to all individuals when both are Mexican citizens.' Shortly after, the ceremony sparked an outcry among conservative politicians in Guatemala, a largely Catholic country and one of a handful in Latin America that still doesn't recognize same-sex marriages. While such marriages aren't explicitly prohibited, Guatemalan law only refers to unions between a man and a woman. Allan Rodríguez, the head of the VAMOS party bloc and ally of former president Alejandro Giammattei, was among those to reject the wedding, writing in a statement that 'although the act may be protected under external jurisdictions, it clearly contradicts Guatemala's current legal framework.' According to the congressman, the properties where embassies are located 'are not foreign territory; they merely enjoy diplomatic privileges" and therefore are not a part of the Mexican state. He claimed considering them as such would "violate constitutional principles of sovereignty, territorial unity, and the rule of law.' Rodríguez, a former president of Congress, is sanctioned by the United States for obstructing anti-corruption efforts and undermining democracy in Guatemala. The office of progressive President Bernardo Arévalo said that under international law embassies like Mexico's "have territorial immunity and operate under the jurisdiction of the state they represent.' 'In this case, it is an activity carried out by the Mexican Consulate in Guatemala and aimed at Mexican citizens. Therefore, it is exclusively the responsibility of the Government of Mexico, through its diplomatic representation, to comment or speak on the matter," the embassy statement said. Still, debate only continued on, with Elmer Palencia, a congressman for the VALOR party, created by the daughter of a former dictator, called the marriage, 'not an act of inclusion, but a provocation.' "Out of respect for the host country, Mexico should refrain from that narrative. Guatemalan sovereignty and social institutions deserve that respect,' he said. Constitutional lawyer Edgar Ortíz contradicted the conservative politicians, saying the marriage doesn't violate Guatemala's sovereignty and complies with the Vienna Convention, which establishes that what happens on diplomatic premises 'are not subject to the host state's jurisdiction.' He noted that Guatemala's constitution establishes that the country will govern following international principles. 'In no way are Guatemala's laws being altered; the effects of this marriage will occur in Mexico, which does recognize same-sex marriage,' he said. 'Rather," he added, 'it is the Guatemalan lawmakers who are violating sovereignty, by interfering in Mexico's affairs and trying to tell them what they can or cannot do. That seems far more discourteous.'
35 minutes ago
Marines temporarily detain man while guarding LA federal building
LOS ANGELES -- Shortly after they began guarding a Los Angeles federal building Friday, U.S. Marines detained a man who had walked onto the property and did not immediately hear their commands to stop. The brief detention marked the first time federal troops have detained a civilian since they were deployed to the nation's second-largest city by President Donald Trump in response to protests over the administration's immigration arrests. The Marines were activated earlier this week but began their duties Friday. The man, Marcos Leao, was later released without charges and said the Marines were just doing their jobs. A U.S. Army North spokesperson said the troops have the authority to temporarily detain people under specific circumstances. He said those detentions end when the person can be transferred to 'appropriate civilian law enforcement personnel.' Leao's detention shows how the troops' deployment is putting them closer to carrying out law enforcement actions. Already, National Guard soldiers have been providing security on raids as Trump has promised as part of his immigration crackdown. Leao, a former Army combat engineer, said he was rushing to get to a Veterans Affairs appointment when he stepped past a piece of caution tape outside the federal building. He looked up to find a Marine sprinting toward him. 'I had my headphones in, so I didn't hear them,' Leao said. 'They told me to get down on the ground. I basically complied with everything they were saying.' Leao was placed in zip ties and held for more than two hours by the Marines and members of the National Guard, he said. After Los Angeles police arrived, he was released without charges, he said. A spokesperson for the Los Angeles Police Department said they responded to a call at the scene but weren't needed, and no charges were filed. 'I didn't know it was going to be this intense here," he said later. A U.S. official told the AP that a civilian had stepped over the line. He was warned they would take him down and they did, according to the official, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter. About 200 Marines out of the 700 deployed arrived in the city Friday, joining 2,000 members of the National Guard that have been stationed outside federal buildings this week in Los Angeles. Another 2,000 Guard members were notified of deployment earlier this week. Before the unusual deployment, the Pentagon scrambled to establish rules to guide U.S. Marines who could be faced with the rare and difficult prospect of using force against citizens on American soil. The forces have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control and standing rules for the use of force, the military has said. But the use of the active-duty forces still raises difficult questions. 'I believe that this is an inevitable precursor of things yet to come when you put troops with guns right next to civilians who are doing whatever they do,' said Gary Solis, a former Marine Corps. prosecutor and military judge. He said it's an example of Trump's attempt to unravel the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars active-duty forces from conducting law enforcement.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Takeaways from AP's investigation of US death benefits program for public safety officers
A federal program that provides benefits to families of police officers and firefighters who die and become disabled on duty is rapidly growing while facing criticism for increasing delays in deciding claims. Congress created the Public Safety Officers' Benefits program in 1976 to guarantee that the spouses and children of officers who put their lives on the line would receive financial support. But repeated expansions in eligibility approved by Congress, including three passed in the last five years, have made the program more popular and complex to administer. Critics say the program fails some families by taking too long to grant or deny benefits and making inconsistent rulings. An Associated Press analysis found that hundreds of families are waiting years to learn whether they qualify for payments, and more are ultimately being denied. For one widow, payment came just as she'd given up hope New Jersey widow Sharline Volcy learned this month that she'd been awarded the benefits, more than 3 1/2 years after her husband, Ronald Donat, died while training at the Gwinnett County Police Academy in Georgia. Volcy said she was grateful for the aid, which will provide some financial security and help pay for her two daughters to go to college. But she said the long wait was stressful, when she was told time and again the claim remained under review and ultimately saw her inquiries ignored. 'They told me they didn't know how long it would take because they don't have a deadline. That's the hardest thing to hear,' she said. 'I felt defeated.' She said lawyers didn't want to take the case, and a plea for help to her congressperson went nowhere. She said she'd given up hope and was lucky she had a job as an airport gate agent in the meantime. The benefits program isn't meeting its timeframe goal Volcy's experience isn't unique, and some cases take longer. As of late April, more than 120 claims by surviving relatives or disabled first responders have been awaiting initial determinations or rulings on their appeals for more than five years, according AP's findings. About a dozen have waited over a decade for an answer. The program has a goal of making determinations within one year but has not taken steps to track its progress, according to a recent Government Accountability Office report. But roughly three in 10 cases have not met that timeframe in recent years. As of late late April, 900 claims had been pending longer than one year. That includes claims from nearly every state. Republican lawmakers have introduced a bill to require the program to make determinations within 270 days. The denial rate for benefits is up, too Over the last year, the denial rate has increased, with roughly one in three death and disability claims getting rejected. Applicants can appeal to a hearing officer and then the director if they choose, but that isn't common. Many say they can't afford attorneys or want to get on with their lives. Justice Department officials, who oversee the program, say they're making complicated decisions about whether cases meet legal criteria. 'Death and disability claims involving complex medical and causation issues, voluminous evidence and conflicting medical opinions, take longer to determine, as do claims in various stages of appeal,' they said in a statement. Claims have doubled in recent years The program started as a simple $50,000 payout for the families of officers who were fatally shot on duty or died as a result of other violence or dangers. But Congress expanded the program in 1990 to cover some first responders who were disabled on duty, which made some determinations harder to reach. A 1998 law added educational benefits for the spouses and children of those deceased and disabled officers. Since 2020, Congress has passed three laws making many other types of deaths and disabilities eligible, including deaths related to COVID-19, deaths and injuries of those working rescue and cleanup operations after the September 2001 attacks, and responders who committed suicide under certain circumstances. Annual claims have more than doubled in the last five years, from 500 in 2019 to roughly 1,200 today. Critics say a key partnership creates a conflict of interest While many applicants have criticized the increasing delays, the leading group that represents the relatives of officers who die on duty has been silent. Critics say that's because the group, Concerns of Police Survivors, has a financial incentive not to criticize the program, which has awarded it tens of millions of dollars in grant funding in recent decades. The Missouri-based nonprofit recently received a new $6 million grant from the program to for its work with deceased officers' relatives, including counseling, hosting memorial events, educating agencies about the program and assisting with claims. The group's founder and retired executive director, Suzie Sawyer, said she was warned many years ago that fighting too hard for claimants could jeopardize its grant funding. But current spokesperson Sara Slone said advocacy isn't the group's mission and that it works 'hand in hand' with PSOB to assist applicants and provide education about benefits. One widow's fight has been remarkable, supporters say Lisa Afolayan's husband died after a training exercise at the Border Patrol academy more than 16 years ago, but she's still fighting the program for benefits. An autopsy found that Nate Afolayan died from heat illness after completing a 1.5-mile test run in 88 degree heat, at a high altitude in the New Mexico desert. The program had awarded benefits to families after similar training deaths, dating back to an officer who died at an academy in 1988. But its independent investigation blamed Nate's death on sickle cell trait, a genetic condition that's usually benign but has been linked to rare exertion-related deaths in police, military and sports training. The program denied Lisa's claim and her subsequent appeals, arguing the death wasn't the result of heat along and didn't qualify. The program stood by its denial in 2024, even after a federal appeals court said it may have failed to adequately consider the weather's role and violated a law barring discrimination on the basis of genetic information.
