U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

31–120 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

WASTE AND INEFFICIENCY IN THE FEDERAL 

GOVERNMENT: GAO’S 2018 DUPLICATION REPORT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 26, 2018 

Serial No. 115–81 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://oversight.house.gov 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, Chairman 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Mark Meadows, North Carolina 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mark Walker, North Carolina 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Will Hurd, Texas 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan 

Greg Gianforte, Montana 

Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts 

Jim Cooper, Tennessee 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Jimmy Gomez, Maryland 

Peter Welch, Vermont 

Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

SHERIA CLARKE, Staff Director 

ROBERT BORDEN, Deputy Staff Director 

WILLIAM MCKENNA, General Counsel 

RICHARD BURKARD, Senior Counsel 

KILEY BIDELMAN, Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 26, 2018 .............................................................................. 1 

WITNESS 

The Honorable Gene Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United States, U.S. 

Government Accountability Office 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 5 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 6 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

WASTE AND INEFFICIENCY IN THE FEDERAL 

GOVERNMENT: GAO’S 2018 DUPLICATION 

REPORT 

Thursday, April 26, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Washington, DC 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Steve Russell presiding. 

Present: Representatives Russell, Duncan, Jordan, Sanford, 

Amash, Massie, Meadows, DeSantis, Ross, Walker, Blum, 

Grothman, Palmer, Comer, Mitchell, Norton, Maloney, Lynch, Cooper, Connolly, Kelly, Lawrence, Krishnamoorthi, Welch, and 

DeSaulnier. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The Committee on Oversight and Government Operations will come to order. 

Without objection, the presiding member is authorized to declare 

a recess at any time. 

This morning the Government Accountability Office released its 

eighth annual report on opportunities for the Federal Government 

to reduce duplication, overlap, and fragmentation, and to achieve 

other financial benefits. 

Over the course of eight years, the GAO has highlighted more 

than 300 areas of such waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government and recommended nearly 800 corrective actions. 

I first want to thank you, Mr. Dodaro, as well as your entire 

staff, for the excellent work that they do. This report provides the 

opportunity to highlight duplication and inefficiency throughout the 

government. Many of the issues that we will discuss today will lay 

the groundwork for future hearings and legislative action. The Federal Government will save an estimated $125 billion by 

2025 based on implementation of GAO recommendations to date. 

Through congressional action and actions by executive agencies, 52 

percent of GAO’s recommended corrective actions have been fully 

addressed and closed, but that does leave 48. 

The GAO’s annual report shows us persistent effort to address 

inefficiencies and resolve wasteful spending can collectively provide 

a significant benefit to the public. Fifty-two percent of actions addressed is a good start, but the other 48 percent need to be done. 

We could save billions more by taking action at just three agencies: the Department of Defense, the Internal Revenue Service, and 

the Department of Health and Human Services. Through GAO’s 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

annual reports, more than half of all corrective actions have been 

directed at these three agencies. Yet, all three have more than 40 

percent of recommended actions still open. 

For example, GAO estimates the Department of Defense could save more than $9 billion by identifying opportunities for consolidating or reducing the size of headquarters organizations. 

GAO also found that the IRS could save billions in fraudulent refunds by improving efforts to prevent fraud associated with identity 

theft. 

GAO has recommended the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services take steps to improve the accuracy and diagnostic coding 

practices for Medicare Advantage payments, which could result in 

savings of billions of dollars. 

GAO does find in this year’s report that the IRS has had some 

success in reducing millions of dollars of fraud by simply delaying 

the date for sending refunds while it verifies critical information. 

The committee would be interested in hearing more about this particular effort. 

The Federal Government has an obligation to taxpayers to avoid 

fragmentation and ensure effective program coordination across 

agencies. Disagreements over policy might lead to disagreements 

over appropriate spending, but wasting tax dollars because of a 

failure to coordinate is simply unacceptable. 

For example, GAO’s newly released report shows that the Department of Agriculture has an entire seafood inspection program 

to ensure the safety of domestic and imported catfish, while the 

Food and Drug Administration is responsible for the safety of all 

other seafood. Having a separate inspection program for one species of fish is an example of inefficiency we hope is an outlier. 

But if we are going to have this type of fragmented seafood inspection system, we expect close coordination, at a minimum, between the two agencies involved. Unfortunately, the GAO has 

found the two agencies are not coordinating well; in fact, do not 

even have common standards for public safety of the fish they inspect. 

All Federal workers must embrace their role as fiduciaries for 

the American public. Everyone should consider it part of their job 

description to avoid waste and ensure tax dollars are being used 

effectively. GAO’s annual report provides an important road map 

to tackling known waste and inefficiency. We know there is only so 

much GAO can do. It is up to agencies to take your recommendations to heart and to act on them, and it is up to us in Congress 

to act in many cases. 

But as we will hear, agencies need to take action more rapidly. 

In some cases, the solution to reducing overlap may be evident, but 

practical or political challenges may be an impediment. In other 

cases, an agency or Congress may lack basic information about 

whether a program is functioning as intended, and simply obtaining better data is a critical first step. 

We look forward to discussing why recommendations remain 

open for so long and what this committee can do to help the agencies gain greater efficiencies and avoid wasting tax dollars. I look 

forward to hearing from the Comptroller General today on ways to 

reduce wasteful spending where it has been identified, as well as 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

areas where agencies can take steps to avoid spending and duplicative waste in the future. 

I now recognize the Ranking Member of the committee, Ms. Eleanor Holmes Norton, for her opening statement. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to begin by indicating my appreciation for this very critical hearing, and I certainly want to thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for 

being here yet again to testify about what is now your eighth annual report on this very important issue. 

We sit here every year in the committee as the committee holds 

this hearing outlining the programs and the progress and the challenges we have. There have been, interestingly, different Chairs, 

and I suppose you haven’t seen Mr. Russell and me, since we are 

imposters for the moment, sitting in for the Chair and the Ranking 

Member, but you get the point that there have been with each of 

your reports different Chairs—Mr. Issa, Mr. Chaffetz. Mr. Gowdy 

is now the Chair, and there may be someone new. In fact, Mr. 

Gowdy is leaving the Congress, so there will be yet another Chair. 

But isn’t it important to note that we are always partners in these 

hearings. 

One constant we have noticed over these years is that the executive branch can certainly do better. I say this regardless of who is 

in the White House, regardless of who is President, and regardless 

of which political party she belongs to. I am sure my Republican 

colleagues would agree. 

However, in order to truly address these recommendations, we 

not only need a sustained commitment by the agencies involved, we 

also need sustained oversight from our own committee. Congress 

needs to follow up on these recommendations to ensure that the reforms are made. That is why today’s hearing is so important. 

For example, the Department of Defense is the largest agency in 

the Federal Government by far. It is probably the largest agency 

in the history of the world. We need it to be successful because it 

defends the country, our people, and our freedom. But the Department of Defense wastes a phenomenal amount of money. Every dollar that is squandered is a dollar that could be gone to help protect 

our troops, our service members who risk life and limb to protect 

us every single day. 

To be clear, there has been progress. In 2011, when GAO issued 

its first duplication report, it recommended several steps to improve the way the Department of Defense develops and acquires 

weapon systems. The Pentagon implemented several of these recommendations and, according to the GAO, saved approximately 

$16 billion from 2011 to 2015. That is a terrific example of how the 

process is supposed to work. 

Unfortunately, there are dozens of areas in which the Department of Defense could do much better. This year, GAO’s report 

says the Department of Defense still has 74 recommendations that 

remain open, some of them dating back to 2011. 

For example, the GAO made several recommendations for the 

Department of Defense to manage its commissaries more efficiently 

and reduce the size and staffing at various headquarters. Now, I 

understand that these may not be the most exciting issues, and 

they may not get headlines, but GAO reports that if the DepartVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:19 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\31120.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

ment of Defense fully implemented these recommendations, they 

could save the American taxpayers $11 billion. To me, if our committee played even a small role in achieving these savings, that 

could be something we could be proud of, because $11 billion is a 

lot of money. 

For these reasons, I would like to make a modest proposal, Mr. 

Chairman. After today’s hearing, I propose that our committee hold 

a follow-up hearing with the Department of Defense. Let’s work 

with the Department officials to determine what they are, in fact, 

doing to address these issues and what more can be done to allow 

them to operate more efficiently and save more like that $11 billion 

I just spoke of. 

This really is the core of our committee’s jurisdiction, and I hope 

we can make this happen. 

Mr. Dodaro, every year you and your talented staff provide us 

and the American people with a crucial service to make sure our 

tax dollars are spent wisely. So I want to, once again, thank you 

for your report and look forward to your testimony today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the gentle lady. 

I am pleased to introduce our witness, the Honorable Gene 

Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United States. Mr. Dodaro is 

accompanied by the following people from the GAO, from my left 

to my right, who will also be sworn in: Ms. Cathleen Berrick, Managing Director for the Defense Capabilities and Management Team; 

Ms. Barbara Bovbjerg, Managing Director of the Education, Workforce, and Income Security Team; Ms. Angela Nikki Clowers, Managing Director for the Health Care Team; Ms. Edda Emmanuelli 

Perez, Deputy General Counsel; Mr. Mark Gaffigan, Managing Director of the Natural Resources and Environment Team; Ms. Jessica Lucas-Judy, Director of the Strategic Issues Team; Ms. 

Michelle Mackin, Managing Director for the Contracting and National Security Acquisitions Team; Mr. J. Christopher Mihm, Managing Director for the Strategic Issues Team; Mr. Dave Powner, Director of the Information Technology Team; and Mr. George Scott, 

Managing Director of the Homeland Security and Justice Team. 

Welcome to you all. 

Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. So I would ask that you please stand and raise 

your right hand. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Mr. RUSSELL. The Chair will reflect that the witnesses answered 

in the affirmative, and please be seated. 

In order to allow time for discussion, please limit your testimony 

to 5 minutes. Your entire written statement will be made part of 

the record. 

As a reminder, the clock in front of you shows the remaining 

time during your opening statement. The light will turn yellow 

when you have 30 seconds left, and red when your time is up. 

Please also remember to press the button to turn on your microphone before speaking. 

It is now my pleasure to recognize the witness. Mr. Dodaro, 

please, we welcome your testimony. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

WITNESS STATEMENT 

STATEMENT OF HON. GENE DODARO 

Mr. DODARO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to you, Ranking Member, Ms. Norton, members of the committee. I am very pleased to be here today to present our eighth 

annual report. 

I am also very pleased to report that, based on the first seven 

years that we issued this report, we issued about 724 recommendations, 52 percent have been implemented, 24 percent have been 

partially implemented, and as a result of these actions there are 

financial benefits that have accrued or will accrue to the Federal 

Government of $178 billion. 

Now, most of these actions were due to the Congress taking action to pass legislation to deal with a number of issues that we had 

raised, and given Congress’ critical role, in the appendix to our testimony today are 58 open recommendations to the Congress that 

we have made that could result in savings of tens of billions of dollars in additional money. So I commend those to your attention, be 

happy to talk about them today. 

In the new report that we are issuing today, we have additional 

tens of actions, 68 new actions, that can be implemented. For example, overlap and duplication in the U.S. Defense Department 

distribution centers could be made that could save, by DOD’s estimate, $527 million over five years. There are tens of billions of dollars potentially that could be saved by treating low-level waste at 

the Hanford Repository with cheaper methods, and it could actually 

get the job done faster. Also at the Veterans’ Administration, there 

could be tens of millions of dollars in additional savings by consolidating their medical and surgical supplies purchasing program. 

Also at the Coast Guard, they have identified themselves a number 

of stations that could be closed that overlap with other stations 

within the same timeframe that could respond to search and rescue, and that could save them millions of dollars and improve their 

operations as well. 

So these are a few examples that we have. 

Now, we also, from our prior work, in addition to these new examples, have a number of outstanding examples that still need to 

be fully implemented, and they range from taking actions at the 

IRS and some other revenue options that could increase the revenue coming into the Federal Government through more efficient 

practices, and also save a lot of money, particularly in the Medicare 

area and in the Medicaid program, which is the fastest growing 

part of the Federal Government’s budget from a spending standpoint. 

So we are very pleased that you are holding this hearing. We appreciate the attention given to our work. My colleagues and I would 

be very pleased to respond to all questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Dodaro follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 31120.001

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. ET 

Thursday. Apri126. 2018 

GA0·18-498T 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Testimony 

Before the Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform, House of 

Representatives 

GOVERNMENT 

EFFICIENCY AND 

EFFECTIVENESS 

Opportunities to Reduce 

Fragmentation, Overlap, 

and Duplication and 

Achieve Other Financial 

Benefits 

Statement of Gene L. Dodaro 

Comptroller General of the United States 
7 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 31120.002

Why GAO Dld.l'his Study 

GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY AND 

EFFECTIVENESS 

Opportunities to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap, and 

Duplication and Achieve Other Financial Benefits 

What GAO Found 

GAO's 2018 annual report identlf!es 68 new actions that Congress or executive 

branch agencies can take to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 

government in 23 new program areas. For example: 

The Department of Defense (DOD) could potentially save approximately 

$527 million over 5 years by minimizing unnecessary overlap and 

duplication in its U.S. distribution centers for troop support goods. 

• The Department of Energy may be able to reduce certain risks and save 

tens of billions of dollars by adopting alternative approaches to treat a 

portion of its low-activity radioactive waste at its Hanford Site. 

• The Department of Veterans Affairs could potentially save tens of millions 

of dollars when acquiring medical and surgical supplies by better adhering 

to supply chain practices of leading hospitals. 

• The Coast Guard should close its boat stations that provide unnecessarily 

duplicative search and rescue coverage to improve operations and 

potentially save millions of dollars. 

Significant progress has been made in addressing many of the 724 actions that 

GAO identified from 2011 to 2017. As of March 2018. Congress and executive 

branch agencies have fully or partially addressed 551 (76 percent) of these 

actions. This has resulted in about $178 billion in financial benefits, of which 

$125 billion has been realized and at least an additional $53 billion is estimated 

to accrue. These estimates are based on a variety of sources that considered 

different time periods, assumptions, and methodologies. GAO estimates that 

tens of billions of additional dollars could be saved should Congress and 

executive branch agencies fu!!y address the remaining 365 open actions, 

including the 68 new ones identified in 2018. 

further steps are needed to fully address these remaining actions. For example: 

Congress and the Internal Revenue Service could realize hundreds of 

millions of dollars in savings and increased revenues by enhancing online 

services and improving efforts to prevent identity theft refund fraud. 

Medicare cou!d save $1 to 2 billion annually if Congress equalized the rates 

paid for certain health care services, which often vary depending on where 

the service is performed. 

DOD could achieve billions of dollars in savings aver the next several years 

by continuing to employ best management practices on its weapon systems 

acquisition programs. 

Congress could consider modifying how Medicare pays certain cancer 

hospitals to achieve almost $500 million annually in program savings. 

The Social Security Administration could help prevent the loss of billions of 

dollars by preventing overpayments to beneficiaries of the Disability 

Insurance program and improper waivers of beneficiaries' overpayment debt. 

Congress could consider modifying tobacco tax rates to eliminate significant 

tax differentials between similar products to address future revenue losses 

caused by manufacturers and consumers substituting tobacco products. 

Federal losses ranged from $2.6 to 3. 7 billion between April 2009 and 

February 2014. 

-------------United States Government Accountability Office 
8 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 31120.003

Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member Cummings, and Members of the 

Committee: 

The federal government faces an unsustainable long-term fiscal path 

based on an imbalance between federal revenue and spending, primarily 

driven by health care spending and net interest on the debt. 1 Addressing 

this imbalance will require long-term changes to both spending and 

revenue and difficult fiscal policy decisions. In the near term, however, 

opportunities exist to take action in a number of areas to better manage 

fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative federal agencies or programs; 

achieve cost savings; or enhance revenues. 

To call attention to these opportunities, Congress included a provision in 

statute for us to identify and report to Congress on federal programs, 

agencies, offices, and initiatives-either within departments or 

government-wide-that have duplicative goals or activities. 2 These 

reports are issued annually to the House and Senate. 3 

In our first seven annual reports issued from 2011 to 2017, we presented 

724 actions in 278 areas for Congress or executive branch agencies to 

reduce, eliminate, or better manage fragmentation, overlap, or 

duplication; achieve cost savings; or enhance revenue4 To date, 

Congress and executive branch agencies have partially or fully addressed 

551 (76 percent) of the actions we identified from 2011 to 2017, resulting 

in about $178 billion in financial benefits. We estimate that tens of billions 

more dollars could be saved by fully implementing our open actions. 5 

Our 2018 report, which we are releasing today, presents 68 new actions 

across 23 new program areas for Congress or executive branch agencies 

to reduce, eliminate, or better manage fragmentation, overlap, and 

duplication and achieve other financial benefits. 6 My testimony today 

Page 1 GA0~18-498T 
9 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 31120.004

describes (1) new issues identified in our 2018 annual report; (2) the 

progress made in addressing actions identified in our past reports; and (3) 

examples of open actions directed to Congress or executive branch 

agencies. 

My comments are based upon our 2018 annual report, as well as our 

update on the progress made in implementing actions that we have 

suggested in our previous annual reports. These efforts are based on 

work we previously conducted in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. More details on our scope and 

methodology can be found in the full report. 

Figure 1 outlines the definitions we use for fragmentation, overlap, and 

duplication for this work. 

Figure 1: Definitions of Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication 

Fragmentation refers to those 

circumstances in which more than 

Page2 

Duplication occurs when two or 

same beneficiaries. 

GA0·18-498T 
10 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 31120.005

New Opportunities 

Exist to Improve 

Efficiency and 

Effectiveness across 

the Federal 

Government 

Along with issuing our report and this statement, we are concurrently 

releasing the latest updates to our Action Tracker (see sidebar). Our 

tracker includes a downloadable spreadsheet (available in XLSX or CSV 

formats) that users can sort and filter based on their specific needs or 

interests. For example, areas and actions can be sorted by the year 

identified, mission area name, implementation status. and implementing 

entities (Congress or specific agencies). 

Over 25 of the 68 new actions we identified in our annual report concern 

fragmentation, overlap, or duplication in government missions and 

functions (see table 1 ). 7 

Table 1: New Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication Areas Identified 

Mission Area ~~-·---· ~~~~--c···· .. -.... ___ ,_,_,_, Agriculture 1. Imported Seafood Oversight: Improved coordination between the Food and Drug Administration and 

Defense 

the Food Safety and Inspection Service on the oversight of imported seafood would help the 

better manage fragmentation and more consistently protect consumers from unsafe drug 

2, Defense Distribution Centers: sY"minimlz!ng unnecessary overlap and duplication and more efficiently 

using its U.S. distribution centers to store and process goods for troop support, such as clothing and 

weapon the Department of Defense could potentiaHy save approximately $527 

million 

Page 3 GA0·18-498T 
11 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 31120.006

General 

government 

Health 

~~-------------

Homeland 

security/law 

enforcement 

Income security 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

Federal Use of Identity Theft Services: The offiCe of Management and Budget should explore options 

to address the risk that federal agencies may offer duplicative identity theft services ln response to data 

breaches, potentially saving millions of dollars annually in unnecessary expenditures. 

Graduate Medical Education Funding: The Department of Health and Human Services should 

coordinate with federal agencies, Including the Department of Veterans Affairs, to 

effectiveness and oversight of fragmented federal funding for physician graduate 

which cost the federal government $14.5 billion in 2015. 

VA Human Capital Challenges: The Veterans Health Administration should strengthen its human 

resources internal control practices and its employee performance management processes to address 

fragmentation across the agency and improve Its ability to serve veterans. 

Coast Guard Boat Stations: The Coast GU8rd should close its boat stations th8t_P_rOvlde·unneceSSari!Y·-

duplicative search and rescue coverage to improve operations and potentially save millions of dollars. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Security Program Management: By addressing 

security management structure, the Department of Commerce and the 

and Technology could improve their physical security program. 

Reviews of SSA Disability Appeals: The Social Security Administration should evaluate its quality 

assurance reviews of decisions on appealed disability claims, which cost at least $11 mH!ion in fiscal 

year 2016, to reduce or better manage overlap between the types of reviews. 

1o. SuppleiTI8rltaTSecurity Income: To better manage fragmentation in service delivefY:theSOClal-----

Secur!ty Administration should explore options for better connecting transition-age youth receiving 

Supplemental Security Income to vocational rehabilitation services. 

·int-;rnational -----·Ti-:-COffibafjng Wildlife Trafficking: Federal agencies that combat wildlife trafficking should Clarify roles--

affairs and responsib!!ities in Southeast Asia to better manage fragmentation and have more reasonable 

Training, 

employment, and 

education 

GAO i GA0·18-49BT 

assurance marshal the contributions of all 

STEM Education Programs: Meeting requirements to assess the 163 federal science, technology. 

engineering, and mathematics education programs could opportunities to better manage 

fragmentation and overlap and enhance the effectiveness portfolio. 

In addition. our 2018 report presents over 30 new opportunities for 

Congress or executive branch agencies to reduce the cost of government 

operations or enhance revenue collections for the U.S. Treasury across 

10 areas of government (see table 2). 

Page 4 GA0·18-49ST 
12 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 31120.007

Table 2: New Cost Savings and Revenue Enhancement Opportunities Identified 

Mission Area 

Defense-------- ----····-1-4·~-FOreiQnCUITerlCYFIUCtUation: The5epartment oi oefense needs to more efficiently and effectively manage 

foreign currency funds to potentially save millions of dollars. 

-15~-·s~·ppiy Operations at Military DepOts: The =o-ep_a_rtc-m-e-ntc-o-=f~D-ef:-e-ns_e_c_o_ulc:d-cim_p_r_ov-e-:t:-he-e-;ffi;:-;td.ency and 

effectiveness of supply operations at Army and Marine Corps depots and Navy shipyards and save tens of 

millions of dollars. ---------···--------------------------~c--c:--= 

Economic 16. fiscal Management of the Universal Service Fund: By addressing weaknesses in the management and 

development oversight of the Universal Service Fund, the Federal Communications Commission could eliminate at least $1 

million annually in fees paid to a private bank to manage investments. 

Energy -·-17~DOE;S-TfS""atrTIEmt of Hanfurd;g-c;;~AC"iiVity Waste: The Department of Energy may be able to reduce 

19. 

certain risks and save tens of biltions of dollars by adopting alternative approaches to treat a portion of its 

radioactive waste. 

Tax Fraud and Noncompliance: The lntemal Revenue Service should fully assess the benefits and costs of 

using its existing authority to hold additional taxpayer refunds as we!! as extending the date for releasing 

those refunds until it can verify wage information on most returns later in the filing season, which could protect 

Health 20. 

---~-::-~millions of dollars annuaii~----·---··---·---------··---------------·==:-::-::=--:­ Premium Tax Credit Improper Payments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Internal 

Revenue Service could save money by strengthening controls over the Premium Tax Credit for health 

insurance. which cost about $35 bil!lon for fiscal Y,,-e_a_r 2-:-0-c1:-:7-:-. c-----;:-;,-:--"7:---c21. VA Medical Supplies Procurement: The Department of Veterans Affairs could potentially save tens of 

millions of dollars when acquiring medica! and surgical supplies by better adhering to supply chain practices 

Homeland 22. -;:---;-c-c----;c;;~o:-f 1"-eac:_dc:_inc;:g';hospita_l_s-;. :--;;;-=--oo--:=-;c -~------;-;= ~~---~-------------· Bureau of Prisons Health Care Costs: The Federal Bureau of Prisons could improve the oversight and 

security/law management of its health care costs to more efficiently and effectively acquire health care goods and services 

enforcement 

Income security 23. 

and potentially save millions of dollars annually. 

Railroad Retirement Board Continuing Disability Reviews: The Railroad Retirement Board could reduce 

overpayments by millions of dollars and better target resources data and 

reallocating resources used for high~risk continuing disability reviews to 

In addition to these new areas, we identified seven new actions that relate 

to six existing areas presented in our 2011 to 2017 annual reports (see 

table 3) 8 

appendix 1Vof GA0~18~371SP for more information. 

Page 5 
13 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 31120.008

Table 3; New Actions Added to Existing Areas in 2018 

Mission ---c--c--------------------------------------------------- New action (area name links to Action Tracker) Year introduced 

(year links to report) 

Agriculture Crop Insurance: In July 2017, GAO identified a new action that Congress can take 

to reduce the cost of delivering the federal crop insurance program by hundreds of 

2013 

millions of dollars 

Congress and 

Executive Branch 

Agencies Continue to 

Address Actions That 

Span the Federal 

Government 

We monitor the progress that Congress and executive branch agencies 

have made in addressing the issues we identified in each of our last 

seven annual reports. As shown in table 4, Congress and executive 

branch agencies have made consistent progress in addressing many of 

the actions we identified from 2011 to 2017. As of March 2018, 376 (52 

percent) of the actions we identified from 2011 to 2017 have been fully 

addressed. See our online Action Tracker for the status of all actions. 

Page6 GA0-18-498T 
14 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 31120.009

Total 

GAO I GA0·18-4(18T 

Benefits Due to Actions 

Taken by Congress and 

Executive Branch 

Agencies 

Total 

(100%) (100%) (100%) 

Note: Due to rounding, the total percentages do not add up to exactly 100 percent 

The progress Congress and executive branch agencies have made in 

addressing our open actions has resulted in $178 billion in financial 

benefits, including roughly $125 billion in financial benefits from 2010 

through 2017, with at least an additional $53 billion in estimated benefits 

projected to accrue in 2018 or later. 9 Table 5 highlights examples of these 

results. 

Page 7 
15 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 31120.010

PageS GA0-18·498T 
16 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 31120.011

"Pub. L No. 113-79, § 1101, 128 Stat. 649.658 (2014). 

bPub. No. 111-23. 123 Stat 1704 (2009). 

'26 U.S.C. § 6426(b)(6). 

0

Pub. L. No. 113-67, § 601(b). 127 Stat. 1165, 1187 (2013) 

aBipartisan Budget Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-74. § 1101. 129 Stat. 584, 625-638 (2015). 

While not all actions resuh in financial benefits to taxpayers, all of our 

suggested actions, when implemented, can result in other benefits-for 

instance, they make government more efficient or eliminate, reduce, or 

improve management of fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative 

programs. For example, such benefits can be seen in the results of our 

work on the government's acquisition of space programs. For over two 

decades. we and others have reported on problems caused by 

fragmented leadership and a lack of a single authority in oversight of 

these multibillion dollar programs. 

In 2012, we made a recommendation aimed at strengthening leadership 

and authority of space systems acquisitions. In response, in 2017 the 

President revived the National Space Council to provide a coordinated 

process for developing and monitoring the implementation of national 

Page 9 GA0-18-498T 
17 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 31120.012

Action on Remaining 

and New Areas Could 

Yield Significant 

Additional Benefits 

space policy and strategy. Separately, in the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, Congress made changes to 

certain DOD space leadership positions and required the department to 

conduct a review and identify a recommended organizational and 

management structure for its national security space components, and 

submit related reports. The act also required DOD to contract with a 

federally funded research and development center not closely affiliated 

with the Air Force to develop a plan to establish a separate military 

department responsible for DOD national security space activities. 10 

These actions could reduce fragmentation and speed decision making in 

the development of a substantial investment in space systems. 

While Congress and executive branch agencies have made progress 

toward addressing the 798 total actions we have identified since 2011, 

further steps are needed to fully address the 365 actions that are partially 

addressed or not addressed. 11 We estimate that tens of billions of dollars 

in additional financial benefits could be realized should Congress and 

executive branch agencies fully address open actions. In addition to 

producing financial benefits, these actions make government more 

efficient; improve major government programs or agencies; reduce the 

risk of mismanagement, fraud, waste, and abuse; and increase 

assurance that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent. 

Congress has used our work to identify legislative solutions to achieve 

cost savings, address emerging problems, and find efficiencies in federal 

agencies and programs. Our work has contributed to a number of key 

authorizations and appropriations. In addition, congressional oversight of 

agencies' efforts has been critical in realizing the full benefits of our 

suggested actions addressed to the executive branch, and it will continue 

to be critical in the future. 

In our 2011 to 2018 annual reports, we directed 100 actions to Congress, 

including the 3 new congressional actions we identified in 2018. Of the 

100 actions, 58 remain open (11 of which were partially addressed and 

47 were not addressed or new) as of March 2018. Table 6 highlights 

areas with significant open actions directed to Congress. Appendix I has 

a full list of all open congressional actions. 

'

0Pub. No. 115·91. § 1601(c), (d).131 Stat.1283, (2017). 

11 The 798 total actions include the 68 new actions identified in this report and six new 

actions that were addressed before this report was issued. 

12!n calculating this 

which considered periods and 

and methodologies. These estimates are 

and when they are 

Page 10 
18 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 31120.013

Table 6: Examples of Areas with Open Actions Directed to Congress 

Annual report 

(year links 

to 

Page 11 
19 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 31120.014

Significant Open Actions 

Directed to Executive 

Branch Agencies 

In our 2011 to 2018 annual reports, we directed 698 actions to executive 

branch agencies, including 65 new actions identified in 2018. Of the 698 

actions, 307 remained open as of March 2018. Of these open actions, 

164 were partially addressed and 143 were not addressed or new. While 

these open actions span the government, a substantial number of them 

are directed to seven agencies that made up 83 percent-$3. 7 trillion-of 

federal outlays in fiscal year 2017 and have the largest number of open 

actions (see figures 2 and 3). 

Figure 2: Fiscal Year 2017 Outlays and Number of Open Actions since 2011, by 

Agency 

Homeland Security (1.4%) 

Notes: Number of open actions includes actions that are partially addressed and not addressed. 

1

'0ther agencies mclude all federal agencies with fiscal year 2017 outlays not listed above 

Page 12 GA0-18-49ST 
20 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 31120.015

As shown in figure 3, seven agencies have at least 25 open actions. 

Figure 3: Number of Not Addressed and Partially Addressed Actions since 2011, by Agency 

Internal Revenue Sen~!ce 

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Management and Budget 

Social Security Admintstmtion 

Department of Veterans Affairs 

Department of the Treasury 

Department of Commerce 

Other entities8 

Department ofthe Interior 

Department of State 

Department of Transportation 

Environmental Protm::tlon Agency 

Department of Agriculture 

Department of Energy 

Department of Justice 

Off'tce of Personnel Management 

Small Business Administration 

Department of Housing and Urban Development 

General ServicesAdm!nistratlon 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

National Science Foundation 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Department of Labor 

Number of actions not addressed 

38 

Pag~ 13 GA0·18-498T 
21 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 31120.016

Defense Resources 

The following sections highlight examples of open actions across those 

seven major agencies. 

In our 2011 to 2018 reports, we directed 176 actions to DOD in areas that 

center on DOD's effectiveness in providing the military forces needed to 

deter war and to protect the security of the United States. As of March 

2018, 74 of these 176 actions remained open. DOD represented about 14 

percent of federal spending in fiscal year 2017, with outlays totaling about 

$635.5 billion. Our work suggests that effectively implementing these 

open actions, including those related to areas listed in table 7, could yield 

substantial financial benefits and improve DOD's effectiveness. 

In our 2011to 2018 reports, we directed 111 actions to the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) in areas that contribute to HHS's 

mission to enhance the health and well-being of Americans. HHS 

provides health coverage for over 145 million Americans through three 

principal programs-Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health 

Insurance Program-as well as the health-insurance marketplaces. HHS 

also operates other public health-related agencies such as the Food and 

Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and 

the National Institutes of Health. 

HHS represented about 27 percent of the fiscal year 2017 federal budget, 

with outlays totaling about $1.2 trillion. As of March 2018,56 of HHS's 

111 actions remained open. Our work suggests that effectively 

implementing these actions, including those related to areas listed in table 

8, could reduce costs, provide services more efficiently, and yield 

substantial financial benefits. 

Page 14 GA0-18-498T 
22 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 31120.017

2016 Medicaid Payments to Institutional Providers (Area 29): CMS should take steps to Improve the oversight of state 

Medicaid payments to institutional providers and better ensure that the federal government does not provide funds 

for excessive state payments made to certain providers, which could result in savings of hundreds of millions of 

In our 2011to 2018 reports, we directed 91 actions to the Internal 

Revenues Revenue Service (IRS) in areas that contribute to effectively and 

efficiently providing high-quality service to taxpayers and enforcing the 

law with integrity and fairness to aiL As of March 2018, 38 of these 91 

actions remained open. The funding of the federal government depends 

largely upon IRS's ability to collect taxes legally owed. Our work suggests 

that effective implementation of our open actions, including those related 

to areas listed in table 9, could increase revenues through better 

compliance or reduce costs. 

Page 15 GA0-1849ST 
23 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 31120.018

1-TICI':ti\J<'I"IC><!(' Of 

Homeland Security 

Operations 

In our 2011 to 2018 reports, we directed 79 actions to the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) in areas that contribute to the effective 

implementation of its mission. In fiscal year 2017, DHS spent about $63.6 

billion, about 1 A percent of federal outlays. As of March 2018, 31 of the 

79 actions to DHS remained open. Fully implementing these actions, 

including those related to areas listed in table 10, could result in financial 

benefits and substantial improvements in agency operations. 

Table 10: Examples of Areas with Open Actions Directed to the Department of Homeland Security 

Implementation of 

Government-Wide Policies 

and Performance 

Many of the results the federal government seeks to achieve require the 

coordinated effort of more than one federal agency, level of government, 

or sector. OMB manages and coordinates many government-wide efforts. 

In our 2011 to 2018 reports, we directed 66 actions to OMB in areas to 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government-wide programs 

and activities. As of March 2018, 30 of the 66 actions to OMB remained 

open. Fully implementing these actions, including those related to areas 

Page 16 GA0·18-498T 
24 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 31120.019

listed in table 11, could yield significant financial benefits and substantial 

program improvements across government. 

Table 11: Examples of Areas with Open Actions Directed to the Office of Management and Budget 

Administering to 

Retirees and Citizens with 

Disabilities 

In our 2011 to 2018 reports, we directed 32 actions to the Social Security 

Administration (SSA) in areas that contribute to SSA providing financial 

assistance to eligible individuals through Social Security retirement and 

disability benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments. As 

of March 2018, 27 of these 32 actions remained open. 

In fiscal year 2017, SSA spent about $1 trillion, roughly 22 percent of 

federal outlays. While most of SSA's funding is used to pay Social 

Security retirement, survivors, and disability benefits from the Old-Age 

and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Disability Insurance Trust 

Fund, our work suggests that effective implementation of these actions, 

including the examples listed in table 12, could result in significant 

benefits. 

Page 17 GAQ.18-498T 
25 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 31120.020

Table 12: Examples of Areas with Open Actions Directed to the Social Security Administration 

2012 Socia! Securlty Benefit Coordination (Area 27): Benefit offsets for related programs help reduce the potentia! for 

overlapping payments but pose administrative challenges. 

In our 2011 to 2018 reports, we directed 54 actions to the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) in areas that contribute to VA effectively and 

efficiently achieving its mission to promote the health, welfare, and dignity 

of all veterans by ensuring that they receive medical care, benefits, and 

social support. As of March 2018, 25 of these 54 actions remained open. 

In fiscal year 2017, VA spent about $183.0 billion-about 4 percent of 

federal outlays-for veterans· benefits and services. Our work suggests 

that effective implementation of these actions, including those related to 

areas listed in table 13, could yield cost savings and efficiencies that 

would improve the delivery of services to the nation's veterans and their 

families. 

Table 13: Examples of Areas with Open Actions Directed to the Department of Veterans Affairs 

Area description (area number links to Action Tracker} 

-~·---~-----vA HumiOC3PitaiCh3iie09eS(Afia-6); Th-eVeteransHea!th-ACfrTITrl.istration should strengthen its human 

resources internal control practices and its employee performance management processes to address fragmentation 

across the agency and improve its ability to serve veterans. 

2018 VA Medical Supplies Procurement (Area 21}: The Department of Veterans AffairS (VA-)COU!d-POtE;ntiSiiYSaYe tens of millions of dollars when acquiring medica! and surgical supplies by better adhering to supply chain 

Page 18 GA0-18-498T 
26 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 31120.021

GAO Contacts 

We will continue to look for additional or emerging instances of 

fragmentation, overlap, and duplication and opportunities for cost savings 

or revenue enhancement. Likewise, we will continue to monitor 

developments in the areas we have already identified. We stand ready to 

assist this and other committees in further analyzing the issues we have 

identified and evaluating potential solutions. 

Thank you, Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member Cummings, and 

Members of the Committee; this concludes my prepared statement. 

would be pleased to answer questions. 

For further information on this testimony or our April 26, 2018 report. 

please contact J. Christopher Mihm, Managing Director, Strategic Issues, 

at (202) 512-6806 or mihmj@gao.gov, and Jessica Lucas-Judy, Director, 

Strategic Issues, at (202) 512-9110 or lucasjudyj@gao.gov. Contact 

points for the individual areas listed in our 2018 annual report can be 

found at the end of each area in GA0-18-371SP. Contact points for our 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs offices may be found on the 

last page of this statement. 

Page 19 GA0-18-498T 
27 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 31120.022

Appendix I: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

In our 2011 to 2018 annual reports, we directed 100 actions to Congress, 

of which 58 remain open. Of the 58 open congressional actions, 11 are 

partially addressed and 47 are not addressed or new, as of March 2018. 

See table 14. 

Table 14: Open Congressional Actions Related to Fragmentation, Overlap, Duplication, Cost Savings, or Revenue 

Enhancement, 2011~2018 

Page 20 GA0-18-498T 
28 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 31120.023

Energy 2018 

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

DOE's Treatment 

of Hanford's Low 

Activity Waste 

(Area 17) 

that the Department of the 

move into the Housing Finance Agency 

Markets (Hardest Hit Fund). Implementing the actions in this area could result in 

$4,8 billion in savings, according to GAO analysis. 

The 

Congress should consider clarifying, in a manner that does not impair the regulatory 

authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Washington, 

Department of Energy's (DOE) authority at Hanford to determine, in consultation 

with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, whether portions of the supplemental low~ 

activity waste can be managed as a waste type other than hlgh~level waste. 

Implementing this action could result ln savings of tens of billions of dollars from 

2018 to 2061. to GAO 

Page-21 GA0·18-498T 
29 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 31120.024

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Page 22 
30 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 31120.025

Mission 

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Congress should consider establishing a formal comprehensive oversight 

mechanism for consumer product safety agencies to address crosscutting issues as 

well as inefficiencies related to fragmentation and overlap such as communication 

and coordination challenges and jurisdictional questions between agencies. Different 

types of forma! mechanisms could include, of 

understanding to formalize and 

or interagency work As a 

Congress should consider expandi0g the mandate that partnerships and S 

corporations electronically file their tax returns in order to cover a greater share of 

filed returns. lmp!ementlng the actions in this potentially enable IRS to 

collect hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. according to GAO 

to corporations. 

payments require reporting< lmc,lenlenlina 

could result in tax revenues of billions of dollars, 

information from the Joint Committee on Taxation. -----------------------------

Page 23 GA0·18-498T 
31 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 31120.026

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Page 24 
32 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 31120.027

Mission 

Medicare 

19) 

Appendix l: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

providers in a manner consistent with a 

enrollees into TRICARE·s regional 

managed care program or other health care Implementing 

this action could save millions of dollars 2022, according 

to GAO analysis. 

Congress should consider requiring Medicare to pay these prospective payment 

system (PPS)~exempt cancer hospitals (PCH) as it pays PPS teaching hospitals, or 

provide the Secretary of HHS with the authority to otherYIIise modify how Medicare 

PCHs. and provide that a!! forgone outpatient payment adjustment amounts be 

to the Supplementary Medica! Insurance Trust Fund. Implementing this 

action could result in savings of almost $500 million annually, according to GAO 

Congress should consider requiring the CMS Administrator to clarify permissible 

methods of calculating non-DSH supplemental payments. 

This action is partially addressed. !n January 2017, a H.R. 

in the House of Representatives which. 

guidance to states that ident!fies permissible 

supplemental providers. However, as 

enacted to require CMS to issue such 

taken some action, including issuing a State 

states to submit non-DSH supplemental 

contract to review Medicaid sur>o>ememal 

Page 25 
33 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 31120.028

Mission report 

2011 

Area 

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Action summary 

Congress should consider requiring the CMS Administrator to require states to 

submit an annual independent certified audit verifying state compliance with 

pennisslble methods for calculating non-DSH supplemental payments. Implementing 

these three actions could result in savings in the hundreds of millions of dollars, 

~-~~~~according to GAO analy~~~~----·~--·--·---.--.. -·-·-·-.. ------·--·-----·--------------

Congress could exempt from the budget neutrality requirement savings attributable 

to policies that reflect efficiencies occurring when services are furnished together. 

This action is partially addressed. The of 2016 

revised the payment reduction for the professional 

services from 25 percent to 5 percent beginning on January 

expenditures attributable to this multiple 

the budget neutraHty provision. MPPRs 

to payments for the technical con1oo,nennor 

ophthalmology services continue to 

neutrality for 2016. Unless Congress from 

requirement savings realized from the imc,lenlenlati<1n 

that reflect efficiencies 

not accrue to the 

Hires 

Implementing this action could result in savings of millions of dollars annually, 

according to GAO analysis. 

Page 26 
34 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 31120.029

by 

Mission 

effective governance structure 

and resolving define and articulate a common 

and 

Page 27 GA0-18-498T 
35 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 31120.030

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Mission report Area 

-----~2c:0""13o----D-iss_e_m-in_a_tiorl-of 

Technical 

Research Reports 

(Area 10) 

Action summary --c;---~-c--:;-~~ccc:~~~o-c=~=-:-c:--­ Congress should consider examining the appropriateness and viability of the fee~ 

based model under which the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) 

for disseminating technical information to determine whether the 

should be continued. 

Page 28 
36 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 31120.031

Mission report 

·Social services 2012 

Sm1r""' GAO i GA0·18.-4>18T 

(102726) 

Appendix 1: Open Congressional Actions, by 

Mission 

Area 

Housing 

Assistance {Area 

28) 

Action summary 

Congress may wlShtQ.Co/15Tder~equiring the DepartnlerltSOf Agricu!i"UrS(US"C)A)- and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to examine the benefits and costs of 

merging those programs that serve similar markets and provide similar products. As 

a first step, Congress could consider requiring USDA and HUD to explore merging 

their sing!e~famHy insured !ending programs and multifamily portfolio management 

programs, taking advantage of the best practices of each and ensuring that targeted 

populations are not adversely affected. 

Page 29 GA0·18-498T 
37 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 31120.032
38 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 31120.033

GAO's Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Connect with GAO 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its coi1SIITU11on:a~ 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to he1p Congress make Informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO's website (https:llwww.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to nu!JS:JJW\NW.gao.gov 

and select ·'E-mail Updates." 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO's actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in co! or or black and white. Pricing and 

information is posted on GAO's website, Jttos:ll'wv.IW.JQacJ.acJv/cJrd,srirlo.tltm 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check. or money order. Cali for additional information. 

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and You Tube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E~rnall Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at https:llwww.gao.gov. 

Contact: 

Website: https:llwww.gao.gov/fraudneUfraudnet.htm 

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Orice Williams Brown, Managing Director, WilliamsO@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW. Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548 

James-Christian Blackwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov. (202) 512-4707 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington. DC 20548 

~') 

Please Print on Recycted Paper. 
39 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you for that. We do appreciate all of the 

hard work. 

I will be holding my questions to the end, but it is my pleasure 

to now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Meadows, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you to the whole team. Let me just say, each and every 

hearing, not just this annual hearing, but each and every oversight 

hearing where we have input from GAO, it improves the quality of 

the hearing, but it also improves the quality of the information. So 

to you, Mr. Dodaro, and your entire team that is here today, a 

heartfelt thank you from members of Congress for handling government accountability in a non-partisan way. I have wanted you to 

be partisan, and you have pushed back. You won’t let me do that, 

and that is good because I think that gives confidence to both sides 

of the aisle. So I just want to say thank you. 

You mention a number of unimplemented requests, 58. Was that 

your testimony? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, 58 open matters for congressional consideration. We have 324 recommendations to the executive branch. 

Mr. MEADOWS. And so in doing that, we are talking about billions of dollars, not millions of dollars. Is that correct? 

Mr. DODARO. Tens of billions. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay, tens of billions. So can you find any reasons, other than complacency, why Congress and the Administration shouldn’t implement at least 10 percent of those recommendations? 

Mr. DODARO. If I didn’t think all of them shouldn’t be implemented, I wouldn’t make them, Congressman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So you would say even a higher threshold than 10 to 20 percent of those should be implemented. You 

would suggest all of them. 

Mr. DODARO. Over time, over three-quarters of our recommendations are implemented in a four-year period of time. So the recommendations in this area are a little lagging behind the overall 

rate that we have for our recommendations. My goal and aspiration 

was that we could get at least to 75 percent, if not 100 percent. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Well, you know well that what I will do 

is I will take a few of your things, and then we will start working 

on those and applying pressure. What would be helpful to me, and 

I want to drill down on the IRS for a second because it seems like, 

according to some of the testimony, that there are a number of 

really high-profile dollars that can potentially be saved, and I see 

that you are getting a new witness to the table. So let me ask what 

is the IRS doing right and wrong? I think there is also the suggestion that if they just delayed refunds for a while, they could save 

dollars. So I would ask you to help us understand that a little bit 

better. 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, sure. Let me give you a broad picture, and 

then I will ask Jessica to give a little bit more details. 

First of all, we think the IRS, they need better information technology systems, no question about that. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
40 

Mr. MEADOWS. So for the record, I am on my side of the aisle 

willing to give them additional appropriations to do exactly that. I 

think we have a bipartisan agreement on that, but go ahead. 

Mr. DODARO. But it has to be managed properly, and we have 

made a number of recommendations, because they have wasted investments in the past in IT, years ago. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

Mr. DODARO. Secondly, they need a customer service strategy. 

They really don’t have a comprehensive strategy. They need a 

strategy for online services that could improve voluntary compliance, as well. Congress could help IRS by lowering the threshold 

for electronic filing for partnerships and corporations, also allowing 

more W–2 information to be submitted electronically from employers. They would help them match faster. They wouldn’t have to 

delay the timeframe, as well. So we have a number of specific recommendations in those areas. 

The number of our recommendations are actually incorporated in 

the package of bills that the House has just passed on IRS reform, 

but there are others that weren’t included that should be included 

in those areas. 

I will ask Jessica to—the operative word for calling another witness up here is drill down. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay, and we have 30 seconds for you to drill 

down before I get gaveled down, but go ahead. 

Ms. LUCAS-JUDY. I will talk just about the tax fraud and noncompliance that we have said the IRS should assess the benefits 

and the costs of holding all taxpayer refunds, not just the ones that 

are claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit and the ACTC. So later 

in the filing season, IRS’ own analysis found that they could have 

potentially prevented an additional $35 to $350 million in fraudulent payments due to identity theft refund fraud just by adjusting 

the holding period for about two weeks. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Wow. All right. 

I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

It is my privilege now to recognize the gentle lady from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Dodaro, thank you again for being here. My questions are 

going to relate to your report on the warfighting equipment, the 

transfer to military depots and shipyards, and your view that they 

are not being run as efficiently as they could be. 

Under BRAC, which is the Base Realignment and Closure round 

in 2005, all of the services were required to transfer to the Defense 

Logistics Agency a function that we don’t usually associate with the 

military, retail supply and storage and distribution functions as 

their depots by 2011. 

First, would you explain why this transfer was considered to be 

efficient for the government? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. The Defense Logistics Agency, DLA, has an 

up-to-date information technology system that can allow real-time 

information in terms of the inventory drawdowns to trigger the 

orderings, so it is a much more efficient process. And the Air Force 

and the Navy, except for one exception, did transfer their responVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:19 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\31120.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
41 

sibilities. But the Army and the Marines have not, and that is 

what —— 

Ms. NORTON. And that is where I am going to focus. So these are 

light functions in the Defense Logistics Agency rather than spreading these functions among various parts of the military, as I understand it. It is kind of classic efficiency. But your report states that 

the Army and the Marine Corps have not yet transferred these 

functions to the Defense Logistics Agency, and neither have the 

Navy shipyards. The initial efforts to transfer these programs at 

the Air Force Logistics Centers and the Navy Fleet and Readiness 

Centers related, we are told, to personnel reluctance to trust the 

DLA. 

So first, let me know what kinds of personnel we are talking 

about. For example, are we talking about uniformed personnel 

being reluctant to transfer a function? 

Mr. DODARO. I am going to ask Ms. Berrick, our Defense expert, 

to answer that question. 

Ms. BERRICK. Thank you for your question. The reluctance is 

coming primarily from the civilians who manage this process at the 

maintenance depots within the Army and the Marine Corps. Now, 

the actual BRAC recommendation was that the services transfer 

the storage distribution and supply operations to DLA to achieve 

efficiencies. The Army and the Marine Corps did transfer storage 

and distribution. They have not transferred supply. They have 

raised concerns that retail supply operations are very interwoven 

with maintenance operations. The Army also raised the point that 

they recently developed a new information system that provided 

greater visibility to their supply operations. They were reluctant 

—— 

Ms. NORTON. Do you regard their pushback for the reasons you 

named as worthy of your consideration? Or do you think they 

should continue, as the other agencies have done? 

Ms. BERRICK. I think they should continue. Some of these same 

concerns were raised by the Navy and the Air Force Air Logistics 

Centers and maintenance facilities, that they overcome. For example, they were concerned that they wouldn’t have visibility over 

supply operations. DLA actually gave them access to their information system that enabled that visibility. They saw savings of $710 

million as a result of that consolidation. 

Ms. NORTON. These are non-uniformed personnel. Would they too 

be transferred? I mean, I am trying to get at their reluctance and 

what you can do about their reluctance. 

Ms. BERRICK. It does require transferring individuals from the 

services to the Defense Logistics Agency. That is part of what the 

transfer would entail. It also requires using DLA’s business processes for managing the supply operations, versus the services. 

Ms. NORTON. We have some of these outstanding since 2011. 

What can you do to—since you still stand behind the efficiency of 

these transfers, what can be done to speed these transfers? 

Mr. DODARO. There are two things. One is to try to prevail upon 

the Defense Department themselves, which for the last three years, 

every year I send each head of a major department agency in the 

Federal Government a list of open GAO recommendations, and I 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
42 

prioritize which ones that I believe still should be implemented. So 

number one is working directly with the Defense Department. 

Number two, an alternative route, is when we go to the Congress 

and there are requirements put in the Defense authorization bill 

or the Defense appropriations bill that requires them to implement 

GAO’s recommendations. Both of those bills this year included 

GAO recommendations that needed to be implemented, and that is 

how some of the savings that I reported, the $178 billion—the services, for example, were duplicating combat uniforms, which complicated even joint operations. It had an operational effect, as well 

as DAR effects. But the Defense authorization bill required them 

to deal with that issue. So we are trying both avenues, working 

with the agencies and working with the appropriate committees in 

the Congress. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much. We might even have a follow-up hearing to press this, since they are making some progress 

and may need a little more of a nudge. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the gentle lady. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Blum, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BLUM. Thank you, Chairman Russell. 

Mr. Dodaro, good to see you again. Thank you for being here. 

Shortly after I was elected three years ago, I held a town hall 

back in Iowa, and I was explaining what committees I was on, and 

I mentioned I was on the Oversight Committee and that our job 

was to investigate and bring some daylight to waste, fraud, and 

abuse. An elderly farmer raised his hand and he said, ‘‘Waste, 

fraud, and abuse. Aren’t those the three branches of government?’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BLUM. True story, but not because of your department, that 

is for sure. There is a lot of cynicism out there is my point, and 

for the most part it is well deserved. 

I come from the private sector, and in the private sector failure 

is penalized. However, in Washington, D.C., in the swamp here, 

there is no penalty for failure. Would you agree with that? 

Mr. DODARO. Not completely. I do think a number of people are 

removed or lose their job over time, perhaps not as many as should, 

and some agencies are forced to take action when they need to. But 

by and large, the incentives are not aligned properly to reinforce 

proper behavior and penalize inappropriate behavior or inefficiencies or waste. So I agree with you, with some exceptions. 

Mr. BLUM. That was one of my comments, that the incentives in 

this town seem to be perverse to me. For example, what incentive 

is there for a government employee or an agency to save taxpayers 

money? What incentive is there? Is there any today? 

Mr. DODARO. What we do is prevail upon people’s commitment 

to public service and to be good stewards, and the reward system, 

like, for example, at GAO, I reward our people based upon what 

we are able to do to save people money, save taxpayers money. So 

there has to be a good reward system in place to do that. It doesn’t 

exist throughout the Federal Government, though. 

Mr. BLUM. In the private sector, if you save the company a million dollars, you probably get a percentage of that. You get some 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
43 

large bonus, and well worth it. I don’t think we have that in the 

Federal Government, but what if we did? Is that an idea worth exploring? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, definitely. I think there should be positive reward systems in place, and theoretically the performance management systems in agencies should do that. 

Mr. BLUM. Should, they should. 

Mr. DODARO. They should. 

Mr. BLUM. Do they? 

Mr. DODARO. I am not positive in all cases it is at the level which 

you would expect. I am most familiar with our own, and I know 

at GAO it works that way. But I am not sure I could say that about 

the rest of the Federal agencies and departments. We have said 

that some of the performance management approaches in the Federal Government, the civil service system, are outdated. It is not 

aligned properly with modern compensation systems, modern classification systems. It needs revamped, and that could certainly be 

part of that revamping. 

Mr. BLUM. Let’s go to 60,000 feet, if we could, for the last minute 

and fifty seconds that I have. Let me ask you this question: Do you 

feel that our agencies are being held accountable? Do you feel that 

the management in those agencies are being held accountable, and 

that the employees in those agencies are being held accountable? 

And if you are going to say somewhat, give me a grade. Where are 

we at? Is it getting better, or is it getting worse? Because the Federal Government is getting so big, seriously, I question if it can be 

managed anymore. 

Mr. DODARO. I definitely think it can be managed. Some agencies 

are better than others, okay? But by and large, I think that much 

more could be done to hold agencies accountable. I think this is 

Congress’ responsibility. I think there needs to be more oversight 

hearings. I have said this a number of times. Where we see positive 

change, we see the Congress’ hand has to be in this area, and that, 

to me, is very important. 

Now, we work also with OMB to try to create change within the 

executive branch, and I meet with the heads of departments and 

agencies as well to try to institute change. But really, the best incentives I have seen to hold people accountable over the years is 

good, rigorous congressional oversight. That will produce change, 

with or without legislation I might add. 

Mr. BLUM. Some folks back in Iowa comment that, oh, you hold 

some great hearings, really good stuff, tough questions. What happens after that? What happens after the tough questions? 

Mr. DODARO. There is not enough follow-up. 

Mr. BLUM. How do we change that? 

Mr. DODARO. I think you have to be clear. I have been involved 

in some things over the years where there is a series of hearings, 

you know? I remember in the Senate when initially we were having 

questions about the personnel security clearances that were not 

being done timely. They held hearings either every quarter or 

every six months. So there was a series. People knew from the 

agencies that it wasn’t like, gee, I just have to get through this 

hearing and it is going to be over with, they will forget about it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
44 

You had follow-up hearings. You had follow-up meetings with the 

agency officials. GAO can help in the follow-up activities as well. 

So there has to be a commitment to follow through until you 

know that the problem is solved. It is not just bringing—— 

Mr. BLUM. That is where we come in. 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, I agree. Congress does a good job at shining 

a light, but then as soon as the light goes away, the problem 

doesn’t get much better. 

Mr. BLUM. My time has expired, but hats off to you as a lone 

voice from the private sector. I think you are doing an amazing job. 

Your agency does an amazing job, and I, for one, am so glad that 

you are here today. 

Mr. DODARO. Thank you very much. 

Mr. BLUM. I yield back the time I do not have. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

It is my privilege now to recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Cooper, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for being here today. This report is 

so important. 

I would like to ask two Defense questions, so you may want to 

get your Defense person up here. 

Mr. DODARO. All right. 

Mr. COOPER. First, in your appendix, you mention an unmet recommendation from 2013 about joint basing. I am on the Armed 

Services Committee, and I may need some help from my colleagues 

on both sides of the aisle on this. The Armed Services Committee 

has banned the Pentagon from even thinking about another BRAC 

round, even though the Air Force has testified to us that as much 

as 25 percent of their facilities are surplus, unneeded, a burden for 

the taxpayers, but they are unable to do anything to adjust that. 

So, I wasn’t sure if your recommendation from 2013 on joint basing was specifically on that topic. You mentioned the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, but you don’t quite nail the fact 

that Congress has stopped the Pentagon from trying to be efficient. 

We don’t even allow them to think about that. 

Mr. DODARO. There are two things that we have, and I will ask 

Cathy to explain in more detail. One is the excess infrastructure 

that they have. That is actually on the high-risk list that we keep 

as far as the Federal Government. So we believe they need to do 

a better job in that area. We have also had many recommendations, and most of them have not been implemented yet, as to how 

the BRAC process could be improved, because they really didn’t realize all the benefits that they promised in the initial activities in 

those areas. 

So if Congress decides that the next BRAC round, to go forward 

with that, I would suggest that that be conditional on implementing GAO’s recommendation so you get better cost estimates 

and you get fewer changes along the way between the recommendations from BRAC and actually what gets implemented by 

the Defense Department, because you have a several-year timeframe in there. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
45 

Secondly, on joint basing, this was an initiative by the Department, and what we found there was that it was to get common 

standards among the services. So instead of getting a common 

standard, they took the highest standard that any service had and 

raised everything up to that level in order to get buy-in. So they 

weren’t really able to get, in any discernible way, cost savings. 

Cathy? 

Ms. BERRICK. With respect to the joint basing recommendations, 

our overall position was that DOD didn’t embrace that 2005 BRAC 

recommendation to try to achieve efficiencies with joint basing. A 

key objective of that initiative was to achieve some significant savings. But with the way they developed the common standards, as 

Gene mentioned, with the way they approached the effort, they 

really weren’t designing it to achieve the savings that were possible. 

So we made a series of recommendations to DOD to re-look at 

their strategy for joint basing and take advantage of some opportunities for additional savings. DOD had concurred with that recommendation routinely. So we ended up recommending to the Congress that they direct DOD to take that action. 

With respect to BRAC generally, DOD has, I think, over the last 

seven years, requested a BRAC round. They, in fact, did not request it in their most recent budget estimate. But setting BRAC 

aside, a point that we have routinely made with the Defense Department is they do have some existing authorities to realign and 

close facilities under Title X, separate from BRAC. It does require 

a congressional notification if it exceeds certain thresholds. But 

DOD has never gone through the process to take any significant action that would actually require congressional notification. 

One of the new areas we mention in this year’s report is the proliferation of distribution centers within the Department. There are 

256 of them. DOD itself identified it can achieve significant savings, in the hundreds of millions of dollars, closing those, but they 

are not taking action on that. They are saying in the absence of a 

BRAC, they are not willing to use their existing authorities to do 

that. 

Mr. COOPER. Thank you. In my short time remaining, you mentioned that the transition to the new M-code GPS system will involve retrofitting 716 weapon systems with cards, and the Pentagon has no plan right now in place to unify the design and implementation of those cards, and most are not even funded. So this is 

a pretty crucial function, and we can’t let any of these weapon systems be down because of a lack of communication with the satellite, and yet the Pentagon isn’t planning sensibly to meet the 

needs. So what do we do? 

Mr. DODARO. I think that the Congress should require them to 

have a unified approach to this area. I mean, even replacing a 

small amount of these receiver cards—in the receiver card, the Mcode is to be a stronger code, to be encrypted, and it makes sense 

to do this. But what we have seen is there hasn’t been a good coordination between actually putting the satellite up and having the 

ground system that could receive the signals and then transmit 

them to these receiver cards in the weapon systems. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
46 

This report this year focuses on those receiver cards, and you are 

right, it has to get to so many weapon systems. They don’t have 

a way to share lessons learned, to get common requirements. And 

what will happen, as we have seen in the past, without proactive 

leadership, the costs will proliferate, and then the Congress will be 

put in a box to say, well, either you give us the money or this investment is not going to work. I think Congress requiring them to 

have a better coordinated, better management approach on this 

could forestall a lot of problems down the road and certainly contain costs in a much better way. 

Mr. COOPER. Thank you very much. 

I see my time has expired, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the gentleman. 

I now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Walker, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Dodaro, we thank you for your continued service to our country and appreciate your willingness to serve in this capacity. 

It is my belief that improved coordination between the Food and 

Drug Administration and the Food Safety and Inspection Service 

on the oversight of imported seafood would help the agencies better 

manage fragmentation and more consistently protect consumers 

from unsafe drug residues. So I have a couple of questions here. 

In your opinion, does it make sense to have a separate program 

at USDA responsible for the food safety of one species of imported 

fish when FDA is responsible for regulating safety for all other 

types of fish and seafood? 

Mr. DODARO. We initially recommended that that not be funded, 

but Congress overrode us and decided that it needed to be implemented. So our approach now is Congress made that decision; at 

least we can make sure that they are coordinating effectively and 

operating together, and that is the focus of our recommendation at 

this point in time. 

Mr. WALKER. I thank you. I believe you found an example of the 

USDA setting a safety standard for a drug residue at a level that 

was 20 times higher than FDA’s standard. Should we be concerned 

about the safety of imported catfish with these kinds of numbers? 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. I think that we saw a lot of inconsistency between 

the FDA and FSIS. You give the example of the 20 times number. 

That is the genesis of our recommendation, and we are concerned 

that there is a discrepancy between the two agencies. 

Mr. WALKER. Mr. Dodaro, you touched on this a little bit earlier 

in your comments. GAO has recommended better coordination. 

What are the current methods for sharing information between the 

agencies, and what change does GAO think needs to be implemented moving forward? 

Mr. DODARO. They definitely need to have a Memorandum of Understanding to reach agreement on what drugs are tested. We also 

point out in the report that one of the agencies is testing 76 different drugs, another one only 27 different drugs. So they need to 

come to some agreement on this, and typically the mechanism for 

that agreement is a Memorandum of Understanding with written 

roles and responsibilities, written agreement to come to a common 

testing approach and sharing of information to make sure that it 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
47 

is consistent with the industry and also an efficient use of Federal 

resources and that they have the proper people to do that. So that 

is what we are recommending that they do. 

Mr. WALKER. Anything that you —— 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. Just the commitment to do what they have talked 

about doing through some of these MOUs. 

Mr. WALKER. Do you believe there are steps Congress should 

take to ensure the effective coordination that has some teeth to 

this? Is there something that you would recommend? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, yes. I mean, there should be reporting requirements that Congress puts on the agencies to report their progress 

in implementing GAO’s recommendations. I would very much support that and would think it would be needed. A number of times 

agencies will tell us that they are going to implement the recommendation, but we don’t close it until they are actually finished 

and have something in place, and sometimes these things get implemented and sometimes they don’t because of bureaucratic resistance to change in a lot of cases, to be honest. So I think Congress’ 

oversight and have them to report their progress until it is fully 

implemented would be warranted. 

Mr. WALKER. Was there something else? 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. And you could keep asking us to look at it, and 

we will come up with those examples to put the light on it. 

Mr. WALKER. As long as there are people like Mr. Meadows and 

others, I imagine those questions will continue to come forward. 

Once again, thank you. I have notes in front of me for my four 

questions. You have no notes in front of you but continue to answer 

the questions. Thank you for being so well informed. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

It is now my privilege to recognize the gentle lady from Illinois, 

Ms. Kelly, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

And thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for your exceptional efforts in GAO 

to compile the 2018 duplication report. 

Back in 2014, Congress passed the Veterans Access, Choice, and 

Accountability Act to help the Department of Veterans’ Affairs address serious problems with appointment scheduling, unreliable 

data on wait times, and inadequate coordination of veteran care between VA and non-VA medical providers. The Choice Act established the Commission on Care, which concluded in June 2016 that 

the care by the Veterans’ Health Administration is inconsistent 

from facility to facility. Several of the Commission’s recommendations focused on the VA’s workforce. GAO’s latest report found that, 

ironically, the Veterans’ Health Administration’s overall workforce 

problems could be traced to its own HR staff decreasing in size, not 

being adequately overseen, and lacking any assessment of skill 

gaps and training. Do you agree? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. 

Ms. KELLY. In turn, the GAO report said the attrition in HR offices has led to difficulties in hiring for clinical positions in medical 

centers and increases in administrative errors. Is that also your 

understanding? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
48 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, that is what we reported and made recommendations to address that issue. 

Ms. KELLY. On a positive note, the GAO report states that as of 

January 2018, staff at the Department of Veterans’ Affairs had developed and began using an online competency tool to identify competency gaps in the Human Resource offices at the medical centers. 

The Department has also established clear lines of authority to require HR staff to complete a competency assessment. However, the 

Department still must use this data to address competency gaps in 

Human Resource offices. Is that also your understanding? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, it is. I am pleased they are taking some action, 

but they need to follow through, just as we talked about in the 

prior exchange with the Congressman. 

Ms. KELLY. As of a year ago, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs 

said it was in the early stages of revising its performance management system. This revision included effective use of both monetary 

and non-monetary awards to promote employee performance. It 

also explored the use of the e-performance information technology 

system to appraise employee performance. 

Can you give us an update as to the Department’s efforts since 

then? 

Mr. DODARO. They really haven’t taken much action since then 

according to our team. They have not in that area. They moved in 

the other area that you mentioned, but they haven’t moved in that 

area. 

I think it is very important. The exchange I had with Congressman Blum talked about the incentives and disincentives, and really 

you need to have a good performance management system that is 

up to date in the Veterans’ Health Administration. So I will urge 

them when I meet with the new Secretary. I met with Secretary 

Shinseki, Secretary McDonald, Secretary Shulkin multiple times to 

try to urge them to implement GAO’s recommendations. I will continue to press in this area. We designated veteran health care a 

high-risk area in 2015, so I and our team are dedicated to follow 

up. 

Ms. KELLY. So, just their lack of follow-up is what you think will 

improve performance —— 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, and right now they need leadership. I mean, 

they need leadership. I am very worried about the Veterans’ Administration. They have some of the most entrenched management 

problems in the Federal Government. That is why we put them on 

the high-risk list. They are making efforts to come up with a plan 

now, but it has been three years since we put them on the list. 

They really haven’t finalized a good plan to come off the list. We 

are working with them. They are making progress. I don’t want to 

say that they are not. But there needs to be more urgency to deal 

with their problems over there, and there are key vacancies not 

only now at the Secretary level but also some of the Undersecretary positions. The CIO is open. 

So I think Congress should be very concerned and focused on getting proper leadership over there, and then make sure that there 

is effective follow-up to resolve their problems. I think our veterans 

deserve no less. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
49 

Ms. KELLY. I definitely agree, and I guess that was my next 

question, what more can Congress do —— 

Mr. DODARO. A lot, a lot, and I would be happy to work and have 

our team work with the Congress in doing this. We have a great 

deal of knowledge. Nikki Clowers is here. She is our expert in the 

Veterans’ Administration. We have been working with the VA committees as well. But I think Congress’ role in this whole area is 

very pivotal. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you for your honesty, and we need to take you 

up on your offer. 

I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentle lady yields back. 

It is my privilege to recognize the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. 

Palmer, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PALMER. Mr. Dodaro, first of all, let me thank you and your 

staff for the outstanding work and cooperation on some critical 

issues that you have brought to this committee’s attention on numerous occasions that is dealing with improper payments, and also 

the tax gap. In that regard, I would like to ask you what is the 

last year that the IRS reported on tax gap? 

Mr. DODARO. I think it was based on 2008. Yes, 2008 information, and that estimate was a net tax gap of a little over $400 billion as an annual. 

Mr. PALMER. It is $406 billion. 

Mr. DODARO. Right. 

Mr. PALMER. They don’t report annually. It is on a periodic basis. 

Is there any rhyme or reason that determines when they report 

that? 

Mr. DODARO. No. You know, initially, years ago, they didn’t report an estimate. It was a GAO recommendation that required 

them that they finally implemented to come up with it. In all fairness, it requires a lot of effort and time, and they certainly haven’t 

had excess resources lately to do it. But I think it could be done 

on a more regular basis. Right now, it is just dependent on them. 

I mean, Congress could set a reasonable interval for them to update that information, particularly given the changes that have 

been made in the tax law recently. I would hope after a period of 

time and some experience, they update it. 

Mr. PALMER. I would appreciate it if you would add some recommendations on what that timetable ought to be, and if you 

would provide them to my office. In that regard, that is one of the 

points that I have been raising about the tax reform, that one of 

the main objectives was to reduce the complexity of the tax code 

in order to reduce the uncollected taxes, to reduce the tax gap. You 

have made numerous recommendations that I think we need to implement, the IRS needs to implement, and Congress needs to exercise oversight over it, because it is one of these things where I tell 

people we have moments here when I think my head will explode, 

and when we talk about $800 billion deficits, and half of that could 

have been erased by collecting all the taxes, plus the interest on 

that that we are having to borrow, that drives me nuts, along with 

my next topic, which you are well familiar with, and that is improper payments. We are, again, very fortunate to have the expertise of the GAO available to try to work out a reasonable solution. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
50 

I want to talk a little bit about some specifics on the improper 

payments. The premium tax credit improper payments, we don’t 

really talk about that a lot. You have a number in your report of 

$35 billion. Is that savings, or is that the net cost? 

Mr. DODARO. That is the total cost. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. Do you have any idea of what we might expect in savings? 

Mr. DODARO. No, not really, yet. They really haven’t done a lot 

of the proper assessments and have much experience in that area 

yet to come up with any estimates. I think it would be good to 

press them to move forward in that area, and then congressional 

encouragement would be helpful. 

Mr. PALMER. When we talk about encouragement, people generally interpret that to mean negative. I think we ought to take a 

more positive approach to this on the whole spectrum of improper 

payments, and you touched on this earlier with the IRS with their 

outdated IT systems. That is a problem throughout the Federal 

Government. 

If you look at the improper payments, and this is the work that 

your staff has done, over 20 percent of the problem is antiquated 

data systems. I think that lends itself to other errors on the administrative side, which is another 30-something percent. So if we 

could deal with this in a more positive way, and one of the things 

that I am thinking about doing is that the savings that we get by 

eliminating improper payments might go back into replacing antiquated IT systems, then I think it needs to be done Federal Government-wide so that you have the interfaces that are necessary. 

It is one of the problems with Social Security. What do you think 

of that? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, I think that is a very good idea. The systems 

are a key part of this, particularly if you wanted to prevent things 

from happening up front. But there also has to be good data sharing to go along with that. You can have great systems, but if they 

are not allowed to share data—like, for example, one of our recommendations is that the Congress direct the Social Security Administration to give the full death master file to the Treasury Department. I mean, it doesn’t make any sense to me that we have 

a ‘‘Do Not Pay’’ list, and we have one department that has the most 

comprehensive list of deceased people that won’t give it to the 

Treasury Department because they believe it can’t be shared. Another example is in our Railroad Retirement Board. They are using 

earnings data that is two or three years old from IRS, and they 

need access to the new hire database. 

So I think a combination of proper incentives, and I am glad to 

see the Administration set a goal for reducing improper payments, 

and they have IT modernization on the President’s management 

agenda, but there has to be sharing of information to go along with 

it to really, I think, have a comprehensive package. 

Mr. PALMER. Well, my goal for reducing improper payments is 

considerably higher than the Administration’s. I have had this conversation with OMB Director Mulvaney, who is a dear friend. 

But again, I commend you. I am one of these odd birds that looks 

forward to the GAO reports. There are some people who look forVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:19 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\31120.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
51 

ward to the next great novel. I look forward to the next great GAO 

report. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

It is my privilege now to recognize the gentle lady from Michigan, Ms. Lawrence, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Thank you. 

I just want to say publicly, Mr. Dodaro, thank you and your staff 

for putting together this report. As my colleagues have mentioned, 

it is impressive that your recommendations have led to $178 billion 

in taxpayer savings over the past years. 

One example that I really want on the record is one of the past 

recommendations that has helped to make a difference to the people in my state. In 2016, the GAO recommended that the Treasury 

relocate up to $2 billion from an underused program and move it 

toward the hardest hit fund. As a result of that, it went a long way 

for cities like Detroit to remove blight and to take care of the 

neighborhoods. So I want you to really have that sense of what you 

do is making a difference, and I just want to say thank you to your 

staff. 

One of the areas, Mr. Dodaro, is IRS for me, as well. Major 

changes to the tax laws will hit everyone in 2019, and I want to 

know if the IRS is helping families understand the impact, and especially low-income families. There are needed taxpayer assistance 

and outreach, and there is a proposed $23 million cut to IRS. Can 

you describe GAO’s current efforts to monitor the IRS and what it 

plans to do over the next years to ensure that the community has 

the support that they need in low-income areas? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. For a number of years we have had an outstanding recommendation that IRS needed to improve their customer service strategy. We are looking at their efforts to do that 

now and the implementation of the new tax law. Ms. Jessica LucasJudy here is our expert in the IRS, and I will ask her to elaborate 

on what we are doing. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Okay. Thank you. 

Ms. LUCAS-JUDY. For customer service, we have said that they 

need to have a comprehensive strategy, and they have put together 

a draft. So we are looking at the extent to which it lays out specific, 

realistic targets for phone service and correspondence and, more 

importantly even, that it lays out a road map for them of what resources are needed to get them there. 

In addition, as Mr. Dodaro said, we are also looking at their implementation of the changes to the tax law. As you know, there are 

quite a few things that the IRS has to do. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Quite a few. 

Ms. LUCAS-JUDY. And so we are looking at how they are communicating those changes, how they are making decisions about 

prioritizing. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. So, with all the vacancies that you outlined and 

the challenges that we see, if the cuts are made to IRS, when do 

you alert Congress that we are getting ready to step into a crisis? 

I understand the yearly report, and you even stated that our response rate is that Congress has addressed about 42 percent of 

your recommendations. How do you bring to our attention are the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
52 

committees looking at the recommendations? And specifically, what 

is the impact if we don’t act on these recommendations? You give 

your report, but we are only looking at 42 percent of them. 

Mr. DODARO. I think, first of all, we try to alert the Congress 

through our reports. We testify before a wide range of congressional committees every year. We brief congressional staff every 

day. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Every day. 

Mr. DODARO. Every day on our work. I mean, we have close 

working relationships with virtually all the committees and the 

Congress, about half of the subcommittees that we do work for. We 

do about 800 requests a year from the Congress. So we are constantly trying to alert the Congress to emerging problems and challenges and encouraging them to implement our recommendations. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. How do you alert Congress? 

Mr. DODARO. Pardon me? 

Ms. LAWRENCE. What format do you use to alert Congress? 

Mr. DODARO. Well, we have two formats. We have this annual report. We have regular reports that we issue virtually every day on 

specific topics. Last year we issued about 700 reports to the Congress, with over 1,400 recommendations. And then every two years 

we issue a high-risk list of the highest risk in the Federal Government. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. That is what I wanted to hear. 

Mr. DODARO. And if there is something that I think rises to that 

level out of the interim two-year period, we do a special announcement. We just did one in January on personnel security clearances 

across the government. I am very concerned. There are 700,000 

backlog of clearances that are not being made. It is not clear how 

the transfer is going to work between OPM and DOD on a number 

of issues. They don’t have quality standards yet in place, metrics 

for the security clearances. The timing is still not good in terms of 

them getting it done in a timely manner. So I think this is a big 

national security issue, and I put it on the high-risk list on the 

cycle. 

The last high-risk list I raised the 2020 Census. I am very concerned —— 

Ms. LAWRENCE. I am very concerned. 

Mr. DODARO.—about the 2020 Census. So we do regular hearings 

on that, as well. 

At GAO, we try to keep the Congress very informed about our 

views on risk and what needs to be done to address the risk. Now, 

the recommendations that have not been implemented, quite frankly, we are leaving tens of billions of dollars on the table in savings 

that could be made. I think the Congress could be more aggressive 

in their oversight of the agencies to ensure effective implementation of our recommendations, and I would encourage that, and 

GAO will support you. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Thank you. My time is up. I just want to say to 

the Chairman that the high-risk list should be something that is 

a priority for us to bring forward in our hearings, as well. Thank 

you. 

Thank you so much. 

Mr. DODARO. You are welcome. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
53 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentle lady yields back. 

I now recognize the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Comer, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. COMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

If time permits, I have questions pertaining to two vastly different subjects. The first would be the Social Security disability appeals process. Then second would be about STEM. I don’t think you 

can get further apart than those two issues, but I am going to try 

in my 5 minutes to address those two issues with questions. 

First of all, in Kentucky, to say that the Social Security disability 

program is abused would be an understatement. We have certain 

counties in Kentucky where you drive down the road and every 

billboard is a disability insurance law firm. Some of those counties 

have as many as one in four adults between the ages of 18 and 63 

that are drawing full disability, and then we have counties in Kentucky where that number is smaller than 1 out of 20. So it just 

kind of depends on the location in the state and the number of people that are involved in that industry in Kentucky. 

But one of the things that we deal with in my congressional office is, obviously, case work. We have people that are truly disabled 

that we are trying to get through the process, and the appeals process sometimes takes a long time, and these are legitimate people 

who really are disabled who have paid into the Social Security system that are trying to get their disability insurance. They get frustrated because they know people that have probably abused the 

system in the past. It is just one of the things that we spend a lot 

of time with my caseworkers dealing with. 

I know that the Social Security Administration has reviewed 

this, and in 2017 the GAO recommended that SSA systematically 

evaluate its quality assurance reviews and take steps to reduce or 

better manage unnecessary overlap among them. 

My first question is, there are five separate quality review processes. Why does SSA have five separate quality assurance review 

processes? 

Mr. DODARO. That is the question we asked and asked them to 

take a look at. We don’t think they need all of them. 

Barbara Bovbjerg is our expert in this area, and actually she is 

our expert in STEM too. So while you have two different topics, we 

have one expert to cover it for you. 

Mr. COMER. That is great. 

Mr. DODARO. Barbara? 

Ms. BOVBJERG. We were surprised that they had five different 

processes across a couple of different components at SSA. They all 

have the same overall goal, which is to make the appeals result 

more accurate and to help the administrative law judges do a better job. They look at the cases a little differently, but they sample 

in roughly the same way. So they can actually be looking at the 

same case in more than one quality assurance review. 

So we thought they should really look at that. It is not a lot of 

money in the context where we are talking about Defense and VA 

health. It is $11 million. But we thought that they could coordinate 

and potentially improve the quality assurance process as they do 

that. They have taken some steps. They have created another component in which four of these five are in that component. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
54 

Mr. COMER. So are they currently taking steps to review the 

process? 

Ms. BOVBJERG. They are taking steps. They are not there, but 

they have just begun. 

Mr. COMER. How else could the Social Security Administration 

resources better utilize in terms of processing disability claims? 

Ms. BOVBJERG. They have put a lot of emphasis at the appeals 

level because what you are seeing is it can take more than 600 

days now that people are kept waiting for an appeals decision, and 

that is a long time when you are not working and waiting. 

Mr. COMER. And legal fees are piling up, as well. 

Ms. BOVBJERG. Yes, and they have done things—for example, 

they are taking cases—they may take a case from Kentucky, and 

if the Kentucky administrative law judge group is really, really 

backlogged, they will send that case to another ALJ group to try 

to move things along. We actually have a report coming out on that 

in the next couple of months. 

They are doing a number of things. But what happens is they 

focus on appeals, and they take their eye off the initial decisionmaking ball, and then people start waiting longer for an initial decision. So we are trying to get them to look at it holistically. 

Mr. DODARO. And, Congressman, we would be happy to give you 

a comprehensive list of every recommendation we have for the Social Security disability process, including appeals and initial 

claims. This has been on our high-risk list—I just mentioned that— 

for well over a decade. So I think this could be an important issue. 

And it is not only Social Security, it is VA as well. That is on our 

high-risk list, too. I just testified at their appeals reform hearing 

that we had. So we will give you a comprehensive list. 

Mr. COMER. Okay. Thank you. 

My time has expired, so I didn’t get to ask the questions about 

STEM, but I appreciate your interest and look forward to getting 

that report, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DODARO. I would be happy to give the answers to the STEM 

for the record, or meet with you separately, Congressman. 

Mr. COMER. Sure. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. We may have some 

time for follow-on questions, if you would like. 

I now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, General Dodaro. Good to see you again. Let me say, I 

think the high-risk list is one of the most important things you all 

do in terms of giving us guidance and throwing down red flags in 

areas of concern, and we want to try to redouble our efforts to work 

with GAO and your team to address those issues. 

One of the issues, of course, that was on that list that I took seriously when I came to Congress, among many, was the whole issue 

of how the Federal Government manages and procures information 

technology. I am just wondering, in terms of duplicative cost—and 

I see you have been joined by Mr. Powner, who has worked diligently with us on implementation of legislative vehicles designed 

to address that concern you have highlighted, and we are going to 

do more. We are drafting a bill right now that we will be working 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
55 

with you on, and we want to make sure that scorecard captures 

progress, or lack thereof. 

But could you talk a little bit about the role of IT in terms of 

duplication, duplicative cost? Because we look at legacy systems, 

people look and say, my God, we are spending $96 billion a year 

on IT in the Federal Government, but so much of that is designed 

to simply keep Band-Aids and wire together to keep legacy systems 

running, but also there are duplicative costs. You have multiple 

email systems, some of which don’t talk to each other. You have 

all kinds of software, some of which is outdated and so forth. 

So I just wondered if you could, either one of you or both of you, 

talk about that, because that is something we can do something 

about tomorrow, in theory. We are trying our best to create a legislative framework to push that along, but I would like to hear your 

thoughts on that. 

Mr. DODARO. That is definitely a potential area for billions of dollars in savings. Data center consolidations—there were over 12,000 

data centers when we started this initiative in OMB and working 

with the Congress before. Several thousand have been closed. By 

the end of this year, hopefully over 7,000 will be closed. That is billions of dollars in savings. But even on the existing data centers, 

they are not fully utilized if you look at their performance metrics, 

both from a server standpoint as well as the facility itself, software 

inventories, new systems, consolidations. 

I will ask Mr. Powner, who knows the details, to give you a little 

bit more details. But I think this is a target-rich area for the Congress, and we are poised to work with you to try to identify more 

opportunities for savings. 

Dave? 

Mr. POWNER. Representative Connolly, if you start with data centers, we have saved about $4 billion to date, and your oversight has 

been instrumental with follow-up hearings, with the scorecard. We 

have had five, and there is another one scheduled next month. 

But when you really look at data center consolidation, there is 

a lot more on the table, as Comptroller General Dodaro mentioned, 

billions more. DOD alone, when we started data center consolidation, had an estimate of $4.8 billion in savings. They have only 

saved a couple of hundred million. So there is a huge opportunity 

there. 

When you mentioned the duplication, we saved about $2 billion 

on duplicative email HR systems and the like. We still have a long 

way to go there. We are well aware, based on the work we are 

doing for you on individual requests and your scorecard, that there 

are many more opportunities to reduce those duplicative commodity systems. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I do want to say I think this is a great example 

of what you were talking about in response to my colleagues, the 

collaboration actually, not just guidance from but hands-on collaboration from GAO and this committee in trying to effectuate positive 

change that frees up dollars, saves dollars, and makes the government more secure and more efficient. And I want to applaud Mr. 

Powner and you, Mr. Dodaro, for taking that lead and doing it. I 

think that is really terribly important. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
56 

Mr. DODARO. It is also a good example, if I might add, Congressman, of the importance of congressional follow-up. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Yes. 

Mr. DODARO. And I think compliments are due to you, Mr. Hurd, 

Mr. Meadows, Ms. Kelly, for your constant follow-up in these activities, and that is what can be yielded, billions in savings, more 

efficient operations, but it requires that commitment. We are happy 

to do our part. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I would just end with a thought. I was listening 

to one of the questions about how do you keep us informed on this 

list, and it may be that we may want to look at a mid-year reminder. You gave us 70 recommendations. We have acted on 30. 

There are still 40 more to go. We estimate that could save $10 billion, because our attention span up here, we have been accused of 

having a very short attention span, and I think that is very unfair, 

but a little reminder list might help. So we might want to work on 

some mechanisms so we keep those issues in front of us, because 

I don’t think it is always willful ignoring of the recommendations. 

I think sometimes we just, in the hustle and bustle of life in this 

town, we lose focus. 

Mr. DODARO. We would be happy to do that, and I have also encouraged—we do update the list with the beginning of each new 

Congress, and I have encouraged particularly oversight committees 

to have a series of hearings on the individual areas that I think 

would be helpful. But this year we started, and I wanted to do updates on a couple of critical areas. So we are due to have an update 

on the cyber security issue, critical infrastructure protection, protecting personally identifiable information, later this summer. We 

will make sure to do that. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. We look forward to working with you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

I am pleased now to recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome back, Mr. Dodaro. You have been doing great work for 

a long time, and we really appreciate it. There is a definite harmony between the work on this committee and the work that your 

folks do. 

I want to raise an issue regarding retroactive classification. We 

talk about the information we get in order to make decisions that 

are necessary. In Afghanistan, we have come upon this change that 

was introduced by the Trump Administration recently where the 

information that we usually get from the Special Inspector General 

for Afghan Reconstruction used to send us publicly available information quarterly about troop size, about the Afghan National Army 

performance assessments, casualties, operational readiness, actual 

and authorized strength figures. We had these ghost units. We are 

paying 75 percent of the freight in Afghanistan right now. We give 

them $5 billion a year, American taxpayer money, to pay their 

troops, and we cannot discuss publicly and the public doesn’t get 

information about the fraud that was going on there for a very long 

time, and may still be going on. We have people on the ground 

there, but we don’t get information on the trained and untrained 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
57 

personnel. They have even classified U.S. air strikes now in Afghanistan. 

So there is a whole swath of information that under President 

Bush and President Obama, that information came directly to the 

public and to Congress so we could talk about it. We have folks on 

the ground there, and we require that information to act decisively 

on behalf of our sons and daughters in uniform, and we need information on that war. We are at war. 

So Mr. Cummings and I wrote a letter to the Trump Administration saying that we wanted that rescinded. 

Could you talk a little bit about the obstruction and the difficulty 

for you and for Congress in doing our jobs with the lack of information coming out of DOD right now, and also coming out of Afghanistan? 

Mr. DODARO. I asked Cathy Berrick to join me. She is our Defense expert, so I will ask her to give her views on this. But I 

would say right after 9/11 we saw a change in the classification approach in the Federal Government to classify more documents. 

After that occurred, we were asked to look at the classification 

practices of a number of agencies and to look at whether or not 

they were being consistent and what their procedures were for classification. They seemed to be settling down and an equilibrium in 

place over time, but what I have seen over the years is that sort 

of approach ebbs and flows over periods of time. I think it is very 

legitimate questions that Congress should ask about the level of 

classification. 

We don’t have classification authority at GAO. We are bound by 

law. We have to treat the information that we use in the same 

manner as the agencies that we receive the information from. What 

we try to do is produce a detailed classified report and then a public version of virtually everything that we do, but it is not easy to 

do that and to get the classification approaches through DOD and 

State and other agencies, Homeland Security. It is not just DOD. 

But Cathy can give you a little bit more insight. We would be 

happy to work with you on this issue. 

Mr. LYNCH. Please. Thank you. 

Ms. BERRICK. As you mentioned, there is an initiative within the 

Defense Department to look more closely at information they allow 

to go into the public domain, and we are certainly experiencing 

that on our products when we send them to the Department for a 

sensitivity review. Just earlier this week we issued a public version 

of a classified report on DOD’s first deployment of the F–35 to 

Japan that identified some significant issues that are in the classified domain. 

I will make a couple of points. First, as we can certainly still 

brief you all and the congressional staff on the results of our classified work given that they have clearances, so we will continue to 

do that. We also have been asked, given this concern, to look specifically at classification within the intelligence community, how 

they are handling that for the intelligence agencies, half of which 

fall into the Defense Department. So we will be looking at that in 

detail and providing recommendations to you all. In my experience 

as well, this tends to ebb and flow as Congress raises concerns, as 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
58 

the press asks more questions. We will see what, if any, changes 

the Department makes. 

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you. 

I do have a classified briefing in the SCIF tomorrow afternoon 

with the Special Inspector for Afghan Reconstruction, but obviously 

I can’t discuss that with my constituents, and they are paying the 

bills. 

But thank you both for your wonderful work. I really appreciate 

it. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

I now recognize the gentleman from South Carolina. 

Mr. SANFORD. I thank the Chair. 

I am going to get into questions in just a moment on both VA 

medical supply and DOD headquarters reductions and workforce 

requirements based on that not really being covered thus far in the 

hearing. I would love to hear your thoughts on both of those. 

But before I do, I am just struck by the fact that Milton Friedman once observed that the only way to make government more efficient was to make it smaller, that fundamental to the democratic 

process was inefficiency. If we wanted efficiency, we would go out 

and get a king or a dictator. They can be quite efficient. We would 

lose the open political system, but the back and forth, one man’s 

gold is another man’s dirt, and vice versa, that there is just builtin inefficiency. 

So I am just struck in reading this report, when you talk about 

tens and tens and tens of billions of dollars of discovered waste, 

and that is not even the undiscovered portion that might be out 

there—was Milton Friedman right? 

Mr. DODARO. Well, I am not an economist by training, but I am 

an auditor, and I have been a student of government for 45 years, 

and I would say that when things don’t work in the government, 

a new thing is created, and the old thing remains. That cumulative 

process over time adds clearly to the inefficiencies in government 

operations, and there is a lack of attention to routinely addressing 

these issues both in the executive branch and in the legislative 

branch. I think both branches can do much more to make government more efficient, and we are happy to help in that regard. 

Mr. SANFORD. And I appreciate your work on that front. So I will 

take that as a yes, that Milton Friedman was right, that ultimately 

an important measure toward making government more efficient 

is, in fact, making it smaller, because indeed you used the word 

‘‘built-in.’’ There are built-in inefficiencies, and I think we all acknowledge those in looking at this process. 

Getting down into the weeds, in the few minutes that I have, I 

don’t know what you would rather stress, but I would love to get 

your thoughts on both the VA medical supply, given its importance 

to a lot of veterans out there, and/or DOD headquarters, going back 

to how you just framed it, that oftentimes we come up with the 

new but we still leave the old. Some of the headquarters are redundant from a need standpoint, thoughts on that as well. I would be 

curious to hear thoughts on both of those. 

Mr. DODARO. Sure. First on the VA medical and surgical supplies 

area, they started an initiative that was intended to save about 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
59 

$150 billion, and this was to consolidate purchasing across all their 

medical centers. But they limited the number of items that they 

wanted to collect, they had no over-arching strategy, they were 

supposed to involve the clinicians in deciding how to do this and 

they didn’t do that as much as they should have, and thus they 

weren’t very successful with their initiative. 

So we made a number of recommendations on how to address 

that and actually achieve some of those savings. So they are starting to move out, adding more commodities that could be made. The 

VA medical centers operate in a very decentralized operation, and 

certainly consolidating purchasing power across a regional and a 

national basis would save tens of billions of dollars over there in 

those supplies and operations, but you have to have an organized, 

stable leadership and approach to realize those savings over time. 

So I think we are trying to get them into a better path now, but 

it will require a lot of follow-up to achieve those savings. 

Mr. SANFORD. Can I be really rude? Just because I am down to 

a minute and 7 seconds. 

Mr. DODARO. Okay, yes. 

Mr. SANFORD. I would love if you would quickly address the 

other, as well. 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, I was. I was just going to move to that. 

Mr. SANFORD. Okay, I’m sorry. 

Mr. DODARO. We are in the same cadence. 

Headquarters consolidation at DOD, a lot of money there. What 

we found was that DOD set a goal to reduce it by 20 percent, but 

our question was 20 percent of what? You really didn’t have a good 

definition, a good baseline figure. So they need to have more figures. They don’t have a good accounting for how many contractors 

they have at DOD. So we have said, look, if you want to have that 

goal, you need a better strategy. You have to set a baseline, you 

have to track it over time, you have to identify what kind of workforce mix you really want in terms of military/civilian and contract 

support activities. So they are focused on trying to improve and 

gain efficiencies in that area. We are giving them continuing advice. 

Mr. SANFORD. Thank you again for your work. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the gentleman. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 

DeSaulnier, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have two subject areas. Hopefully I can get to both of them. 

One of them I don’t have great expertise on. I will offer that to you, 

and I hope you can respond to it. 

So, in a 2017 GAO report on the DOE and how it deals with nuclear waste, there was a quote that said ‘‘tens of billions of dollars 

by adapting alternative approaches to treat a portion of its low-activity radioactive waste.’’ Most of this is done at two sites, Savannah and Washington. I would just like to know, without trying to 

go through the details and trying to express expertise in a technical matter that I am not familiar with, whether the DOE is responding to your suggestions to go with one type rather than the 

one that is more costly. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
60 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. Actually, congressional action will be needed 

to help them in that area. Congress has acted to allow the waste, 

the low-level nuclear waste at Savannah River, to be treated in a 

different manner. So they can actually use grout, which is cement, 

basically. At Hanford, everything is to be treated as high level, 

which means it needs to be vitrified, vitrification, turned into glass, 

basically, and then stored in that way. That is a process that hasn’t 

been perfected. They are still working on that, and some of that 

will need to be done that way at Hanford. 

But there is this supplemental low-activity waste that they don’t 

really have a strategy for yet, and we think they could use grout 

to do that. It could save a lot of money, tens of billions of dollars, 

and it could be done faster. Since Congress set the policy at Hanford, the technologies have improved. We convened an expert panel 

to help us in that area, so we think Congress should give DOE the 

flexibility to do that. It will treat that supplemental low-activity 

waste faster and cheaper. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. And DOE, in your discussions, is not arguing 

with your findings? 

Mr. DODARO. Mark is our expert here. 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. They have not argued with that. In fact, I think 

they would like the flexibility to do that. There are 54 million gallons of this waste at Hanford. None of it has been treated. They 

have spent almost $19 billion so far. Only 5 million of that is high 

level, and to vitrify it all is not necessary according to the experts. 

We are not experts on all this stuff either, but we convened a National Academy panel, as Mr. Dodaro said, in May of 2016, and 

they agreed that some of that waste could be treated with the 

grouting. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. So literally, they are waiting for congressional 

—— 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. They want that, because they have a commitment 

to vitrify about a third, up to half of the total waste, but the other 

waste, the supplemental, they haven’t made a decision yet on. They 

would like that option, the flexibility, to go either way. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Okay. And on a totally separate subject, and 

I know there have been a lot of questions about DOD but I just 

wanted to get an understanding of where your role might be in the 

future. My interest was piqued when we had a hearing with the 

business advisory group and people who have dealt with DOD oversight on a financial level for a long time. They had McKenzie do 

a very basic oversight. They identified what they believed was $125 

billion of waste. So given it is our biggest department, given concerns about procurement that you have talked about, the technical 

levels of really good investments but letting the public know the 

cost/benefit for these investments in a world that is changing, and 

the back of the office things that McKenzie identified, and on top 

of that then having the first full audit that the IG is looking at. 

So my concern is I know your roles are different, but to the degree that you all are responsible for identifying waste and more efficiency, how do we, hopefully, get more accountability into the 

DOD? How do you see your role being able to support the IG’s efforts and the advisory board’s efforts? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
61 

Mr. DODARO. Well, first of all, with regard to the financial audit, 

our responsibility is to audit the financial statements of the Federal Government. We have created a network across the government where the Inspector Generals have responsibility for doing 

the individual audits. We review their work. We agree on a methodology. We stay in contact with them. So we use their work to 

help us make our audit of the overall statements of the Federal 

Government. 

Some parts of the Federal Government we do ourselves. We do 

all revenue collection, all the debt, auditing all the debt, which unfortunately is the largest item on our balance sheet, but that is a 

separate hearing —— 

Mr. DESAULNIER. If I could interrupt, that is sort of what I am 

getting at. Since this is new, this full financial audit, you will have 

some responsibility for overseeing that so that is done on the appropriate timeline, and there was best practices asserted in that. 

Mr. DODARO. Oh, yes. We have regular meetings with the independent auditors that have been hired for the services and with 

DOD IG. I have met with Glenn Fine, the Acting IG. We are very 

involved. We have a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities. 

But GAO definitely has a role to play and responsibilities in that 

area. 

On the other business systems in DOD, about one-third of our 

high-risk areas are DOD business practices—weapons systems acquisition, contract management, inventory management, supply 

chain operations, infrastructure. We are also reviewing their new 

management approaches. They have a new chief management officer now. That is something we have recommended for years that 

they put in place. I am meeting tomorrow with the new person who 

has been in that area. I have met with the Deputy Secretary of Defense. I have met with all three service secretaries. I have met with 

the comptroller over there. So we are very involved in trying to 

help them achieve some of those savings. 

On the Defense Business Board, I am an observer on that board, 

so I know what they are doing, and they use a lot of our work to 

do their studies. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

Mr. DODARO. Sure. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentleman yields back. 

We appreciate the depth of expertise that all of our witnesses 

have. 

To drill down more on the Hanford versus Savannah River, in 

your report this is really the big-ticket item, tens of billions, $40 

billion. Just kind of doing the math between facilities, it might be 

built, might not be built, processes that occurred, those are huge 

sums. 

So DOE, as I understand it, then, has no current authority 

bound by law. It would take congressional action for them to make 

a decision on vitrification versus grout. Is that correct? 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. Yes. They have an order where they have treated 

some waste at other sites through the grouting process. But back 

in 2002 they were challenged in court, and they sought clarificaVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:19 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\31120.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
62 

tion. So in 2004, the Congress clarified that, yes, they did have that 

authority for everywhere except Hanford. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Why was it left out? 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. Because Hanford at that time was not convinced—the State of Washington, of course, is also a player here— 

was not convinced that the technology was as good. They had some 

concerns, for example, that DOE did grouting at Rocky Flats outside of Denver, Colorado in the early ’90s, and it fell apart. In fact, 

when I first started my career almost 30 years ago, I did some of 

that work. But they have gotten better at that, and some of the 

technologies have improved. So we think it is an option, and at Savannah they have grouted 4 million gallons of the low-level waste 

successfully, as well as 4 million of the high-level waste. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And not had the legal challenges or —— 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. They had the authority clarified by Congress in 

2004, and they have successfully done that. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I see. So if the committee or others, if we were to 

take congressional action, then it would need to specifically name 

Hanford as being on the same par? 

Mr. GAFFIGAN. It would clarify that for them, yes. 

Mr. RUSSELL. What legal hurdles do you think that would face? 

Mr. DODARO. I don’t think there would be legal or —— 

Mr. RUSSELL. Because the other facilities are using this. 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, right. You already have precedent at Savannah River. I think, of course, the congressional delegation from 

Washington needs to be involved in the process because there are 

other perception issues that need to be dealt with there. I think 

this evolved with good people making the best decisions at the time 

and the maturity of the technology at the time. But the maturity 

of the technologies involved now is a different issue, so I think Congress could take a different approach. 

One area we added to the high-risk list with the last update was 

environmental liabilities for the Federal Government. Reported estimates now to clean up nuclear waste in these other areas are approaching a half a trillion dollars. We are spending tens of billions 

of dollars every year to clean up this activity, but the liability 

keeps growing, as opposed to going down. So there needs to be riskbased, cost-effective strategies put in place, and that is why we 

suggested this particular issue at Hanford be revisited. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And I think that is an excellent recommendation. 

In fact, if this committee were to do nothing else other than save 

$40 billion in the course of this term, we would be doing great service to the republic. 

With regard to other big-ticket items, $16.2 billion paid in fraudulent EIC payments, $1.7 billion paid in identity theft fraud. It is 

one thing to have duplication and fragmentation, but to pay thieves 

and just calling it improper payments is not only improper but it 

is an insult to every single taxpayer that is out there. 

Can you speak to any of your recommendations where delays of 

payments could help buy time to give proper identification and 

catch these frauds and prevent it? And then you have those who 

say, oh, no, no, no, no, you can’t do that because we don’t want to 

affect the economy and people want their refunds. Well, as an 

American taxpayer, I think anyone out there, would you accept a 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
63 

slight delay in your refund so that the thief next door is not taking 

somebody else’s money? I think most Americans would be amenable to that. But can you speak to that for a moment? 

Mr. DODARO. Oh, sure, I would be happy to. When identity theft 

first came on the scene, in addition to the Earned Income Tax 

Credit problem that they have with fraud and abuse—first of all, 

tax administration has been on our high-risk list since it was created back in the 1990s. So it has been a problem for a long time. 

Now, what we recommended to the Congress was that the IRS 

get W–2s from employers earlier in the process. They are processing tax returns in February and March largely, starting maybe 

even earlier than that, but they weren’t getting the W–2s until 

April. So the crooks file early, okay? 

Mr. RUSSELL. Sure, in January get a refund, be gone, and the actual person files. 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. So Congress acted on our recommendation. 

They implemented it. The W–2s now come in earlier, except there 

are still a lot that come in in paper form that they can’t process 

quickly enough. So we have recommendations to encourage Congress to mandate more electronic filing of W–2s from employers. 

Right now the threshold is set at 250 employees. We think it could 

be done at 10 in that area. IRS’s own estimates are that they could 

save $300 million by delaying it a couple of weeks to do that. 

Now, I think we have suggested IRS do a cost/benefit analysis 

and share it with the Congress and see if we can get agreement. 

I think you could have a phased approach over time that allows 

them to delay the returns until more electronic information can 

come in, and then I think over time if you can get more electronic 

information in, they can get their systems up to date, they won’t 

need the extra time in that approach. So that is kind of what we 

are looking at. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And we really need to assist in these findings. 

Your previous recommendations have helped, but we see, as technology advances, there are a lot of crooks that leverage it, and the 

IRS is not the favorite agency of the American public, but we need 

to try to help them with the right tools and have the public respond, and Congress certainly needs to take the lead on that. 

I am out of time for my initial round of questions. 

I would like to recognize the gentle lady from New York, and 

then if we have time available we will go to a couple of additional 

questions. 

The gentle lady is recognized. 

Ms. MAHONEY. Thank you so much. 

Welcome, and thank you so much for everything that GAO does 

for the people of America. 

I want to talk to you about the boat stations of the Coast Guard 

and your report on them. The Coast Guard’s mandate is to prevent 

the loss of life, injury, and property damage in the maritime environment through its search and rescue efforts. It maintains over 

200 stations with some combination of boats and helicopters along 

the U.S. coastline, and we are extremely grateful and appreciative 

of the hard work and sacrifice of these men and women in the 

Coast Guard. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
64 

But this year’s report highlights a 2017 GAO report on actions 

needed for the U.S. Coast Guard to close stations that are identified as overlapping and being a duplication. Are you familiar with 

this report? 

Mr. DODARO. I am. 

Ms. MAHONEY. And the GAO found in your report that the Coast 

Guard has a sound process for analyzing the boat stations, and following this process the Coast Guard and its contractor wrote, and 

I quote, that they ‘‘identified 18 unnecessarily duplicative boat stations with overlapping coverage that could be permanently closed 

without negatively affecting their ability to meet the two-hour response and search time.’’ 

Are you familiar with these findings? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, I am. 

Ms. MAHONEY. And in 2017, GAO reported that the Coast 

Guard’s leadership still believed that these findings were valid. Is 

that true? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. 

Ms. MAHONEY. So closing the unnecessary duplication of stations 

could save up to $290 million, they say. That is a lot of money over 

30 years. 

So, Mr. Dodaro, if that is true, then why are these duplicative 

stations still open? 

Mr. DODARO. There has been some resistance from the local communities, and there has been some resistance in the Congress as 

a result of that, and that has prevented it from being closed so far. 

Now, the one thing I would want to point out, in addition to the 

savings, there is an important operational aspect that the Coast 

Guard points out, and that is the fact that because so many of 

these stations aren’t as actively busy, people aren’t getting the 

training necessary to stay up to speed. We raised this issue at the 

Navy about not adequately having time for training, and as a result, partly as a result of that, they had some accidents with their 

operations over time. They need to have proper training. 

So, to me, this is not only saving money but allowing the Coast 

Guard people, who we have great respect for as well, allow their 

people to get proper training. So I would encourage Congress to 

allow the closure of these stations. 

Ms. MAHONEY. Well, I had one closed in my district. Of course, 

no one liked to see it closed. It was a popular service that was in 

the district I am privileged to represent, but we closed it because 

it was no longer needed. We haven’t closed any of these since 1988. 

What are the obstacles that stop these things from being closed? 

Mr. DODARO. I will ask George Scott, our expert in this area, to 

address that, Congresswoman. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. As we reported last year, the Coast 

Guard has a sound, rigorous process for identifying which stations 

to close. Since 1973, they have made eight attempts to close a series of stations, and as the Comptroller General pointed out, in 

each instance either there has been opposition at the local level 

and/or congressional intervention which has prevented the Coast 

Guard from following through on making the closures. 

One of the points we make and that Gene made as well, it is not 

just about saving money but there are also operational impacts. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
65 

For example, the Coast Guard spent over $2 million to repair a station a few years ago damaged by Hurricane Sandy that was on the 

closure list. So again, in addition to diverting resources from existing stations, we are actually spending money that we wouldn’t 

have to spend if they were allowed to move forward with closing 

those stations. 

I actually sort of view this as a good news story. If Congress does 

nothing, no action is actually needed, then the Coast Guard can actually follow through with its plan to move forward with closing 

these stations. And we also made recommendations for the Coast 

Guard to, once they have a plan in place with the timeframes to 

close these stations, that they also turn their attention to some air 

stations where there is also some potential duplication and overlap 

in air stations. They are not quite as far along in their process yet, 

but I think allowing them to move forward with this first round of 

closures will really set the stage for them to follow through with 

potential analysis of closing duplicative air stations as well. 

Ms. MAHONEY. This seems ridiculous that they have identified unnecessary facilities that are costing $260 million. I remember 

when we had this problem with the military bases. We had a bipartisan effort where we did a bill that once the Commission came 

back and said that these bases had to be closed, Congress no longer 

had a role in it, it had to be closed, and maybe that is what we 

have to do here. Everybody is going to fight for services that are 

in their community. That is our job. So if they are trying to close 

something in a community, it is jobs, it is activity, it is economic 

activity in the area, it is going to be fought tooth and nail by members of Congress. 

So I respectfully request the Chairman to look at the base closing 

bill and see if maybe we need to do the same thing with the Coast 

Guard stations, because we are incapable of closing something that 

has been there for a number of years and that people like, even 

though it is not needed, is unnecessary, and is wasting taxpayer 

funds, especially when you say they are being repaired when they 

are not even being used. It is sort of ridiculous. 

Anyway, my time is up, and I thank you for yielding to me, and 

thank you very much. Good to see you again. 

Mr. RUSSELL. The gentle lady yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Palmer for some follow-up. 

Mr. PALMER. I will be brief. 

In the supplemental security income, you identify a 40 percent 

increase in individuals under age 18. Is there any insight into the 

cause of this increase? 

Mr. DODARO. I believe most of the increase, a big part of it, has 

been in children. 

Go ahead, Barb. The question was about the 40 percent increase 

in Social Security SSI population benefits and what is driving the 

increase. 

Mr. PALMER. The supplemental security income, you have a 40 

percent increase in the number of children, 14 to 17 I think, 14 to 

18. Any insight into why we had that increase? What are people 

claiming they are qualified for? 

Ms. BOVBJERG. Well, we are confirming that qualification. That 

is not just applications. That is how many people have come on the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
66 

rolls. So there are more children with disabilities. We think that 

increasingly people are better able to recognize what may be happening with their child. 

Mr. PALMER. So it is better diagnostic techniques? 

Ms. BOVBJERG. Yes, and when they are in school, for example, 

there is the disability program in public schools where schools are 

required to pay attention and to identify children with disabilities. 

So I think there is a great sensitivity. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. On the Earned Income Tax Credit, you 

talked about delaying the payment for a couple of weeks. Do you 

think that would help with reducing the improper payments, the 

$16 billion in improper payments on the Earned Income Tax Credit? 

Mr. DODARO. I think it could because it could allow more time 

for the auditing to be done. They can increase the auditing for the 

Earned Income Tax Credit as well. What we are suggesting is you 

could delay them for everybody, all types of returns —— 

Mr. PALMER. Yes, you don’t single anybody out. 

Mr. DODARO. Right, right. But while you are doing that, you 

could audit more of the EITC returns and hopefully identify additional ones that should not be paid. So it could help with the improper payments in the EITC, as well as prevent identity theft. 

Mr. PALMER. And my last question is on Medicare Advantage. 

GAO made five recommendations, none of which have been implemented, including one priority recommendation. Do you have any 

communication between Medicare and GAO on that and any explanation for why they have not implemented these recommendations, 

particularly the one priority recommendation? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. I met with Seema Verma, who is the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. I met 

with Secretary Price before he left, and I am going to meet with 

the new secretary as well. We are now meeting on a quarterly 

basis with them to go over all open recommendations in GAO. 

Ms. Nikki Clowers can give a more specific update. 

Mr. PALMER. Let me just ask this: If those recommendations 

were implemented, would it have any impact on reducing the improper payments, the $14 billion in improper payments? 

Ms. CLOWERS. It would certainly result in cost savings. We estimate billions of dollars each year if they would fully implement our 

recommendations on the Medicare Advantage payments, which is 

really the coding. They need better adjustments between what they 

pay in Medicare fee-for-service and making coding adjustments 

when they translate to the payments under Medicare Advantage. 

They have taken some steps in making those adjustments, but we 

think the adjustments are still too low. If they got better data, 

more updated data to help make those coding adjustments, they 

will make significant savings. 

Mr. PALMER. My last question on that is, is this an issue of antiquated data systems, or is it—I mean, I don’t understand why, particularly when one is a priority, that they haven’t acted on this. 

And again, considering the magnitude of savings that could be 

achieved. 

Mr. DODARO. It just causes them to—there is no limitation on it. 

We did it. You just need to get updated information. It is just that 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
67 

they don’t want to change the process that they have in place is 

my feeling, and we are trying to continue to persuade them that 

they need to change and that it will result in billions in savings. 

Mr. PALMER. I was afraid that that would be the answer. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you for indulging me another 

round of questions. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I appreciate the questions. 

The gentleman yields back. 

I want to thank the witnesses and thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for 

your great work. And I also want to point out for the record that 

you lead by example. In a conversation that we had prior to this 

hearing, you had mentioned a figure of the money that you turned 

back to the government. And what was that figure? 

Mr. DODARO. Last year, as a result of our work and Congress’ actions on it and the executive branch, over $73 billion in financial 

benefits occurred. That is $128 back for every $1 invested in GAO. 

Mr. RUSSELL. This shows government the way it should function 

and the way it should work. I thoroughly believe if we doubled the 

size of our auditors and doubled the size of our Inspectors General, 

we could get at a lot of the country’s problems right there. But, as 

has been pointed out in this hearing, we have a responsibility to 

act, or maybe in the case of the Coast Guard to not act if they have 

authority, right? 

But I think it does mention something that has also been raised 

in this hearing by the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, that 

it is probably incumbent upon us to do more of a touch. What we 

see is the GAO and the Department of the IG, they reach out continually, but it is probably incumbent upon us to do more of a 

touch and a line of action, and you have certainly given us some 

crucial areas today where we could take some action in a bipartisan fashion to get at many of these problems. 

I am very grateful for all of the hard work that each of you do. 

A lot of times it is thankless work, and unadvertised, but it shows 

true public servants to our great country, so I am very, very grateful to each of you for the work that you do. 

The hearing record will remain open for two weeks for any member to submit a written opening statement or questions for the 

record. 

If there is no further business, without objection, the committee 

stands adjourned. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:53 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER