Gabbard, Patel testify at House hearing on global threats

[0:00] I also think it's interesting that, you know, we're talking about fraud, waste, and abuse [0:04] in an administration that both in the second term and the first term has added trillions [0:08] of dollars to the deficit. [0:12] And so look, I can disagree with you. [0:13] I can believe that these programs help stabilize fragile regions, that support our partners [0:18] to advance democratic values and provide strategic advantages for the United States, also why [0:23] lifting people out of disease and poverty. [0:24] I can argue that when we pull back our soft power, adversarial nations like China are [0:30] all too happy to fill the void we've left. [0:32] Just look at the fact that when we rapidly stood up, that China rapidly stood up identical [0:37] programs that we pulled out of last year. [0:40] And I just don't think you can have it both ways. [0:42] My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and I agree with them on this, are worried [0:45] about Chinese influence around the world, but at the same time, if you're worried about [0:49] that, then you can't withdraw from the international community knowing full well China will fill [0:54] that void. [0:56] And so because of, you know, these precarious zones in which a lot of foreign assistance [1:00] is delivered. [1:01] Conflict areas, weak governance regions. [1:03] We much have an even more rigorous and informed oversight. [1:07] That's why, what hearings like this are designed to do, and that brings to a point that I believe [1:12] deserves acknowledgement today. [1:13] If the administration really believed that waste, fraud, and abuse in foreign assistance [1:16] were serious enough to justify dismantling major foreign assistance agencies, then these [1:21] oversight hearings should have happened first, and they should have happened a long time [1:25] ago. [1:26] We should have examined the evidence, heard from the experts, evaluated the oversight [1:28] mechanisms, and considered reforms. [1:30] That's how a legislative process is supposed to work. [1:34] Oversight should precede major structural decisions, not follow them. [1:37] But we all know that's not what happened. [1:38] In fact, we watched Doge actually sideline Congress. [1:42] They even sidelined the Doge caucus, okay? [1:46] There was a caucus created in Congress to look at government efficiency, and Elon Musk [1:50] and Doge never even brought them into the fold. [1:53] Congress was completely cut out. [1:54] They canceled programs across government claiming fraud, waste, and abuse, and they left the [1:59] Department of State scrambling. [2:00] In fact, Trump's administration had to undo some of the things that Doge wound up doing. [2:06] They never got to the efficiency part. [2:09] Doge never did anything that created more efficiency for the government. [2:14] And then the Foreign Affairs Committee got one closed roundtable with then-Deputy Administrator [2:19] of USAID, Peter Morocco. [2:20] It lasted 45 minutes, and he didn't have a lot of the answers. [2:24] That's not what legislative oversight is. [2:27] So eliminating institutions doesn't automatically eliminate waste. [2:30] In fact, after USAID was closed, food purchase with American taxpayer dollars was allowed [2:34] to sit and spoil, and then more American tax dollars had to be spent to incinerate the [2:38] hundreds of metric tons of food. [2:41] To me, that sounds like the GAO definition of what waste, which we reviewed earlier. [2:46] It's our goal to reduce fraud, waste, and abuse, and the answer is not simply dismantle [2:49] institutions and to eliminate programs just because you don't like them. [2:52] The answer is to strengthen oversight, improve transparency, modernize monitoring tools, [2:57] and ensure Congress receives clear and timely information. [2:59] I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. [3:00] I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today, working with my colleagues on both [3:02] sides of the aisle to ensure that our oversight responsibilities are met. [3:06] Thank you, and I yield back. [3:07] Mr. Chairman. [3:09] Thank you so much to the Ranking Member. [3:10] While I agree that we didn't get necessarily to the efficiency piece, that's why the investigation [3:14] such as this is so important. [3:15] But I would say the elimination of certain programs and projects, for example, like you [3:20] saw in the Veterans Administration's building, where they were having a $50,000 to $70,000 [3:25] per year contract to water five plants, I think that's something that we could look [3:31] at as a waste, fraud, and abuse area. [3:33] I'll also note that we don't always have to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at nations [3:39] in order to build strong relationships. [3:40] I just came back from Honduras yesterday, where I met with the new president, as well [3:44] as for the head of the Congress, and I can tell you that they are very much in line with [3:49] trying to get rid of China and the corruptive practices that are going on there, to get [3:53] rid of communism, which is a long-fought goal of not just the Conservative Party, but the [3:58] Liberal Party. [3:59] And all it took—and this was coming to an end. [4:00] Thank you. [4:01] Thank you. [4:02] Thank you. [4:03] And I think I'll also note that what Mr. Obama said, directly from the president and [4:04] from the head of Congress, said what really got us over the edge was when President Trump [4:07] had tweeted out and asked to have a free and fair election and showed support for this [4:11] administration. [4:12] So sometimes the thing that people hate so much—a simple tweet—can be very effective. [4:18] Other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for [4:21] the record. [4:22] This committee recognizes the importance of the issues before us. [4:25] Our two witnesses today include Mr. Adam Kaplan, the associate deputy inspector general for [4:30] the office of the inspector general at the White House. [4:31] That's Mr. Kaplan. [4:31] the U.S. Agency for International Development, who has been at the forefront of holding organizations [4:36] accountable for terrorist diversion, fraud, and corruption. [4:41] Ms. Leticia Love-Grayer is the Director of International Affairs and Trade at the Government [4:45] of Accountability Offices. [4:47] Ms. Love-Grayer has over 23 years of experience leading performance and forensic audits, leading [4:52] to millions of dollars in savings across federal programs where U.S. taxpayer dollars were [4:56] at risk of waste, fraud, and abuse. [4:59] This committee recognizes the importance of the issue before us and is grateful to have [5:03] you both here to speak with us today. [5:05] Your full statements will be made part of the record, and I'll ask you to keep your [5:08] opening remarks to five minutes in order to allow members to have enough time for questioning. [5:13] With that, I'll now recognize Mr. Kaplan for your opening statements. [5:18] Thank you. [5:19] Chairman Mills, Ranking Member Moskowitz, and members of the subcommittee, thank you [5:24] for the opportunity to testify today. [5:27] Nobody has a track record like the USAID IG in fighting fraud in America. [5:32] The USAID IG is the only agency dedicated solely to overseeing foreign assistance programs [5:39] run by multiple agencies. [5:41] We know the people, places, and schemes that put taxpayer dollars at risk. [5:46] USAID had a dedicated staff and solid mechanisms to manage risks to its programs. [5:52] As the IG, we naturally found shortcomings. [5:55] Today, I'll summarize three such challenges identified in my written testimony applicable [6:01] to any agency. [6:02] 1. [6:03] Ensuring Transparent Access to Information USAID heavily relied on award recipients [6:11] operating in remote locations to self-disclose fraud allegations. [6:16] Of all award recipients, the least transparent is the United Nations. [6:23] We encounter non-stop obstruction by the UN to share information about potential misuse [6:29] of U.S. funds. [6:30] To illustrate, we've sought information from five different U.S. agencies, including the [6:33] U.N. [6:34] Department of Defense and the U.N. [6:35] Department of Defense and U.N. [6:36] agencies on ten investigations. [6:37] Response times ranged from six months to two years. [6:40] This is unacceptable. [6:41] We urge the State Department to implement a clause mandating that awards to the U.N. [6:46] provide us with access to information. [6:49] Challenge 2. [6:50] Ensuring that award terms prioritize accountability USAID had hundreds of regulations designed [6:56] to address risks to programs. [6:58] However, there were shortcomings. [7:00] For example, USAID declined to include a Forum Selection Clause. [7:02] For example, USAID declined to include a Forum Selection Clause. [7:03] USAID declined to include a Forum Selection Clause. [7:04] For example, USAID declined to include a Forum Selection Clause in agreements with [7:05] foreign-based N.G.O.s. [7:07] There is no reason why a Florida-based aid organization can be to sued for fraud in [7:12] U.S. [7:13] Court, while one based in London can't, but cases have been dismissed because USAID omitted [7:18] this clause. [7:20] Further, USAID's antiterrorism certifications applied only to grants, not contracts. [7:26] This certification allowed the Department of Justice and OIG to bring cases against grantees [7:30] for concealing past support to Iran and Hezbollah. [7:33] chose. [7:34] Inexplicably, however, contractors were not required [7:39] to make the same representation. [7:41] Also, USAID's required partner vetting [7:44] of aid organization staff designed to ensure [7:47] that terrorists don't get our money exempted UN staff. [7:51] To address this gap, USAID IG is investigating UN staff [7:55] for ties to Hamas to ensure US taxpayers [7:58] don't pay their salaries. [8:00] Challenge three, ensuring effective monitoring and staffing. [8:04] Mitigating risks requires more [8:06] than announcing costly monitoring contracts. [8:09] For example, USAID missed opportunities [8:11] to improve programs in Somalia because it lacked a system [8:14] for managing recommendations from its monitors. [8:17] In Ukraine, contractors USAID hired to oversee [8:20] its $26 billion in direct budget support [8:23] failed to provide required reports on time or at all. [8:27] Moving forward, the government must ensure monitors [8:30] provide timely information and that officials [8:32] leverage monitor findings to ensure [8:34] program objectives are being met. [8:37] To further mitigate risk, the government [8:38] must adequately staff awards and monitor sub-awardees. [8:42] Our audit found in Ethiopia, USAID [8:44] employed too few people to manage awards [8:47] and ultimately failed to detect a massive food diversion [8:50] scandal. [8:51] The path forward requires an appropriate ratio [8:53] of staff to awards given the money at stake. [8:56] Lastly, despite fraud often occurring at the sub-award [8:59] level, there is no internal database of sub-awardees. [9:03] Despite their outsized role, [9:05] U.S.AID is committed to ensuring that sub-awardees [9:07] are able to make a difference in programs [9:09] and involvement in fraud schemes. [9:11] Finally, combating overseas fraud requires an IG [9:13] that is willing to follow the money, ask difficult questions, [9:15] and hold perpetrators accountable. [9:17] Rather than playing Monday morning quarterback, [9:19] USAID IG's experience places us in the pre-game huddle, [9:23] allowing us to inform Congress and agencies of risks [9:27] before billions of dollars of programming goes out, [9:29] not years later. [9:31] Our unique authority to employ foreign service officers [9:34] also allows us to routinely visit [9:36] project sites in remote and dangerous locations. [9:40] In doing so, we've uncovered roads that were reported [9:42] as complete but were never built. [9:45] We found edible grain meant for starving kids being replaced [9:48] with animal feed. [9:50] And distribution sites where food reported as delivered [9:53] never arrived. [9:54] Without USAID IG on the ground, those losses would remain hidden [9:57] and the schemes would continue. [9:59] And critically, we work to protect and empower [10:01] confidential sources who face real risks for coming forward [10:05] to report fraud, diversion, and sexual exploitation, [10:08] and abuse. [10:09] The American people deserve confidence [10:11] that their taxpayer dollars are protected, [10:13] and the communities who rely on U.S. assistance [10:15] deserve assurance that the support intended them [10:18] is not lost to fraud, corruption, or abuse. [10:21] I thank the committee for its continued support [10:23] for USAID IG's unique brand of oversight [10:26] and look forward to your questions. [10:28] Thank you so much, Mr. Kaplan. [10:30] I now recognize Ms. Love-Grier for an opening statement. [10:42] Can you hear me now? [10:43] Chairman Mills, Ranking Member Moskowitz, [10:45] and members of the subcommittee, thank you [10:48] for the opportunity to discuss GAO's work examining [10:50] federal efforts to manage the risk of fraud, waste, [10:53] and abuse in foreign assistance. [10:55] U.S. foreign assistance plays an important role [10:57] in advancing U.S. foreign policy goals. [11:00] It supports countries that are strategic to U.S. security [11:02] and economic interest, countries experiencing conflict, [11:06] and vulnerable populations around the world. [11:09] In fiscal year 2026, Congress appropriated roughly [11:12] $50 billion for the Department of State [11:14] and other foreign affairs programs. [11:17] For many years, much of this [11:18] assistance was administered by the U.S. Agency [11:20] for International Development. [11:21] However, following changes in 2025, [11:24] the U.S. Department of State is now [11:25] the federal government's primary provider [11:27] of foreign assistance. [11:28] This time of transition calls for a focus [11:30] on fraud risk management. [11:32] Foreign assistance is often delivered [11:33] in complex environments marked by conflict, instability, [11:37] and humanitarian crisis, conditions [11:39] that can heighten the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse. [11:42] Although most federal spending is not lost to fraud, [11:45] every diverted dollar weakens programs, weighs taxes, [11:47] taxpayers' dollars, and undermines public trust. [11:51] Because fraud is costly and difficult to detect, [11:54] prosecute, and recover, prevention is the most effective [11:57] way to protect taxpayer dollars [11:58] and ensure program integrity. [12:01] Our work has identified several factors [12:02] that make foreign assistance particularly vulnerable. [12:05] First, assistance is often delivered [12:07] through implementing partners, such as contractors, [12:09] nonprofits, and international organizations. [12:12] These partners may also fund subpartners. [12:14] Controls, if controls are weak anywhere in that chain, [12:17] the risk of fraud increases. [12:20] Second, many programs operate in conflict zones [12:22] where violence and instability may limit in-person oversight [12:26] by agencies and partners, making it hard to verify [12:29] how funds were actually used. [12:31] Third, humanitarian crisis often require rapid delivery of aid. [12:35] When agencies must move funding quickly to address emergencies, [12:39] maintaining strong controls can be more challenging. [12:42] Finally, agencies have a desire to work directly [12:44] with local organizations to deliver assistance. [12:47] This approach can improve [12:48] long-term sustainability, but some local partners [12:50] may have limited experience managing federal awards [12:53] or maintaining strong financial controls. [12:56] GAO's work has identified real examples of fraud, [12:59] waste, and abuse in foreign assistance. [13:01] For instance, our recent review [13:03] of the U.S. African Development Foundation [13:05] identified significant fraud risk management weaknesses, [13:08] as well as highly questionable procurement practices [13:11] that we reported were red flags for potential fraud schemes. [13:14] The Director of Financial Management later pled guilty [13:17] to contract-related offenses. [13:19] In another example, our 2023 review [13:21] of fraud risk management in conflict zones [13:23] described widespread diversion of food aid in Somalia. [13:26] And in Afghanistan, GAO reported multiple instances [13:29] of fraud and waste tied to reconstruction programs. [13:32] These examples demonstrate why strong fraud risk management [13:36] is essential. [13:37] Agencies have taken some positive steps. [13:40] They conduct certain risk assessments, [13:42] review some partners' past performance, [13:44] require reporting of suspected violations to Inspector General, [13:46] and sometimes use third-party monitoring [13:48] to access hard-to-reach locations. [13:50] However, our work has identified significant weaknesses. [13:53] For example, some agencies, like State and USAID, [13:56] did not conduct program-specific fraud risk assessments, [13:59] leaving them vulnerable to predictable risks. [14:02] Fraud awareness training was not required, [14:04] limiting officials' awareness of how to prevent, [14:06] detect, or respond to potential fraud. [14:08] Oversight of subpartners was inconsistent or wholly lacking. [14:12] Third-party monitoring often focused on performance management, [14:16] but not fraud. [14:17] The agency's role in fraud management [14:19] was not designed for fraud risk detection, [14:21] and agencies did not always use available data analytics [14:24] to identify unusual spending patterns [14:26] that can be indications of fraud or abuse. [14:29] From July 2016 through September 2025, [14:32] GAO has made more than 50 recommendations [14:34] to improve fraud risk management in foreign assistance. [14:37] As early as 2026, agencies had implemented [14:40] only 22 of those recommendations, [14:42] while 29 remain unimplemented. [14:44] Addressing our recommendations will be particularly important, [14:47] as programs are restructured, [14:48] and the State Department assumes a larger role [14:50] in administering them. [14:51] Congress can also help strengthen oversight [14:53] by reinstating certain requirements [14:55] for agencies to regularly report on their anti-fraud [14:58] and risk management activities. [15:00] By strengthening controls, learning from past risks, [15:03] and implementing GAO and OIG recommendations, [15:06] agencies can better protect taxpayer dollars [15:08] and ensure that foreign assistance [15:10] achieves its intended purpose. [15:12] Chairman Mills, Ranking Member Moskowitz, [15:14] members of the subcommittee, [15:15] this concludes my oral statement. [15:16] Be happy to take questions at this time. [15:18] Thank you, Ms. Love-Grier. [15:20] I now recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. [15:24] USAID attempted to develop a number of oversight mechanisms [15:27] to improve program effectiveness [15:29] and safeguard U.S. funds over the years. [15:32] Yet, foreign assistance has remained susceptible [15:34] to waste, fraud, and abuse. [15:36] Regardless of the type of implementer, [15:38] bad actors have profited from U.S. generosity abroad. [15:41] Whether they are contractors committing fraud [15:43] or terroristic diverting aid, [15:45] a multitude of systemic weaknesses [15:47] have enabled bad actors to commit waste, fraud, and abuse. [15:50] How have you seen bad actors exploit gaps [15:53] in the U.S. oversights? [15:55] I'll start with you, Mr. Kaplan. [15:56] Thanks for your question. [16:00] They certainly have tried to exploit gaps, [16:02] and some of them are exactly what I just identified [16:04] in my opening testimony. [16:06] And they're examples. [16:07] I mean, and sometimes they're very slight examples, [16:09] and they go back to the actual clauses [16:11] that either exist or don't exist. [16:14] So, for example, the forum selection clause I mentioned, [16:16] we actually had a great case [16:18] in the Southern District of New Jersey [16:20] in New York where a British NGO [16:23] had falsified its past support [16:26] provided to Hezbollah and Iranian affiliates. [16:30] They had to declare it under their certification. [16:33] They made the false representation. [16:37] We had them dead to right. [16:38] Brought the case. [16:41] The judge in New York said, [16:42] well, there's really no ties to... [16:44] It's a British firm, [16:46] and other than the actual contract grant, [16:48] there's no ties to the United States. [16:51] They don't have an office in the U.S. [16:53] It's a personal jurisdiction issue. [16:54] Case dismissed. [16:56] You have no idea how much that frustrated us [16:58] because it was a great case, [17:00] and this contractor lied about his past representation with... [17:03] affiliation with terrorist actors. [17:06] The judge said, [17:09] had USAID simply put in a forum selection clause [17:12] where the grant recipient would have said, [17:14] okay, by virtue of us accepting millions of dollars in aid, [17:17] we accept the risk that we could be brought... [17:21] brought in U.S. court for a fraud suit. [17:23] They should accept the risk. [17:26] They accept our money. [17:27] The same goes for the United Nations. [17:29] The United Nations puts up every excuse in the book [17:32] as to why they cannot comply with our information requests. [17:36] Every excuse in the book. [17:38] They're a grant recipient. [17:40] The problem is the accountability mechanisms are limited [17:42] when it comes to the United Nations. [17:44] We have more access and more enforceability over... [17:47] There's criminal consequences, [17:48] civil consequences for contractors in NGO. [17:51] With the UN, the enforcement mechanisms are... [17:54] mechanisms are much more limited. [17:56] However, there's still things that USAID [17:59] and the State Department can and State Department should be doing, [18:03] and that's enforcing vetting. [18:06] There's no reason, again, [18:08] why NGO staff and contractor staff [18:12] operating in high-risk environments [18:14] controlled by terrorist actors [18:16] had to put their folks through U.S. government vetting systems. [18:19] The UN was exempt. [18:21] Why? [18:24] Are we to trust the UN's own vetting procedures [18:26] given what happened with UNRWA [18:29] and the mass infiltration of UN staff [18:33] that also are Hamas affiliates [18:35] or participated in the October 7 terrorist attacks? [18:38] There's no reason why UN staff should escape [18:41] the same level of vetting and scrutiny [18:43] as NGOs and contractors. [18:46] No reason at all. [18:47] Forum selection clause, access to information. [18:50] There's three buckets of recipients. [18:52] Contractors... [18:53] I just want to get to a couple more questions. [18:54] Yeah, I'm sorry, go ahead. [18:55] Go ahead. [18:56] If you wrap up, please. [18:57] Yep. [18:58] No, I think I've said my piece on this. [18:59] Go ahead. [19:00] All right. [19:01] And to your point, [19:02] I wanted to point these out [19:03] because I know you're aware of them. [19:04] You know, examples of waste, fraud, and abuse that we have, [19:06] for example, the $550 million bribery scheme [19:08] a USAID contracting officer and three executives [19:10] pled guilty to. [19:12] Improperly vetted contractors, [19:13] to your point about vetting, [19:14] for $800 million in USAID contracts. [19:17] Last year, it was uncovered [19:18] USAID awarded for a joint venture [19:20] to receive up to $800 million [19:22] to address irregular migration [19:23] of Central America to the United States [19:25] and climate change. [19:27] Even after that, [19:28] substantial evidence that, [19:29] as a partner, [19:30] a company visitant was involved [19:31] in that bribery scheme. [19:34] Debarment of former UNRWA employees [19:36] for participation, to your point. [19:38] Former USAID subawardee employees [19:40] debarred for five years [19:42] for embezzling U.S. global health funds [19:43] for falsifying documents. [19:45] And also, the director of USAID projects [19:46] arrested for a nine-year fraud scheme [19:48] that resulted in over $240,000 to his pocket. [19:51] So, with the time that I have, [19:53] remaining at this point, [19:54] I want to talk with GAO for a minute. [19:56] And this is kind of important for me. [19:59] In your testimony, [20:00] you identified systemic weaknesses [20:02] in agencies' efforts to prevent, detect, [20:04] and properly respond to fraud risk [20:07] and foreign assistance, [20:08] or made recommendations for these weaknesses. [20:11] Many of these recommendations [20:12] have not been implemented. [20:14] Was USAID not effectively managing fraud risks [20:17] and implementing internal control systemically? [20:20] We did identify weaknesses [20:22] in USAID's efforts to do so. [20:24] You mentioned some of them. [20:25] The screening of implementing partners [20:28] and subpartners was limited. [20:30] Here's another area we haven't talked about yet. [20:32] When we are working with partners [20:34] who we know have committed fraud, waste, or abuse, [20:36] or been suspended or debarred, [20:38] that information is often not making it back [20:40] into the federal procurement databases [20:42] that are used to screen them for future awards. [20:45] So, we can have a cycle [20:47] of working with the same actors [20:48] who we know have had a history [20:50] of violating our rules, our regulations, [20:52] and fraud, waste, and abuse, [20:54] being among them. [20:55] So, that's one of the internal control weaknesses [20:57] we identified. [20:58] There's others that relate to monitoring, [21:00] especially in conflict zones [21:02] where we can't go ourselves. [21:04] For example, [21:05] we're not using third-party monitors effectively, [21:07] and we have been recommending for over 10 years [21:10] that third-party monitors be trained on fraud awareness [21:13] and it be built into their contract [21:15] that they look for fraud [21:17] and report on detecting fraud. [21:19] That is still inconsistently happening. [21:21] And so, you both believe that members [21:23] or companies or for-profit entities [21:25] or implementing partners [21:26] who have been accused and found guilty [21:29] of waste, fraud, and abuse [21:30] should be disbarred from being able to go [21:32] for future contracts, correct? [21:36] They should be debarred whether or not [21:38] they're found guilty or convicted. [21:39] Sometimes it's very hard [21:40] because of the jurisdictional issues, [21:41] but at the very least, [21:42] they should be debarred, [21:43] and USAID IG has been exceptionally aggressive [21:46] in referring implementers for debarment. [21:48] And Ms. Love-Grayer, [21:49] just a yesterday note, [21:50] how are your feelings as well? [21:51] Yeah, depending on the case, absolutely. [21:53] We should not be working with actors [21:54] who have a repeated history of fraud, waste, and abuse. [21:57] Thank you so much. [21:58] With that, I'm going to go ahead [21:59] and turn it over to the ranking member, [22:01] Mr. Moskowitz, for five minutes. [22:02] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [22:03] Mr. Kaplan, you spoke about issues [22:05] and accountability at the UN [22:06] and mentioned that we should tighten [22:08] mandatory disclosure requirements [22:09] and add clear consequences [22:11] for failure to comply. [22:12] Can you provide some more details [22:14] on what you think that should look like [22:16] and would you recommend additional auditing [22:18] and transparency tools? [22:20] Absolutely. [22:21] Thanks for that question. [22:22] It's just a constant source of frustration, [22:23] and it's something [22:24] that should frustrate [22:25] every single American taxpayer [22:26] where money is going to the United Nations, [22:28] where money continues to go to UN agencies. [22:32] Again, they're a one bucket of recipient. [22:35] You have UN agencies, NGOs, and contractors. [22:37] When it comes to the UN, [22:38] we have the least enforcement remedies available. [22:42] We have the least access [22:43] and the least transparency in that. [22:45] So I think there's absolutely means to tighten up. [22:48] In the 2024 Appropriations Act, [22:51] there's a specific clause, Section 7048. [22:53] If you're keeping up with that, [22:54] you're keeping score at home. [22:55] That requires the Secretary of State [22:57] to seek to implement in all agreements with the UN [23:00] access for the USAID IG, State IG, and GAO. [23:04] That is essential, [23:05] and failure to comply with that [23:07] should either result in not receiving an award [23:10] or reward remedies for noncompliance. [23:13] I appreciate that, and I agree. [23:15] I want to go with this logic for a second [23:18] that because there was waste, fraud, and abuse in USAID, [23:22] we should get rid of it. [23:23] That was the argument. [23:26] I assume you would agree that in a $7 trillion budget, [23:30] we could probably find, in fact, [23:32] we have found waste, fraud, and abuse in every department. [23:35] That's why you have inspectors general to root it out. [23:37] That's right. [23:38] So there's waste, fraud, and abuse in the Pentagon, right? [23:40] Correct. [23:41] And there's waste, fraud, and abuse in DHS. [23:42] Yes. [23:43] In fact, we just saw the other day, [23:44] $200 million to be spent on advertising. [23:48] That sounds like a waste to me. [23:50] I mean, there was more money that was spent [23:52] on the last Jurassic Park movie [23:53] or one of the Lord of the Rings movies [23:55] or one of the Harry Potter movies. [23:57] I think the Barbie movie was less expensive. [23:59] In fact, I think every movie except one [24:01] that was nominated for an Oscar was less expensive [24:04] than what Kristi Noem spent. [24:06] To spend $200 million, Kristi Noem, [24:07] and not get nominated by an Oscar, [24:09] I think shows their liberal bias. [24:11] So there's definitely waste, right? [24:13] But no one's talking about getting rid of those places. [24:15] No one's talking about, you know, [24:17] just because we're spending, you know, $9 million [24:19] on crab legs in the Pentagon [24:21] or $220 million on furniture. [24:23] in the Pentagon or, you know, [24:25] $100,000 on a Steinway piano in the Pentagon. [24:28] No one's talking about getting rid of the Pentagon [24:30] just because there's waste, fraud, and abuse, right? [24:32] That would be unreasonable, Mr. Kaplan. [24:34] You agree? [24:37] No one's talking about getting rid of those agencies. [24:39] Right, right, of course, right? [24:41] And that's where the disconnect is here, [24:44] is that somehow because this agency, [24:47] no different than all the other agencies we could sit, [24:50] HUD, Department of Agriculture, [24:53] we can go through them, right? [24:54] There's waste, fraud, and abuse, [24:55] and we owe it to the American people, by the way, [24:57] to eliminate that waste, fraud, and abuse. [24:59] There's no excuse for that, okay? [25:01] We owe it to them. [25:02] But in the search of trying to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse [25:05] doesn't mean we should get rid of an entire agency. [25:07] No, we should eliminate the waste, fraud, and abuse [25:10] from those agencies because all of these agencies [25:12] still have important functions, obviously. [25:14] The Pentagon, we're not getting rid of the Pentagon [25:17] even though they haven't been able to pass an audit [25:19] eight years in a row. [25:21] There's over $2.5 trillion, [25:23] let me say that again, [25:24] over $2.5 trillion missing in the Pentagon, [25:28] like real money, okay? [25:31] And no one's talking about getting rid of it. [25:33] And so, you know, [25:34] that's the function of the problem I have. [25:36] Look, in my own household budget, right, [25:38] I can tell you my kids are definitely, [25:40] there's tons of waste in my family budget [25:43] based on what my kids like to spend, okay? [25:45] There's definitely abuse going on. [25:47] And based on the amount of boxes [25:48] that show up in my house every day, [25:49] my wife is definitely committing fraud, okay? [25:52] But the point is I'm not getting rid of these people, right? [25:54] What am I going to do? [25:55] I'm going to sit them down at the kitchen table [25:57] and I'm going to say, [25:58] we need to spend less, right? [26:01] What are we spending on? [26:02] We didn't have that conversation here with USAID. [26:05] We never got to say, [26:07] hey, look, these programs, delete them. [26:10] These things, get rid of them, okay? [26:13] Every other agency, somehow, [26:15] is getting that benefit of the doubt, right? [26:17] We're giving that benefit of the doubt to the Pentagon. [26:20] I want to end with this. [26:21] Now that these functions are going to move over [26:23] to the State Department, [26:24] all right, Mr. Kaplan, [26:26] do you think the State Department has the resources, [26:28] the personnel to do all of this oversight, [26:32] the grant oversight, [26:34] the capacity to handle all of this [26:36] without adding more personnel to the State Department? [26:40] Let me begin with this, Congressman Moskowitz. [26:44] I can assure you that the same vile predators [26:47] that sought to steal from USAID [26:49] or divert funds to terrorist organizations [26:52] or sexually abuse minors [26:54] like they did in the Ebola response, [26:56] will try to do the same thing at State. [26:59] Yeah, and look, that's all terrible. [27:00] We all support, you know, [27:02] clamping down on that and getting rid of it. [27:04] My question is, do you think the State Department [27:06] at this juncture needs additional resources [27:09] now that they have all this additional responsibility? [27:12] You know, contrary to media reports, [27:14] foreign assistance programs are not dead, [27:16] and there are billions and billions and billions of dollars [27:19] now being spent and administered [27:21] by not only State Department but agriculture. [27:23] My time is up. I'm just trying to get an answer. [27:25] Okay, yes, I'm with you. [27:27] But do you now think that now that that is all moved over [27:29] to the State Department, do they need more resources [27:31] to limit the fraud, waste, and abuse? [27:33] Because otherwise, aren't we going to wind up [27:35] in the same situation where there's going to be [27:37] fraud, waste, and abuse because we're not investing [27:39] in that oversight? [27:40] Maximum oversight is essential, [27:42] and that's what we brought as the IG for USAID. [27:44] And when you have billions going out [27:47] in complex emergency environments [27:49] and money spent overseas in areas controlled [27:51] by terrorist organizations and any armed group, [27:54] you need adequate staffing, people, good monitoring, [27:58] and an effective IG to oversee and investigate [28:00] any misuse of those funds. [28:02] All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [28:05] Thank you so much. [28:06] I will just note really quickly, though, [28:08] that while comically anecdotal, [28:10] unlike other agencies, foreign assistance [28:12] has benefited designated terrorist organizations [28:14] who have preyed on civilians and undermined [28:16] U.S. national security. [28:18] So that's a little bit different, [28:20] and I don't throw your family into that, [28:22] although I understand Amazon can be terroristic. [28:24] Um... [28:25] Trust me, my son gets on my phone [28:27] and looks at Amazon, and I've had packages [28:29] that came without my even knowing. [28:31] With that, I'm gonna go ahead and recognize [28:34] the gentleman from Rhode Island for five minutes. [28:36] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [28:38] And thank you to our witnesses for being here [28:40] and for your continued work [28:43] conducting oversight and ensuring federal funding [28:46] is spent on foreign aid programs as Congress directed. [28:49] Now, last year, President Trump and Secretary Rubio [28:52] used unfounded claims of waste, fraud, and abuse [28:54] as an excuse to illegally close a USAID [28:57] and decimate our foreign assistance programs. [29:00] While their justifications may have been false, [29:02] the impacts are very real. [29:05] Between 500,000 and 1 million people died in 2025, [29:10] hundreds of thousands of lives lost [29:12] in the name of eliminating fraud that didn't even exist. [29:16] By 2030, these cuts could lead to more than 14 million deaths, [29:21] including the deaths of more than 4.5 million people [29:23] and more than 4.5 million children under five years old. [29:27] Because of this administration, children were allowed to starve [29:30] while food was left to rot at ports and in warehouses [29:34] and die of treatable diseases as medicine expired on shelves. [29:38] And while Secretary Rubio continues to claim [29:40] that no one has died from his aid cuts, [29:43] I think we all know the truth. [29:45] He's continuing to endanger lives, [29:47] and even worse, is causing more waste, fraud, and abuse. [29:51] In February 2025, [29:52] he fired the USAID Inspector General Paul Martin [29:56] when he warned in February 2025 [29:58] that $489 million in food assistance [30:02] was at risk of spoilage or potential diversion. [30:05] In July 2025, he greenlit the State Department [30:08] incinerating 500 metric tons of emergency food assistance [30:12] that could have fed 1.5 million children. [30:15] The GAO defines waste as the use or expenditure of resources [30:19] carelessly, extravagantly, [30:22] or to no purpose. [30:24] Spending $800 million of taxpayer funds [30:27] on life-saving food aid that feeds no one [30:30] and then another $125,000 to incinerate it [30:34] seems to match this very definition of waste from the GAO. [30:38] So, Director Love-Grayer, in your expert opinion, [30:41] would incinerating life-saving food aid [30:43] and spending nearly $1 million in the process [30:46] be considered waste under GAO's definition? [30:49] Paying for food that never reached [30:54] its intended beneficiaries [30:56] would be something that we probably would classify as waste [30:59] if it could have been avoided. [31:00] And on top of that, spending money while wasting. [31:04] And spending money to do so if it could have been avoided [31:06] is something that probably would meet that definition. [31:09] Check. Waste. [31:12] The rapid termination of our foreign assistance programs [31:16] and the firing of expert USAID staff [31:18] caused many reported instances of wasted supplies and equipment. [31:23] There are reports that USAID inventory [31:26] and equipment were abandoned or auctioned off [31:29] at a significant loss to the U.S. government [31:32] due to a lack of guidance from USAID and the State Department. [31:35] Before USAID was illegally closed, [31:37] there was clear guidance on what to do with extra supplies. [31:40] But now, over a year after the administration [31:43] shuttered the USAID website, erasing that guidance, [31:47] the risk of waste continues. [31:49] That's why I introduced the Supplies Act, [31:51] which would require the State Department [31:53] to establish clear guidance on handling [31:55] unused supplies to ensure that aid is not diverted, [31:59] destroyed, or allowed to expire. [32:01] So, Mr. Kaplan, what guidance should be established [32:04] to prevent continued waste and to ensure our aid [32:07] helps the people we intended to save [32:09] not waste away in warehouses or on shelves [32:11] beyond the reach of those who need them? [32:14] Yeah, thanks for that question. [32:16] Look, after we issued that report in February, [32:20] that launched a multitude of USAID IG products. [32:24] And we did look exactly at that issue [32:26] at the disposition of assets, [32:29] that US government-funded assets in the field. [32:32] We dispersed auditors to eight countries, [32:34] including Ukraine, to account for taxpayer-funded equipment. [32:38] This is including IT equipment, laptops, armored vehicles. [32:42] I will say this, to USAID's credit, [32:45] and to the USAID staff still around, [32:48] and despite having limited staff... [32:50] Well, the agency shuttered. [32:52] So they're not USAID staff anymore. [32:54] At the time, but to their credit, [32:56] generally the assets were disposed of, [32:58] sold or donated according to plan. [33:00] And that is a testament to their responsibility [33:02] and the policies that were in place [33:04] and that they did follow. [33:06] So we gave a solid rating to USAID [33:09] for managing the disposition of assets [33:12] under some very extenuous circumstances. [33:14] Well, thank you, Mr. Kaplan. [33:15] And it's good that they have a solid rating, [33:17] but the agency is closed, shuttered illegally. [33:20] And so even with guidance in place, [33:22] now it would be nearly impossible [33:25] for the State Department to be able to implement [33:28] this guidance without expert staff. [33:31] In May 2025, the State Department's Inspector General [33:34] said that the Department may not have the staffing capacity [33:37] to implement the foreign aid programs now overseas. [33:40] So, Mr. Kaplan, what would the State Department need to do [33:43] to ensure its workforce has the capacity and capabilities [33:46] to prevent waste in our foreign assistance programs? [33:48] First of all, you need two things. [33:50] You need adequate people to adequately staff programs, [33:53] especially in complex emergency environments. [33:55] And we've, you know, we dinged USAID for years [33:58] that USAID was not, did not staff its awards well enough. [34:02] There was one statistic for every contracting officer. [34:05] There was one contracting officer for every $65 million [34:09] in USAID funds spent overseas. [34:12] One for 65. [34:14] DOD is one for 15 million. [34:16] One contracting officer for 15 million. [34:18] USAID's were one for 65. [34:20] Adequate staffing is essential. [34:22] We saw this in the Ethiopia aid response. [34:25] To the crisis there, only six of 16 positions were filled. [34:31] Six of 16. [34:33] USAID staff on the ground were looking left and right. [34:36] Where is everyone? [34:37] Where are the other 10 coming in to adequately monitor [34:39] and oversee these awards? [34:41] They never showed up. [34:42] And that placed U.S.-funded food commodities at great risk [34:45] and has resulted in a massive food diversion scandal, [34:50] also involving the U.N., by the way. [34:52] But massive food diversion scandal [34:54] because it was not adequately staffed [34:56] so that there could be a rapid response [35:00] to reports of misuse of funds. [35:02] So, yes, adequate staffing is vital [35:04] as foreign assistance moves forward. [35:06] Well, I appreciate you making that point, [35:08] and I thank you both for your work [35:09] to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, [35:11] and I'm hopeful that we see real efforts at that going forward. [35:15] With that, I yield back. [35:16] Thank you so much. [35:17] At this time, I'll recognize Representative Schneider [35:19] for five minutes. [35:21] Thank you, Chairman Mills, [35:22] and I want to thank the witnesses [35:24] for being here. [35:26] I think it is notable [35:27] that we have an imbalance [35:30] on the representation here. [35:33] We hear a lot about waste, fraud, and abuse [35:35] from my colleagues on the other side, [35:36] but evidently this hearing is not important enough [35:38] for them to come and explore it. [35:40] What you all do is important. [35:42] Mr. Captain, you mentioned [35:43] you talked about $1 to $65 million. [35:46] It's a matter of return, [35:47] and every one of our inspector generals, [35:49] every one of our people in jail [35:50] more than pay for their salaries [35:52] with what they protect in investments. [35:54] It's a matter of time [35:55] for what we spend, [35:56] and at a time when we're spending [35:57] a billion dollars or more in Iran a day, [36:00] having that inspection capacity is important, [36:05] and the money we spend on USAID development [36:08] is so important for us [36:10] to protect and defend American interests [36:13] around the world. [36:14] A couple of questions for you, Mr. Captain. [36:17] President Trump has undermined [36:19] the very oversight mechanisms [36:21] that was put in place [36:22] to mitigate fraud, waste, and abuse. [36:24] Trump, Elon Musk, and Secretary Rubio [36:27] fired nearly 10,000 USAID experts [36:30] overseeing billions of dollars [36:32] in our foreign assistance [36:33] with no plan for transitioning oversight [36:35] of USAID functions to the State Department. [36:37] On top of this, [36:38] the State Department laid off [36:39] another 1,300 state employees, [36:41] including many with foreign assistance [36:43] programming experience. [36:44] Public reporting suggests [36:45] that the process by which [36:46] the State Department assumed primary responsibility [36:49] for managing U.S. foreign aid programs [36:51] was rushed and uncoordinated. [36:53] So, Mr. Captain, [36:54] have those staff reductions [36:55] and the USAID-State merger [36:57] impacted the United States' ability [36:58] to mitigate fraud, waste, and abuse [37:00] in foreign assistance? [37:01] Look, I'll defer any questions [37:04] specifically about staffing [37:06] at the Department of State [37:08] to the Department of State. [37:09] We, as USAID-IG, [37:11] currently do not have access [37:13] to that information. [37:14] We'd like to have access [37:15] so we could do our oversight work [37:16] at State Department. [37:18] We don't have that access, [37:19] so respectfully, [37:20] I would defer that question. [37:21] I think, in general, [37:22] what I can tell you is that, [37:24] yes, given the billions of dollars [37:27] going to the most remote [37:29] or dangerous locations, [37:31] it's absolutely essential [37:32] to have experts [37:33] understanding the risks, [37:34] the vulnerabilities to programs, [37:36] understanding the implementers, [37:38] not just once it's awarded, [37:40] but at the pre-award stage. [37:42] To extend on that, [37:44] in your view, [37:45] do you think the State Department, [37:46] OIG, [37:47] has the capabilities and personnel [37:49] to oversee former USAID programming [37:52] or new initiatives [37:53] like the $2 billion [37:54] UN OCHA Memorandum of Understanding [37:57] announced in December? [37:58] I can tell you that USAID-IG [38:00] has the capacity [38:01] and longstanding historic experience [38:04] to oversee these funds. [38:05] We have been authorized [38:07] five different times by Congress [38:09] to provide oversight [38:10] of additional agencies [38:11] administering foreign assistance agencies. [38:13] We also really appreciate the support [38:15] and the confidence of Congress [38:17] in the recent SFOP's 26th bill [38:20] to fully fund USAID-IG [38:23] to provide continued oversight [38:25] of foreign assistance dollars. [38:27] We appreciate that confidence [38:28] on the part of Congress [38:30] and our office. [38:31] I know I have several [38:32] of our best law enforcement personnel [38:35] sitting right behind me. [38:36] We are hungry for the work. [38:37] We want to do the work. [38:38] We have an overseas presence, [38:40] which is unique to us. [38:41] We're in Ukraine, Israel, [38:43] El Salvador, Thailand, South Africa. [38:45] We're looking to expand to other places. [38:47] We are confident we can do the work. [38:49] It requires more oversight, not less. [38:51] Thank you. [38:52] Thank you. [38:53] And let me turn to Director Love-Grayer. [38:56] You're well aware last May, [38:59] Ranking Member Meeks, [39:01] Congresswoman Jacobs [39:03] requested GAO review [39:05] of the financial costs [39:06] and strategic consequences [39:08] of the Trump administration's [39:09] illegal effort to collapse USAID [39:11] into the State Department [39:12] and terminate thousands of state [39:14] and USAID contracts, grants, [39:16] and cooperative agreements. [39:18] Trump's USAID closure has led [39:20] to the needless deaths [39:21] of thousands of people around the world [39:23] and exposed the executive branch [39:24] to illegal actions, [39:25] which should cost U.S. taxpayers [39:27] millions of dollars. [39:28] Unfortunately, [39:29] not a single Republican [39:30] signed on to the letter. [39:31] It seems like potential waste, [39:33] fraud, and abuse [39:34] by the Trump administration [39:35] is something they're willing [39:36] to let slide. [39:37] So my question, [39:38] Director Love-Grayer, [39:39] is it is our understanding [39:42] that State has delayed providing [39:43] critically important information [39:44] in response to GAO's requests [39:46] for over six months [39:47] since that letter was sent, [39:49] which hinders congressional oversight, [39:50] limits accountability, [39:51] and reduces opportunities [39:52] to improve the process? [39:54] In your understanding, [39:55] why has State delayed responding [39:57] to these requests? [39:58] And what do you need [39:59] from Congress to succeed [40:00] in meeting GAO's [40:01] congressionally mandated [40:02] reporting requirements [40:03] on these issues? [40:04] Okay, good. [40:07] Thank you for the question. [40:08] You are correct. [40:09] We have had a request out [40:11] to the State Department [40:12] to understand what programming [40:14] they've assumed, [40:15] what programming they've actually [40:18] pulled over from USAID [40:19] along with their current programming, [40:21] what their staffing levels are, [40:22] due to the questions [40:23] that have been asked today [40:24] about whether they have [40:25] adequate staffing. [40:26] We are trying to understand [40:28] whether they have adequate staffing [40:29] for oversight, [40:30] as well as the processes [40:31] they've been using [40:32] to not only move those programs over, [40:34] but also to oversee them [40:36] in the future. [40:37] And we have been delayed [40:39] for almost eight months [40:40] in getting a response [40:41] to those questions. [40:42] It's not clear 100% [40:45] why we've been delayed. [40:46] We've heard part of it [40:48] is the transition of staff, [40:50] different non-state [40:52] and state agencies. [40:53] I'm not sure who's supposed [40:54] to be taking on [40:55] certain questions that we have, [40:56] but I did thankfully receive [40:57] some assurance [40:58] over this last Friday [40:59] that there will be [41:00] greater cooperation in the future. [41:02] What we need from Congress [41:03] is encouragement [41:04] of the agencies [41:05] to respond to GAO and OIG audits. [41:08] Again, this is information [41:09] that's critical to understanding [41:11] whether they are capable [41:12] or positioning themselves [41:13] to effectively oversee [41:14] all of this new foreign assistance. [41:16] We're unable to provide [41:17] that information [41:18] to Congress and taxpayers [41:20] in a timely way [41:21] when we're waiting [41:22] up to eight months [41:23] for basic answers to questions. [41:25] Thank you, [41:26] and I'll yield my time, [41:27] but before I do, [41:28] I ask the chair to join us [41:29] in helping to get that pressure [41:31] and let's get those reports done. [41:33] I yield back. [41:34] Thank you, Representative Schneider. [41:35] I will just have one rebuttal, [41:36] which is that USAID's budget [41:37] steadily increased over the years. [41:39] More money did not fix [41:40] USAID's systemic problems. [41:42] Further, the cost of compliance [41:43] can exceed the cost [41:44] of delivering foreign assistance [41:46] as well. [41:47] And Congress has a right [41:48] to fund or not fund [41:49] any department, agency, [41:50] and or bureau. [41:51] It's not illegal [41:52] for the president [41:53] to eliminate anything [41:54] where wage fraud and abuse [41:55] or create anything [41:56] such as Doge. [41:57] Mr. Chairman, [41:58] I have a UC request. [41:59] Without, [42:00] go ahead. [42:02] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [42:03] I would like to enter, [42:04] submit to the record, [42:05] a statement from Donald Sherman, [42:06] President and CEO [42:07] for Citizens for Responsibility [42:08] and Ethics in Washington, [42:10] and a statement [42:11] from Asher Moss, [42:12] the Executive Director [42:13] of the Alliance [42:14] for the American Leadership. [42:15] Both statements address [42:16] the disruption of oversight [42:17] with the illegal dismantling [42:18] of USAID [42:19] and detailed recommendations [42:20] for the path forward [42:21] and then a letter [42:22] to the committee [42:23] from the Campaign Legal Center, [42:24] a nonpartisan legal organization [42:25] to help strengthen [42:26] and enforce [42:27] campaign finance [42:28] and ethics laws [42:29] to prevent corruption. [42:30] It shall be entered. [42:33] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [42:34] With this, [42:36] I'd like to recognize [42:37] the gentleman from Ohio, [42:38] Mr. Davidson, [42:39] for five minutes. [42:40] Thank you, Chairman, [42:41] for holding this hearing [42:42] and, you know, [42:43] Mr. Kaplan, [42:44] I appreciate your work [42:45] as Inspector General. [42:47] And, you know, [42:48] when you think about [42:49] the premise, [42:50] you know, [42:51] somehow it's controversial [42:52] that America's resources [42:53] should at least [42:54] advance America's interests. [42:55] I think, [42:56] you know, [42:57] that's long overdue. [42:58] So when Secretary Rubio [42:59] came in [43:00] and started looking at, [43:01] you know, [43:02] USAID, [43:03] look, [43:04] we've talked about it [43:05] for years. [43:06] They felt they were [43:07] so autonomous [43:08] that they didn't even need [43:09] to respond [43:10] to the Secretary of State. [43:11] They certainly didn't [43:12] respond to Congress. [43:13] They would come [43:14] give us information, [43:15] but they would continue [43:16] on autopilot [43:17] doing the things [43:18] that they felt [43:19] were important [43:20] regardless [43:21] of what [43:22] the executive branch [43:23] told them, [43:24] which was money. [43:25] So I think it was [43:26] long overdue [43:27] for them to be shut down. [43:28] And the essential things [43:29] are being done. [43:30] And the things that, [43:31] you know, [43:32] some of my colleagues [43:33] are, you know, [43:34] grieved about [43:35] are, you know, [43:36] funding like millions [43:37] of dollars [43:38] for DEI initiatives [43:39] and climate agenda things. [43:40] Things like [43:41] transgender operas [43:42] or transgender surgeries. [43:43] And, you know, [43:44] advancing these [43:45] in particular [43:46] in countries [43:47] where their laws [43:48] found it offensive. [43:49] So if you look [43:50] at Guatemala, [43:51] for example, [43:52] they were being pressured [43:53] to change [43:54] their constitution [43:55] because it [43:56] is pro-life. [43:57] It protects life. [43:59] That was [44:00] the priority [44:01] for the administration, [44:02] the Biden administration, [44:03] instead of [44:04] trying to say, [44:05] well, [44:06] how do we work together [44:07] with Guatemala [44:08] to do the things [44:09] that are mutually important [44:10] to Guatemala [44:11] and the United States? [44:12] And when Guatemala [44:13] offered to try [44:14] to help [44:15] all the migration crisis [44:16] that was flooding [44:17] our country, [44:18] the Biden administration [44:19] was like, [44:20] no, no, no, [44:21] we're doing that on purpose. [44:22] Don't get in the way here. [44:23] To the point [44:24] of the prosecutor general [44:25] and put leverage [44:26] on the members [44:27] of Guatemala [44:28] and Congress [44:29] to do that, [44:30] all to advance, [44:31] you know, [44:32] an agenda [44:33] that isn't [44:34] the United States agenda. [44:35] It's a radical left agenda [44:36] run by the Democrat Party today. [44:37] So that's why [44:38] my colleagues [44:39] are here [44:40] venting [44:41] their frustrations today [44:43] as we turned off [44:44] their boodle bag. [44:45] So you look at, [44:46] Mr. Kaplan, [44:47] so much of this money [44:48] is essentially [44:49] laundered [44:50] through [44:51] non-government organizations. [44:53] I think there's [44:54] a lot of irony [44:55] in the word [44:56] laundering. [44:57] Of course, [44:58] it's funded [44:59] almost completely [45:00] by the government. [45:02] So can you talk [45:03] about the challenges [45:04] of transparency [45:05] when the money [45:06] goes through [45:07] non-government organizations [45:08] and maybe with [45:09] specific application [45:10] to Ukraine, [45:12] for example? [45:13] Thanks for that question, [45:14] especially [45:15] for referencing Ukraine. [45:16] We are the only [45:17] IG office [45:18] with full-time [45:19] criminal investigators [45:20] posted in Kyiv [45:21] that are [45:22] investigating [45:23] fraud [45:24] and corruption [45:25] involving non-security [45:26] U.S. foreign assistance [45:27] to Ukraine. [45:28] So, [45:29] very active [45:30] in that space [45:31] we always have been. [45:32] With NGOs, [45:33] I would, [45:34] again, [45:35] put it, [45:36] the three buckets [45:37] of recipients, [45:38] contractors, [45:39] NGOs, [45:40] and United Nations. [45:41] I'd put the U.N. [45:42] at the very bottom [45:43] in terms of transparency [45:44] and accountability, [45:45] way at the bottom, [45:46] like under this table [45:47] for transparency [45:48] and accountability. [45:49] NGOs really depends. [45:50] And if it's [45:51] a foreign NGO, [45:52] meaning an NGO [45:53] that's based in London [45:54] or based in Guatemala, [45:55] as opposed to an NGO [45:56] which is really [45:57] just another name [45:58] of an organization, [45:59] you know, [46:00] think Mercy Corps [46:01] based in Oregon, [46:02] Save the Children [46:03] with the D.C. Office, [46:04] Samaritan's Purse [46:05] in North Carolina, [46:06] there's different types [46:07] of aid organizations. [46:08] We had trouble [46:09] with foreign NGOs, [46:10] usually they're lawyers, [46:11] and they would, [46:12] you know, [46:13] NGOs based in Europe, [46:14] they would, [46:15] again, [46:16] try to hide behind [46:17] European general [46:18] data privacy [46:19] regulations [46:20] or some other thing [46:22] that seemed like [46:23] they'd make up [46:24] on the spot [46:25] as to why they couldn't [46:26] share information [46:27] regarding employees [46:28] who corrupted [46:29] or frauded [46:30] U.S. programs [46:31] or even worse, [46:32] sexually assaulted [46:33] beneficiaries [46:34] while performing [46:35] U.S. government [46:36] funded awards. [46:37] We would have [46:38] those fights, [46:39] we would navigate [46:40] those challenges, [46:41] we would [46:42] find solutions, [46:44] I think, [46:45] tightening up [46:46] award provisions [46:47] both with [46:48] the United Nations [46:49] and foreign NGOs [46:50] where transparency [46:51] and access [46:52] is much more [46:53] limited [46:54] and challenging [46:55] and recourse [46:56] is much more [46:57] limited too. [46:58] It's much harder [46:59] to find a [47:00] NGO based [47:01] in Geneva [47:02] than one based [47:03] in Ohio. [47:04] So, [47:05] that is a major [47:06] challenge. [47:07] Access and transparency, [47:08] that challenge continues, [47:09] not just USAID, [47:10] it's going to continue [47:11] at future foreign [47:12] assistance agencies. [47:13] Yeah, [47:14] and I think, [47:15] look, [47:16] you know, [47:17] if they're not [47:18] supportive, [47:19] if they're not [47:20] fully cooperative [47:21] in transparency, [47:22] why would they be [47:23] eligible for [47:24] another dime [47:25] of aid? [47:26] And, [47:27] in particular here, [47:28] you've got, [47:29] you know, [47:30] the United Nations [47:31] and the United States [47:32] that have been [47:33] working [47:34] with us [47:35] and the United States [47:36] and the United States [47:37] to offer us money [47:38] to fund abortions. [47:39] Domestically, [47:40] that's Hyde [47:41] and in foreign aid [47:42] it's Helms, [47:43] Helms Amendment. [47:44] And so, [47:45] you know, [47:46] we had statements [47:47] by East African [47:48] faith leaders [47:49] who viewed USAID [47:50] as quote [47:51] missionaries of evil [47:52] because the [47:53] Biden administration [47:54] hijacked the aid [47:55] programs to promote [47:56] abortion, [47:57] LGBTQ, [47:58] transgenderism [47:59] and the accountability [48:00] act of 2025 [48:01] to permanently [48:02] defund these agencies. [48:03] So, [48:04] I think that's the [48:05] question. [48:06] Can we get something [48:10] like that applied [48:11] and would you be able [48:12] to audit? [48:13] On the abortion [48:14] specifically or [48:15] access in general? [48:16] Correct. [48:17] You know, [48:18] compliance with law, [48:19] abortion as an example. [48:20] If that aid, [48:21] if that passes [48:22] and becomes law, [48:23] would that be easy [48:24] for you to audit [48:25] and apply? [48:26] Whatever compliance [48:27] requirements were [48:28] imposed on [48:29] aid recipients [48:30] by either Congress [48:31] or the state? [48:32] Well, [48:33] you know, [48:34] if there is a [48:35] substantial violation [48:36] of policy [48:37] laws, [48:38] rules, [48:39] regulations on [48:40] the books, [48:41] that would be [48:42] something that we [48:43] absolutely would be [48:44] able to audit [48:45] and investigate. [48:46] It would be our [48:47] responsibility to [48:48] do so. [48:49] If a law is on [48:50] the books [48:51] and an organization [48:52] receiving U.S. [48:53] taxpayer dollars [48:54] is violating that [48:55] law, [48:56] that absolutely [48:57] would be in our [48:58] remit. [48:59] Thank you. [49:00] I want to reiterate [49:01] my colleagues [49:02] who requested [49:03] that the [49:04] administration [49:05] cooperate with [49:06] the GAO review [49:07] that was requested [49:08] in a bipartisan way [49:09] by a ranking [49:10] member [49:11] and myself [49:12] to look [49:13] at the impacts [49:14] of the illegal [49:15] dismantling [49:16] of USAID [49:17] and the foreign [49:18] assistance cuts. [49:19] I also want [49:20] to follow on [49:21] my colleague [49:22] Mr. Davidson's [49:23] questions. [49:24] Ms. [49:25] Love-Grayer, [49:27] he highlighted [49:28] the difficulties [49:29] in, [49:30] you know, [49:31] when you're [49:32] giving money [49:33] to NGOs, [49:34] but the Trump [49:35] administration [49:36] has actually [49:37] taken dramatic [49:38] steps to change [49:39] how we're doing [49:40] foreign assistance. [49:41] For example, [49:42] in the past, [49:43] we would give [49:44] NGOs money [49:45] to deliver [49:46] key global [49:47] health assistance, [49:48] including in countries [49:49] known to have [49:50] high levels [49:51] of corruption. [49:52] However, [49:53] now the State [49:54] Department [49:55] will provide [49:56] health assistance [49:57] directly to [49:58] those governments [49:59] through government [50:00] to government [50:01] assistance. [50:02] So, [50:03] I'm just [50:04] wondering, [50:05] you know, [50:06] is this [50:07] an appropriate [50:08] tool to enable [50:09] long-term [50:10] sustainable [50:11] transition [50:12] off foreign [50:13] assistance? [50:14] Its implementation [50:15] actually requires [50:16] enhanced oversight [50:17] and risk [50:18] mitigation [50:19] techniques [50:20] to prevent [50:22] fraud. [50:23] So, [50:24] in your view, [50:25] what risks [50:26] do such [50:27] changes [50:28] present? [50:29] And does [50:30] the State [50:31] Department [50:32] have [50:33] the [50:34] ability [50:35] to [50:36] take [50:37] action [50:38] on [50:39] the [50:40] risk [50:41] of [50:42] fraud? [50:43] Well, [50:44] I think [50:46] we have [50:47] a [50:48] very [50:49] diverse [50:50] set [50:51] of [50:52] resources [50:53] in [50:54] the [50:55] State [50:56] Department. [50:57] And [50:58] I think [50:59] one [51:00] of the [51:01] most [51:02] important [51:03] things [51:04] is that [51:05] government [51:06] to government [51:07] can be [51:08] a little [51:09] less [51:10] transparent. [51:11] So there [51:12] are risks [51:13] to government [51:14] to government. [51:15] There are [51:16] actions you [51:17] can take [51:18] to improve [51:19] those risks, [51:20] such as [51:21] building in [51:22] requirements [51:23] for certain [51:24] types of [51:25] reporting [51:26] and building [51:27] that into [51:28] the actual [51:29] system. [51:30] And [51:31] we have [51:32] in the [51:33] past [51:34] identified [51:35] weaknesses [51:36] in both [51:37] State and [51:38] USAID in [51:39] terms of [51:40] having a [51:41] sufficient [51:42] number of [51:43] staff to [51:44] conduct [51:45] oversight [51:46] with the [51:47] new programs [51:48] that State [51:49] is [51:50] administering [51:51] and with [51:52] the fact [51:53] that they [51:54] have not [51:55] increased [51:56] their staff, [51:57] this is [51:58] an area [51:59] of concern [52:00] that we [52:01] need to [52:02] address. [52:03] So we [52:04] have [52:05] requested [52:06] the [52:07] Department [52:08] of State [52:09] to [52:10] address [52:17] the [52:18] issue [52:19] of [52:20] waste [52:21] fraud [52:22] and abuse [52:23] in [52:24] foreign [52:25] assistance. [52:26] So we [52:27] have [52:28] requested [52:29] the [52:30] Department [52:31] of State [52:32] to [52:33] address [52:35] the [52:36] issue [52:37] of waste [52:38] fraud and [52:39] abuse. [52:40] And we [52:41] have [52:42] requested [52:43] the [52:44] Department [52:45] of State [52:46] to [52:47] address [52:48] the [52:49] issue [52:50] of [52:51] waste [52:52] fraud [52:53] and abuse. [52:54] And we [52:55] have [52:56] requested [52:57] the [52:58] Department [53:00] of State [53:01] to [53:02] address [53:03] the [53:04] issue [53:05] of [53:06] waste [53:07] fraud and [53:08] abuse and [53:09] abuse. [53:10] And we [53:11] have [53:12] requested [53:13] the [53:14] Department [53:15] of State [53:16] to [53:17] address [53:18] this [53:19] issue. [53:20] And we [53:21] have requested [53:22] the [53:23] Department [53:24] of State [53:25] to [53:26] address [53:27] the [53:28] issue [53:29] of [53:32] waste [53:33] fraud [53:34] and abuse. [53:35] So we [53:36] have [53:37] get past some of the concerns that USAID has raised with regard to providing information [53:43] moving forward. [53:44] So we are at a bit of a standstill, but we're hoping to move forward with some progress [53:48] soon. [53:49] For USAID, I'd say we believe, and I think Congress just confirmed in SFOPs in the state [53:58] appropriations bill that USAID has continued oversight jurisdiction over programs under [54:03] part one of the Foreign Assistance Act, which is basically all humanitarian and development. [54:08] We have the expertise to do so. [54:10] We know the people's projects, problems, places where the fraud occurs. [54:15] We are working with the Department of State to try to obtain access both operationally [54:20] to State Department systems and records and personnel. [54:23] It has been to date the position of state and the state IG that we, USAID IG, despite [54:28] our expertise, should only look backwards, only look at allegations that came in pre-July [54:33] 1, not post-July 1. [54:35] We appreciate Congress's support. [54:37] We appreciate the ongoing efforts. [54:38] We work with the Department to get access to state records and information so we can [54:44] continue to combat fraud, waste, corruption, diversion, sexual exploitation and abuse, [54:50] human trafficking, so on and so forth, in foreign assistance programs, because we know [54:54] what we're doing. [54:55] Thank you. [54:56] Well, I urge the administration to cooperate with you all. [54:58] These investigations are important. [55:00] We all want to address waste, fraud, and abuse, but what they're doing is actually making [55:03] it harder to do so. [55:04] Mr. Chairman? [55:06] Thank you so much. [55:07] At this time, I'd like to recognize Ms. Madeline Dean. [55:08] Thank you. [55:10] Ms. Dean from Pennsylvania for five minutes. [55:11] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. [55:14] I'm glad we're having this hearing. [55:15] It is important to focus in on auditing, forensic auditing, identification of waste, fraud, [55:21] and abuse whenever taxpayer money is involved. [55:25] So I thank both of you for testifying today. [55:27] Thank you for the work that you do. [55:29] And Mr. Kaplan and Ms. Love-Grayer, I want to enlist your help, because what we hear [55:34] in this committee, and so often from the administration, is misinformation. [55:40] So we can talk about things that we're so concerned about, but why do we have to do [55:44] what's so important? [55:45] And I have a lot of reasons to do it, and we've done it, and we deserve it, and we'll [55:48] do it, and we'll do it again. [55:50] We may have to do it again, but we're doing it again. [55:52] We're doing it. [55:53] We're doing it. [55:54] We're doing it. [55:55] And the truth is, I'm so glad you've been here. [55:56] You've been doing it. [55:57] You've been doing it. [55:58] Have a good night, everyone. [55:59] Have a good night. [56:00] And thank you, everyone. [56:01] We'll be right back. [56:02] You know, Mr. Kaplan is a great man, Mr. President. [56:03] And he's also a great Mommy. [56:04] He's a wonderful, wonderful man. [56:05] here today. $70,000 for production of a DEI musical in Ireland. Shocking. You know what the DEI of it [56:14] was? Number one, it was not USAID. This was a State Department grant, not USAID. In 2022, the U.S. [56:22] ambassador hosted an event featuring Grammy-winning folk duo Terese and Giddens, along with other [56:30] Irish and American musicians. Horrible. How did we ever let that happen? $47,000 for transgender [56:38] opera in Colombia. How often have we heard about the transgender opera? I'm sick of it, because [56:45] guess what? It wasn't USAID. They did not fund it. The White House appears to be referring to a [56:51] $25,000 State Department grant that was in Bogota to stage an opera as one, it is called, [57:00] composed by the U.S. State Department. The U.S. State Department is not a U.S. State Department. [57:00] The U.S. State Department is not a U.S. State Department. The U.S. State Department is not a U.S. [57:00] state department, and it is composed by Laura Kaminski. It is a well-known opera in the [57:04] United States and highly acclaimed by its audiences. How about $32,000 for a transgender comic [57:10] book in Peru. We've heard that one from the president, from this majority party. Wrong. USAID [57:17] did not fund this. And it was not specifically transgender. Instead the grant, State Department [57:24] grant provided $32,000 under the guise of public diplomacy to Peru's Education Department to [57:30] to cover expenses to produce a tailor-made comic book [57:34] featuring an LGBTQ plus hero, not USAID. [57:41] Let's talk about the vast, vast majority of what has been cut. [57:44] Critical life-saving aid. [57:46] I've purposely brought these with me. [57:48] I was recently in West Africa visiting programs [57:51] impacted by the shuttering of USAID, [57:54] programs helping pregnant women with vitamins. [57:58] The United States pulled out of that program [58:01] life-saving vitamins for the women's nourishment [58:04] as they were pregnant. [58:06] Programs that measure, maybe you've seen this band used. [58:10] It is used around the arm of a baby. [58:13] And if you see the red, they are malnourished. [58:18] I can't tell you the number of arms [58:20] that I saw in programs in Ghana and Togo [58:23] where the children were in the red. [58:25] Children the size of infants when they were actually toddlers. [58:31] What did we do? [58:32] We pulled out. [58:33] We're not gonna do that anymore because of the trans operas. [58:36] Honest to God, help me with the truth. [58:40] This is already costing lives. [58:41] Studies have estimated that USAID's dismantling [58:45] will lead to 14 million additional deaths globally. [58:48] Think of the irony. [58:50] Think of the hypocrisy. [58:52] Think of the paradox. [58:54] The Trump administration wants you and us [58:57] to gut the mechanisms and staff that are essential [59:00] to mitigate against waste, [59:02] fraud and abuse. [59:04] And so let me ask you one question. [59:07] Speaking of waste, as my colleague said, [59:10] let's repeat this horrific example. [59:12] In 2025, following the president's shuttering, [59:16] the United States government chose to destroy [59:18] nearly 500 metric tons of emergency food assistance [59:22] procured by USAID. [59:25] Starving children, their families hungry too. [59:30] Instead of using it to feed as many as 1.5 million hungry [59:33] children that had already been purchased, [59:35] $800,000 worth of food, it cost another $125,000 [59:41] to incinerate it. [59:42] Would anyone in this room oversee a program [59:44] that would do that? [59:46] Would anyone? [59:47] Would you? [59:57] That's certainly. [59:58] Could have stood up and stopped it. [1:00:03] I consider that grotesque waste. [1:00:05] I consider that a fraud on the American people. [1:00:09] And I consider it abuse of the global health system. [1:00:13] I don't know if, were any of my photographs available [1:00:16] from my trip, were they shown while I was speaking? [1:00:21] Just to show you. [1:00:22] In the middle is a vaccine clinic in Togo [1:00:26] where the village elders were encouraging the mothers, [1:00:29] the fathers to come with their children. [1:00:31] We helped administer vaccines as of course, [1:00:34] we have the nonsense here in this country [1:00:36] under Secretary of Health and Human Services. [1:00:39] These parents were so eager to make sure their children [1:00:42] were vaccinated against disease so that they could thrive. [1:00:45] You can see the mothers holding their babies. [1:00:47] You can see that baby being weighed [1:00:50] and not nourished enough. [1:00:52] They measure their arms, they measure their development [1:00:54] and they come in regularly. [1:00:57] UNICEF is doing the middle program, U.S. isn't helping. [1:01:00] And these other programs, the United States dollars [1:01:03] have been shuttered. [1:01:04] And that's just a handful of programs. [1:01:06] There are programs around women and girls, [1:01:10] sexual abuse, rape, incest. [1:01:14] What did we do? [1:01:15] We visited one such program, our money is gone. [1:01:18] And so. [1:01:19] This program is far less effective. [1:01:21] We saw a woman who was waiting for help. [1:01:24] She had been badly beaten. [1:01:26] We went in and visited with her. [1:01:27] She was bloodied. [1:01:28] And in order to get to the next doctor with no U.S. funding [1:01:32] in the program that had been U.S. funded, she needed $5. [1:01:37] She didn't have it. [1:01:38] So guess what? [1:01:39] The person who beat her up was called to come pick her up. [1:01:44] That's failure of U.S. leadership. [1:01:47] I will argue till my dying day that we should spend more [1:01:51] in humanitarian aid in this kind of financial assistance [1:01:54] around the world. [1:01:55] Dollars spent like this magnify versus dollars spent in war, [1:02:01] a billion dollars a day taking lives. [1:02:04] I ask for your help to please stop the majority party [1:02:07] and the administration from putting forward [1:02:09] these lies that are actually harming health around the world. [1:02:13] I yield back. [1:02:14] And I thank you for the indulgence. [1:02:17] My pleasure. [1:02:18] I understand the passion that we have. [1:02:20] And certainly, it is always important for us [1:02:22] to ensure that money gets to those who are in need. [1:02:24] But the problem we have seen is that the increase in U.S. aid [1:02:27] funding hasn't led to better oversight, [1:02:30] but more waste, fraud, and abuse has demonstrated. [1:02:32] It's led to better outcomes, Chairman. [1:02:34] To include, Ms. Steen, the exact program [1:02:37] that you talked about when it comes to global health funds, [1:02:39] where falsified documents of over 359 unauthorized wire [1:02:43] transfers just in the U.S. aid-funded bank accounts. [1:02:47] And so this is why the OIG being referred to this case, [1:02:50] the U.S. Attorney's Office of the District [1:02:52] of Columbia, which declined to pursue criminal prosecution, [1:02:55] but U.S. aid issued the former subawardee, another employee, [1:02:58] a five-year debarment from working. [1:03:00] So these programs have been grossly abused. [1:03:04] But the necessary aid and support to those in need, [1:03:07] certainly, we should find. [1:03:08] And that's why this is about finding a pathway to ensure [1:03:11] that we can get control of the waste, fraud, and abuse [1:03:13] and guarantee that the money gets to those in need. [1:03:16] I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony [1:03:18] and the members for their questions. [1:03:20] The members of the subcommittee may have additional questions [1:03:22] for the witnesses. [1:03:23] And we will ask you to respond to these in writing. [1:03:25] Pursuant to committee rules, all members [1:03:28] have five days to submit statements, questions, [1:03:30] and extraneous materials for the record subject [1:03:32] to the link limitations. [1:03:34] Without objection, the committee stands adjourned. [1:03:36] I thank you both so much for this opportunity [1:03:38] and look forward to working with you in the future, [1:03:40] as well as for helping to support more transparency [1:03:42] and no stonewalling. [1:03:43] With that, we're adjourned.