Floor Statements

Madam President, I join the POW*MIA Awareness Rally Corp. of Pocatello, ID, in acknowledging National POW/MIA Recognition Day this September 18, 2026.

I am grateful for the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency's, DPAA, steady and often challenging work to meet its responsibility of recovering America's servicemembers. Each year, the DPAA leads the creation of a poster commemorating National POW/MIA Recognition Day, as ceremonies are held across the country to honor those who were held captive and returned, as well as those who remain missing. The year's poster reads, ``Warrior Ethos: `I will always place the mission first . . . I will never leave a fallen comrade.' ''

Second Lieutenant Charles Atteberry, a World War II servicemember from Parma who had been missing and unidentified for 80 years, is one of the Idaho servicemembers most recently returned home. Through the U.S. military's use of DNA testing, Lt. Atteberry was identified from a mass grave in Taiwan and returned to Idaho in 2025. Lt. Atteberry's brother Lloyd also served in the military as a pilot during World War II and is still considered missing in action since he was reportedly shot down in 1943.

On June 10, 2026, the DPAA also accounted for U.S. Army Air Forces Staff Sgt. Harold T. Thompson, 24, who was killed during World War II. The DPAA reported, ``In the winter of 1944, Thompson was assigned to the 718th Bombardment Squadron, 449th Bombardment Group, in Italy. On Jan. 30, he was serving as a gunner aboard a B-24 Liberator bomber on a mission to Udine, Italy. The plane was shot down while returning from its mission and was last sighted north of the Isle of Morgo off the Italian coast near the town of Grado. Three crew members made it out of the plane before the crash, but only one survived. The other seven members, including Thompson, were believed to have still been in the aircraft when it crashed.''

As we celebrate Idahoans' return home, we maintain hope for the return of Idaho's other servicemembers, including the eight who remain unaccounted for from the Vietnam war. This includes Major William Ellsworth Lemmons, who was on a visual reconnaissance mission in South Vietnam on June 18, 1967, when the aircraft he piloted failed to return from the mission for unknown reasons and was declared missing. Major Lemmons is memorialized on the Courts of the Missing at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific and Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall in Washington, DC.

I thank America's servicemembers, veterans, and their families for their extraordinary commitment to our country, as I remain deeply grateful to those who keep attention on bringing every American servicemember and the DPAA and its partners working steadily to provide the fullest possible accounting of missing U.S. personnel to their families and our country.

To support these efforts, I continue to use every opportunity to press for enactment of the Bring Our Heroes Home Act. This legislation would help eliminate obstacles preventing families and caseworkers from accessing the records needed for recovering America's POWs and MIA.

We honor America's missing servicemembers and those they served beside by never giving up in our pursuit of finding them and bringing them home.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate immediately execute the order in relation to the Westercamp nomination.

Madam President, in response to the discussion that my colleague from Oregon has just engaged in, far too often, our Nation's healthcare system incentivizes low-value, high-cost services. For years, bipartisan policy makers throughout Capitol Hill and across administrations have endeavored to disrupt this flawed paradigm, especially in the Medicare Program. Unfortunately, despite progress to incorporate new value-based payment arrangements, Medicare's underlying reimbursement structure continues to rely heavily on the volume of services provided, rather than the quality of care.

In addition to failing patients and providers, Medicare's perverse financial incentives contribute to massive waste and abuse. Well- meaning clinicians often face opaque coverage guidelines that can result in denied reimbursements, while malicious actors exploit bureaucratic vulnerabilities to defraud the program.

Through the wasteful and inappropriate service reduction model--work WISeR--CMS is testing whether enhanced technology can help address these systemic failures. For a limited set of nonemergency services with a documented history of abuse and overuse, providers in select States must submit claims for review. Claims that meet existing Medicare coverage requirements are quickly approved, offering providers payment predictability.

When issues arise, board-certified clinicians--not technological machines, board-certified clinicians--intervene to make the final decision. The potential benefit of this ``detect and prevent strategy'' is substantial. For example, Medicare spending on skin substitutes, one of the chosen WISeR model services, increased and--hear this--increased from $256 million in 2019 to $10 billion in 2024. It doesn't even take a technological machine to tell you that something is wrong there.

Proactive, technology-based scrutiny could have detected this outlier spending growth and protected both patients and taxpayers.

Regrettably, misinformation about this model has sparked fears of delays in essential patient care and additional burdens on providers.

Later today, the Senate will proceed to a resolution to stop this important work of the WISeR model. Every Member of this body agrees that patients should have access to high-quality care, providers deserve predictable payment for services, and avoidable waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare should be stopped. Ending this pilot program prematurely will deprive CMS of a useful tool to accomplish each of those goals.

And I urge my colleagues to consider the facts and oppose this resolution.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have eight requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

COMMITtEE ON ARMED SERVICES

The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on a nomination.

COMMITtEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS

The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

COMMITtEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on a nomination.

COMMITtEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a business meeting.

COMMITtEE ON FINANCE

The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

COMMITtEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 11 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

COMMITtEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on a nomination.

COMMITtEE ON THE JUDICIARY

The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 16, 2026, at 9 a.m., to conduct an executive business meeting.

Mr. President, I commend the Administration for Children and Families, ACF, for its achievement in securing the participation of all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico in the A Home for Every Child Campaign.

This milestone represents a meaningful bipartisan accomplishment: every jurisdiction choosing to join a voluntary effort focused on improving the lives of vulnerable children and families. At a time when consensus can be difficult to achieve, this campaign demonstrates that leaders across the political spectrum can unite around the fundamental goal of ensuring every child has a safe, stable, and loving home.

This initiative is rooted in Idaho, where it is transforming the child welfare system and resolving the shortage of quality foster homes. The Gem State's model has improved foster care outcomes by achieving higher home-to-child ratios, prioritizing kinship recruitment, and preventing both unnecessary placements into care and burnout by current foster families. With the support of every State, that innovative approach is now being successfully implemented at the national level by Dr. Alex Adams, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Family Support, who previously served as Idaho's Health and Welfare Director.

As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I was proud to help enact the Working Families Tax Cuts that made the adoption tax credit partially refundable up to $5,000, helping offset the costs of adopting a child. And the Trump administration announced plans to help foster youth participate in the Trump Accounts created in the law to help the next generation build wealth,

with Idaho pledging to adopt policies that will allow all its foster youth the same opportunity.

By strengthening collaboration between the Federal Government and States, ACF is helping transform outcomes for children and families while establishing a model for strategic Federal-State partnerships. I thank the foster families across Idaho and the country who provide the stability and love every child deserves. I commend ACF, participating State and Territorial leaders, and all those working to make this vision a reality.

Mr. President, with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representative Mike Simpson, we recognize the 100-year anniversary of the Bannock County Veterans Memorial Building, on North Johnson Avenue in Pocatello, ID.

This beautiful and beloved building adds to the appeal and history of the community. Architect Frank Paradice, Jr., designed the timeless brick building with a tiled roof and brickwork accents, and it was built by contractor Alex Mathers from 1924 to 1926. As the Idaho Heritage Trust described, ``This site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as part of the Lincoln-Johnson Avenue Residential Historic District, though it stands in stark contrast to the typical craftsman/bungalow-style single family homes that typify the rest of the neighborhood.'' Earlier this year, community members came together to celebrate the grand reopening of the building after it underwent renovation following considerable water damage. Many worked to secure resources and restore this local asset.

Over the past century, the building has been a cherished community treasure for the veterans and military families it pays tribute to, as well as for many others in the community who have used the building for special events. The Bannock County Veterans Memorial Association maintains the veterans memorial building, which is a community center and hub for veterans' support services. Numerous veterans organizations hold regular meetings in its meeting and event space. Local residents have also hosted wedding receptions and other private events in the building over the years, and it has been the backdrop for photographs and other gatherings marking personal milestones and celebrations.

The building also houses a memorial museum for those who have served in all branches of the military, with local servicemembers donating artifacts to its collection. An official replica of Pocatello native Sergeant James Edmund Johnson's Medal of Honor is among the esteemed items displayed at the museum. Sergeant Johnson was one of 48 awardees with significant Idaho connections to receive our country's highest military award for heroism by those serving with America's Armed Forces. His medal is a reminder of the bravery, grit, and unrelenting responsibility to others on which our great State and country are built.

At the February 2026 reopening of the building, Bannock County Veterans Memorial Building historian Miguel Dominic recognized the veteran volunteers who have given immensely in service to our country and continue to sustain the building and serve the community. He reflected, ``May this memorial building continue to stand as a beacon of honor, fellowship and unwavering ideals for generations to come. As we stand together in this memorial building, we honor not only the heroes whose names and sacrifices are remembered here, but also the heroes who continue to serve within these very walls.''

We wish the residents of Bannock County and Pocatello well, as we acknowledge the century the Bannock County Veterans Memorial Building has memorialized Idaho Veterans, while framing countless, valuable conversations, achievements, and celebrations. Congratulations to the Pocatello community and Bannock County on this considerable milestone of an Idaho gem.

Mr. President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading and, in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 685 submitted earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; that the preamble be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 686, which is at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; that the preamble be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, the Democratic leader, the Republicans are working to reduce healthcare costs and lower premiums, but this amendment is not in order. Creation of such a point of order is outside the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee and is therefore not appropriate for inclusion in a budget resolution.

Adopting this amendment would jeopardize the privilege of the budget resolution and lose our ability to use reconciliation to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. Therefore, under the provisions of section 305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I raise a point of order that the amendment offered is not germane.

Mr. President, the focused budget blueprint before us today is necessary to quickly fund ICE, Border Patrol Agents, and support staff.

Since the Finance Committee is not instructed in this budget resolution, this is not a tax, trade, or healthcare reform bill. The budget makes that clear.

Adding a deficit-neutral reserve fund and finance jurisdiction is nongermane, as it expands the scope of the budget resolution.

Therefore, under the provisions of section 305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I raise a point of order that the amendment offered is not germane.

Mr. President, we just voted briefly, a few moments ago, against the Sanders MFN amendment. This is a similar amendment. It is outside the purpose of the budget resolution.

I encourage Senators to vote no and support the focused budget blueprint before us and quickly fund ICE and Border Patrol agents and support staff.

Vote on Amendment No. 5336

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise to speak in opposition to the Speedy Tariff Refund Act of 2026.

I share my colleagues' support for ensuring that any administrative processes are efficient and easy to navigate, especially for small businesses, but this legislation is unnecessary. The bill would require the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to swiftly refund tariffs collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The CBP is already in the process of doing just that. In fact, yesterday, CBP launched its new portal through which importers of all sizes may file declarations requesting refunds. The portal is called the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries--the CAPE-- portal. This portal will help CBP manage the expected high volume of submissions to ensure that importers can track the refund process.

CBP is committed to helping the public navigate this portal. In fact, it released written guidance and is holding public webinars, including one held earlier today.

As CBP demonstrated to the satisfaction of the U.S. Court of International Trade, this is a necessary process given the complexities of tariff refund calculations. By all accounts, CBP is now expeditiously complying with the court's order.

For these reasons, I object.

I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise in opposition to S. 3948, the Direct File Act of 2026.

After listening to those who have described why we need it, you might say: Well, how could there be a different story or another side of the coin?

I will tell you. There is a huge disagreement about the facts, and there is a huge disagreement about what has happened, and there is another side of the coin.

This bill seeks to reverse the Treasury Department's recent suspension of the Direct File Program. Direct File was an unauthorized, unnecessary program that wasted taxpayer funds and presented a clear conflict of interest by empowering the IRS to be not only the evaluator of tax returns and the enforcer of tax returns but the preparer of tax returns, empowering the IRS to prepare tax returns for the same taxpayers that it was later going to audit.

And, by the way, when that did happen with some of these taxpayers, they were successfully audited by the IRS for errors in their returns.

As part of the Biden administration's so-called Inflation Reduction Act, congressional Democrats provided the IRS with $15 million to study the feasibility of providing a new, direct e-file program. On the same day that the study was due to Congress, the Biden administration announced the launch of a limited pilot Direct File Program. This so- called pilot program quickly expanded, spending tens of millions of dollars, despite the narrow mandate provided by Congress.

As part of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, Congress further directed the Treasury Department to evaluate and study alternatives to direct file.

Treasury's subsequent October 2025 report found significant concerns with the Biden administration program, warranting its suspension.

What were those concerns? In its report, the Treasury found that the Direct File Program accounted for just two-tenths of 1 percent--get that--0.2 percent of the 146 million tax returns filed in the year 2024.

Yet despite its small footprint, Direct File cost taxpayers at least $41 million to administer. That is $138 per return in 2024 and nearly three times the total funding authorized by Congress. Alarmingly, the Treasury acknowledged that these figures likely underestimate the true cost of the Direct File Program with the IRS failing to include costs for employee support, online services, and submission processing--among others.

A later report from the nonpartisan Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration further confirmed that Direct File had poor performance. Contrary to what you had been told, that everyone loved it, it had poor performance.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report found that nearly 60 percent of the registered users abandoned their return before they even filed it, meaning that less than half of the registered users even ended up using Direct File to submit a return.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration also estimated that over 3,000 returns were filed with preventable errors burdening taxpayers and delaying refunds.

There are actually free file options available. This notion that this is TurboTax and H&R Block trying to divert people into its system is simply false. Ultimately, the Democrats' Direct File experiment demonstrates that the IRS can better serve taxpayers by highlighting existing free filing options and improving basic customer service rather than diverting a growing share of its resources and attention to redundant, expensive government-run programs.

Now, what do I mean when I say there are alternatives? Looking at the last year when Direct File was operational, it processed 296,531 accepted returns out of 160 million total filings. That is the .2 percent number.

There are multiple options available to almost all U.S. taxpayers to be eligible to use programs like IRS Free File, a public-private partnership that has no cost. In the same year that 296,000 people used Free File, after I think--I don't know if that number is before or after 60 percent of them declined to stay in the program--Free File filed 1.9 million returns for those who wanted to do it--a public- private partnership.

In addition, there is a group called the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program and the Tax Counseling for the Elderly Program--both of which provide free, in-person preparation at thousands of locations nationwide. And these two programs themselves prepared approximately 2.7 million more tax returns for free for people in 2024, vastly exceeding Direct File's reach at a fraction of the cost.

The myth is that people have to go pay money to get their tax returns prepared, when the reality is there are multiple private sector and private-public partnerships that are available for almost all Americans to have their tax returns prepared for free.

Ultimately, the Democrats' Direct File experiment demonstrates that the IRS can better serve taxpayers by highlighting existing free filing tax options and improving its own basic customer service, which it did this year, rather than diverting a growing share of its resources and attention to a redundant, expensive government-run program. Therefore, Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 107.

The resolution seeks to overturn a Trump administration IRS notice intended to prevent abuse of the forthcoming phasedown of tax credits for wind and solar projects by requiring project developers to take meaningful steps toward project construction.

While Democrats assert that reversing this notice would help with affordability issues, the result would actually be exactly the opposite. Overturning this notice would create more uncertainty and unpredictability for current projects and discourage focus on more reliable and affordable energy sources.

Under the Biden administration, the Democrats enacted massive new incentives for ``green energy'' projects under the Inflation Reduction Act, abandoning secure, reliable American energy sources for unreliable and costly solar and wind projects. As Republicans predicted, the cost of the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act subsidies far exceeded predictions. A 2023 report by Goldman Sachs found that the cost of these Green New Deal incentives could exceed $1.2 trillion-- more than three times what the Democrats claimed.

As part of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, Republicans succeeded in reining in these high costs while also preserving tax incentives for reliable baseload power like hydroelectric and nuclear. Congressional Republicans also imposed new, prohibited foreign entity restrictions to prevent the flow of American taxpayers' dollars to Chinese companies and encourage energy supply chains to return to the United States.

This resolution would ultimately disrupt important progress toward achieving President Trump's ``America First'' energy agenda, create unpredictability by overturning guidance, while also impeding the Treasury Department's official work to implement the Working Families Tax Cut Act.

I encourage my colleagues to vote against this resolution.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, with my Idaho congressional delegation colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representatives Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher, I congratulate the Idaho Small Business Development Center, SBDC, for 40 years of advancing small business success in the Gem State.

Statewide expansion, broadened infrastructure, and modernized assistance have been hallmarks of the Idaho SBDC's 40 years of support for Idaho small businesses. In 1986, Idaho SBDC opened at Boise State University with the assistance of the U.S. Small Business Administration. Over the next 5 years, Idaho SBDC regional centers expanded statewide to provide critical counseling services for budding entrepreneurs across Idaho's 44 counties. The Idaho SBDC's reach was extended further in 2003 with the opening of the TECenter in Nampa to support startups and the Boise Business Accelerator opening in 2008. Then, amid the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Idaho SBDC reports its response helped preserve more than 2,600 Idaho jobs. In the years since, Idaho SBDC has provided significant economic support, celebrating $58.8 million in sales growth for its clients in 2024 alone.

The centers offer extensive services to help Idaho small businesses succeed. These services include customized training and business planning and expansion. SBDC staff also help with the development of marketing and advertising plans, providing market research, cost analysis, and organizational development. Securing capital is another important aspect of starting and maintaining a business, and staff also assist with loan information for any stage of a business, cash flow projections and analysis, and the purchase or sale of a business. Furthermore, the Idaho SBDC assists with more specialized needs beyond its core support. These focused services include assistance with complying with environmental regulations, navigating government contracting, cyber security, selling into foreign markets, and more.

The Idaho SBDC has leveraged its assistance to Idaho businesses into significant economic impacts. From 1986-2026, Idaho SBDC indicates the center's support has resulted in $984 million in capital formation and a sales increase of $1.29 billion. Importantly, since its start, Idaho SBDC has helped start 2,149 businesses and helped create 18,482 jobs. The wide range of businesses Idaho SBDC has assisted reflects the diversity of our great State. Specialty shops, restaurants, bakeries, manufacturers, and so much more are among the Idaho SBDC's success stories. The first page of Idaho SBDC's success highlights on its website illustrates its far-reaching assistance to a specialized drilling company, law firm, irrigation systems company, fish farm- processor, rare bookstore, and firearms training range.

We have been proud to support this important work by advocating for pro-growth policies that help small businesses hire, invest, and innovate. This includes many of the tax provisions made permanent in the Working Families Tax Cut Act, along with a resounding push for regulatory relief from costly requirements placed on businesses of all sizes by the Federal Government.

Former President Ronald Reagan's reflections in 1983 about the central role of small businesses reinforce the importance of Idaho SBDC's work: ``America is small business . . . Too often, entrepreneurs are forgotten heroes. We rarely hear about them. But look into the heart of America, and you'll see them. They're the owners of that store down the street, the faithfuls who support our churches, schools, and communities, the brave people everywhere who produce our goods, feed a hungry world, and keep our homes and families warm while they invest in the future to build a better America.''

Thank you to the Idaho Small Business Development Center for your steady work to help small businesses across Idaho build strong foundations, innovate, and grow. We all benefit from these local engines that not only provide jobs in communities across our State, but also back countless important local efforts. We wish you well on this SBDC Day, as we express our gratitude for your decades of providing trusted counsel, resources, and support for these great American assets.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, there is no debate that Jeffrey Epstein's crimes of sexual abuses and other crimes are appalling. And the investigation there is, ongoing, must focus on bringing those who participated to justice.

The Justice Department already has been tasked and has tasked about 500 lawyers to publicly release over 3 million pages, 180,000 images, and 2,000 videos in response to President Trump having signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law on November 19, 2025.

According to one New York Times article, the current pile of pages would reach to the top of the Empire State Building.

Since the House of Representatives took the lead on moving the Epstein Files Transparency Act, it is not surprising that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the House Judiciary Committee are now leading the congressional review of the millions of pages of documents from the Justice Department. The House Oversight Committee is particularly busy reviewing documents relating to corporate, nonprofit, academic, and governmental entities with known or alleged ties to Epstein's web of financial networks that were turned over by the U.S. Justice Department on January 31, along with documents turned over earlier by the Epstein estate.

The House Oversight Committee also specifically requested these Treasury documents that have been talked about here today from the Department of Treasury and requested that the Department provide all suspicious activities reports, or SARS, and accompanying material filed relating to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein for its independent review.

That is these very files that the Treasury Department was asked to release and provide. Treasury replied that it would fully cooperate with the committee and that it will work alongside other relevant Federal Agencies to deliver on the request as thoroughly as possible.

The subpoenas, depositions, and SAR requests made between the two House committees are part of a very robust investigatory process, one which deals with massive amounts of information and patterns of activity collected over a 20-year period.

The Finance Committee has one of the broadest committee jurisdictions in the Senate, but it is the Banking Committee, not the Finance Committee, which has specific subject matter jurisdiction over bank suspicious activity reports and a more particular expertise with reading and handling of those documents.

At this stage, while the House committees are pursuing the same exact information from the same Agencies and the Agencies have agreed, by law passed in the House and Senate, to release those materials, it would not be helpful for either the Senate Finance or the Senate Banking Committee to confound the process by attempting to duplicate or compete with their work while adding more stress to the Department struggling to keep up with the pace of congressional demands.

Mr. President, for these reasons I object to my colleague's request.

Mr. President, just to make one quick clarification, I am not just talking about the Justice Department. The Treasury Department has agreed to release the exact files that have been demanded and has said that they will provide them as thoroughly and as quickly as possible to the House Oversight Committee.