Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. James Comer (R-KY) · 2 active : 2 Republicans
Latest action: Received in the Senate.
Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act
This bill establishes requirements to prevent fraudulent or improper payments from federal programs.
Specifically, the bill directs executive agencies to take corrective actions to temporarily pause, condition, or segment payment voucher requests before certifying them if the agencies have sufficient reason to determine that the payments present elevated risks of fraud or improper payments resulting in financial loss to the government. The corrective actions must be (1) based on objective, documented fraud-risk indicators; (2) narrowly applied to the portion of the payments presenting the elevated risk; and (3) limited in duration to the minimum period necessary to verify the eligibility or accuracy of the payments.
The Department of the Treasury must return certified payment vouchers to agencies for corrective action if they present an elevated risk of fraud based on an output of Treasury’s Do Not Pay system.
The bill also prohibits officers or employees of the federal government from being personally liable for actions taken in good faith under this bill.
Each member’s recorded vote compared with their swing projection from before the vote. A member by voting against most of their own party.
| BandBand before the vote | VotedVoted yea or nay | BrokeBroke with party | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Swing | 32 | 4 | 13% |
| Middle | 241 | 2 | 1% |
| Entrenched | 145 | 0 | 0% |
| All |
Members fall into . 2 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has. Where the House has voted, each member’s appears with the projection made before it.
Loading similar votes
| 418 |
| 6 |
| 1% |
: Pair any member who broke with one who stayed with their party: in 94% of those pairs, the one who broke had the higher swing score before the vote. Chance would be 50%.
Projections from swing-v2, computed with data from before the vote. Present and not voting never count as breaking.
These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.
Ringed dots broke with their party on the vote.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 3 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 2 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Similar votes count toward swing-v3 in the House: total similarity weight 27.0 (needs 5.0).
