Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) · 1 active : 1 Democrat
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Taxpayer Resources Used in Emergencies Accountability Act or the TRUE Accountability Act
This bill requires agencies to develop and implement plans for preventing fraud and improper payments relating to federal emergency spending (e.g., providing funding relating to disasters or pandemics).
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) must issue, and review every three years, guidance to agencies for developing plans with appropriate internal controls. The guidance must incorporate the current Government Accountability Office frameworks for managing fraud risk in federal programs and managing improper payments in federal emergency assistance.
Within one year after the bill’s enactment, agencies must submit to OMB plans required by the guidance. Each plan must include procedures to (1) evaluate the risk of financial loss to the federal government caused by improper payments and fraud relating to the agency’s federal emergency spending; (2) develop risk reduction strategies that are, to the extent possible, implemented prior to expenditure; and (3) adopt payment monitoring to identify and reduce improper and fraudulent payments (e.g., anomaly detection). Agencies must revise and resubmit plans, as necessary, at least every three years.
OMB must annually submit the plans to Congress along with information relating to helping agencies implement the plans and legislative recommendations for emergency appropriations.
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 | 29 | 0 | 0% |
| Middle | 220 | 0 | 0% |
| Entrenched | 135 | 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
| 384 |
| 0 |
| 0% |
Too few members broke with their party to measure .
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.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 2 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 10.5 (needs 5.0).
