Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fraud And Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee stalls on consolidated anti-fraud bill; vote to move to Ways and Means ties 7-7 and fails, bill laid over
Summary
House File 2,603, a compilation of anti-fraud provisions, received debate in the State Government Finance and Policy Committee. A motion to re-refer the bill to Ways and Means failed in a 7–7 recorded vote; the committee then laid the bill over for possible inclusion.
House File 2,603, described by author Rep. Pinto as a compilation of provisions to strengthen detection, oversight and enforcement against fraud, was presented to the State Government Finance and Policy Committee on March 27. The committee considered an A1 (adding an Article 7 state-government-specific provision) and adopted that amendment; members debated whether to re-refer the bill to Ways and Means or to lay it over for further consideration.
Rep. Pinto said the bill groups provisions into three buckets: better detection and oversight, stronger investigative and enforcement authority, and increased criminal penalties. The bill consolidates provisions that are also moving in other, subject-matter committees; Pinto said costs tied to individual provisions would be carried in the respective implementing agencies' budgets if adopted by those committees.
Co-chair Nash and others said they preferred to lay the bill over rather than send it to Ways and Means at this time, with Nash and other members noting their side of the aisle had not had sufficient opportunity to offer amendments in a formal hearing setting. Chair Pinto argued the bill had previously received a lengthy informational presentation and that members had had opportunities to ask questions; she urged advancement. The committee then took a roll-call vote on a motion to re-refer to Ways and Means. The result was 7 ayes and 7 nays; the motion did not prevail. Following that result, the committee laid the bill over for possible inclusion.
Representative comments during debate stressed the bill's focus on fraud involving government programs and the need for careful committee consideration. Co-chair Nash asked whether the bill had been heard in other committees; Pinto confirmed parts of the bill had been presented in other forums, including an informational session to the fraud prevention and state agency oversight committee. Nash and others emphasized process concerns and the fairness of amendment opportunities.
No final policy or appropriation changes were adopted in this hearing; the committee’s recorded roll call on the re-referral motion is included below.
