Technical corrections only. The diff primarily reflects standard legislative formatting for a bill reported out of committee, including instructions to strike the original text and insert the new, italicized version. A minor stylistic change from 'in respect of' to 'with respect to' was made in Section 2(a), but no substantive policy changes occurred between v1 and v2.
Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in TANF Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Carey, Mike [R-OH-15]
- Committees
- Ways and Means Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 3, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to enhance accountability, reduce improper payments, and ensure federal TANF funds are more directly targeted to low-income families and supplement, rather than supplant, state efforts.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Social Security Act to impose stricter requirements on states regarding the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant program. It mandates that states apply federal payment integrity laws to their TANF programs, sets a 200% of poverty guideline income threshold for families to receive TANF assistance or services, establishes deadlines for states to obligate and expend TANF funds while allowing limited reserves, and prohibits states from using federal TANF funds to replace their own state spending on welfare programs.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill is crucial for restoring integrity and effectiveness to the TANF program by ensuring funds reach their intended beneficiaries and are not misused or hoarded by states. They contend that applying federal payment integrity standards will reduce fraud and waste, thereby strengthening public trust in the TANF program and freeing up resources for legitimate needs. The income threshold will focus resources on the most vulnerable families, while spending deadlines and the "supplement, not supplant" rule will prevent states from accumulating large unspent balances or reducing their own welfare spending by relying on federal funds.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that these new federal mandates infringe on state flexibility, which is a core principle of the TANF block grant. They may contend that a strict income threshold could exclude families who, while above 200% FPL, still face significant economic hardship or need specific services. Opponents could also raise concerns that strict spending deadlines and "supplement, not supplant" rules might force states to rush spending or reduce their ability to respond to future economic downturns by drawing on reserves, potentially leading to less effective or less innovative programs.
The bill is short and relatively straightforward, allowing a diligent reader to understand its core provisions within a few minutes.
Section 2, amending Section 404 of the Social Security Act.
Application of Payment Integrity Law to States
This provision requires states, when administering their TANF programs, to follow the same rules for identifying, measuring, and reducing improper payments that federal agencies must follow under the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019. It also directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to create a 10-year plan to eliminate improper TANF payments by states.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is essential to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent effectively and reach eligible families. Applying federal integrity standards will reduce waste, fraud, and abuse, thereby strengthening public trust in the TANF program and freeing up resources for legitimate needs.
Critics contend
Some state administrators might argue that this imposes an unfunded mandate and an additional administrative burden on states, potentially diverting resources from direct service provision to compliance activities. They might also contend that states already have mechanisms in place to address improper payments, and a one-size-fits-all federal approach may not be optimal.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between increasing federal oversight and accountability for payment accuracy versus preserving state flexibility and avoiding excessive administrative burdens that could detract from service delivery.
Section 3, amending Section 404 of the Social Security Act.
200% Poverty Guideline Income Threshold
This provision mandates that states can only use federal TANF grant funds to provide assistance or services to families whose income is less than 200% of the federal poverty guidelines. This sets a uniform income cap for federal TANF spending across all states.
Section 4, amending Section 404(e) of the Social Security Act.
Time Limits for State Obligation and Expenditure of TANF Funds
This provision sets new deadlines for states to use their federal TANF funds. States must obligate funds by the end of the fiscal year following their receipt and expend them by the end of the second fiscal year following receipt. An exception allows states to reserve up to 15% of annual funds for future use, but the total reserve cannot exceed 50% of the prior year's grant. States must notify HHS of their intent to reserve funds.
Section 5, amending Section 404 and 402(a) of the Social Security Act.
"Supplement, Not Supplant" Requirement and State Certification
This provision introduces a "supplement, not supplant" rule, requiring states to use federal TANF funds to add to, rather than replace, their own state and local spending on programs assisted under TANF. It also mandates that the chief executive officer of each state must certify that federal TANF funds will not be used to supplant state or non-federal funds.