Now, before we get too deep into this episode, I want to share something interesting with you. I was in the analytics of this channel and I noticed something a little bit off. 65% of you listen or watch and are not subscribed to the channel, but 35% of you are and I appreciate you and thank you for subscribing. Now, the other 65% of you that aren't subscribed, I'm going to make you a deal.
If you subscribe to the channel right now, I will continue to bring you content that is better every single time. So it takes you a second to do that, but also you get something out of this too. Not only do you get my content, but you get content similar to mine that you'd be interested in in your feed because the platforms, they see what you do
on their platform. If you like and subscribe here and also leave a comment, you're going to get more stuff like this in your feed and you're going to love it. Not just for me, but from other creators on the platform. So that's the deal. I make better content every time and all I ask is for a subscriber real quick. All right. Thanks.
Who know is that first Mr. Must saw tax information that is housed in the Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Services And when the former nonpartisan top career official at the Treasury Department, a trusted guardian of Americans privacy under both Republican and Democratic presidents for more than 35 years. When he rebuffed Musk and said he wanted to protect the privacy as he had done for three
decades, he was pushed aside. While administration officials initially testified that Doge was granted read only, They were just going to read and invade our privacy. That way the sensitive data they were later and forced to admit that the Musketeers had both read and write. That is, they can make changes in the sensitive databases related to federal tax returns, Social Security benefits, Supplemental Social Security Income benefits, and pay for
veterans. Not satisfied with this temporary access to American families, financial information must then came for some of the even more highly guarded taxpayer data that's contained in the IRS Integrated Data Retrieval System. This is a system to which access is denied to political officials, even the IRS Commissioner, the taxpayer advocate, and the IRS Chief
information officer. And I want to respond directly to you, Mr. Schmucker, about that and your claim that there were hundreds of additional people that we wanted to have go into all this data. What we wanted was to enforce the tax laws. We wanted the tax cheats to be brought to justice. You all took the cop off the beat. But let me make this point.
The data that Musk and the Musketeers are seeking that they perhaps got exposed is data that is so sensitive that even the IRS commissioner is not entitled to see it. That is protected data protected until this happened.
And the claim that because some of it that they got was anonymous would not get into the privacy was rebutted by Mr. Barthole when I questioned him as the head of the Joint Committee on Taxation, an independent, nonpartisan group, who explained to us how that data could be used. When Mr. Musk and his AI and his minions and his Musketeers get together and compare these databases and invade our privacy, we must adopt this resolution. I yield back. Gentleman yields.
Now recognize Mr. Evans, just write the last word. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this conversation, led by Mr. Doggett, the gentleman could speak into the microphone. This conversation LED by Mr. Doggett, I think he needs to know I like the year of my time. To Mr. Doggett, thank you very. Much. Thank you very much for that. There are two laws that Mister Musk and DOGE are ignoring. They are Section 61 O three of the Internal Revenue Code and the Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 61, O3, which has been before this committee on numerous occasions, protects the confidentiality of tax returns and return information, including all of the tax return information that is received, are collected by the Internal Revenue Service. The Privacy Act of 1974 was designed to provide individual Americans with more control over the government gathering, disseminating, and using our
private information. What's happened to the libertarians in the Republican Party who once believed that government was a challenge and that the privacy of American citizens should be protected from the overreach of government? What we have here is an
overreach without justification. Why is it necessary in fighting waste, fraud and abuse to interfere with the personal data of American citizens, every American citizens of the issues that we have before us today or that DOGE has also sought access to what are called omnibus sharing agreements. This is another aspect I've not touched on so far. And these omnibus sharing agreements would let must the link individual tax data across the whole host of different
federal agencies. A federal statute makes it unlawful for the IRS to share taxpayer data with other agencies for reasons unrelated to the administration of our tax system. New York University Tax Law Center experts indicate that such an omnibus information sharing agreement across agencies would not conform with the strict, strict rules of 61 O3 that govern how and when taxpayer information can be shared.
And so again, here is an area that needs to be explored other than through an empty witness chair to find out about the extent of the violation of federal law with this sharing agreement that has been rubber stamped by the administration. And most recently, just last week, Mr. Musk came for more of Americans private information stored in the Child Support database that is used to enforce court order child support payments, which is a good, good thing.
But each agency receives tax data that has a detailed data sharing agreement with IRS and they have to comply with those taxpayer privacy protections when that goes over to the Department of Health and Human Services. Unfortunately, Health and Human Services is now run by the vaccine denier Robert F Kennedy Junior. And he not disregarding really those requirements. He gave those exactly what they asked for.
It's simply outrageous that Americans private and personal financial information has not been protected from the prying eyes of an unelected billionaire and his teenage Musketeers. At a bare minimum, Congress and the American people need a full accounting of what data has been shared with Musk and Doge and
for what purposes. And despite all the rhetoric on the other side, we have absolutely no explanation as to why that right of Americans for a full accounting is not being provided, why it is being obstructed and blocked by the Republicans. Answers to this resolution of inquiry on behalf of all the Democrats on this committee will provide us with a little of that accounting.
Only then can we begin to move forward as a bipartisan majority, as the bipartisan majority did over 50 years ago when there was criminality from another Republican president in the wake of the Watergate scandal and addressed the shortcomings of the enforcement of our tax privacy law and begin to restore taxpayer trust in our voluntary tax system.
The Republicans basically say they don't know and they don't care what Musk is doing with your personal tax return, your Social Security information, your health data, anything concerning child custody. And by blocking this resolution, they just want to ensure that no questions are asked and no information about this likely violation of multiple federal laws ever becomes public. That's why we should adopt this resolution. And I yield back.
Authority, statutory authority. We will remain independent and objective and we'll continue to follow our auditing standards and our work continues unabated as we currently are still working under our Inspector General, Doctor Kafari. Thank you. And my question to Mr. Curry is for over 100 years, GAO has played a crucial role in enhancing the effectiveness of government programs and ensuring
taxpayer money is well spent. Over the past 20 years, GAO work has resulted in about 1.45 trillion in financial benefits and over 30,000 programs and operational benefits. Through its high risk list, GAO focused attention on the most significant challenges facing the government.
Once the challenge is human capital, including skills shortage, a challenge Doge does not seem to appreciate as it purges civil servants, what are the consequences of reducing the federal workforce using a sledgehammer rather than a scalpel? Well, you're correct. Many of the high risk areas, and there's over 30 of them across all of the federal government that we've identified are on the list because of some sort of staffing or capacity challenge.
That means that either they don't have the right number of people to perform the mission or they don't have the right skills. So typically what you do is you, you figure out what you want the government or the agencies to do and how you want to do it, and then you figure out what sort of staff you need to do it. So obviously it's, it's going to have some implications, but you know, we, we don't know yet what exactly those will be. Thank you.
And Miss Lang, I didn't give you any time to respond. So if you want to take a couple 30 seconds if you like. No, thank you. I. Think my colleague covered. Everything. Thank you, Chair, and I yield back. Hey, thank you so much for listening today. I really do appreciate your support. If you could take a second and hit the subscribe or the follow button on whatever podcast platform that you're listening on right now, I greatly appreciate it.
It helps out the show tremendously and you'll never miss an episode. And each episode is about 10 minutes or less to get you caught up quickly. And please, if you want to support the show even more, go to patreon.com/stage Zero. And please take care of yourselves and each other. And I'll see you tomorrow.