Biggs Backs Legislation To Strengthen Medicaid Fraud Oversight Amid Arizona Audit Delays



October 15, 2026

By Matthew Holloway |

U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) is backing legislation that would require states to conduct annual Medicaid fraud risk assessments and implement corrective plans to address weaknesses in their programs.

Amid his campaign for Arizona Governor, Biggs announced his support for the Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act on Oct. 13, citing federal concerns about Arizona’s Medicaid oversight and repeated delays in submitting required financial audits.

H.R. 10636 was introduced Sept. 28 by Rep. Michael Rulli (R-OH), with Biggs among its original cosponsors. The legislation was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

“I’m pleased to co-sponsor the Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act to establish a clear baseline for states to identify fraud, recover improper payments, and correct deficiencies in their Medicaid programs,” Biggs said. “Arizona officials must take these responsibilities seriously. Taxpayers deserve accountability, and continued failures in oversight risk both federal funding and the public’s trust.”

Under the bill’s provisions, states would complete their first assessment within one year of enactment and repeat the review at least annually. The assessments would cover fee-for-service payments, managed care, and eligibility and enrollment systems.

States would rank vulnerabilities, estimate potential improper expenditures, evaluate existing safeguards, and identify gaps in data sharing and enforcement. Within 90 days of completing an assessment, they would have to implement a corrective action plan with measurable outcomes and deadlines.

The legislation would also require annual state reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) describing identified risks, corrective actions, and progress. HHS would report to Congress on national trends and states’ implementation of corrective plans.

Biggs’ office cited a recent warning from the administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) identifying Arizona among eight states reporting “zero fraud referrals and overpayments recovered in Medicaid managed care.” According to the announcement, the states were given 30 days to review their figures and verify that oversight was occurring.

The warning concerns Medicaid managed-care reporting. It does not establish that Arizona had no Medicaid fraud investigations or recoveries across all programs.

Biggs also criticized the state administration’s oversight approach.

“For far too long, governments at every level have allowed a festering culture of fraud and waste of monumental proportions across the United States,” he said. “Government officials have a responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and ensure that Americans’ hard-earned money is spent appropriately and protected from fraud.”

Separately, Arizona’s delayed federal audit submissions were the subject of a September hearing before the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.

HHS Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources Gustav Chiarello testified about Arizona missing the federal Single Audit deadline for four consecutive fiscal years.

The fiscal year 2025 audit, due March 31, 2026, remained outstanding at the time of the hearing. Auditor General Lindsey Perry projected that it might not be issued until March 5, 2027.

A Single Audit examines financial reporting and compliance with federal award requirements. The legislative statement said HHS had warned that continued noncompliance could result in additional funding conditions, withheld payments, disallowed costs, or suspension or termination of federal awards.

The audit delays prompted questions from Arizona lawmakers about the administration’s corrective plans and potential consequences for federally supported programs.

Biggs’ announcement also cited an estimated Arizona Medicaid improper-payment rate above 6%, without identifying the measurement year. CMS explains that improper payment estimates measure compliance with payment requirements and can include documentation deficiencies. They do not measure the percentage of spending attributable to fraud.