PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 24, 2013
Verifying Agencies' Lasting Use of Expenditures Act of 2013 or the VALUE Act of 2013 - Requires a federal agency, when making a rule, to: (1) clearly identify the nature and source of the problem that the proposed rule is designed to address, (2) assess the costs and benefits of the rule, and (3) identify and assess available alternatives to the rule.
Allows a rule that does not meet such requirements to take effect temporarily only if the President makes a determination by executive order that such rule is: (1) necessary because of an imminent threat to health or safety or other emergency, (2) necessary for the enforcement of criminal laws, (3) necessary for national security, or (4) issued to implement an international trade agreement.
Requires the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), every five years, to: (1) review the rules of each agency; (2) assess the costs and benefits of such rules to determine whether any such rules are outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome; and (3) report to the head of each agency on such review.
People & committees
Rep. Kingston, Jack [R-GA-1] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3341 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3341 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3341 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3341 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.