PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 3, 2011
Maple Agriculture Protection and Law Enforcement Act of 2011 or the MAPLE Act - Prohibits knowingly and willfully introducing or delivering for introduction into interstate commerce a product that is labeled as maple syrup but that is not maple syrup, unless the product's label includes a clear identification of the product's true nature.
Defines "maple syrup" to mean a liquid food: (1) that is derived by concentration and heat treatment of the sap of a species of tree in the genus Acer or by solution in water of maple sugar made from such sap, (2) that is not less than 66% by weight of soluble solids derived solely from such sap, and (3) the concentration of which may be adjusted by adding water.
People & committees
Rep. Welch, Peter [D-VT-At Large] · D–VT
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 Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.3363 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.3363 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.3363 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.3363 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.