PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2008
Federal Agency Performance Review and Efficiency Act - Amends the Inspector General Act of 1978 to make it the principal duty and responsibility of each Inspector General to review annually the operations, efficiency, and effectiveness of all federal programs within his or her establishment and to report to Congress and the President any recommendations, along with proposed legislation, on whether an abolishment, reorganization, consolidation, or transfer of existing federal programs and agencies is necessary to: (1) reduce federal expenditures; (2) increase efficiency of government operations; (3) eliminate overlap and duplication in federal programs and offices; (4) abolish agencies or programs that no longer serve an important governmental purpose; and (5) identify reductions in amounts of discretionary budget authority or direct spending that can be dedicated to federal deficit reduction.
People & committees
Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4] · R–OH
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 Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
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.6639 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.6639 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.6639 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.6639 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.