Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 12, 2014
Searching for and Cutting Regulations that are Unnecessarily Burdensome Act of 2014 or the SCRUB Act of 2014 - Establishes the Retrospective Regulatory Review Commission to review the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to identify, using specified criteria, rules and sets of rules that collectively implement a regulatory program that should be repealed to lower the cost of regulation to the economy, giving priority to major rules that: (1) have been in effect more than 15 years, (2) impose paperwork burdens that could be reduced substantially without significantly diminishing regulatory effectiveness, (3) impose disproportionately high costs on small business entities, and (4) could be strengthened in their effectiveness while reducing regulatory costs. Requires the Commission to establish a public website to make regulatory information accessible to the public at no cost.
Requires a federal agency that makes a new rule to: (1) repeal rules identified by the Commission to offset the cost to the economy of such new rule (cut-go procedures), and (2) include in the final issuance of such rule a plan for reviewing the rule not later than 10 years after it is promulgated. Requires the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review and certify the accuracy of agency determinations of the cost of new rules.
Makes agency compliance with the requirements of this Act subject to judicial review.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.3011 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.3011 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.3011 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.3011 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.