PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4750-4752)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 9, 2010
Reduce Unnecessary Spending Act of 2010 - Amends the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to require the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to transmit, within 45 calendar days after enactment of the funding in question, a message to Congress with specified information requesting any rescission the President proposes under the procedures in this Act.
Prescribes requirements for timing and packaging of rescission requests.
Authorizes OMB, subject to a specified time limit, to withhold funding from obligation temporarily if the President proposes a rescission.
Prohibits the President from invoking such expedited procedures or such authority to withhold funding on more than one occasion for any Act providing funding.
Sets forth procedures for expedited congressional consideration of proposed rescissions.
People & committees
Sen. Feingold, Russell D. [D-WI] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4750-4752)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4749-4750)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.3474 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 S.3474 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 S.3474 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 S.3474 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.