Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The bill bars United States assistance to any country whose recorded votes in the most recent UN General Assembly (and Security Council votes if a Security Council member) matched the U.S. position less than 50 percent of the time. Covered assistance includes Economic Support Fund, International Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing, and "any other monetary or physical assistance." The Secretary of State may temporarily exempt a country if there is a fundamental change in government and the country will no longer oppose U.S. positions, with notification to Congress.
Liberals emphasize harm to vulnerable populations and multilateralism
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly focused substantive policy change that defines its core prohibition and ties determinations to an existing reporting mechanism.
The bill bars United States assistance to any country whose recorded votes in the most recent UN General Assembly (and Security Council votes if a Security Council member) matched the U.S. position less than 50 percent of the time.
Covered assistance includes Economic Support Fund, International Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing, and "any other monetary or physical assistance." The Secretary of State may temporarily exempt a country if there is a fundamental change in government and the country will no longer oppose U.S. positions, with notification to Congress.
The law takes effect after the next required section 406 report submission, due by March 31, 2026.
Contentious foreign-policy conditioning, limited compromise features, and strong Senate hurdles lower odds despite administratively clear text.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly focused substantive policy change that defines its core prohibition and ties determinations to an existing reporting mechanism. It includes a limited administrative pathway for exemptions and identification of covered assistance categories, but it omits several implementation, fiscal, and exception details that would be expected for a statute that materially alters foreign assistance authorities.
Liberals emphasize harm to vulnerable populations and multilateralism
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize harm to vulnerable populations and multilateralism
Likely strongly opposed.
The persona would view the bill as punitive toward poorer and nonaligned countries, undermining multilateral diplomacy and humanitarian cooperation.
They would worry it trades away long-term influence for short-term retaliation.
Mixed to skeptical.
Sees potential value in accountability for UN voting, but worries about bluntness, administrative complexity, and strategic harm.
Would demand clearer exemptions, oversight, and narrowly tailored scope.
Generally supportive.
Views the bill as a tool to hold foreign governments accountable and prevent U.S. aid from subsidizing countries that oppose U.S. interests at the UN.
Prefers tying aid to tangible alignment.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Contentious foreign-policy conditioning, limited compromise features, and strong Senate hurdles lower odds despite administratively clear text.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize harm to vulnerable populations and multilateralism
Contentious foreign-policy conditioning, limited compromise features, and strong Senate hurdles lower odds despite administratively clear t…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly focused substantive policy change that defines its core prohibition and ties determinations to an existing reporting mechanism. It includes a limited adm…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.