Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
This bill raises the maximum State Department reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Nicolás Maduro to $100,000,000. The reward must be paid from assets already seized or withheld from Maduro, his officials, or co-conspirators under U.S. sanctions and related authorities.
Progressives stress due process and humanitarian risks
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly amends existing law to authorize a higher reward amount and specifies a sanctions‑asset funding source, but it provides limited implementation detail, safeguards, and accountability mechanisms.
This bill raises the maximum State Department reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Nicolás Maduro to $100,000,000.
The reward must be paid from assets already seized or withheld from Maduro, his officials, or co-conspirators under U.S. sanctions and related authorities.
It overrides the existing statutory limit in the State Department Basic Authorities Act for this specific case.
Narrow, targeted change with limited fiscal impact and precedent for rewards programs gives moderate chance, though Senate procedural hurdles and legal/diplomatic questions add uncertainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly amends existing law to authorize a higher reward amount and specifies a sanctions‑asset funding source, but it provides limited implementation detail, safeguards, and accountability mechanisms.
Progressives stress due process and humanitarian risks
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress due process and humanitarian risks
Likely supportive of holding alleged narco-terrorism perpetrators accountable, but concerned about process and consequences.
Would welcome using seized assets rather than taxpayer funds, while insisting on safeguards for due process and human rights.
May worry that large bounties encourage abuse or destabilize civilians in Venezuela.
Pragmatic support is likely if legal and fiscal mechanics are clear.
Appreciates using frozen assets and a targeted reward to assist prosecutions, while seeking oversight.
Concerns center on feasibility, asset sufficiency, and possible diplomatic consequences.
Strongly favorable: sees the bill as a firm, law-and-order measure against a hostile regime.
Supports aggressive use of sanctions and seized assets to reward information and promote arrests.
Likely to view this as consistent with pressure campaigns on Maduro.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, targeted change with limited fiscal impact and precedent for rewards programs gives moderate chance, though Senate procedural hurdles and legal/diplomatic questions add uncertainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress due process and humanitarian risks
Narrow, targeted change with limited fiscal impact and precedent for rewards programs gives moderate chance, though Senate procedural hurdl…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly amends existing law to authorize a higher reward amount and specifies a sanctions‑asset funding source, but it provides limited implementation de…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.