Support for Democracy and Human Rights in Zimbabwe Act of 2007
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 284.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Jul 24, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Support for Democracy and Human Rights in Zimbabwe Act of 2007 - States that is U.S. policy to: (1) support the people of Zimbabwe in their efforts to promote democracy and respect for human rights in Zimbabwe; and (2) call on President Mugabe to restore democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe.
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the United States welcomes the Southern African Development Community's announcement that the President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, will lead negotiations between the ruling and opposition parties in Zimbabwe; (2) preparations should be made to hold free elections in accordance with international standards; (3) cooperation among the United States, regional players in Africa, and the international community is an important component of a proactive strategy to support democratic rule and respect for human rights in Zimbabwe; (4) normalized relations with the government of Zimbabwe are desirable but until the government of Zimbabwe promotes democracy and the rule of law the United States will continue to isolate the government of Zimbabwe and expand financial and travel sanctions against those responsible for repressing Zimbabwe's people; and (5) the United States should use its influence in the U.N. Security Council to emphasize the threat to international peace posed by the government of Zimbabwe.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Directs the Secretary of State to provide Congress with quarterly briefings on U.S. strategy for engagement with Zimbabwe. (Terminates such requirement three years after the date of the enactment of this Act.)
Authorizes appropriations to support democracy and governance activities in Zimbabwe, including support for: (1) free and peaceful national elections; (2) creation of nonviolent political space; and (3) human rights programs.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.1500 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.1500 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.1500 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.1500 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.