Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 5, 1999
Debt Relief for Poor Countries Act of 1999 - Amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to direct the President, subject to authorization of appropriations, to cancel or reduce all amounts owed to the United States by heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs) as a result of concessional and nonconcessional loans made, guarantees issued, or credits extended prior to January 1, 1996, under any provision of law. Sets forth eligibility requirements for cancellation or reduction of debt. Directs the President, in canceling or reducing debt, to give priority to HIPCs that have demonstrated a sustained commitment to poverty alleviation or have recently suffered a major natural disaster.(Sec. 2) Provides that cancellation or reduction of debt shall not be considered to be assistance for purposes of any law limiting assistance to a country.Authorizes appropriations.Sets forth certain procedures for the making of new loans, extending new credits, or issuing new guarantees to the governments of developing countries.(Sec. 3) Amends the International Financial Institutions Act to urge the President, in order to accelerate multilateral debt relief and promote economic and human development and poverty alleviation in HIPCs, to commence diplomatic efforts within the Paris Club of Official Creditors, as well as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and other appropriate multilateral development institutions to make certain modifications in the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, including: (1) the placing of a limit on maximum waiting period before a country receives debt relief; (2) the revision of country eligibility requirements under the HIPC Initiative; (3) the adoption of an economic opportunity and human development action plan by HIPCs; (4) limits on the amount of debt reduction; (5) transparency and participation by HIPCs in HIPC decision making; and (6) the provision of HIPC review.Authorizes appropriations for the HIPC Trust Fund. Declares the sense of Congress that the amounts that would otherwise be provided by the United States for development aid or other debt relief should not be reduced on account of any such appropriations.Directs the President to work with the member countries of international financial institutions to ensure transparency and public participation in decisions to make new loans to developing countries, including terms and conditions.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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.1690 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.1690 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.1690 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.1690 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.