PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 8, 2016
Trafficking In Persons Report Integrity Act
This bill amends the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 to revise provisions regarding the Department of State's determination of whether countries are meeting the minimum standards for elimination of human trafficking, including provisions regarding: (1) the State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons Report, (2) additional requirements for meeting minimum standards, (3) actions against governments failing to meet minimum standards, (4) the tier ranking process for meeting such standards, and (5) congressional oversight of such process.
The President shall instruct the U.S. executive director of each international financial institution to: (1) support the U.S. policy goal of ending slavery and human trafficking and encourage other nations to adopt similar policies, (2) oppose loans or other programs to Tier 3 and Tier 2 Watch List countries and channel funds from such countries to countries in better compliance with such standards, and (3) propose that other institutions develop anti-human trafficking provisions in their project safeguards and procurement policies.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
A Tier 3 country is a country the government of which does not fully meet the minimum standards and is not making significant efforts to do so.
A Tier 2 Watch List country is a country the government of which does not fully meet the minimum standards but is making significant compliance efforts and in which: (1) the number of victims of severe forms of trafficking is very significant or is significantly increasing, (2) there is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year, or (3) the compliance determination was based on the country's commitments to take additional steps over the next year.
People & committees
Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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 Foreign Relations.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.3520 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.3520 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.3520 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.3520 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.