PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 5, 1997
International Peacekeeping Reform Act of 1997 - Prohibits funds made available to the Department of State under the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities Account, or under any law to pay for contributions for United Nations peacekeeping activities, from being available to the United Nations for the establishment, expansion, or modification in mission of a United Nations peacekeeping operation unless the President: (1) makes the certification required by this Act; and (2) notifies the Congress, at least 15 days before (or in the event of an emergency, within 48 hours after) any vote by the United Nations Security Council to establish, expand, or modify such operation, of the intent to support the operation. Directs the President to certify that the peacekeeping operation meets the following requirements: (1) the operation involves an international conflict in which hostilities have ceased and all significant parties to the conflict agree to the imposition of United Nations forces to seek an enduring solution to the conflict; (2) the percentage of the U.S.-assessed share of the operation's cost is no greater than the percentage of the share for the regular United Nations budget; (3) adequate measures have been taken by the United Nations to protect sensitive U.S.-supplied intelligence information; and (4) with respect to units of the U.S. armed forces trained to carry out direct combat missions, the operation advances U.S. national security interests, the units are critical to the success of the operation and will be under U.S. command and control, and any armed forces member would be protected by the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.
People & committees
Sen. Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME] · R–ME
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3964-3966)
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 21, 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.696 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.696 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.696 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.696 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.