{
  "id": "97-949",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "97-949",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 105030,
      "date": "1999-11-01",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:41:21.455941",
      "title": "Economic Sanctions to Achieve U.S. Foreign Policy Goals: Discussion and Guide to Current Law",
      "summary": "As the close of the 106th Congress, 1st session, nears, there are last-minute efforts to place one\nor\nmore sanctions measures into a bill that has its own momentum.  H.R. 434 , the African\nGrowth and Opportunity Act, is under consideration to carry a variety of trade-related amendments. \nIt has been mentioned in the press as a possible vehicle for  S. 757 , the Sanctions Policy\nReform Act. It is also possible that  H.R. 434  could advance \"Food and Medicine for\nthe World Act.\" The Senate agreed to food and medicine exemption language earlier in the session;\nthat language was excised from the agriculture appropriations bill in conference. A new version of\nthe bill has been introduced as  S. 1771  in the Senate and as  H.R. 3140  in\nthe House.\n  The 106th Congress has under consideration more than 100 bills or joint resolutions to impose\nnew sanctions, ease current regimes, or overhaul the entire process that the legislative and executive\nbranches employ when considering the use of sanctions. Of these, enactment of the \"Enhancement\nof Trade, Security, and Human Rights Through Sanctions Reform Act,\"  H.R. 1244 , or\nits counterpart, the \"Sanctions Policy Reform Act,\"  S. 757 , could most change the way\nthe United States uses sanctions as a foreign policy tool. The bills seek to clarify the use of unilateral\nsanctions in U.S. foreign. The bills revise procedures both branches follow before enacting or\nimposing sanctions, and require extensive reporting on expected costs and benefits of sanctions. The\nAdministration and many Members of Congress have spoken in favor of some sort of overhaul; there\nare serious points of disagreement, however, between the two branches, particularly when new\nproposals seek to reduce the President's flexibility in using sanctions as a foreign policy tool.\n  Some suggest that there is a post-Cold War trend toward sanctions becoming the method of first\nresort in foreign policy. Others contend that sanctions, unilateral or otherwise, are a peacetime means\nto improving international behavior in important areas such as human rights or weapons proliferation,\nand should not be avoided solely for trade concerns. Particular attention is paid to the domestic\nimpact of sanctions. A frequently cited report issued by the Institute for International Economic\n(April 1997) concludes that U.S. unilateral sanctions may have cost U.S. businesses some $15-19\nbillion in 1995. The Congressional Budget Office, on the other hand, has found that sanctions have\nhad a negligible effect on the overall U.S. economy, with a loss of perhaps $1 billion in 1997,\ncompared to U.S. national income of $6.6 trillion.\n  This report addresses how and why sanctions are applied, who has the authority, under what\nterms that authority is exercised, what objectives the U.S. government seeks to achieve or advance\nwhen imposing (or lifting) sanctions, the secondary consequences of imposing sanctions, and the\noption of multilateral sanctions. The report also offers a list of current U.S. laws that require or\nauthorize the imposition of sanctions.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/97-949",
          "sha1": "3b5f6e20283b318dd8b1ff9a255642d1b7a02427",
          "filename": "files/19991101_97-949_3b5f6e20283b318dd8b1ff9a255642d1b7a02427.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/19991101_97-949_3b5f6e20283b318dd8b1ff9a255642d1b7a02427.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc822512/",
      "id": "97-949_1998Jun05",
      "date": "1998-06-05",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Economic Sanctions to Achieve U.S. Foreign Policy Goals: Discussion and Guide to Current Law",
      "summary": "This report provides background on foreign policy sanctions and the events that might necessitate their use, criteria to consider when determining if sanctions are appropriate, approaches that might be effective, and aspects of the use of sanctions that are sometimes overlooked or not considered fully. The report also provides an uncomplicated map of where sanctions policies and options currently may be found in U.S. law.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/19980605_97-949_dc3c5818dcd32f324ead051fcc206a45357a37a2.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/19980605_97-949_dc3c5818dcd32f324ead051fcc206a45357a37a2.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "International affairs",
          "name": "International affairs"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Sanctions (International law)",
          "name": "Sanctions (International law)"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Foreign policy",
          "name": "Foreign policy"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Trade",
          "name": "Trade"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations",
    "Economic Policy",
    "Foreign Affairs",
    "Intelligence and National Security",
    "National Defense"
  ]
}