Calling for the annulment of the Monroe Doctrine and the development of a "New Good Neighbor" policy in order to foster improved relations and deeper, more effective cooperation between the United States and its Latin American and Caribbean neighbors.

Bill Number: H.Res. 1056
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 2
Policy Area: International Affairs
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2026-02-10: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Last Updated: 2026-04-15T08:06:01Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This House Resolution (H. Res. 1056) expresses the sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the U.S. should formally end the Monroe Doctrine—a historical policy from 1823 that originally warned European powers against interfering in the Americas but later justified U.S. interventions—and replace it with a "New Good Neighbor" policy. The goal is to build better relations and stronger cooperation with Latin American and Caribbean countries by respecting their sovereignty, ending past patterns of interference, and addressing shared challenges like climate change and inequality.

Key Provisions

The resolution outlines a detailed historical critique in its preamble, highlighting U.S. military interventions, support for coups and dictatorships, economic sanctions, and human rights issues in the region from the 19th century to recent years (e.g., actions in Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, and others). It then resolves that the House believes:

The Department of State should officially state that the Monroe Doctrine is no longer U.S. policy to signal a shift away from interference.
The U.S. government should create a "New Good Neighbor" policy, including measures such as:
Promoting development that respects countries' own economic plans, with support for technology sharing, climate financing, and grants over loans.
Ending all unilateral economic sanctions (e.g., the Cuba embargo) via executive action and legislation.
Amending laws like the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (which allows the president to impose sanctions during emergencies) and the National Emergencies Act to give Congress more oversight.
Reviewing U.S. aid to countries after any undemocratic power changes until legitimacy is confirmed.
Respecting countries' choices on international memberships, alliances, and diplomatic ties.
Declassifying U.S. archives on past interventions, coups, and human rights abuses.
Reforming the Organization of American States (OAS—an intergovernmental body for the Americas) for more accountability, transparency, and independence in areas like elections and human rights.
Increasing U.S. funding for environmental efforts like the Amazon Fund and a U.N. Loss and Damage Trust for climate-vulnerable nations.
Reforming international financial institutions (e.g., IMF, World Bank) to give developing countries more say, issue special financial aid (Special Drawing Rights), and shift toward policies supporting growth, health care, education, social protections, taxes on the wealthy, workers' rights, and sustainability.
The U.S. should partner with regional groups (e.g., Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, Caribbean Community) on issues like climate change, inequality, arms trafficking, tax evasion, drug-related money flows, workers' rights, and protections for Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities.
The U.S. must always follow international law, respect other countries' borders and independence, and uphold human rights standards that ban unlawful killings (including at sea).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

As a non-binding resolution, it does not directly alter laws but urges Congress and the executive branch to pursue changes, such as:

Terminating statutory sanctions like the Cuba embargo (enacted in 1962).
Modifying the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (1977) and National Emergencies Act (1976) to strengthen congressional checks on presidential emergency powers for sanctions.
Creating new laws for automatic aid reviews after power shifts and increased funding commitments (e.g., to the Amazon Fund or U.N. climate trust).

These would shift U.S. foreign policy from unilateral actions to more collaborative, oversight-driven approaches, potentially limiting executive discretion in sanctions and interventions.

Potential Impacts

On government agencies: Could require the State Department, Treasury, U.S. Trade Representative, USAID, and others to redesign policies, end sanctions, declassify documents, and boost funding for international reforms—potentially straining budgets but fostering multilateral diplomacy.
On citizens: Might reduce economic hardships from U.S. sanctions (e.g., in Cuba and Venezuela, easing migration pressures) and support better access to health, education, and climate aid in the region; U.S. citizens could see improved trade, security cooperation, and fewer migration-related costs.
On international relations: Aims to repair U.S. ties with Latin America and the Caribbean by ending perceived bullying, promoting equality, and countering isolation (e.g., via OAS reforms); could enhance U.S. influence through partnerships but risk tensions if seen as critiquing allies or past administrations.

Main Stakeholders Affected

U.S. Government entities: Departments of State, Treasury, Defense, and Justice; Congress; agencies like USAID and the U.S. Trade Representative.
Latin American and Caribbean countries and citizens: Governments and populations in nations like Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, Honduras, Brazil, and others historically impacted by U.S. actions; could benefit from lifted sanctions, aid, and sovereignty respect.
International organizations: OAS, IMF, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, U.N., and regional bodies like CELAC or CARICOM—facing proposed reforms and increased U.S. engagement.
U.S. domestic groups: Latin American diaspora communities, businesses involved in trade/sanctions, and human rights advocates.
Multinational corporations and investors: Affected by potential changes to trade agreements and Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which allow companies to sue governments over regulations.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Urges adherence to international law (e.g., U.N. Charter on sovereignty) and human rights treaties, potentially challenging past U.S. actions like unauthorized strikes or sanctions as violations; calls for declassification could expose legal liabilities from historical interventions.
Constitutional: Emphasizes Congress's role in foreign affairs (e.g., war powers, treaty-making under Article I), pushing back against executive overreach in emergencies or military actions without congressional approval, aligning with original intent of laws like the War Powers Resolution (1973).
Political: Serves as a partisan critique of historical and recent U.S. policies (especially under Republican administrations), signaling a progressive vision for diplomacy; as a "sense of the House" resolution, it has no legal force but could influence debates, elections, and future legislation, potentially dividing Congress along ideological lines while appealing to global south nations for better U.S. standing.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7]

Cosponsors (18)

Rep. Ramirez, Delia C. [D-IL-3], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria [D-NY-14], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Casar, Greg [D-TX-35], Rep. Grijalva, Adelita S. [D-AZ-7], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29], Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7], Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Omar, Ilhan [D-MN-5], Rep. Simon, Lateefah [D-CA-12], Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

Recent Actions

2026-02-10: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2026-02-10: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2026-02-10: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2026-02-10: Submitted in House
2026-02-10: Submitted in House

Bill Versions

Calling for the annulment of the Monroe Doctrine and the development of a "New Good Neighbor" policy in order to foster improved relations and deeper, more effective cooperation between the United States and its Latin American and Caribbean neighbors. — issued 2026-02-10 — PDF (20 pages)