Congress has long expressed interest in supporting democratic governance and related rights in other countries as a means of projecting American values, enhancing U.S. security, and promoting U.S. economic interests. More than $2 billion annually has been allocated from foreign assistance funds over the past decade for democracy promotion activities, including support for good governance (characterized by participation, transparency, accountability, effectiveness, and equity), rule of law, and promotion of human rights. While there has been bipartisan support for the general concept of democracy promotion assistance, policy debates in the 116 th Congress may question the consistency, effectiveness, and focus of such foreign assistance. With President Trump indicating in various ways, including in proposed funding cuts for democracy promotion assistance, that promoting democracy and human rights are not top foreign policy priorities of his Administration, this debate has taken on new vigor. The 116 th Congress may consider the impact of the Trump Administration's requested foreign assistance spending cuts on U.S. democracy promotion assistance, review the effectiveness of democracy promotion activities, evaluate the various channels available for democracy promotion, and consider where democracy promotion ranks among a wide range of foreign policy and budget priorities. This report provides information on the history of democracy promotion as a foreign assistance objective, the role of the primary U.S. agencies administering such programs, and funding details and trends, as well as issues of potential relevance to Congress. Democracy promotion may be defined in many ways, but it generally encompasses foreign policy activities intended to encourage the transition to or improvement of democracy in other countries. U.S. foreign aid to promote democracy may focus on electoral democracy, with a narrow emphasis on free and fair elections, or reflect a more liberal concept of democracy, which includes support for fundamental rights and standards that some argue make democracy meaningful. U.S. democracy promotion assistance refers to U.S. program descriptions and funding levels for democracy promotion activities funded through the international affairs (function 150) budget, as reported under the Governing Justly and Democratically (GJD) objective in the annual International Affairs Congressional Budget Justification (CBJ) submitted by the Administration to Congress. The GJD objective (also sometimes called Democracy, Human Rights and Governance—DRG) is defined as including activities to advance freedom and dignity by assisting governments and citizens to establish, consolidate and protect democratic institutions, processes, and values, including participatory and accountable governance, rule of law, authentic political competition, civil society, human rights, and the free flow of information. Congress has used a similar if somewhat more detailed definition in annual appropriations legislation, in which it frequently includes directives related to democracy assistance. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, defines "democracy programs" as programs that support good governance, credible and competitive elections, freedom of expression, association, assembly, and religion, human rights, labor rights, independent media, and the rule of law, and that otherwise strengthen the capacity of democratic political parties, governments, nongovernmental organizations and institutions, and citizens to support the development of democratic states, and institutions that are responsive and accountable to citizens. The following examples of democracy promotion assistance reflect the broad range of activities that fall within this category: Election Support. Through the Support for Increased Electoral Participation (SIEP) project in Afghanistan, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has supported training for party poll watchers and candidate agents to effectively participate in election activities; implemented in-depth, multi-month civic education initiatives for women advocates and youth leaders on the electoral system, good governance, and the importance of political participation; and developed a national and local debate series between university students, among other activities. Judicial Reform. In Jordan, USAID recently supported judicial reform by installing computer automation in Jordan's courts with a customized Arabic-language case management system; partnered with the Ministry of Education to launch a program to involve high school students in sessions on democracy, human rights, and elections; and promoted election reform by supporting the establishment of an Independent Election Commission and a national coalition of civil society organizations to campaign for improved election procedures and monitoring. Law Enforcement Reform. After the 2014 revolution in Ukraine, Ukraine's Ministry of Internal Affairs sought to establish a new first-responder police force rather than rehire police officers from within an existing system that the Ukraine public widely saw as corrupt. The State Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) worked with Ukraine to create a transparent and competitive recruitment process, including a public awareness campaign carried out by INL's implementing partners focused on inclusion of women, who made up 25% of applicants. Municipal Governance. USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives is helping municipal governments in Colombia to execute recently signed peace accords and mitigate destabilizing tensions that threaten to derail the peace process. Activities include aligning municipal plans with accord priorities and disseminating best practices from public and private sector leaders in other regions emerging from conflict; training members of community action boards to manage resources and understand accord implications to ensure that implementation reflects local realities and priorities; and providing technical assistance to four government ministries to improve their capacity for accord implementation. Human Rights and Rule of Law. In Ethiopia, National Endowment for Democracy (NED) grants have supported workshops for judicial and security officials and religious and civic leaders to improve understanding of human and democratic rights, assess the main challenges within their communities, and strengthen their ability to prevent rights violations in their individual and professional capacities. NED also supports workshops, forum discussions, and competitions among secondary school students in Addis Ababa to promote awareness of cultural factors that foster democratic development. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), which is the basis of U.S. foreign assistance, cites "democratic participation" and "effective institutions of democratic governance" among the principles on which U.S. foreign assistance policy should be based. The FAA authorizes activities to promote good governance by combatting corruption and promoting transparency and accountability, and conditions some assistance on compliance with human rights standards. The law has also been amended over the years to add more explicit democracy promotion authorization for specific regions through legislation such as the Central America Democracy, Peace, and Development Initiative (FAA §461; 22 U.S.C. 2271), the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989 (22 U.S.C. 5401 et seq. ), and the FREEDOM Support Act of 1992 ( P.L. 102-511 ; 22 U.S.C. 2295). In addition, State Department democracy activities are guided by the various authorities compiled in the U.S. Code chapter on Advancing Democratic Values (22 U.S.C. CHAPTER 89 §8211-12), and NED activities are authorized through the 1983 National Endowment for Democracy Act ( P.L. 98-164 ; 22 U.S.C. 4411-4416). As with many foreign assistance programs, authorizations related to democracy promotion may have expired, but annual appropriations language designating funds for this purpose is used by Congress in lieu of new authorizing legislation. Democracy promotion assistance may generally be implemented "notwithstanding" other provisions of law that otherwise restrict foreign assistance, allowing it to be implemented in countries where other types of foreign assistance may by prohibited. There are laws and related agency policies, however, that specifically restrict the scope of democracy assistance activities. The FAA section authorizing development assistance for human rights promotion, for example, states that "none of these funds may be used, directly or indirectly, to influence the outcome of any election in any country." Similarly, USAID's Political Party Assistance Policy states that such assistance must support representative, multiparty systems and not seek to determine election outcomes. NED is also prohibited by provisions in its authorization from using funds for partisan political purposes, including funding for national party operations and support for specific candidates. Resources and attention to U.S. democracy promotion assistance have varied among Administrations and Congresses—with other interests, including U.S. security concerns, variously bolstering and competing with democracy promotion objectives. In the aftermath of World War II, the United States supported democratization efforts in Germany and Japan, but also supported the overthrow of democratically elected regimes in Iran and Guatemala. As one scholar described this period, "stability took precedence over values and the fight against communism over the promotion of democracy." Stability was the primary foreign policy objective of the Lyndon B. Johnson, Nixon, and Ford Administrations, during which it was perceived that stable dictators were better for U.S. interests than countries in democratic transition, which may be susceptible to communism. Democracy and human rights promotion gained traction in U.S. foreign policy in the 1970s. Congress took a lead on this issue, amending the Foreign Assistance Act in 1975 to restrict aid to the governments of countries that engaged in a consistent pattern of "gross violations" of human rights, as detailed in the legislation, and creating the position of Coordinator for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs at State in 1976. Elected during a Cold War thaw, President Carter emphasized democracy promotion as part of a broader human rights agenda, particularly with respect to Central and South America. With the support of Congress, the Carter Administration used foreign assistance to promote this human rights agenda primarily through use of negative conditionality—reducing aid to human rights violators, especially military aid to Latin America, in the early years of his Administration. Stability was still a concern, however, and President Carter sought reform within existing regimes, not the overthrow of totalitarians. Upon taking office in 1981, President Reagan immediately resumed the assistance to Latin America on which Carter had put conditions (this assistance was later sharply curbed by Congress) and focused on the existential threat it saw in communism rather than promoting democracy or human rights.