This bill prohibits the use of United States embassies and diplomatic posts for fundraising activities benefiting any foreign political party or candidate.
Edward "Ed" Markey
Senator
MA
The No Foreign Fundraising at United States Embassies Act prohibits the use of U.S. diplomatic posts, including embassies and consulates, for any fundraising activities benefiting a foreign political party or candidate. This legislation aims to ensure strict U.S. neutrality during foreign elections by banning the hosting of such political events on federal property. The Secretary of State is required to update regulations within 90 days to explicitly enforce this prohibition.
If you’ve ever wondered why your tax dollars fund U.S. embassies overseas, Congress just gave a very clear answer: It’s for diplomacy, not for hosting political fundraisers for foreign candidates. The No Foreign Fundraising at United States Embassies Act is a straight-shooting bill designed to shut down any appearance that the U.S. government is playing favorites in foreign elections.
This bill’s core purpose is simple: U.S. diplomatic posts—embassies, consulates, and other official grounds—are now declared off-limits for foreign political fundraising. The State Department’s job, as the bill’s findings section notes, is promoting U.S. security and democratic values globally, not pushing the financial interests of a specific foreign political party. This applies to everyone, from the Ambassador down. No federal funds, and crucially, no personal funds from U.S. officials, can be used to host any gathering where the goal is to raise money for a foreign political party or candidate (SEC. 3).
Think of it this way: If a U.S. Ambassador in, say, France, wanted to host a lavish reception for a local political candidate, they could still do that as part of building relationships. But if that reception turned into a meet-and-greet specifically designed to solicit campaign donations, that’s now a hard stop. The bill defines “fundraising event” broadly, covering any gathering where the intent is to raise money, including setting up meetings between potential donors and political groups (SEC. 3).
This isn't just a memo; it’s a required change to the official rulebooks. The Act amends several existing laws, including the Foreign Service Act of 1980 and the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956. These changes make it illegal for the Secretary of State to authorize or pay for official entertainment expenses related to activities that raise funds for foreign political parties. Essentially, the money faucet for this kind of activity is being turned off completely (SEC. 3).
Perhaps the most immediate action item is the mandate for the Secretary of State to revise the Department of State Standardized Regulations (DSSR) and the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). These documents are the internal operating guides for every U.S. diplomat worldwide. The Secretary has just 90 days from the bill becoming law to update these rules and certify to Congress that they explicitly forbid using diplomatic posts for foreign political fundraising. They also have to make sure the new rules discourage any activity that might even look like it’s promoting one party’s financial interests over another's during an election (SEC. 3).
While this bill deals with high-level diplomacy, its impact is about credibility. When the U.S. government maintains strict neutrality, it strengthens our position when we talk about fighting corruption and advocating for free and fair elections abroad. For the average American, this means less chance of our diplomatic resources being used in ways that could be perceived as interfering in another country’s democratic process—which is vital for maintaining stable international relationships that ultimately affect trade, security, and the global economy. It reinforces the idea that U.S. diplomacy should serve the national interest, not the political ambitions of foreign factions. The main challenge here is defining that broad term of “fundraising event,” which could lead to some internal debates about where genuine diplomatic outreach ends and prohibited financial promotion begins.