The SAFE VISITS Act is a proposed law that aims to improve security when foreign nationals visit state, local, Tribal, or territorial government officials or facilities in the United States. It requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to analyze potential terrorism threats associated with these visits and provide annual reports to Congress. Based on these analyses, DHS must offer guidance to local governments on how to handle such visits safely. Additionally, DHS is tasked with assisting in vetting foreign visitors and conducting debriefings after their visits to identify any security concerns.
Supporters of the SAFE VISITS Act argue that it enhances national security by proactively addressing potential threats from foreign nationals visiting local government entities. They believe that the bill's requirements for regular threat analyses and tailored guidance will help local governments better protect their officials, facilities, and sensitive information. Proponents also highlight that the bill fosters improved collaboration between federal and local authorities, ensuring a unified approach to mitigating terrorism risks.
Critics of the SAFE VISITS Act express concerns that the increased surveillance and vetting of foreign visitors could lead to privacy violations and the potential for profiling. They worry that the bill may strain resources at the local government level, requiring additional training and infrastructure to implement DHS's guidance effectively. Opponents also question whether the measures proposed in the bill will significantly enhance security or if they might inadvertently discourage beneficial international collaboration and exchange.
The SAFE VISITS Act, sponsored by Dan Goldman, does not show any direct industry overlaps with his top donor industries, which include Health Professionals and Retired individuals. The total contributions from these donors amount to $157.5 million, but they do not appear to have a direct financial interest in the specific provisions of the bill. Although there is significant lobbying activity in the policy area, particularly from companies like Tencent and Alibaba, the lack of direct financial ties to Goldman's donor base mitigates potential conflicts of interest. Voters should be aware that while lobbying exists, it does not directly correlate with Goldman's funding sources, suggesting a lower risk of conflict.
Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.
| Client | Lobbying Firm | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| TENCENT AMERICA, LLC | BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP | $200,000 |
| ALIBABA GROUP HOLDING LIMITED | BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP | $80,000 |
| B&H FOTO & ELECTRONICS CORP | STONINGTON GLOBAL | $75,000 |
| CTIA-THE WIRELESS ASSOCIATION | MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C. | $60,000 |
| NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE, LLC | NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE, LLC | $10,000 |
| SULLIVAN STRATEGIES OBO ODOT | COLUMBIA STRATEGIC COUNSEL | $10,000 |
| ACT FOR AMERICA | ACT FOR AMERICA | $10,000 |
| ALIBABA GROUP HOLDING LIMITED | MERCURY PUBLIC AFFAIRS, LLC | undisclosed |
| TENCENT AMERICA LLC | MERCURY PUBLIC AFFAIRS, LLC | undisclosed |
| XTAR LLC | THE MADISON GROUP | undisclosed |
| ALLERGY & ASTHMA NETWORK | ALLERGY & ASTHMA NETWORK | undisclosed |
| ARDMORE CONSULTING GROUP, INC | BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP | undisclosed |
| T-MOBILE USA, INC. | ALPINE ADVISORS | undisclosed |
| AXON ENTERPRISE, INC. | ALPINE GROUP PARTNERS, LLC. | undisclosed |
| PLAYPOWER, INC. | MILLER STRATEGIES, LLC | undisclosed |
Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026
Top industries funding Dan Goldman, ranked by total contributions.
Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)
