H.R. 8223 is a bill that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to pay back state and local first responder agencies for any costs they incur when responding to situations involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Customs and Border Protection. This could include situations like emergencies, operations, or other incidents that require the involvement of these local agencies.
Supportive media outlets have praised H.R. 8223 for its potential to alleviate financial burdens on local and state agencies that are often stretched thin in terms of resources. They argue that it's only fair for the federal government to reimburse these agencies for work that involves federal immigration and customs enforcement. Some also see it as a way of improving relationships and cooperation between local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies.
However, critics in the media have expressed concerns that H.R. 8223 could incentivize local and state agencies to become more involved in federal immigration enforcement, potentially leading to a more militarized approach to immigration. They suggest that the bill could blur the lines between local law enforcement and federal immigration agencies. Others worry about the potential for misuse of funds and lack of oversight in how these reimbursements are used.
The analysis of H.R. 8223, which seeks to reimburse state and local first responder agencies for costs related to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), reveals no direct industry overlaps with the sponsor Dave Min's top donor industries. The top donor industries do not appear to have a vested interest in immigration enforcement or border protection, which minimizes the risk of conflicts of interest. The lobbying activity in this policy area primarily involves natural resources and educational institutions, which do not directly relate to the bill's subject matter. Therefore, the potential for conflicts of interest is low, as the financial contributions do not suggest any influence over the bill's provisions.
Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.
| Client | Lobbying Firm | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| TENCENT AMERICA LLC | JOHN MCENTEE | $225,000 |
| AMERICAN COUNSELING ASSOCIATION | AMERICAN COUNSELING ASSOCIATION | $180,000 |
| PARKER MEGGITT | PARKER MEGGITT | $100,000 |
| GUIDESTAR ELDERCARE | LOPER CONSULTING LLC | $40,000 |
| GERSHOW RECYCLING CORPORATION | BROWN & WEINRAUB ADVISORS, LLC | $30,000 |
| PACE UNIVERSITY | BROWN & WEINRAUB ADVISORS, LLC | $30,000 |
| NATURA RESOURCES | BLUEWATER STRATEGIES | $20,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | BLUEWATER STRATEGIES | $20,000 |
| TOSHIBA CORPORATION | BLUEWATER STRATEGIES | $18,000 |
| AUTISM SCIENCE FOUNDATION | IKON PUBLIC AFFAIRS | $18,000 |
| MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION | IKON PUBLIC AFFAIRS | $18,000 |
| NATIONAL RETIREE LEGISLATIVE NETWORK | ALYSON PARKER | $15,000 |
| TOWN OF CLARKSTOWN | BROWN & WEINRAUB ADVISORS, LLC | $10,000 |
| CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI | TWO RIVERS LLC | $6,000 |
| JOHN HOPE FRANKLIN CENTER FOR RECONCILIATION | CARTER LAWS & ASSOCIATES | undisclosed |
Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026
Top industries funding Dave Min, ranked by total contributions.
Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)
