SAFE VISITS Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
ID: G000599
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
May 13, 2026
Introduced
Committee Review
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
Floor Action
Passed House
Senate Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
📚 How does a bill become a law?
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Bill Summary
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the intellectually bankrupt geniuses in Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The SAFE VISITS Act (because who doesn't love a good acronym?) claims to provide threat analyses and guidance to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments regarding visiting foreign nationals. How noble. In reality, it's just another excuse for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to expand its surveillance state and justify more bureaucratic busywork.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by adding a new section that requires the Secretary of DHS to submit threat analyses and guidance to Congress every year. Because, you know, the existing 17 intelligence agencies weren't enough. This new provision will undoubtedly create more paperwork, more meetings, and more opportunities for bureaucrats to justify their existence.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: state, local, tribal, and territorial governments; foreign nationals (because who doesn't love a good xenophobic dog whistle?); and, of course, the DHS. Oh, and let's not forget the fusion centers, which will get to collect even more data on unsuspecting citizens.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "security theater" – all show, no substance. It will likely lead to:
1. More surveillance and data collection on foreign nationals (and, by extension, American citizens who interact with them). 2. Increased bureaucracy and red tape for state and local governments. 3. A further erosion of civil liberties, as the DHS expands its reach into every aspect of American life. 4. A nice, fat contract for some lucky defense contractor to develop new "threat analysis" software.
In conclusion, the SAFE VISITS Act is a textbook example of legislative malpractice. It's a solution in search of a problem, designed to justify more government spending and expand the surveillance state. The real disease here is the insatiable appetite for power and control that afflicts our elected officials. And, as usual, the American people will be left to foot the bill – literally and figuratively.
Related Topics
💰 Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 3 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]
ID: T000193
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
ID: E000300
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Pou, Nellie [D-NJ-9]
ID: P000621
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 27 nodes and 30 connections
Total contributions: $116,000
Top Donors - Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
Showing top 14 donors by contribution amount
Industry Impact
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.
- +Cybersecurity confidence 0.80
Section 2(a) provides for threat analyses and guidance related to visiting foreign nationals, which could lead to increased demand for cybersecurity services to protect against potential threats, as described in SEC. 210H.
- +Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech confidence 0.70
Section 2(a) provides for outreach and vetting assistance to State, local, Tribal, or territorial governments, which could involve law enforcement and surveillance technology, as described in SEC. 210H(c)(1)(B).
- +Defense Contractors confidence 0.60
Section 2(b) mentions research and development of technology to enhance sharing of information, which could involve contracts with defense contractors, as implied by the coordination with the Under Secretary for Science and Technology of the Department of Homeland Security.
Who funds the sponsor on these industries
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]) received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
Industries this bill HELPS
- Cybersecurity$6,600from 2contributions
- ANDERSON, CATHLEEN$6,600
- from 1contribution
- WEBER, JOHN$250
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The SAFE VISITS Act aligns with the Project 2025 policy objective of enhancing national security and protecting U.S. interests, as it aims to mitigate homeland security threats posed by visiting foreign nationals. The bill's focus on threat analysis, guidance, and cooperation between government agencies also overlaps with the policy's emphasis on a functional diplomatic machine serving the national interest."
— 169 — Department of Homeland Security 19. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General, Management Directive No. 0810.1, June 10, 2004, https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/foia/mgmt_directive_0810_1_the_office_of_inspector_general. pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 20. H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-296, 107th Congress, November 25, 2002, https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/5005 (accessed January 18, 2023). — 171 — 6 DEPARTMENT OF STATE Kiron K. Skinner The U.S. Department of State’s mission is to bilaterally, multilaterally, and regionally implement the President’s foreign policy priorities; to serve U.S. citizens abroad; and to advance the economic, foreign policy, and national security interests of the United States. Since the U.S. Founding, the Department of State has been the American gov- ernment’s designated tool of engagement with foreign governments and peoples throughout the world. Country names, borders, leaders, technology, and people have changed in the more than two centuries since the Founding, but the basics of diplomacy remain the same. Although the Department has also evolved throughout the years, at least in the modern era, there is one significant problem that the next President must address to be successful. There are scores of fine diplomats who serve the President’s agenda, often helping to shape and interpret that agenda. At the same time, however, in all Administrations, there is a tug-of-war between Presidents and bureaucracies— and that resistance is much starker under conservative Presidents, due largely to the fact that large swaths of the State Department’s workforce are left-wing and predisposed to disagree with a conservative President’s policy agenda and vision. It should not and cannot be this way: The American people need and deserve a diplomatic machine fully focused on the national interest as defined through the election of a President who sets the domestic and international agenda for the nation. The next Administration must take swift and decisive steps to reforge the department into a lean and functional diplomatic machine that serves the
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill's focus on threat analyses and guidance for visiting foreign nationals tangentially relates to the Project 2025 policy's emphasis on border security and immigration enforcement, but it does not directly address the policy's core objectives of reorganizing the Department of Homeland Security or prioritizing border control."
— 135 — Department of Homeland Security Unfortunately for our nation, the federal government’s newest department became like every other federal agency: bloated, bureaucratic, and expensive. It also lost sight of its mission priorities. DHS has also suffered from the Left’s wokeness and weaponization against Americans whom the Left perceives as its political opponents. To truly secure the homeland, a conservative Administration needs to return the department to the right mission, the right size, and the right budget. This would include reorganizing the department and shifting significant resources away from several supporting components to the essential operational components. Prior- itizing border security and immigration enforcement, including detention and deportation, is critical if we are to regain control of the border, repair the historic damage done by the Biden Administration, return to a lawful and orderly immi- gration system, and protect the homeland from terrorism and public safety threats. This also includes consolidating the pieces of the fragmented immigration system into one agency to fulfill the mission more efficiently. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is a DHS com- ponent that the Left has weaponized to censor speech and affect elections at the expense of securing the cyber domain and critical infrastructure, which are threat- ened daily.2 A conservative Administration should return CISA to its statutory and important but narrow mission. The bloated DHS bureaucracy and budget, along with the wrong priorities, provide real opportunities for a conservative Administration to cut billions in spending and limit government’s role in Americans’ lives. These opportunities include privatizing TSA screening and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program, reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government, eliminating most of DHS’s grant pro- grams, and removing all unions in the department for national security purposes. A successful DHS would: l Secure and control the border; l Thoroughly enforce immigration laws; l Correctly and efficiently adjudicate immigration benefit applications while rejecting fraudulent claims; l Secure the cyber domain and collaborate with critical infrastructure sectors to maintain their security; l Provide states and localities with a limited federal emergency response and preparedness;
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill and the Project 2025 policy are tangentially related, as both deal with aspects of homeland security, but they focus on different areas and do not share significant objectives. The bill's emphasis on threat analyses and guidance for visiting foreign nationals does not directly align with the policy's goals of reorganizing the Department of Homeland Security and prioritizing border security and immigration enforcement."
— 135 — Department of Homeland Security Unfortunately for our nation, the federal government’s newest department became like every other federal agency: bloated, bureaucratic, and expensive. It also lost sight of its mission priorities. DHS has also suffered from the Left’s wokeness and weaponization against Americans whom the Left perceives as its political opponents. To truly secure the homeland, a conservative Administration needs to return the department to the right mission, the right size, and the right budget. This would include reorganizing the department and shifting significant resources away from several supporting components to the essential operational components. Prior- itizing border security and immigration enforcement, including detention and deportation, is critical if we are to regain control of the border, repair the historic damage done by the Biden Administration, return to a lawful and orderly immi- gration system, and protect the homeland from terrorism and public safety threats. This also includes consolidating the pieces of the fragmented immigration system into one agency to fulfill the mission more efficiently. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is a DHS com- ponent that the Left has weaponized to censor speech and affect elections at the expense of securing the cyber domain and critical infrastructure, which are threat- ened daily.2 A conservative Administration should return CISA to its statutory and important but narrow mission. The bloated DHS bureaucracy and budget, along with the wrong priorities, provide real opportunities for a conservative Administration to cut billions in spending and limit government’s role in Americans’ lives. These opportunities include privatizing TSA screening and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program, reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government, eliminating most of DHS’s grant pro- grams, and removing all unions in the department for national security purposes. A successful DHS would: l Secure and control the border; l Thoroughly enforce immigration laws; l Correctly and efficiently adjudicate immigration benefit applications while rejecting fraudulent claims; l Secure the cyber domain and collaborate with critical infrastructure sectors to maintain their security; l Provide states and localities with a limited federal emergency response and preparedness; — 136 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Secure our coasts and economic zones; l Protect political leaders, their families, and visiting heads of state or government; and l Oversee transportation security. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SEC) In the next Administration, the Office of the Secretary should take on the fol- lowing key issues and challenges to ensure the effective operation of DHS. Expansion of Dedicated Political Personnel. The Secretary of Homeland Security is a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed political appointee, but for budgetary reasons, he or she has historically been unable to fund a dedi- cated team of political appointees. A key first step for the Secretary to improve front-office functions is to have his or her own dedicated team of political appoin- tees selected and vetted by the Office of Presidential Personnel, which is not reliant on detailees from other parts of the department, to help ensure the completion of the next President’s agenda. An Aggressive Approach to Senate-Confirmed Leadership Positions. While Senate confirmation is a constitutionally necessary requirement for appointing agency leadership, the next Administration may need to take a novel approach to the confirmations process to ensure an adequate and rapid transition. For example, the next Administration arguably should place its nominees for key positions into similar positions as “actings” (for example, putting in a person to serve as the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of CBP while that person is going through the confirmation process to direct ICE or become the Secretary). This approach would both guarantee implementation of the Day One agenda and equip the department for potential emergency situations while still honoring the confirmation requirement. The department should also look to remove lower-level but nevertheless important positions that currently require Senate confirmation from the confirmation requirement, although this effort would require legislation (and might also be mooted in the event of legisla- tion that closes portions of the department that currently have Senate-confirmed leadership). Clearer, More Durable, and Political-Only Line of Succession. Based on previous experience, the department needs legislation to establish a more durable but politically oriented line of succession for agency decision-making purposes. The ideal sequence for line of succession is certainly debatable, except that in cir- cumstances where a career employee holds a leadership position in the department, that position should be deemed vacant for line-of-succession purposes and the next eligible political appointee in the sequence should assume acting authority. Further,
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.