In general, I strongly support this legislation. It is a way of telling the world that our country believes in human rights and that our country chooses to deny entry to those who use violence to oppress any group of people for nothing more than their human rights be who they they were born to be or have chosen to become. I agree with specifically calling out the LGBTI community rights to exist as a group that is not trying to impose their rights to infringe upon the human rights of other ‘groups’ of people. I think this legislation should be expanded to cover racial, ethnic and religious groups as well. With that addition, I think this legislation is a far more powerful long-term expression of what we value as a country - and that we are willing to demonstrate our commitment to our values by limiting access to our country for those who violently suppress fundamental human rights. It is a far more powerful message than targeted sanctions for human rights abuses alone, which often seem to be more about political pressure than our actual beliefs. At any rate, this legislation could set the stage for sanctions if needed and make sanctions to be viewed more as statement of who we are and less of a political maneuver. Finally, there needs to be clarity regarding ‘who and ‘how much’ involvement in violent suppression of human rights should be on the ‘list’ of people denied access. This should be specified to ensure the process is honestly applied as a statement of our beliefs and not as a political tool to selectively target specific countries; the credibility of this legislation as a notice to the world of our beliefs is lost if is used as a means to selectively pressure other countries to support some other agenda.