Rhode Island sets the pace on candidate security

In an era when threats against public officials are no longer theoretical, Rhode Island lawmakers have taken a pragmatic - and necessary - step forward.

On May 19, the state Senate approved the SECURE (Safeguarding Election Candidates Using Reasonable Expenditures) Act, legislation that explicitly allows candidates and elected officials to use campaign funds for home and office security systems, including ongoing monitoring.

The move deserves recognition from the electronic security industry and beyond. At its core, it reflects a reality the industry has been tracking for years: personal security is no longer optional for public-facing leaders.

The timing is no coincidence.

In recent years, executive protection has moved to the forefront of the national conversation. The assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City in December 2024, along with the June 14, 2025, targeted shootings of Minnesota lawmakers and their families - including the killing of Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, and the shooting of State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette - underscored the vulnerabilities facing both corporate and public-sector leaders.

These incidents are part of a broader escalation in threats, intimidation and targeted violence. For integrators, monitoring providers and security consultants, that shift is translating into rising demand for residential systems that deliver commercial-grade protection: integrated alarms, video surveillance, access control and 24/7 monitoring.

What Rhode Island has done with the SECURE Act is align policy with that reality.

By allowing campaign funds to cover security systems, the state removes a longstanding barrier: cost ambiguity. Candidates and officeholders can now invest in protection without uncertainty over whether those expenses qualify as legitimate campaign use.

The legislation also maintains clear guardrails. A $10,000 cap per election cycle, strict reporting requirements and prohibitions on misuse balance accountability with public trust - a framework that could serve as a model for other states.

And follow they should.

At the federal level, this type of spending has long been permitted. At the state level, however, policies have lagged the evolving threat environment. Rhode Island now joins a small but growing group of states recognizing that safeguarding public servants is neither a luxury nor a political talking point - it is a baseline requirement.

For the security industry, the implications are clear.

This is more than a policy story - it’s a signal: personal security is becoming institutionalized across new customer segments. Residential security, when driven by risk rather than convenience, is evolving into a more sophisticated, integrated offering. And monitoring - the backbone of recurring monthly revenue (RMR) - remains central to these deployments.

More broadly, it reinforces a trend the industry knows well: the convergence of commercial-grade security into residential environments for high-risk individuals.

Executive protection is no longer confined to boardrooms or travel - it’s extending into the home, supported by both technology and, increasingly, policy.

That perspective is already being echoed publicly. In a LinkedIn post following the vote, Holly Borgmann, vice president of government affairs at ADT, thanked Sen. Hanna Gallo and the Rhode Island Senate “for advancing this important measure” in response to the “dramatic increase in threats against political candidates and officeholders.”

Rhode Island’s action won’t solve the rise in threats. But it does something equally important: it acknowledges the risk and provides a clear path for protection.

That’s not just good policy - it’s common sense, and a step other states would be wise to follow.