Your comment is a cynical one. The very people qualified to define something like AI safety for the US population is...the US Government. Which is what they're doing. If you don't like some of what they're doing, there's many pathways to making sure your voice is heard, including voting for people who would explicitly support your policy preferences.
>nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet
Now is the time to start talking about it and taking it seriously though. If we keep avoiding trying to define it then we'll never be qualified to do so.
I realize you're making a direct reference but scare-quotes seem more applicable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
"documents of the FVEY have shown that they are intentionally spying on one another's citizens and sharing the collected information with each other"
What else would you expect? Both issues are about power, and I say that in the most matter-of-fact and non-judgemental fashion I can. The US government will effectively defend the privacy of American people as long as it poses a vulneravility, and that is one facet of AI safety. But a "right to privacy" as a domestic matter is different beast and there's clear malalignment.