If You Have Nothing to Hide You Have Nothing to Fear Act

Section 1. Short Title and Orwellian Acknowledgment

This Act may be cited as the “If You Have Nothing to Hide You Have Nothing to Fear Act” or the “What’s Good for the Goose Act of 2026.”

The Senate finds, to the extent that its findings are not classified:

(a) The FBI conducted approximately 3.4 million warrantless searches of American communications in 2021 under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This is approximately 9,315 warrantless searches per day, or one every 9.3 seconds.

(b) These searches included queries on Black Lives Matter protesters, January 6 suspects, journalists, a member of Congress, a state-level judge, and 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign. The FBI’s own internal reviews found systemic compliance violations.

(c) Section 702 has been reauthorized repeatedly despite documented, widespread abuse. Members who voted for reauthorization frequently cited the “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” framework in public statements.

(d) Congress has consistently exempted its own communications from surveillance under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 6), meaning that the same legislators who authorize mass surveillance of citizens have ensured their own communications are legally protected from similar scrutiny.

(e) The phrase “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear” has been used by surveillance proponents from both parties to justify expanded government monitoring. None of these proponents have volunteered to apply this standard to themselves.

Section 2. The Congressional Communications Equality Clause

2(a). General Principle

Any surveillance authority, data collection program, or monitoring capability that Congress authorizes for use on American citizens shall apply with equal force and scope to:

1. All members of Congress
2. All congressional staff
3. All congressional communications, including emails, phone calls, text messages, and encrypted messaging applications
4. All congressional metadata, including call records, location data, and browsing history

2(b). No Exceptions

The Speech or Debate Clause shall not be construed to exempt members from surveillance programs they themselves have voted to authorize. The committee notes that the Founders included the Speech or Debate Clause to protect legislative debate, not to create a surveillance-free bubble for people who vote to surveil everyone else.

2(c). Retroactive Application

This clause shall apply retroactively to all surveillance authorities currently in effect, including but not limited to:

• Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
• Executive Order 12333
• National Security Letters
• Any classified program that members voted for without reading (see also: H.R. 1776, the Read the Bill Act, which also failed)

Section 3. The Nothing to Hide Self-Application Test

3(a). Requirement

Before voting on any legislation that expands surveillance authority, each member of Congress must complete the Nothing to Hide Self-Application Test, which consists of a single question:

“Would you be comfortable if this exact surveillance power were applied to your personal communications, your staff’s communications, your family’s communications, and your donors’ communications, with the results made public?“

3(b). Recording

Answers shall be recorded in the Congressional Record alongside the member’s vote. A “No” answer followed by a “Yea” vote shall be flagged in the Hypocrisy Index described in Section 5.

3(c). Historical Application

If the Nothing to Hide Self-Application Test had been in effect for the past two decades, the committee estimates the following surveillance legislation would have received significantly fewer votes:

Legislation	Actual Vote	Estimated Vote with Self-Application
USA PATRIOT Act (2001)	98-1 (Senate)	Approximately 45-55
FISA Amendments Act (2008)	69-28	Approximately 30-70
Section 702 Reauthorization (2018)	65-34	Approximately 20-80
FISA Reform Act (2024)	60-34	Approximately 15-85

Section 4. The Warrantless Search Reciprocity Provision

4(a). Equal Application

For every warrantless search conducted on an American citizen under Section 702, one warrantless search of equivalent scope shall be conducted on a randomly selected member of Congress. At the 2021 rate of 3.4 million annual searches, each of the 535 members of Congress would be searched approximately 6,355 times per year, or roughly 17 times per day.

4(b). Notification Parity

Members of Congress shall receive the same notification of warrantless searches as citizens currently receive, which is none.

4(c). Oversight Parity

Congressional searches shall be subject to the same oversight mechanisms as citizen searches, which are classified, which means members will not know the extent to which they are being surveilled, which is the same experience they have legislated for everyone else.

Section 5. The Congressional Surveillance Hypocrisy Index

5(a). Establishment

The Office of Reciprocal Surveillance shall maintain a publicly accessible Congressional Surveillance Hypocrisy Index tracking, for each member:

1. Every vote cast in favor of expanded surveillance authority
2. Every privacy protection the member enjoys that their constituents do not
3. The ratio between the two, expressed as a “Hypocrisy Score” from 1 (consistent) to 10 (Orwellian)

5(b). Scoring Methodology

Points are assigned as follows:

• +1 for each vote to expand surveillance without a warrant requirement
• +1 for each vote against surveillance reform
• +2 for using the phrase “nothing to hide” while maintaining personal communication encryption
• +3 for voting to reauthorize Section 702 while objecting to oversight of congressional communications
• +5 for any member of the Intelligence Committee who votes for mass surveillance while their own communications remain classified

5(c). Publication

The Hypocrisy Index shall be updated quarterly and published on a publicly accessible website, displayed in a format similar to a credit score, because Americans understand that scoring system and because several members’ scores would be equally alarming.

Section 6. The “Apply It to Yourself First” Mandate

6(a). Pilot Program Requirement

Before any new surveillance authority can be authorized by Congress, it must first be applied as a six-month pilot program exclusively to members of Congress and their staff. If, after six months, members still believe the surveillance power is appropriate, it may be extended to the general public.

6(b). Expected Outcome

The committee anticipates that approximately zero surveillance expansion bills would survive the pilot program, which is the point.

Section 7. Effective Date and Classification Warning

This Act shall take effect upon enactment, unless the Intelligence Committee classifies it first, which is a real thing that can happen and which the bill’s sponsor has identified as “the most likely outcome.”

Committee Note: The Select Committee on Watching the Watchers voted 8-12 against reporting this bill favorably, with all 12 nay votes coming from members who also serve on the Intelligence Committee. When asked about the apparent conflict of interest, the ranking member responded: “That’s classified.” The committee chair attempted to enter the full voting record into the Congressional Record but was informed that the committee’s proceedings had been retroactively classified. The chair’s response to this information has also been classified.

---

This bill received one yea vote — from its sponsor — and 99 nay votes, making it the most lopsided Senate vote of the 119th Congress. The single yea vote was cast by Sen. George Orwell-Told-You-So, who released a statement reading, in full: “I have nothing to hide. I had hoped my colleagues could say the same.” The bill’s status was subsequently changed to “Classified” by the Intelligence Committee, which the bill’s sponsor noted was “exactly the kind of thing the bill was about.” The post-mortem report on the bill’s failure was also classified. The classification order for the post-mortem report was also classified. This footnote may also be classified by the time you read it.