As House Republicans debate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a strategy has emerged: use the surveillance bill as leverage to advance the SAVE America Act.

The idea — promoted by members such as Republican Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna — would link the election integrity legislation to a FISA extension, a strategy supporters argue could improve its chances of passage.

The Senate would walk over broken glass to pass FISA, which is why FISA is the perfect vehicle to attach the SAVE America Act and force a vote.

No more excuses. No more delays. Attach it, pass it, and get voter ID done. pic.twitter.com/Ud9uonlvWR

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) March 17, 2026

A group of Senate Republicans blocked an effort to attach the SAVE America Act to the budget reconciliation bill on Thursday. The vote took place during the Senate’s “vote-a-rama,” a marathon session where senators can offer and vote on numerous amendments regardless of their relevance to the underlying budget framework.

However, the proposal to combine the SAVE America Act with other legislative measures has exposed divisions within the Republican conference, particularly in the wake of a short-term 10-day FISA extension, over what path forward to take.

Some Republicans remain wary of packaging the bills together, arguing each should be evaluated on its own merits. Their concerns largely center on Section 702 of FISA, which critics say has been used in ways that raise civil liberties concerns and could involve surveillance of Americans.

Opponents of the pairing argue that tying surveillance authorities to election integrity reforms risks weakening support for the broader effort — especially if it is viewed as exchanging expanded intelligence authorities for policies such as proof-of-citizenship requirements and tighter voter roll standards, or as potentially losing out on getting the best of both worlds if the measures were considered and advanced separately.

Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie has also vocally opposed combining the two measures, criticizing the approach on the Free The People podcast.

“Why do you have to take the Fourth Amendment hostage and then shoot it, in order to get safe elections? I don’t buy into that.” Massie said.

Massie, alongside Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, introduced the “Surveillance Accountability Act” on Thursday. If passed, the legislation would require federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies to obtain a probable cause warrant before accessing Americans’ private digital data — including information stored with third-party service providers.

I’ve introduced HR 8470, the Surveillance Accountability Act, with @RepBoebert.

It requires a probable cause warrant before the federal government can search your private data — even if that data is held by a third party.

Warrantless searches are unconstitutional. pic.twitter.com/kXJPUa8m6I

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 23, 2026

Republican North Carolina Rep. Pat Harrigan told the Daily Caller on Tuesday at the Republican Study Committee’s media row that negotiations have dragged on for months, adding Congress can’t keep “kicking the can down the road.” He said the drawn-out process shows a “clean” Section 702 reauthorization isn’t viable — and argued that’s ultimately a good thing.

“I’m more particular about what are we putting into law, what guardrails and restrictions, because if we get the right bill, I don’t care if it’s 2 years, 5 years, 10 years,” Harrigan said, emphasizing that the length of the extension matters less than ensuring strong protections are built into the statute.

Harrigan also suggested there is growing agreement among some lawmakers that the core concerns with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stem from how the agency has exercised its surveillance authorities, rather than from the broader intelligence community — arguing that reforms should focus on preventing future misuse of those tools.

Republican Tim Burchett weighed in on a separate proposal to combine the two bills, expressing skepticism about both the policy and the legislative strategy.

“Yeah, I don’t like FISA, but if we’re going to pass it, that’d be the only way I could see supporting it,” Burchett said. “I think the Senate’s going to wait to the last minute, and if they do — so they can say, ‘Oh, we passed it’ — it’ll be a disaster in the implementation of it.”

.@RepTimBurchett on possible FISA extension: “I think all the safeguards that we put in place will be stripped. It worries me because we complained about it under the Biden administration, now all of a sudden, all these things are going to be okay. I just don’t buy that.” pic.twitter.com/UuqEzo0Ahk

— CSPAN (@cspan) April 21, 2026

Similarly, Republican Mark Harris described ongoing negotiations over attaching the SAVE America Act to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) extension as filled with “political maneuvering” and “political gymnastics.”

“There’s so much political maneuvering — so many political gymnastics around this,” Harris said, adding that as a freshman lawmaker, he prefers to focus directly on the issues and move forward.

While reiterating that the SAVE America Act “needs to be passed,” Harris called it “unfortunate” that the Senate has yet to act. He acknowledged the measure could ultimately be attached to FISA, but framed that possibility as a political calculation.

“At the end of the day, when you look at FISA, my number one concern is that we have the guardrails in place to make sure Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights are not violated,” he said, emphasizing that strong safeguards remain his top priority in the broader debate.

On Thursday, House Republicans released a new FISA proposal that would extend current authorities for three years while pairing the reauthorization with a series of reforms. The plan includes tighter restrictions on FBI queries of U.S. person data, mandatory attorney approval for those searches, and expanded oversight through enhanced reporting requirements to the Intelligence Community’s Civil Liberties Protection Officer and the Inspector General. A legislative alert issued by the Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability (PPSA) — a nonprofit civil liberties advocacy group — contends that “the proposal is a diversion that restates existing law as a reform, the policy equivalent of fool’s gold.”

Importantly, the version sent to the House Rules Committee stops short of including a comprehensive warrant requirement — a key demand from several lawmakers. A spokesperson for Republican North Carolina Rep. Pat Harrigan told the Caller that the congressman “wants to see a warrant requirement and real accountability measures in place,” adding that “when that happens, he is ready to vote yes.”

It would further include new criminal penalties for misuse of surveillance authorities, a GAO audit of targeting practices, and expanded congressional access to FISA court proceedings — alongside a short-term reauthorization extending Section 702 through 2029.

“I am working very hard with our Great Speaker, Mike Johnson, along with Chairman Jim Jordan and Chairman Rick Crawford, to get a clean extension of FISA 702 through the House of Representatives this week…” – President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/p0eM201xGr

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) April 14, 2026

Meanwhile, Republican John Rose, a vocal advocate for FISA reform, has put forward three proposals aimed at strengthening oversight. His amendments would require a full congressional briefing and public report on FBI abuses tied to an “advanced filtering tool,” allow members of Congress to attend FISA court proceedings, and establish a program for security-cleared public witnesses to observe and review Section 702 activities.

Rose told the Caller that Section 702 raises serious privacy concerns, arguing it violates Fourth Amendment protections, warning the FISA court cannot be fully trusted, and calling for stronger safeguards — including a warrant requirement — to protect Americans from unwarranted surveillance.

“I think we’re a ways off from having an answer here, because I think that 702 is an affront to the Fourth Amendment right to privacy,” Rose told the Caller Tuesday. “I think Americans deserve to know when they’re being spied on. I think it’s very clear that the FISA court, including the judges, cannot be trusted. And so I think there have to be more robust protections. I personally favor a warrant requirement, but I think there needs to be other safeguards around FISA.”

The Caller reached out to House Speaker Mike Johnson’s office for comment regarding combining the two bills, but did not receive a response in time for publication.

AUTHOR

Ashley Brasfield

Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Admin Reaches Settlement With Carter Page Over FISA Spying

Late Night FISA Push Tanked By House GOP Hardliners

Trump Hated Deep State Spying Powers Used Against Him. Then He Launched A War

Senate Pushes Through Short-Term Extension Of Spy Tool Beloved By Deep State

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.