Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act
Latest action. Placed on Senate legislative calendarThe list of measures reported out of committee and eligible for floor action. Being on the calendar is not a promise of a vote.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) under General Orders. Calendar No. 114.
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act - Includes as a protected disclosure by a Federal employee: (1) any lawful disclosure an employee or applicant reasonably believes is credible evidence of waste, abuse, or gross mismanagement, without restriction as to time, place, form, motive, context, or prior disclosure; and (2) the disclosure of information required to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs that the employee or applicant reasonably believes is direct evidence of waste, abuse, or gross mismanagement if such disclosure is made to a Member or employee of Congress who is authorized to receive information of the type disclosed. Excludes disclosures pertaining to policy decisions that lawfully exercise discretionary authority unless the disclosing employee reasonably believes that there is evidence of a violation of law or government waste, fraud, or abuse. Provides for employee discipline for disclosures to congressional employees who are not authorized to receive such information.
Codifies the legal standard for determining whether a whistleblower has a reasonable belief that a disclosure evidences governmental waste, fraud, or abuse, or a violation of law.
Provides that the following actions may not be taken against whistleblowers for protected disclosures: (1) the implementation or enforcement of any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement; (2) a security clearance suspension or revocation; and (3) an investigation (other than routine nondiscretionary agency investigations) of an employee or applicant for employment.
Authorizes the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to conduct an expedited review of cases charging retaliation for whistleblowing when the whistleblower's security clearance or access determination is suspended, revoked, or otherwise adversely affected. Requires an agency that improperly revokes a whistleblower's security clearance to report to Congress explaining its actions. Exempts an agency from this requirement if the agency can show by a preponderance of the evidence (currently, clear and convincing evidence required) that it would have taken the same personnel action in the absence of the whistleblower disclosure. Authorizes the President to exclude certain agencies engaged in the conduct of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence activities from whistleblower protections if such exclusion is made prior to any personnel action against the whistleblower.
The summary continues for 5 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Reported to Senate without amendment" stage on May 25, 2005. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on May 25, 2005: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 114.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the Senate
- Passage by the House
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 109th Congress (2005-06), 482 of the 10,701 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 4.5 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
DANIEL AKAKA (D-HI) introduced it on March 2, 2005, and 14 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 9 Democrats, 5 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on March 2, 2005, 7862 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 7778 days ago, on May 25, 2005.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 109th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2007 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- SenateIn committee, no floor vote yet
- HouseAwaits Senate passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers