Thoroughly Investigating Retaliation Against Whistleblowers Act
Latest action · Jan 5, 2017 Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Progress
Where this bill reached, and when. A stage with no date was not reached; one that failed a vote and later carried shows the date it carried.
- IntroducedJan 3, 2017
- Passed HouseJan 4, 2017
- Passed SenateNot reached
- To the PresidentNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Summary
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Thoroughly Investigating Retaliation Against Whistleblowers Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 to reauthorize through FY2021 the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency led by an official appointed by the President to protect federal employees, former employees, and applicants for employment from prohibited personnel practices (i.e., employment-related activities that violate the merit system through discrimination, retaliation, improper hiring practices, or failure to adhere to employment law).
(Sec. 3) The OSC shall have access to any record or other information of any agency under its jurisdiction. The Department of Justice (DOJ) or an inspector general may withhold access to information if the disclosure could interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation or prosecution, but only if DOJ or the applicable agency head submits a report to the OSC describing the records withheld and the reasons for the withholding.
(Sec. 4) The bill: (1) extends from 15 to 45 days the period for the OSC to review a disclosure of violations of law, gross mismanagement, or other matters; (2) requires an agency to provide a detailed explanation of any failure to take action to address information about a violation of law transmitted to it by the OSC; and (3) requires an agency to report to the OSC within 180 days on agency action proposed to address a violation of law, whether such proposed action has been taken, and if not, why not.
(Sec. 5) The OSC may terminate an investigation of a prohibited personnel practice if: (1) it involves an allegation that has been previously made by the same person, (2) the OSC does not have jurisdiction to investigate such allegation, or (3) the person should have known of the alleged prohibited personnel practice earlier than three years before the OSC received the allegation.
(Sec. 6) The bill expands the OSC's annual reporting requirements to include: (1) the cost of allegations disposed of by the OSC; (2) the number of stays or disciplinary actions that the OSC negotiates with agencies; (3) the number of corrective action petitions and disciplinary action complaints initiated before, and stays obtained from, the Merit Systems Protection Board; and (4) the number of prohibited personnel practice complaints that result in a favorable action or outcome for the complainant.
The OSC must include in its publicly disclosed list of noncriminal matters referred to agencies: (1) any comments from the complainant, provided that the availability to the public is appropriate, not prohibited by law, and is consented to by the complainant; and (2) the OSC's comments or recommendations.
(Sec. 7) The OSC shall design and establish a pilot program in FY2018-FY2019 to survey individuals who have filed a complaint or disclosure with the OSC. The responses shall be used to improve customer service at various stages of the review or investigative process.
(Sec. 8) Penalties for violations of Hatch Act prohibitions against engaging in political activities may include a combination of the disciplinary actions and the civil penalty prescribed under current law.
(Sec. 9) The OSC must prescribe and publish in the Federal Register any regulations necessary for the OSC to perform functions required by amendments made by this bill.
Cosponsors 3
Members who signed on, in the order they did. All signed on Jan 3, 2017.
| Seat | Cosponsor | Signed on | |
|---|---|---|---|
| D-MD | Elijah E. Cummings | Original | Jan 3, 2017 |
| D-VA | Gerald E. Connolly | Original | Jan 3, 2017 |
| R-NC | Mark Meadows | Original | Jan 3, 2017 |
Committees 2
Where it was sent and what each committee and subcommittee did with it, in order.
| Chamber | Committee | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| House | Oversight and Government Reform Committee | Referred Jan 3, 2017 |
| Senate | Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee | Referred Jan 5, 2017 |
Actions 8
Everything that happened, newest first.
- Jan 5, 2017Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- Jan 4, 2017Mr. Chaffetz moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- Jan 4, 2017Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H71-74)
- Jan 4, 2017DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 69.
- Jan 4, 2017Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H72-73)
- Jan 4, 2017Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Jan 3, 2017Introduced in House
- Jan 3, 2017Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
In the Congressional Record 1
Days the Record’s own index lists this bill, newest first, with the pages and the members it names. Pages starting H are the House, S the Senate, E Extensions of Remarks.
| Where | In the Record | Members | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| House | Debate and remarks H71–H74Text printed H72 | Gerald E. Connolly D-VA, Jason Chaffetz R-UT, Rod Blum R-IA, Wm. Lacy Clay D-MO | Jan 4, 2017 |
Research
What has been written about this bill: committee reports, cost estimates, the sponsor’s authority statement, printed hearings and the Congressional Research Service’s work.
Constitutional authority
The sponsor’s statement, as printed in the Congressional Record, vol. 163, no. 1, January 3, 2017, page H48.
Printed hearings 2
Hearings whose printed record names this bill, newest first: hearings on it, and wider hearings where it came up.
| Number | Hearing | Committee | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Serial No. 115-17 | TRANSPARENCY AT TSA66 pages | Oversight and Government Reform Committee | Mar 2, 2017 |
| Serial No. 115-10 | FIVE YEARS LATER: A REVIEW OF THE WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ENHANCEMENT ACT84 pages | Oversight and Government Reform Committee | Feb 1, 2017 |
CRS reports 1
Congressional Research Service work that CRS links to this bill or the law it became, newest first.
Cite it 1
Products on other subjects that cite it, usually among other measures.
| Product | Title | Kind | Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| R44701 | Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) FY2017 Appropriations: Independent Agencies and General Provisions Archived | Report | Aug 23, 2017 |
Titles 3
Every title it has carried, official and short, at each stage.
- Official Title as Introduced
- To reauthorize the Office of Special Counsel, to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide modifications to authorities relating to the Office of Special Counsel, and for other purposes.
- Short Titles as Introduced
- Thoroughly Investigating Retaliation Against Whistleblowers Act
- Short Titles as Passed House
- Thoroughly Investigating Retaliation Against Whistleblowers Act
Subjects
Assigned by the Library of Congress. Policy area: Government Operations and Politics.
Text 3
Each version as it was printed, newest first.
- Jan 5, 2017Referred in Senate
- Jan 4, 2017Engrossed in House
- Jan 3, 2017Introduced in House
Everything here is as published by Congress: the summary is the Congressional Research Service's, the action wording is the clerks', and the subjects are the Library of Congress's. How far it got is read from the actions themselves, taking the most recent one of each kind, so a bill that failed a vote and later passed is shown as having passed. Records come from this bill on Congress.gov and govinfo.gov; cost estimates are the Congressional Budget Office's, and the hearings are the printed hearings GovInfo publishes, which can appear months after the hearing.
