PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Held at the desk.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Aug 23, 1994
Amends the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (WPA) to extend the authorization of appropriations for the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Makes numerous miscellaneous and technical amendments to various OSC provisions under WPA, including those regarding OSC administration and powers of disclosure, investigation of prohibited personnel practices and individual rights of action in certain reprisal cases, and OSC reports. Amends Federal law to: (1) make an agency decision to order psychiatric testing or examination of an employee a personnel action subject to review in whistleblower cases; (2) extend protection against certain prohibited personnel practices to employees of Government corporations; (3) make agency and Government corporation heads responsible for ensuring that their employees are informed of the rights and remedies available under Federal law for whistleblowers; (4) make compliance with merit systems principles a factor in Senior Executive Service performance appraisals; (5) revise the definition of covered position with respect to prohibited personnel practices; (6) permit reasonable attorney's fees in certain cases; (7) allow Federal employees to use circumstantial evidence in seeking to obtain corrective actions; (8) include discrimination and retaliation as prohibited personnel actions; (9) extend whistleblower protection coverage to certain Department of Veterans Affairs personnel; and (10) allow the Board to order corrective action that will make the employee whole. Requires OSC to: (1) issue a policy statement regarding the implementation of WPA; (2) include in any letter terminating an investigation of a prohibited personnel practice the identification of an OSC employee who can respond to questions on the investigations; and (3) conduct an annual survey of all individuals who contact it for assistance.
People & committees
Sen. Levin, Carl [D-MI] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Voice Vote.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S13958-13961)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 599.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Glenn with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 103-358.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Glenn with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 103-358.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3276-3278)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.622 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.622 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.622 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.622 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.