This is not an official government website.
© 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a floor statement or debate entry. It mentions legislation such as Expanding Whistleblower Protections for Contractors Act of 2026, members such as Eric Burlison.
Issued
July 20, 2026
house side of the record
People
2
Linked members mentioned in this section
Legislation
1
Bills and resolutions linked from this section
Committees
0
No linked committees in this section
Senate Holds
0
No hold activity linked here
Source Document
Connected Data
People mentioned
Bills and resolutions
Source Control
Reader mode is for comprehension. The linked government PDF is the official published source.
Download official House Record PDFReturn to issue contextMr. BURLISON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5578) to ensure that whistleblowers, including contractors, are protected from retaliation when a Federal employee orders a reprisal, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5578
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Expanding Whistleblower
Protections for Contractors Act of 2026”.
SEC. 2. DEFENSE CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES: PROTECTION FROM
REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.
Section 4701 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) in paragraph (1)—
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—
(I) by striking “An employee” and all that follows
through “services contractor” and inserting “A protected
individual”; and
(II) by striking “disclosing” and all that follows
through “evidence of”; and
(ii) by striking subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) and
inserting the following subparagraphs:
“(A) Refusing to obey an order that would require the
protected individual to violate a law, rule, or regulation
related to any contract, subcontract, grant, or subgrant.
“(B) Disclosing to a person or body described in paragraph
(2) information that the protected individual reasonably
believes is evidence of the following:
“(i) Gross mismanagement of any Department of Defense
contract or grant, any gross waste of Department funds, any
abuse of authority relating to any Department contract,
subcontract, grant, or subgrant, or any violation of law,
rule, or regulation related to any Department contract or
subcontract (including the competition for or negotiation of
a contract or subcontract) or grant or subgrant.
“(ii) Gross mismanagement of any National Aeronautics and
Space Administration contract or grant, any gross waste of
Administration funds, any abuse of authority relating to an
Administration contract, subcontract, grant, or subgrant, or
any violation of law, rule, or regulation related to any
Administration contract or subcontract (including the
competition for or negotiation of a contract or subcontract)
or grant or subgrant.
“(iii) A substantial and specific danger to public health
or safety.”; and
(B) in paragraph (3)—
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking “an employee” and
inserting “a protected individual”; and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following subparagraph:
“(B) it shall not be within the authority of an executive
branch official to request that a contractor, subcontractor,
grantee, or subgrantee engage in a reprisal prohibited by
paragraph (1).”;
(2) in subsection (c)—
(A) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following
subparagraph:
“(E) Propose appropriate disciplinary action against any
executive branch official for any request made of a
contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee that
subjected the complainant to a reprisal prohibited by
subsection (a).”; and
(B) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following
paragraph:
“(8) Clarification for Scope of Waiver Restrictions.—The
rights, forum, and remedies provided for in this section may
not be waived by any public or private agreement, policy,
form, or condition of employment, including by any predispute
arbitration agreement.”;
(3) in subsection (f)—
(A) by striking “an employee” and inserting “a protected
individual”; and
(B) by striking “the employee” and inserting “the
protected individual”; and
(4) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
“(8) The term `protected individual' means—
“(A) a contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee
of the Department of Defense or the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, including—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i);
“(B) an employee of a contractor, subcontractor, grantee,
or subgrantee of the Department of Defense or the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, or a former employee of
such contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee whose
protected disclosure or engagement in any activity protected
against reprisal under this section occurred prior to
termination, including an employee of—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i); or
“(C) a person performing personal services for the
Department of Defense or the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration pursuant to a contractual agreement for the
performance of personal services, including a personal
services contract or personal services agreement, and who
engages in an activity for which any reprisal is prohibited
under subsection (a), including a person performing personal
services pursuant such a contractual agreement for—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i).”.
SEC. 3. ENHANCEMENT OF NON-DEFENSE CONTRACTOR PROTECTION FROM
REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.
Section 4712 of title 41, United States Code, is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following
paragraph:
“(1) In general.—A protected individual may not be
discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a
reprisal for the following:
“(A) Refusing to obey an order that would require the
protected individual to violate a law, rule, or regulation
related to any contract, subcontract, grant, or subgrant.
“(B) Disclosing to a person or body described in paragraph
(2) information that the protected individual reasonably
believes is evidence of the following:
“(i) Gross mismanagement of any Federal contract or grant,
any gross waste of Federal funds, any abuse of authority
relating to any Federal contract, subcontract, grant, or
subgrant, or any violation of law, rule, or regulation
related to any Federal contract or subcontract (including the
competition for or negotiation of a contract or subcontract)
or grant or subgrant.
“(ii) A substantial and specific danger to public health
or safety.”; and
(B) in paragraph (3)—
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking “an employee” and
inserting “a protected individual”; and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following subparagraph:
“(B) it shall not be within the authority of an executive
branch official to request that a contractor, subcontractor,
grantee, or subgrantee engage in a reprisal prohibited by
paragraph (1).”;
(2) in subsection (c)—
(A) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
“(E) Propose appropriate disciplinary action against any
executive branch official for any request made of a
contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee that
subjected the complainant to a reprisal prohibited by
subsection (a).”; and
(B) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following
paragraph:
“(7) Rights, forum, and remedies not waivable.—The
rights, forum, and remedies provided for in this section may
not be waived by any public or private agreement, policy,
form, or condition of employment, including by any predispute
arbitration agreement.”;
(3) in subsection (e)—
(A) by striking “an employee” and inserting “a protected
individual”; and
(B) by striking “the employee” and inserting “the
protected individual”;
(4) in subsection (g), by inserting after paragraph (2) the
following new paragraph:
“(3) The term `protected individual' means—
“(A) a contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee
of the Federal Government, including—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i);
“(B) an employee of a contractor, subcontractor, grantee,
or subgrantee of the Federal Government or a former employee
of such contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee
whose protected disclosure or engagement in any activity
protected against reprisal under this section occurred prior
to termination, including an employee of—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i); or
“(C) a person performing personal services for the Federal
Government pursuant to a contractual agreement for the
performance of personal services, including a personal
services contract or personal services agreement, including a
person performing personal services pursuant to such a
contractual agreement for—
“(i) the government of each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, an Indian tribe or authorized tribal
organization, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or any other territory or possession of the
United States; and
“(ii) the government of any political subdivision of,
agency of, or instrumentality of, a government listed in
clause (i).”.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Subramanyam) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
General Leave
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this measure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
have adequate protection from retaliation for speaking out against fraud, waste, or abuse of taxpayer dollars.
Inspector General found that a lack of whistleblower protections for contractors discouraged them from coming forward. This isn't surprising. It is a difficult decision for someone to come forward and risk their job and their livelihood.
address this by strengthening whistleblower protections for Federal contractors by prohibiting reprisals for certain actions.
individual believes is evidence of mismanagement, waste, abuse, or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety related to a contract or grant.
on this important bill with Chairman Comer and recognize Senators Gary Peters and Chuck Grassley for their steadfast leadership on these necessary reforms.
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5578, the Expanding Whistleblower Protections for Contractors Act.
oversight. They are key to identifying and stopping waste, fraud, corruption, and abuse of power.
Millions of workers performing critical jobs for the U.S. Government are contractors, not Federal civil servants, but they don't have the same whistleblower protections as civil servants right now. As a result, contractors are less likely to report wrongdoing, especially since they fear retaliation or mistreatment.
This bill would strengthen protections for contractors. It protects them from retaliation for refusal to participate in illegal activity. It also ensures that contractors are legally able to disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and dangers to public health and safety.
This bill will help us do our job to uncover abuses of power. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.
I thank the ranking member for his leadership on this issue. Especially at a time when a lot of folks in Federal civil service and Federal contractors are concerned about coming forward, we need to protect whistleblowers more than ever.
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important whistleblower reform bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5578, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.