According to Janet P. Near and Marcia Miceli of Indiana University, a whistle-blower is an “employee or member of an organization (former or current) who discloses the illegal, immoral, or illegitimate practices of their employers to persons or organizations that may be able to effect action.” Near and Miceli cite three instances when whistle- blowing occurs in organizations: A person or persons must commit a wrongdoing; somebody else must observe, define, and report it; and another person or persons must be a victim of the wrongdoing. They conclude, “From a legal standpoint, a whistle-blower should believe the wrongdoing has implications for public policy, or some portion of society is endangered by the organization’s actions.” A whistle-blower can report wrongdoings to parties either inside or outside the organization. There is no law that mandates whistle-blowers must report wrongdoing within an organization; they come forward themselves for many reasons. According to Near and Miceli, “From a legal perspective, effectiveness of whistle-blowing can be defined in terms of win/loss ratio in lawsuits entered into by whistle-blowers. However, many define whistle-blower success as the extent to which the questionable or harmful practice is terminated as a result of the whistle-blower’s complaint.” Whistle-blowers risk potential discrimination or retaliation by the organization they report for wrongdoing. Examples of discrimination include firing, demotion, job transfer, LAYOFF, and losing an opportunity for overtime or promotion. If a whistle-blower suffers such consequences, he or she must be able to prove the employer had acted in a discriminatory or a retaliatory manner. There are four elements of a whistle-blower reprisal violation: The employee must make a protected disclosure, the official responsible for the action must have knowledge of the disclosure, the employee must be subjected to personnel action, and there must be a connection proved sufficient to establish that the protected disclosure was a contributing factor in the personnel action. Federal legislation has been enacted to protect whistle-blowers from such discrimination or reprisal, although currently there is no comprehensive federal whistle-blower protection law. The whistle-blower protection law, the False Claims Act (1986), allows a private individual or whistle-blower with knowledge of past or present FRAUD to sue on behalf of the government and receive a monetary reward. The first whistle- blower act was first enacted during the American Civil War was known as the Lincoln Law. It was strengthened in 1986 to make it easier for private citizens to sue. The government has the right to intervene and join the action. If the government does not join the action, the plaintiff can proceed alone. Other federal legislation with whistle-blower protection statutes include laws with employee protection provisions, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002, and the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989. Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, companies are required to set up confidential whistleblower hotlines so corporate employees can report misdeeds. The Whistle-blower Protection Act of 1989 provides protection for federal employees, whose complaints are handled through the government Office of Special Counsel. There are also many states with statutes or provisions for whistle-blower protection. Employees who face retaliation for whistle-blowing can be reinstated and receive back pay and compensatory DAMAGES. Supporters of whistle-blower protection argue that whistle-blower’s actions can save lives and billions of dollars, and the individuals who report the fraud should be afforded protection. Strong laws allow employees to be comfortable about voicing concerns and to work for change. When the employee is comfortable working within the system, MANAGEMENT is able to address potentially harmful situations and rectify them before a crisis occurs. Critics of whistle-blower protection maintain that the inconsistent application of the laws discourage employees from pursuing administrative remedies and instead pursue punitive damage suits. There is also argument that narrow legal interpretations and inconsistent application of the law actually discourages insiders from reporting corporate wrongdoings. Finally, critics point out that the Department of Justice only takes 20 percent of the complaints filed under the False Claims Act, which further discourages whistle-blowers to come forward. Some of the more notable whistle-blowers include Sharon Watkins in the Enron case, Colleen Rowley in the FBI case, Mary Schiavo in the FAA case, Winston McCully in the Hanford Nuclear Reservation case, and Karen Silkwood in the Kerr-McGee plutonium case.