In 1986, the U.S. Congress amended the qui tam provisions of the U.S. False Claims act in a way to make it more probable that a private citizen could file and win a qui tam suit. This move to amend the complaint was driven by the proliferation of news stories of companies defrauding the federal government, especially in the area of national defense. Some of the improvements included the trebling of damages, expanding the role of the qui tam relator, guaranteeing the relator a set percentage of the money that the government recovers, and the whistleblower protection clause.

By trebling the damages of the amount of fraud discovered, the qui tam relator was in a better position to convince others, especially attorneys, that it was worth the costs involved to bring a suit. One million dollars of fraud discovered could mean three million dollars back to the U.S. Treasury and a higher percentage of money to the relator. The trebling of damages also encourages companies who have defrauded the government to settle the case rather than to risk the trebling of damages found by a jury.

The role of the qui tam relator was expanded by the 1986 amendment because, before, the relator did not have the right to play a role once the government intervened in the case. Although the government has the primary role if they intervene in the case, the relator "shall have the right to continue as a party to the action." This clause gives you and your attorney the right to watch the Justice Department's handling of the case before settlement and allows you to go to the judge if you believe that the case is not being handled well or not in your best interests.

Before the 1986 amendment, the court could arbitrarily set the percentage of award for the qui tam relator. The 1986 amendment guaranteed a minimum of 15 percent of the recovery and a maximum of 30 percent. That was another help for the relator in finding an attorney willing to commit the time and money into a case.

The whistleblower protection clause is one of the strongest protection clauses in federal law. It not only protects the relator but anyone who investigates, initiates, testifies in furtherance of, or assists in a case. In Section 3730(h), whistleblowers who have proven harassment are entitled to "all necessary relief necessary to make the employee whole" including "reinstatement with the same seniority status... two times the amount of back pay, interest on any back pay, and compensation for any special damages." This clause not only helps the relator keep their job if they are still employed while the case is proceeding, but also makes a company think twice about harassing any employees who cooperate with exposing the fraud. Unfortunately, this clause does not help subcontractors and independent contractors who want to cooperate with the investigation.

The effect of the 1986 amendment has dramatically changed the way that attorneys view whistleblowers. Before the False Claims Act was amended, attorneys had very little financial incentive to help whistleblowers and most legal help for whistleblowers consisted of attorneys helping whistleblowers protect their rights pro bono (for free) or through long, painful and personal wrongful discharge suits. The amended qui tam provisions changed that by showing attorneys that they could share in the recovery as a reward for fronting costs and taking risks on potentially complicated litigation. The good news is that whistleblowers' complaints are now seen as valuable to both the government and the attorneys. The bad news is that, as in any profession, there are attorneys that are willing to take unfair advantage of the whistleblower and the whistleblower must be careful to make informed decisions about obtaining legal help.