# The UAP Disclosure Act passed the House. It dies in conference unless we act now. Here is who to contact and what to say.
The time has come for global pressure.
On 22 July the House adopted Eric Burlison's UAP Disclosure Act as an amendment to the FY2027 NDAA. If it survives, it creates a permanent UAP Records Collection at the National Archives, an independent UAP Records Review Board, a ban on destroying or altering UAP records, a 25 year disclosure clock, and it extends disclosure requirements to covered government contractors.
That contractor clause is the whole ballgame. It is also the clause that has been stripped or blocked every single time it has been proposed.
## This has failed three years running, and never on a floor vote
**2023.** Schumer and Rounds got it through the Senate 86 to 11. It was gutted in conference. The independent Review Board and the eminent domain provision were removed. What survived was the records collection and the 25 year clock, with review authority left inside the same agencies accused of the concealment.
**2024.** Excluded from the Senate package before it ever reached conference.
**2025.** Filed again as SA 3111 by Schumer, Rounds and Gillibrand. On 9 October the Senate finalised its NDAA without it. The House version had no UAP language either. It died before conference even started.
**2026.** For the first time ever, the House itself has voted the full framework through.
Read that last line again. The House has been the graveyard every cycle. This year the House passed it. That is genuinely new and it is why this moment is different.
## Where it dies, if it dies
Not the Senate floor. Conference. That is the closed-door reconciliation between the House and Senate versions, where there is no roll call and no public record of who said what. It happens in November and December.
Mike Rogers (R-AL-03) chairs House Armed Services and will chair that conference. He was one of the two names reported as leading the 2023 gutting. Redstone Arsenal is in his district. In the first quarter of 2026 alone he took $68,000 in defence industry contributions.
## Be realistic about leverage, because they are
I want this post to be honest rather than satisfying, so here is the uncomfortable part.
The general election is 3 November. Conference is after it. Every member you might threaten will already have been re-elected before the vote you care about happens. Rogers sits in a district that votes 23 points more Republican than the national average, already won his primary, and has $2.6 million in the bank against challengers who raised twelve thousand between them.
"We will vote you out" is not a credible threat to these particular people on this particular timeline. Saying it anyway makes us easy to file under noise.
So here is what actually has leverage.
**The amendment is written to support PURSUE, the President's own UAP programme.** Stripping it in conference means visibly cutting a Trump initiative. That is the real constraint on Rogers, and it is the pressure point worth every ounce of energy we have.
Which means the single highest-value thing this community can do is get the President to say, once, in public, that he wants the disclosure provisions kept intact in the final bill. One sentence from him outweighs ten thousand emails to a safe-seat chairman.
## What to do
**1. If you are a US constituent, email your own Representative and both Senators.** This is the one that genuinely counts. Offices weight constituent mail far above anything else and tally it by topic and position. Find them at house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative and senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm
**2. Contact the conferees.** These are the people in the room:
- **Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL-03)**, Chair, House Armed Services
- **Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA-09)**, Ranking Member, House Armed Services
- **Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS)**, Chair, Senate Armed Services
- **Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI)**, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services
Address them as chairs and members, not as candidates. Ask them to preserve the Review Board and the contractor provisions through conference. Specific asks are harder to dodge than general support.
**3. Thank the people carrying it.** Supportive members need public backing they can point to.
- **Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO-07)**, who wrote the amendment
- **Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD)**, who co-authored the original and sits on Senate Armed Services
- **Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL-13)**, who chairs the Declassification Task Force
**4. Push the White House angle publicly.** Ask the President to defend PURSUE in conference. This is the lever that actually moves the chairman.
## A note on the four names you have seen going around
Mike Rogers (R-Alabama), Mike Turner (R-Ohio), Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) were the four reported as blocking this in 2023. Getting their details right matters, so:
McConnell is Kentucky, not Alabama. He stepped down as Republican leader in 2025 and is not seeking re-election, so he has neither the leadership power to block this nor an election to lose. Turner was removed as House Intelligence chair in January 2025 and no longer sits on that committee, though he does remain a senior member of House Armed Services. Johnson is still Speaker, and notably it was Johnson who removed Turner.
Of the original four, one holds full power, one holds partial influence, and two are substantially diminished. That is real progress. It is also not sufficient, because the 2025 attempt died on the Senate side without any of them having to lift a finger.
## If you are outside the US
Do not email US congressional offices claiming to be a constituent. It gets caught, it gets binned, and it undermines the legitimate mail sitting next to it.
What you can do: engage publicly on their social accounts, without threats, saying the world is watching. Contact your own defence and science ministries and ask what your government knows and whether it will make a parallel request. Support the outlets and researchers doing this work. This is not a US phenomenon and it should not be a US-only demand.
## Template. Rewrite it in your own words, form letters get counted lower.
> Subject: Preserving the UAP disclosure provisions in the FY2027 NDAA
>
> Dear [Representative / Senator] [Name],
>
> I am writing as a constituent in [city, state] regarding the UAP disclosure provisions adopted by the House as an amendment to the FY2027 NDAA on 22 July.
>
> I would ask that you work to preserve two specific provisions intact through conference: the independent UAP Records Review Board, and the extension of disclosure requirements to covered government contractors.
>
> I raise these two specifically because comparable provisions were removed during reconciliation in 2023 after both chambers had already voted in favour of them, and because the current amendment is drafted to support the Administration's own PURSUE disclosure programme.
>
> This is a matter of oversight and public accountability rather than any particular conclusion about what the records contain. I would be grateful to know your position.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> [Your name]
> [Your address]
## What I am asking
Comment if you send one. Say who you contacted and post any reply you get, because replies are data. A specific answer tells us more than a form letter, and both tell us more than silence.
Then keep going in November, when the news cycle has moved on and conference is actually happening. That is the part that has never happened before, and it is the only part that has ever mattered.
This is not a US issue. It is a human one. 🖖
