Have you watched the dramatic testimonies of the scientists who have been forced to make their research politically correct–and patently false? Or watched the contortions to which Congressional oversight committees have had to go to get the truth from government employees? That’s because of an accountability loophole created by the SCOTUS decision Garcetti v. Ceballos (with Alito as the deciding vote.)
Now your help is needed to reverse the devastating effects of this decision, and protect the whistleblower rights of government employees and contractors.
This spring the Senate will take up S. 274, Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act.
First, a little more history:
Last year the Supreme Court dealt a blow to free speech that caused few waves in public awareness:
The Supreme Court scaled back protections for government workers who blow the whistle on official misconduct Tuesday, a 5-4 decision in which new Justice Samuel Alito cast the deciding vote.In a victory for the Bush administration, justices said the 20 million public employees do not have free-speech protections for what say as part of their jobs.
Critics predicted the impact would be sweeping, from silencing police officers who fear retribution for reporting department corruption, to subduing federal employees who want to reveal problems with government hurricane preparedness or terrorist-related security.
Alito was the deciding vote on Garcetti v. Ceballos. Just a year earlier O’Connor had been the deciding vote on a case that protected whistleblowers in schools.
The bill is strongly supported by the Union of Concerned Scientists:
–Highly qualified scientists have been dropped from advisory committees dealing with childhood lead poisoning, environmental and reproductive health, and drug abuse, while individuals associated with or working for industries subject to regulation have been appointed to these bodies.
–Censorship and political oversight of government scientists is not restricted to the EPA, but has also occurred at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and Interior, when scientific findings are in conflict with the administration’s policies or with the views of its political supporters.
–The administration is supporting revisions to the Endangered Species Act that would greatly constrain scientific input into the process of identifying endangered species and critical habitats for their protection.
–Existing scientific advisory committees to the Department of Energy on nuclear weapons, and to the State Department on arms control, have been disbanded.
–In making the invalid claim that Iraq had sought to acquire aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment centrifuges, the administration disregarded the contrary assessment by experts at Livermore, Los Alamos and Oak Ridge National Laboratories.
A week ago, the House took dramatic action to restore these lost rights–especially for scientists who feel their work is being undermined. H.R. 985 was proposed by Henry Waxman. It reads in part:
To amend title 5, United States Code, to clarify which disclosures of information are protected from prohibited personnel practices; to require a statement in nondisclosure policies, forms, and agreements to the effect that such policies, forms, and agreements are consistent with certain disclosure protections, and for other purposes.
It passed the house by a veto-proof majority (331-94) largely as a result of the uproar caused by recent hearings on the stifling of global warming research (esp. at NASA). All 94 Nays were Republican.
A similar action was passed last spring, but eliminated by conference committee under intense pressure from the White House. But elections have consequences. Here’s what happened last week:
But passage of S. 274 (despite cosponsorship by Collins) in the Senate by a veto-proof majority is questionable, and Bush has listed this as one of the 16 he will flush. (No wonder: Imagine what would happen if government employees were suddenly freed from their muzzles!)
If you agree that
The distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease if the public is to be properly informed about issues central to its well being, and the nation is to benefit fully from its heavy investment in scientific research and education.
then it’s time to call your senator.
Postscript: There is another issue that is peripheral to the bill. Bush vetoed nothing for the first 6 years of his presidency. Why now? Is someone telling him that the signing statement scam is unlikely to be sustained by the SCOTUS? Remember, he’s getting different legal advice now from Fred Fielding, the first White House counsel who had any legal ability at all.
