::::::::
In the final countdown to Tuesday next--January 20, 2009, a long awaited date--there are some who may feel that they are being ridden out of town on a rail. Christopher Moraff is a writer and photographer who frequently contributes to In These Times,His article on January 5, 2009, BUSH'S FINAL PURGE is instructive. It explains the raw deal whistleblowers have been given during the Bush administration.
In a longstanding case, a professional from the Environmental Protection Agency, Marsha Coleman-Adebay--a policy analyst and whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), received notice of her dismissal on Oct. 30. This woman has waged a long-standing battle. She was written up during the Clinton administration and since then she has pursued various legal avenues. I suspect the reason Mr. Maroff singled out her case has something to do with her experience in bucking the system. This is not the usual newer civil service employee who could be persuaded to find other employment to make a place for a loyal follower of the Bush view.
Jesselyn Radack, a former Justice Department whistleblower who serves as homeland security director of Government Accountability Project (GAP), says such purges have been a Bush administration policy since the beginning. "It's hard to imagine that they're doing it at a faster rate than the meteoric pace they already have been," Radack wrote in an e-mail. "I would view such a phenomenon as just a continuation of [the administration's] notorious eight-year long, brutal campaign of retaliation against anyone who dissents, disagrees or exercises independent judgment."
Ms Coleman-Adebay says, "I'm hoping the new president will send a clear message that he will not tolerate this kind of illegal retaliation and harassment, and one way that he can do that is to reinstate whistleblowers who were terminated at the end of the Bush administration," she says. "It would be a very powerful gesture."
I personally think back to the musical chairs I observed in 1945. Although I was not a civil service worker, I saw how longtime government workers jockeyed to safe berths. "Loyalty oath" was a reality in the days of Joe McCarthy. The difference which occurs now is more nuanced, I surmise. But call it what you will. A loyalty oath is put in play to keep "the bureaucrats" in line.
My wish is that those who have Barack Obama's ear will fill it full of how destructive fearing for one's job is-- how it impacts efficiency in government.
