Blocked Whistleblower Protections Put Obama Transparency Promises at Risk; Intvw with Whistleblower advocate Tom Devine

Rob: So the new administration flat-out didn't do their job?-

Tom: Well, they have a lot to do, but yes, this needs to be protected. In the meantime, the WPA is a bad joke""it's a fraud.-

Rob: It's an actual law that was passed, right?-

Tom: Yes, Congress unanimously passed this law in 1989.-

Rob: So how could these Bush holdovers invalidate it?-

Tom: They have the power to make a decisions, and they have basically ruled that if they want day to be night, it can be so. For the time being, Mr. Maclean does not have the benefit of the WPA.-

Rob: Was this the intention of the law when Congress passed it?-

Tom: In fact, it was the exact opposite.-

Rob: What's the history of this law?-

Tom: It began as a law in the post-Watergate Civil Service Reform Act. Sen. Leahy was one of the pioneers, as was Morris Udall in the House. The WPA was passed to strengthen that law and give it a real mandate in 1989. The champions for that were Pat Schroeder in the House and Carl Levin from Michigan and Sen. Charles Grassley from Iowa in the Senate.-

Rob: Grassley has long been an advocate for whistleblowers, right?-

Tom: Grassley and Levin have labored over the last ten years for the WPA to be overhauled. Its free speech rights are beautiful on paper, but the Achilles Heel of this law has always been minor-league due process""you don't have normal access to court. There's this one bureaucratic board that's kind of a consolation prize for presidential appointments. It's not a prestigious government job""it's either a stepping stone or consolation prize. And the appointees know better than to threaten the power structure and the powers that be. In 1989, the WPA was passed b/c the same board that was formed by the Civil Service Reform Act had only ruled for whistleblowers four times. So Congress realized they had to change something, but they decided not to scrap the board but instead simply give it more guidance. They did this same thing again with amendments in 1994. Well, what's happened since 2000""the board's only ruled three times for whistleblowers. Under McFee, the Bush chairman, whistleblower's record is 1-44. You don't stand a chance. The WPA has become probably the primary reason why wb's remain silent observers instead of sticking their necks out.-

Rob: Tom, we went to meet with Rep. Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. Do you recall that?-

Tom: Yes, Robert Maclean, the fired air marshal, came to DC to fight for the WPA. He's selflessly lobbying Congress for a new law even though new rights won't apply to him.

Rob: So we went to the Hill in March and met with Chairman Conyers and had a fairly lengthy meeting. Did anything ever come of that?-

Tom: We didn't get direct results from that meeting, but we have gotten the ear of the Justice Dept. Obama has assigned its White House Counsel and many of the top lawyers from his admin to work with the "good government" community trying to get a consensus. Frankly, I think the Obama folks are a little idealistic""there's never going to be consensus with the dark side of the bureaucracy on freedom of speech, but they're giving it the old college try.-

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4