Because the lack of oversight and insight into the doings of the Executive Branch, employees are often the only source of information about mistakes, flaws and abuses that violates laws, rights and national security.
“National Security whistleblowers are at even greater danger and with less protection than whistleblowers in other settings. At least in the non-national security setting the federal whistleblower has access to some process and may resort to publication, the news media, fully consult counsel, and access evidence relevant to his or her case. Nevertheless, National Security employees are ensconced in secrecy. They are hemmed in by security clearances and access, threats of criminal prosecution, and non-disclosure and pre-publication review agreements.”
Witness testimony at Administration Oversight, Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Hearing
While it might seem reasonable that people with access to information regarding intelligence, defense, national security etc should not be allowed to leak such information without restrictions, as it now stands, particularly in the realm of National Security, the Executive Branch has argued that it has exclusive control over classified information and that its employees may not provide this information to Congress without approval.
The President has claimed the right to determine how, when, and under what circumstances certain classified information should be disclosed to members of Congress even though Congress members have or can receive appropriate security clearance.
Someone giving information outside the chain of authority within the Executive Branch, for example by going to a member of Congress, can be punished severely – both formally and informally.
One argument often advanced in defense of this, is that the chain of authority is the instance most capable of correcting problems and thus should be the place to go for employees with information about them.
Nevertheless, this does not resolve the issue in cases in which an employee fears reprisals, or has reason to doubt that going up the chain of authority will actually lead to anything. In many cases, whistleblowers have discussed the problems in the actions of going to precisely the same people he or she would have been forced to go to.
In 2007, the House passed an act protecting federal whistleblowers and allow them to go to the appropriate Congress chairs, without facing the risk of reprisals. The need to gain insight into a branch which has blocked oversight, has engaged in many cases of suspected abuse and committed severe mistakes was emphasized as the main reasons. The Whistleblower Protection Act of 2007 was considered not just a protection of rights for federal employees, but a protection of Congress’ rights—the right to know the actions of the Executive Branch, to oversee implementation of law, and to fulfill its constitutional obligations as a separate and co-equal branch of government.
According to Sourcewatch President George W. Bush, citing National Security concerns, promised to veto the bill should Congress enact it into law. The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs approved the Senate’s version of the Whistleblower Protection Act (S. 274) on June 13 2007. However, it has yet to reach a vote by Senate as a hold has been placed on the bill by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK).
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
