Watchdog Blog

Testifying on Behalf of More Accountability and Transparency

On May 14 at 10:00 AM, Congress Watch Advocacy Director Angela Canterbury testifies in support of the the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009 before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. We believe that as our country faces challenges of historic proportions, one reform can save billions of taxpayer dollars and help fulfill the imperative for more transparency and accountability:  authentic whistleblower protections for all federal employees. Learn more about whistleblower protections, watch her testify live online and read her written testimony, then take action.

Poll: Americans Oppose Forced Arbitration, Demand Corporations Be Held Accountable

Wide support exists across party lines for Arbitration Fairness Act; consumers, employees from around U.S. lobby lawmakers today

Washington, DC – Americans widely oppose corporations using mandatory binding arbitration clauses in the fine print of consumer and employment contracts, according to national polling of likely voters conducted by Lake Research Partners.

Forced arbitration clauses are hidden in the fine print of everything from cell phone, home, credit card and retirement account terms of agreement to employment and nursing home contracts. Just by taking a job or buying a product or service, consumers and employees are forced to give up their right to take their case to court if they are harmed by a corporation.

Insider Trading: How Congress Can Make Big Bucks at Our Expense

It has been a difficult start for the financial services sector thus far in 2009 - yet it may be even more difficult to excuse the multitude of bad decisions made by Wall Street already (refusing to release information about bailout spending, Bank of America's $10 million super bowl ads, obscenely large bonuses for AIG executives...the list goes on).  Thankfully, it looks like Congress and the federal government are finally getting more serious about oversight of Wall Street and the financial sector.

Now also would be a good time to put an end to secret spending and insider trading immunity for government officials. 

A recent piece of legislation proposes to do just that.  Introduced by Reps. Brian Baird (D-Wash.), Louise McIntosh Slaughter (D-NY) and Tim Walz (D-Minn.), the “Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act” (H.R. 682) would ensure that those with access to privileged "non-public information" gathered through oversight proceedings would not be able to use that information for personal benefit in securities and commodities trading.

Specifically, H.R. 682 would negate a little-known loophole in the law which could allow members of Congress as well as executive staffers and government officials to practice insider trading in order to enrich themselves as well as their associates.  Of course,  this type of insider trading would be wholly illegal for citizens like you and me.

The act would also be effective in combating corrupt lobbying practices, since lobbyists and stock traders ("political intelligence consultants") who haunt the halls of Congress precisely in order to glean insider tips from staff would also be banned from insider trading.

The legislation would require members of Congress and their staff to disclose stock transactions of $1,000 or more within 90 days, and require “political intelligence consultants” to register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act and disclose their financial activities.

The time to pass this legislation is now, before our tax dollars pay for any more lucrative insider investments.

Posted by Craig Holman

Time to Blow the Whistle on Washington

Beginning on Sunday, an important assembly will convene to urge Congress to take the next step forward in strengthening accountability and transparency in government. The 2009 National Whistleblower Assembly is a gathering of whistleblowers and advocates organized by the Make It Safe Coalition. Over the course of four days, the assembly will lobby members of Congress, share stories, and educate the public. The event takes place in Washington D.C. from Sunday, March 8th - Wednesday, March 11th. 

As we've said over and over again, whistleblowers ensure real accountability, protect our tax dollars in the stimulus and other government spending, and are indispensable to a healthy, non-corrupt government. It's a disgrace that speaking out about government fraud, misconduct, waste and corruption is still such a risky endeavor, especially in these times, after countless studies have verified that whistleblowers are the most effective weapon against fraud.

If you can, please join us in D.C. and take a stand for government accountability and civil servant rights.  But if you can't make it to Washington, you can still help. You can join those making the rounds to members of Congress from home.

For more information about this event and whistleblower and taxpayer rights, visit us here.

Likely DOJ Nominee Has Long History of Lobbying Against Consumer Rights

We've been keeping a close watch over the Obama Administration's potential nominees to ensure that members of the new administration will be advocates for consumer and taxpayer rights.

We recently issued an investigative report on Mark Gitenstein, a longtime corporate lobbyist, who may get the nod to head the DOJ's Office of Legal Policy.

Gitenstein's long list of corporate lobbying activities appear to directly violate President Obama's ethics policy prohibiting executive branch employees from becoming appointed to "issue areas" in which they have acted as lobbyists within the last two years.  A closer look at Gitenstein's lobbying reveals that he has sought to weaken or eliminate vital consumer protections, including the False Claims Act, which has saved billions of taxpayer dollars, and access to court to hold corporations accountable for bad behavior.

Gitenstein's past actions seem to be in stark contradiction with Obama's executive order governing conflicts of interest, and clash with Obama's regular calls for more accountability for government and corporations alike.

Public Citizen sent a letter to Obama raising concerns about Gitenstein's long history of corporate lobbying activities, and suggesting that the possible nomination be reconsidered.  We also joined forces with the Project on Government Oversight, Government Accountability Project, and other noteworthy organizations to make the Senate Judiciary Committee aware that this potential candidate does not have our endorsement.

Deputy AG-Nominee is "a big believer in whistleblowers"

This just in from Steven Aftergood's "Secrey News" blog with the Federation of American Scientists:

David W. Ogden, who has been nominated to be the next Deputy Attorney General, last week expressed strong support for government whistleblowers who help to expose corruption or malfeasance.

“I am a big believer in whistleblowers,” he said at his February 5 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, “and in the need to make sure that people feel comfortable coming forward to make complaints.”

“I think what we need is a process that encourages whistleblowing in this administration and any other administration going forward. The business of making sure that we’re doing the right thing is an ongoing business,” Mr. Ogden said in response to a question from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse.

He said he would work with the Attorney General “to fashion an appropriate process that encourages whistleblowers to raise issues that need to be addressed.”

Mr. Ogden also indicated a willingness to consider public disclosure of certain legal opinions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Sen. Ron Wyden noted that “there are a lot of important rulings that go to the meaning of surveillance law, and I think that a lot of those kinds of judgments really could be redacted and declassified so that the country could be brought in in a more informed, a more complete way to these national-security debates.”

“I absolutely will commit to take a fresh look at this issue if I’m confirmed,” Mr. Ogden said.

FIS Court opinions that interpret surveillance law were one of several categories of “secret law” that were identified (pdf) in an April 30, 2008 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the subject.

Original post available here.

A personal letter from Bunny Greenhouse

Below is an important letter from Bunnatine Greenhouse who spoke up regarding the approval of a highly improper muti-billion dollar no bid contract to Halliburton for the reconstruction of Iraq. In retaliation for her courage she was removed from her position as the highest-ranking civilian contracting official at the Army Corps of Engineers.

My name is Bunny Greenhouse. I am the former Procurement Executive and highest-ranking Army Corps of Engineers civilian procurement official.

Today I am asking you to contact your Senators and Representatives to demand, in the strongest possible terms, that employees who disclose fraud in federal contracting are fully and properly protected in the 800 billion dollar stimulus package that Congress is currently debating. Here's why.

Shortly before the Iraq War commenced, I blew the whistle on improper contracting concerning the award of a multi-billion dollar no-bid, cost plus contract to Halliburton/KBR for the reconstruction of Iraq.

I was concerned that improper contracting activity would cost the taxpayers billions – and it did. The contract should not have been awarded. From my inside prospective, it was clear that the “fix was in” – the contract was going to be awarded to Halliburton no matter what I said or did.

Those who should have protested the contract remained silent. And their silence is not surprising because, as federal employees, we have no meaningful whistleblower protection! We can be fired for reporting fraud. We can lose our careers simply for doing our job and trying to protect the taxpayer.
I know this is true. It happened to me. The top brass demanded that I drop my protests. I refused. The top brass – many of whom had longstanding relations with government contractors – retaliated. They removed me from the Senior Executive Service and from anything having to do with contract oversight. When I went to federal court to demand protection the judge dismissed my case because as a federal employee I had no protection.

The bottom line is that without access to independent courts, real judges and juries, whistleblowers don’t stand a chance, and fairness and transparency will not see the light day.

Only Congress can fix this. The House of Representatives has already acted decisively by adding H.R. 985 to the stimulus bill, by a unanimous voice vote (now called H.R. 1, Section IV). President Obama's presidential campaign is on record as supporting the same whistleblower protections now found in House version of the stimulus bill.

So, the buck stops with the Senate. I urge you to contact your Senators and let them know that whistleblower protection is a critical part of the stimulus package for protection of the public trust. I urge you to contact your Representatives and tell them to hold strong -- and refuse to cut whistleblower protections from the bill. Federal employees, like me, who risk their careers to protect taxpayer money need to be protected.

Please act now! Pass this letter to your friends! Pass this letter to your co-workers! Pass this letter to your family! Send a letter to your Senator Now!

Billions of taxpayer dollars are at stake and it is up to the Senate to do the right thing.

Very truly yours,

Bunnatine H. Greenhouse
Former Procurement Executive
Army Corps of Engineers

Post Editorial Misses Mark on Whistleblowers: Protections in Stimulus Bill Help Workers Hold Government Accountable

Today our whistleblower coalition responded to the Washington Post's outrageous editorial from February 2, 2009.

A Joint Statement from a Coalition of Public Interest Groups

Monday’s Washington Post editorial, “Wrong Way to Protect,” did a disservice to its readers and the taxpayers when it opposed provisions in the economic stimulus bill that are designed to empower federal whistleblowers.

The editorial argues that the reform should be pursued through ordinary legislative channels rather than included in the stimulus, stating “This is not the way it’s supposed to work.”  This is exactly how it is supposed to work: Federal whistleblower protection legislation has had the benefit of hearings, and has been vetted in both chambers for several years.  This is not an extraneous measure, as the editorial suggests.  In both chambers, the original stimulus bills included whistleblower protections for state and local employees.  Members of the House had the good sense to recognize that the massive stimulus package creates an urgent need for federal employees, who are the taxpayers’ first line of defense against waste and fraud, to be given the same protections afforded state and local employees.  

Public Citizen Applauds House Vote to Encourage Federal Workers to Watchdog Spending of Taxpayer Dollars

We applaud the House of Representatives for answering the call on Wednesday for more meaningful transparency and accountability in the federal spending bill. House lawmakers passed a critical, bipartisan whistleblower protection amendment offered by Reps. Todd Platts (R-Pa.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) that will strengthen and expand protections for federal workers and contractors who report waste, fraud and abuse. We strongly urge the Senate to include the same commonsense whistleblower protections in its stimulus spending legislation.

This is a true victory for taxpayers who will be well-served if the final stimulus bill empowers hard-working federal employees and contractors who are uniquely positioned to observe and report if funds are mishandled. Workplace retaliation for reporting wrongdoing is real and ruthless. That’s why we have long fought for these critical protections. 

Deadline tonight: Tell your reps to vote for accountability in government

President Obama has asked Congress for a federal spending bill to get the economy moving again. Billions of tax dollars are already being spent in the bailout and billions more are needed to begin to dig us out of this financial crisis. But before we agree to this massive spending bill, we must know that someone will be watching the store. We must ensure that federal employees can blow the whistle waste, fraud or abuse - without fear of retaliation or reprisals!

We now have a chance to protect whistleblowers and make sure there is real accountability in the economic stimulus package! But we have to act quickly!

Two champions of accountability, Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Representative Todd Platts (R-PA), have offered an amendment to the stimulus bill that would restore and strengthen protections for federal workers who blow the whistle. This is the same bill that we have long supported and that passed the House with overwhelming support in 2007.

Congress is voting this evening on whether the economic stimulus should include protections for federal workers who blow the whistle on waste, fraud and abuse.

We need you to call your representative now and ask for support for federal government employees! You can find your member of the House here, or simply call the Capitol switchboard (202) 224-3121and ask for your representative.

Please tell your member of Congress to support federal employee whistleblower rights and vote yes on the Platts/Van Hollen Amendment today!

We’ve been fighting for these whistleblower protections for a long time. Passing the stimulus bill passes with these protections in place would be an outstanding victory for all of us who have fought for government accountability over the years. Please call your member of Congress today!

Let us know your thoughts on how your call went! Email us at action@citizen.org.

FDA Puts BPA Under Further Review

A couple of weeks ago, we decried the FDA's cozy relationship with industry in its announcement that the safety of products containing BPA was "adequate." It looks like we weren't the only ones who noticed. Friday, an advisory panel agreed that the FDA's report created "a false sense of security" regarding the safety of BPA. According to the Washington Post, the toxicologists on the panel "said the FDA had relied too heavily on studies funded by the chemical industry to make its decision." The FDA deserves credit for taking a second look at the science behind its decision, but this whole episode only further demonstrates that the danger of our federal agencies outsourcing their work to the industries they regulate – a trend the Obama administration should look to reverse.

Public Citizen Files Complaint for Violations of Franking Privilege

U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) appears to have abused his franking privileges and violated U.S. House of Representative rules against using taxpayer funds to pay for political mailers promoting himself within 90 days of the general election, Public Citizen charged today in a complaint filed with the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards.

Members of Congress are allowed to distribute mass mailings to their constituents at taxpayer expense touting their legislative records ("franked" mail), but not within 90 days of an election. A bipartisan Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, known as the "Franking Commission," is responsible for oversight and regulation of the franking privilege in the House of Representatives.

Protecting the rights of government whistleblowers

originally posted by Alyssa Wolice at CitizenVox

It’s no secret that the government officials you elect to serve the public’s best interests often abuse their power and cost you your hard-earned dollars. So, when the average government employee witnesses the acts of corruption that continue to plague our political system, shouldn’t they have the freedom to speak up and protect the public’s rights without facing the risk of retaliation?

Whistleblowers: Best Defense Against Corruption

By Angela Canterbury. Originally published on The Hill's Congress Blog.

For years now, corrupt interests have co-opted our government for political gain and private profiteering. Our best line of defense when the law is ignored and regulation fails are the informed insiders who believe so strongly in the importance of accountability and saving taxpayer dollars - and often saving lives - that they are willing to risk their careers and safety to expose government wrongdoing.

It is a national disgrace that speaking out about government fraud, misconduct, waste and corruption is still such a risky endeavor. More often than not, whistleblowers suffer from some form of serious retaliation, including threats, demotion or outright firing for exposing wrongful conduct. Conscientious civil servants deserve strong statutory protections, not risk and intimidation. Yet many end up sacrificing because the 1989 Whistleblower Protection Act has been interpreted and enforced in a way that weakens the protections Congress intended - protections that government whistleblowers desperately need.

It’s time to end the discrimination and retaliation - as well as the unmistakable and deeply chilling message it sends to all employees that they should keep quiet, or else. Congress should complete the marathon legislative effort to restore a credible Whistleblower Protection Act.

Stupak’s Effort to Arm the FDA with Subpoena Power Over Company Records

After years of discussion, Rep. Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who runs the investigations panel of the House Commerce Committee, has, again, wisely urged the FDA to support Congress’s addition of subpoena power to FDA’s arsenal of tools needed to make our food and drug supply safe. Some food and drug industry folks immediately criticized the idea, claiming the result would simply be more bureaucratic meddling in their affairs. To date, there has been no official response from the FDA.

Recent episodes of contaminated foods and drugs again raise disturbing questions about whether the Food and Drug Administration has the tools and resources necessary to protect the public. Often the agency, it seems, is the last to learn of hazards threatening us all.

The FDA does no testing of its own, and in making decisions it must rely on the test results submitted by manufacturers. Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s Health Resource Group, previously noted that “the FDA is extraordinarily dependent on the companies to be honest.”

If the FDA is really serious about cracking down on unsafe products, why doesn’t it accept Stupak’s offer to authorize the subpoena power?  Some fear that the FDA no longer has consumer protection as its first priority, but has been co-opted by the industry it is supposed to oversee.

Von Spakovsky Withdraws Nomination

In a major victory for those who believe in free and fair elections, Hans von Spakovsky – a Republican nominee for commissioner on the nation’s elections agency – has withdrawn his nomination. Von Spakovsky’s nomination has been so contentious and volatile that it shut down the Federal Election Commission (FEC) since January. Now that he is gone, Congress can begin moving ahead and quickly reinstate the agency as we enter the second half of the election season.

As four seats of the six-member FEC expired this year, Hans von Spakovsky was nominated to fill one of the Republican slots, along with three other nominees.

But in an unprecedented five-page, single-spaced letter sent to the Senate Rules Committee, several top former career officials in the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Voting Section complained about von Spakovsky’s service there as a political appointee, stating that he sought to undermine voting rights for partisan reasons. Von Spakovsky was instrumental in providing pre-clearance to a discriminatory voter ID requirement in Georgia. He also blocked a U.S. Attorney’s attempt to investigate a Minnesota rule that prevented American Indians who did not live on reservations from using tribal IDs as voter identification, and he supported Tom DeLay’s partisan redistricting in Texas. About half of the career lawyers in the Voting Section, some serving as long as 20 years in the office, left the Section under von Spakovsky’s watch.

The Next President on Open Government

We’re all fed up with lengths to which the Bush Administration has gone to hide its business from public scrutiny.  But how open will our next president be?  Our coalition, the Sunshine Week alliance, asked all the presidential candidates to complete a survey in last October about their positions on open government and freedom of information issues. 

Of the remaining three candidates, only Sen. Hillary Clinton responded (read her answers here [pdf]).  To get the other candidates’ positions, a team of researchers poured over articles, speeches and debate transcripts, and any other records they could find.

Below are brief overviews -- read the complete findings here.

How to End Government Secrecy

Yesterday was the much-anticipated webcast on government secrecy and the newest online resources available for uncovering information (watch the archived event here).

Remember the checks and balances and our freedoms of speech and press?  They were written into the Constitution and Bill of Rights to ensure we had the tools to hold government accountable.

So, what happened?  How do you explain how the Bush Administration has gotten away with so much unnecessary secrecy over the past seven years?

Joan Claybrook Speaks Out on Secrecy

What are the effects of so much unnecessary secrecy in our government?  Joan Claybrook, President of Public Citizen, explains why it is a threat to democracy and what Congress needs to do about it:

An open and accountable government is a cornerstone of our democracy. As Americans, it is our right and our duty to know how government operates; transparency is one of the great checks we have against corruption and tyranny. Yet, during the past seven years, President Bush has gone to extremes to keep the workings of his administration in the shadows, away from public scrutiny.

Get Your Sunglasses - It's Sunshine Week

Today marks the beginning of Sunshine Week 2008!

It's long been painfully clear that the Bush Administration does not believe in an open democratic government.  It has used one ruse after another to keep information from the public -- from “national security” to “executive privilege” to plain old stonewalling.  That's why this Sunshine Week we are joining print, broadcast and online news media, civic groups, libraries, non-profits, schools and individuals interested in the public's right to know, to call on the federal government to end its campaign of secrecy.

Some events you should check out include:

• Tomorrow, March 18, Associated Press President and CEO Tom Curley will address Freedom of Information and other open government issues during a Sunshine Week dinner event at The National Press Club.  Learn more.
• This Wednesday, March 19, OpenTheGovernment.org, Public Citizen and others sponsor a free webcast from 1:00 to 2:30 pm EDT on excessive government secrecy. You can register to watch it here, or if you have a Facebook account, click here.
• On Thursday, March 20, the Sunlight Foundation and Omidyar Network are hosting a webcast of Prof. Lawrence Lessig, who will introduce a plan called "Change Congress," designed to increase congressional transparency.

Check out other events happening in D.C. and states across the country.

Also, be sure to urge you members of Congress to support our agenda for a more open, transparent government.

Bush, Sunshine and Apple Pie

What does it mean to have an open government?  As a catch phrase, it is appealing, like apple pie.  It seems especially American and downright fundamental: “a government by and for the people.”  It suggests that we are in power, and that through transparency we can avoid tyranny and oppression.

In truth, it is an ideal – one for which we are still reaching.  The Constitution, and the First Amendment in particular, provides the principles, but it has taken the efforts of many over two centuries to create a legal and practical framework for some transparency in government.  We might prefer that our elected officials spend their time pondering how to make the government more accountable to the people (instead of fundraising), but unfortunately, this is rarely the case.  Often we have gained more access through legislation, such as the Freedom of Information Act, enacted in response to some crisis of trust in our public officials.

Now is such a time.

Gagging the Government on Auto Safety

Don’t Quote NHTSA on That…What’s happening at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)? Depending upon whom you ask you might get no answer at all—or at least no answer for use on the record. NHTSA seems to have pulled the proverbial shade on any kind of transparent, open door communication policy between the press and its staff, leaving crucially important safety information unavailable for on-the-record publication and consumers in the dark about agency dealings.

Perhaps an example is in order.  Given a situation like the I-35 bridge collapse catastrophe, if a reporter seeks on-the-record information, two options apparently exist: contact the office of NHTSA administrator Nicole Nason (trained in law, not engineering), or pursue the questionably ambiguous process of obtaining special permission to speak on the record with a real expert, after what can only presumably be a nip/tuck job by higher-ups of all the expert’s statements. Forget contacting the now inappropriately titled communication staff—the policy applies to them, too. The other “choice” involves use of information without official attribution; a process frowned upon by responsible publications around the country.

Enough is Enough – Kyl Should Stop Blocking OPEN Government Act

Today, Public Citizen sent a letter to Senator Jon Kyl (R.-Ariz.), asking him to allow an important bill to increase access to government information to come to a vote in the Senate.

We’re not the only ones asking for a break. Last week, Sen. Dick Durbin (D.-Ill.), the Democratic whip, sought unanimous consent to bring up the OPEN Government Act again, which would critically improve the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The GOP again blocked consideration of the bill for the now-unmasked “Senator Anonymous ” – Senator Kyl (R.-Ariz.). At yesterday’s opening of the Senate session, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), asked for an end to objections over bringing the uncontroversial, bipartisan bill to the floor. Kyl did not back down.   

It’s time for Senator Kyl to stop obstructing a vote for FOIA and allow the OPEN Government Act to go to the floor. The bill would strengthen the law that provides access to government documents for the press and citizens. Senator Kyl is quibbling over a few parts of the bill, and Senators Leahy (D.-Vt.) and Cornyn (R.-Tx.) have tried to accommodate his concerns.

But there is a limit to how much compromise is deserved here. 

The current bill encourages the timely settlement of cases where the government lacks a reasonable basis to withhold information. The incentive it provides would strengthen FOIA, decrease the cost of litigation and benefit taxpayers. People of modest means should not be penalized when it comes to using FOIA.  In fact, the majority of FOIA requesters are individuals and businesses – taxpayers that deserve real and timely information about the actions of their government.

Senator Kyl should step aside now, and allow the Senate to vote on the OPEN Government Act.      

The Power of People Over Profit

After our activists helped to defeat Michael Baroody as the once-dangerous nominee for the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), we put out another call asking for letters-to-the-editor on the urgent need to have the agency represent consumers, not manufacturers.  One of our more moving and inspiring responses came from Lisa Lipin, a mother and consumer advocate from Skokie, Illinois.

Lisa has since been published in the Chicago Sun Times (“Bush should put people before profit”):

I am a Chicago mother who became a consumer advocate in June 2003 after my son was nearly strangled by a dangerous toy that already had been recalled in countries around the world.

I have been urging the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ban the Yo-Yo Water Ball for years. I successfully lobbied Illinois lawmakers to ban this toy effective Jan. 1, 2006, with Senate Bill 1960. I gained the support of U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky and Senators Richard Durbin and Barack Obama -- all of whom sent letters to the CPSC urging that the agency ban the toy. Unfortunately, the CPSC refuses to take action and sits idle on the issue.

I was so relieved to hear that Michael Baroody, executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, had withdrawn his nomination to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission under immense public pressure. Baroody was clearly the wrong person for this position, given his background as an industry shill who spent the last 13 years of his career trying to disable the CPSC.

However, we must not forget that Baroody represents a regular practice by the Bush administration of promoting unqualified cronies and anti-government hacks to public office.

It is imperative that President Bush nominate a real advocate for consumers, rather than a spokesperson for big-business interests.

It is high time that the administration put people before profit!

The Chicago Parent also picked up a piece by Lisa, in which she challenges: "Who does the Consumer Product Safety Commission protect?" 

We congratulate Lisa on reaching thousands of readers!  We also thank her for being a relentless advocate for the safety of our children and all consumers.

Libby Lied, but Justice Served

Yesterday, some justice was served when I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was sentenced to two and a half years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for lying and otherwise obstructing the investigation into the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. The former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, Libby was one of the highest-ranking officials in the government. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton noted that "individuals have to understand that when you transgress the law there are consequences," stressing the seriousness of Libby's crimes as a reason for the stiff sentence, according to NPR.

Libby will find out next week when he has to report to prison. On June 14, the judge will decide whether Libby can remain free while appealing the verdict. In the meanwhile, I imagine the White House will be diverting attention from the possible pardon they will give Libby.

Forgive me, but a presidential pardon would be inexcusable.

Gotcha! Senator Secret is Senator Kyl

Senator Kyl finally confirmed that he is the senator with the secret hold on the OPEN Government Act.  We first blogged about the ironic secret hold on this transparency bill last week.  Since then, our activists and others like the Chamber of Commerce have been sending letters and flooding the Senate with calls to smoke out the senator in hiding.

Kyl (R AZ) finally buckled under the pressure yesterday, admitting he placed the secret hold because of Department of Justice concerns.  We have plenty of DOJ concerns ourselves.  It’s clear DOJ under Attorney General Gonzales is opposed to any transparency and accountability. 

Shame on DOJ, shame on Senator Kyl.

Isn’t It Ironic? OPEN Government Held Hostage by Secret Hold

It’s an almost unbelievable irony that a bill called the OPEN Government Act has been sequestered by another secret hold. 

The bill in question is a bipartisan effort to update the seminal Freedom of Information Act to make the government more open and accountable.  It recently overwhelmingly passed the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The House version of the bill, "Freedom of Information Act of 2007," passed on March 15 by 308 to 117.  More than one hundred organizations and thousands of citizens have expressed support for the bills.

Yet, when Senators Leahy and Cornyn tried to bring the bill to a vote on the floor last Thursday, the vote was blocked by “Senator Anonymous.”  Some Republican senator called the Minority Leader’s office and objected to a vote on the bill, but asked for anonymity and did not publicly state the reason for the hold.

This is not the first time the secret hold has been used to thwart transparency.  In fact, this tactic for lampooning openness in government seems to be the new darling of the old school back-room deal makers. 

The secret hold is used to block a bill from coming to the floor for a vote.  It is typical for a non-controversial bill – like the OPEN Government Act – to be brought to the floor by unanimous consent.  However, any senator can call their party leader and ask that the bill be held – anonymously and with absolutely no transparency.  That will change if the Senate lobbying and ethics bill passed in January ever becomes law.

Until then, we have only grassroots pressure to ferret out the secret holder.

It’s time to expose the cowardly senator who mocks us by hiding behind an anachronistic power play and blocking real reform.  Everyone with a Republican senator should call or email to ask: Did you place the secret hold on the OPEN Government Act?

Any senator with a spine would speak up now.

Hit comments below this post or email us and tell us what you learn in your calls.

Bye, Bye Baroody

Yesterday, Michael Baroody withdrew his nomination as head of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Baroody, executive vice president and a chief lobbyist for the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), was the latest in a parade of Bush cronies nominated to oversee their former industries.

Baroody withdrew just before what would likely have been a tumultuous hearing this morning on his nomination, amid mounting opposition from Senate Democrats who were rightly concerned that Baroody's appointment presented a clear conflict-of-interest. Sens. Bill Nelson of Florida, and, Dick Durbin and Barack Obama of Illinois had all spoken out against Baroody's appointment.

Also adding substantially to concerns about where his loyalties lay, the New York Times revealed last week that Baroody would have received a $150,000 windfall severance package from NAM following his appointment.

Baroody was a stunningly inappropriate choice. His career included stints as a partisan political operative, pushing to elect pro-business and anti-consumer candidates. He has spoken out against numerous safety and health regulations, including ergonomics rules to prevent worker injuries, efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to curb pollutants and regulations to mandate fire-safe cigarettes and prevent the 700 to 900 deaths that occur each year from home fires started by cigarettes and other smoking products.

Many of the companies overseen by the CPSC are NAM members or affiliates. In fact, as Public Citizen has shown, these industry groups accounted for more than half of the penalties the agency assessed in the past ten years for violating its most important rule, a requirement that companies inform the agency when they discover dangerous defects in their products. NAM successfully pushed last year to weaken that rule. Given Baroody's strong ties to the industries he would have had to regulate and his past positions, he would have faced unavoidable conflicts.

As with other appointments made by this Administration, choosing Baroody was clearly an attempt to undercut regulations that protect consumers in favor of fatter corporate profit margins. Thankfully for consumers, in this case it was an attempt that failed.

Who’s Making Global Warming Political Today? The Smithsonian

Apparently concerned about upsetting lawmakers or the Bush administration, the Smithsonian toned down an Arctic climate change exhibit last year – doing such things as altering the text of the exhibit to make the relationship between global warming and humans seem more uncertain, according to The Associated Press.

Robert Sullivan, who used to be the associate director in charge of exhibitions at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History (he resigned last fall), says the museum’s leaders didn’t want to anger politicians, although he did acknowledge that he knew of no one in the administration who pressured the Smithsonian.

“The obsession with getting the next allocation and appropriation was so intense that anything that might upset the Congress or the White House was being looked at very carefully,” Sullivan said.

The White House says that it had “no role” in the exhibit.

NAM weakened accountability for its members

We’ve had a lot to say recently about Michael Baroody, President Bush’s nominee to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Today, Public Citizen released a report that shows just how poor a choice he is for such a critical agency.

Last year, while Baroody was running the National Association of Manufacturers’ (NAM) lobbying and advocacy efforts, NAM and its allies pressed the CPSC to weaken the agency’s primary enforcement regulation, which has been responsible for more than 80 percent of the agency's fines since 1997, about $33 million.  NAM members and affiliates have paid more than half of those penalties, about $18 million in fines.

The safeguard in question requires companies to report when they find out about dangerous products defects.  It helps the agency decide when a recall is needed.

The report describes a number of cases where manufacturers allegedly defied the requirements.  Graco Children’s Products paid a record $4 million penalty in 2005, settling charges that it failed to report numerous possible defects in its products, which killed six babies and caused injuries including skull fractures, concussions and broken bones in others.  General Electric’s vice chairman is on NAM’s board.  It paid $1 million for not reporting possible defects and problems with some of its dishwashers, despite knowing about more than 100 incidents, including nearly 50 fires, between 1992 and 1998.

It seems simple enough – consumers, especially parents, should be informed when merchandise they purchased is dangerous.  Especially if children are getting killed, companies shouldn’t be allowed to bury reports that their products are dangerous.  But the changes that NAM and its allies sought will almost certainly do just that, reducing the number of reports from companies, leading to more deaths and injuries due to defective products.

The upshot is that a Baroody confirmation would put consumers in harm's way while NAM member companies remain unaccountable.

Tell your senators that Baroody is a bad choice for consumer safety.

Bush Steps Up His Attack on the Regulatory System, Endangering Important Health and Safety Protections

When Democrats won control of the Senate and the House of Representatives in November, President Bush was backed into a corner.

For the first time since he took office in 2001, the all-powerful president, who appeared to have a blank check from lawmakers to do as he pleased, finally has had to worry that Congress would challenge his policies, launch investigations into his actions and harshly question his agency heads.

One of his latest and most disturbing power grabs is his stepped-up attack on the federal regulatory system - which establishes critical health, environmental, occupational, vehicle and other protections for citizens.

Toothless in Washington: CPSC Stalls While Children Die from Dangerous Toys

A two-part series that ran today and Saturday in the Chicago Tribune tells of the outrageous neglect of child safety by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and toy makers. 

Super-powerful magnets hidden in Magnetix and other toys fall out of the plastic pieces and have almost irresistible attraction for young children, who swallow them. The magnets attract each other as they move through the intestines, ripping bullet-like holes in the intestinal wall and admitting deadly bacteria. The toy defects have led to more than two dozen life-threatening injuries and at least one death. Kenny Sweet, Jr., a Seattle toddler, was killed by nine magnets in his intestines.

Despite the efforts of parents and caregivers to repeatedly call the issue to the attention of federal regulators who could initiate a recall, the CPSC at first ignored the seriousness of the complaints. When it did finally act, its authority to take decisive steps was muddled by Reagan-era laws that badly weaken the agency, handcuffing its ability to require a recall.

It also appears that the toy makers were aware of the complaints about the severe injuries from the magnets, yet the recall notices they finally sent following negotiations with the CPSC were weak and confusingly worded. The Tribune’s investigation found that many of the recalled versions remain on toy store shelves even today.

The article is a wake-up call to Congress to fix CPSC’s authority so that it can mandate recalls of hazardous products.  It also makes it painfully clear that confirmation of Bush’s nominee, manufacturing association lobbyist Michael Baroody, would be nothing short of a cataclysm for the safety of American families.

The FDA Is Hooked on Drug Money

There is an inherent conflict of interest in the Food and Drug Administration’s relationship with pharmaceutical companies that endangers the lives of millions of Americans.  The FDA has been giving the green light to more and more dangerous drugs. 

Why? Because the FDA relies on a user fee system that has drug companies pay the agency to have their products reviewed.  How can the agency objectively review drugs and rigorously protect public health when they are taking money from the companies whose products they regulate?  They can’t.

As we mention in our letter to lawmakers, user fees have left behind a trail of banned drugs - and patients who have been needlessly killed or injured by them: Vioxx, Bextra, Tigan and Zelnorm . . .

Pending bills – including the Prescription Drug User Fee Act – contain some laudable provisions but would keep the FDA hooked on money from drug companies.  Some claim that the user fees are a “necessary evil.”  Not so.  Congress must end the FDA dependence on drug company money and instead properly fund the agency through the general treasury.  Our lives depend upon it.

Please tell your senators to vote NO on reauthorizing the user fees.

Justice Department Refuses to Release Documents

Even with all the negative attention it’s received over the U.S. attorney firings, the Justice Department still has the nerve to refuse to release papers related to the scandal.

According to The Washington Post, the Justice Department has released almost 6,000 pages of documents relevant to the firing of the eight U.S. attorneys. But it refuses to release 171 documents to Congress.

The withheld papers include e-mails that discuss media strategies, drafts of letters to Capitol Hill, memos and other documents, according to the Post.

Can’t imagine that Congress is going to like this …

Wrong Man(ufacturer) for the Job

You've read here about Michael Baroody, the latest in a parade of industry cronies nominated by the White House. This time it’s to fill the empty chairman’s seat at the critically important Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Baroody, who was in charge of lobbying for the 14,000-member National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and has a long career as an industry shill and anti-regulatory politicker, spent most of his career working to tilt the playing field away from consumer safety and keep corporations from being held accountable for any damages they cause.

Today, a coalition of consumer groups, including Public Citizen, released highlights of Baroody’s record and of NAM’s actions during his time with them, showing why he is a bad choice to head up an agency dedicated to public health and safety. The story was also picked up in The Hill.

Under Baroody, NAM repeatedly pushed to weaken the CPSC, which safeguards consumer products, including most children’s products.

Take, for example, baby walkers – a source of numerous accidents involving infants. The paper released today details NAM’s hostility to basic safety protections on baby walkers, among other issues. The walkers’ original design lacked any locking mechanisms or other protective devices. Babies in them could, and did, injure themselves by falling down stairways and off ledges.

NAM’s “solution”? Blame parents for improper supervision – and fight new standards that would correct obvious, serious and potentially fatal shortcomings in the walkers.

We chronicled stories involving the victims of harmful products as well. What happened to four-year-old Lee Ann Gryc is a particularly tragic example. Lee Ann has scars on more than a fifth of her body after her pajama top burst into flames while she was reaching across an electric stove. The pajama maker had cut costs by not treating the clothing with flame-retardants, although the fabric they use is almost as flammable as newspaper.

The Flammable Fabrics Act, which CPSC enforces, makes it illegal in most cases to peddle flammable sleepwear. NAM and other groups often tried to gut that rule and others, blaming parents or consumers for injuries and deaths.

Check out our information page on why Baroody is not the right man(ufacturer) for the job. Then tell your senators that you don’t want child safety jeopardized by a “loyal Bushie” and industry shill like Baroody.

You Never Know What’s Secret in the Bush Administration

Intelligence officials have spent months figuring out just how many contractors work for intelligence agencies, including the FBI, CIA, National Security Agency and others, according to The New York Times.

Apparently, there’s some concern about how reliant the intelligence agencies have become on private contractors. The Times article noted that the intelligence agencies have increased their use of contractors during the Bush administration’s tenure.

But the question remains: How many contractors do work for intelligence agencies?

We don’t know. The government won’t tell us, because the number of contractors is classified.

Apparently, knowing the number of contractors – not government employees, mind you – will somehow give the bad guys a leg up.

“It reveals how confused the government is about what is really sensitive and what is not,” said Steven Aftergood of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. “What would Osama bin Laden do with the fraction of intelligence workers who are contractors? Absolutely nothing.”

Bush Regulators Do the Darnedest Things

We've told you before about the Bush administration's attempts to roll-back safety regulations by nominating rotten eggs like Susan Dudley and Michael Baroody to head up regulatory agencies. But what happens when industry shills actually do take over these agencies?

Today's New York Times has a must-read article about how the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) - the agency charged with ensuring workplace safety - has been failing to protect workers under this administration.

Since George W. Bush became president, OSHA has issued the fewest significant standards in its history, public health experts say. It has imposed only one major safety rule. The only significant health standard it issued was ordered by a federal court.

And who's in charge at OSHA? Edwin J. Foulke, Jr.

Before coming to Washington last year, Mr. Foulke, a former Republican Party state chairman in South Carolina and top political fund-raiser, worked in Greenville, S.C., for a law firm that advises companies on how to avoid union organizing. Representing the United States Chamber of Commerce, he had testified before Congress several times to promote voluntary OSHA compliance programs. He also opposed the ergonomics standards.

And as a member in the 1990s of an independent agency that reviews OSHA citations, he led a successful effort to weaken the agency’s enforcement authority.

Foulke, Dudley, Baroody - they all have one thing in common: They were nominated to gut the protections that took years to win, and that ensure that Americans today enjoy a high quality of life. Read the whole article to find out how bad it really is.

The Mystery of the Missing White House E-mails

To enable White House officials to conduct political business without getting into trouble for doing it with government equipment, the Republican National Committee (RNC) gave the officials RNC e-mail accounts several years ago. Those receiving the accounts included top White House advisor Karl Rove, according to news reports (Check out this Reuters report and this column in The Washington Post).

Trouble is, Rove apparently conducted some government business with his RNC account - a great way to keep that government business hidden.

Now, some of those official e-mails may erroneously have been deleted, the White House says. And some of Rove's e-mails may have been related to the controversial firing of U.S. prosecutors.

Cover up? Or just an honest mistake? Stay tuned. Well almost certainly hear more about this one.

It's a Sham

Public Citizen filed a complaint last week with the IRS and the FEC against the non-profit Americans for Job Security (AJS) – a group that might better be called Corporations Influencing Elections. AJS uses a special type of non-profit status to conceal its funders while singing the praises of candidates it likes and dropping attack ads on those it opposes.

AJS typically targets its six-figure – and sometimes seven-figure – ad campaigns at the most hotly contested Senate races and at presidential races.

For example, the group spent an estimated $1.5 million to promote Sen. Rick Santorum’s unsuccessful reelection bid last year and poured more than a million into attack ads against Paul Wellstone in his Minnesota Senate race before he died in a tragic airplane crash in 2002.

AJS acknowledges that part of its strategy is to keep the identities of its funders secret because revealing them would distract from its message. But, as Washington Post campaign finance expert Jeff Birnbaum noted today in the Washington Post, such secrecy “runs counter to one of the basic tenets of modern-day election law – broad public disclosure.”

The New Dog on the Blog

Welcome to our new and improved Watchdog Blog.

This dog covers all Congress Watch issues and campaigns, not just money and politics.  We aren’t going to let up on exposing political corruption, but now we will cover all of the juicy stuff in our bailiwick – critical issues like civil justice, including access to courts and consumer advocacy.  If government or corporate accountability is in question, or when other vital reforms are needed, you will read about it here.

In addition to the freshly groomed appearance of the Watchdog, it also now has syndication by both RSS feed and email.  You can subscribe to receive all Watchdog Blog posts, or if you prefer, you can choose to receive only posts on Money & Politics or Civil Justice issues.

It’s also MUCH easier to participate.  If you can’t remember your comment login and password, don’t worry.  Now all you need to join the discussion is a name, an email, and an opinion.

Just hit comments and let’s begin the conversation.   

Recess Appointment for Dudley Puts Public at Risk

President Bush’s decision to give anti-regulatory extremist Susan Dudley a recess appointment to serve as the new regulatory czar is more than just a slap in the face of the Senate:  it is a signal that the Bush administration is moving from siege to all-out war on the nation’s public protections.

Dudley has now become, by White House fiat, the new administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget.  There, Dudley will have power to weaken, delay, and eliminate all important regulations to protect the environment, public health, safety, civil rights, privacy, and consumers.

This position is so powerful that the White House must submit nominees to the Senate for its constitutional role of advice and consent.  Bypassing the Senate is a sign that Bush does not have faith that Dudley could get through the process on her own merits.  Instead of facing up to her record on the issues, Bush has decided to evade public accountability and simply install her in this incredibly powerful office.

Easter Recess... And Rotten Eggs

The Senate is out for Easter recess now.  Which means the White House might be planning to hide some rotten eggs — by giving out recess appointments that would give a lot of power to some unacceptable special interests.

Rotten Egg #1: Susan Dudley

One of them might be Susan Dudley.  You might remember Dudley: she spent her career arguing that if we truly valued protections like air bags or privacy rights, then corporations would already be giving them to us… so there’s no need for any regulation to protect us.

Bush nominated her to an office where she would have power to weaken and eliminate all those pesky regulations, like air bags and privacy rights, which Dudley thinks we don’t really need.

Your calls and letters to the Senate last year were successful:  the Susan Dudley nomination wasn’t even allowed to leave the committee.  And the Republican Senator who chaired that committee last year actually told the press that the president would be within his rights to send the nomination back in 2007… but it would just be a waste of time.

So did Bush learn his lesson?  Nope.  Bush is at it again in 2007 – nominating, once again, Susan Dudley to become the regulatory czar.  But even that wasn’t enough:  while the Senate is looking again at her nomination, Bush decided to put her in power through the backdoor, by making her a “senior advisor,” so that she can go ahead and do the job that the Senate decided last year she shouldn’t be allowed to do.

Remind the Senate that Dudley is unfit to have such enormous power to ruin your health and safety, and tell the White House not to use the Easter recess to give her a recess appointment.

Rotten Egg #2:  Michael Baroody

President Bush would be hard-pressed to find a more inappropriate nominee to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CSPC), the government agency charged with protecting consumers from dangerous products, than Michael Baroody.  Why?  Because Baroody has spent the past decade lobbying to undermine consumers’ rights.

As the head of advocacy efforts for the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Baroody has spearheaded campaigns at both the federal and state levels to limit the ability of regulatory agencies like CPSC to protect us, and to bar consumers who have been injured from being able to go to court and demand justice.

NAM advocacy efforts include a wide-ranging strategy to influence elections. In conjunction with the Business Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC) and other groups, NAM helps run the “Prosperity Project,” an effort to elect pro-business candidates.  2004 was a busy time for NAM and its “Prosperity Project” – which NAM claimed was a neutral voter education effort, although University of Minnesota political scientist Lawrence Jacobs thought otherwise:  “This is not nonpartisan, evenhanded campaign material,” he said, about literature distributed by Prosperity Project companies and associations.  “It’s material that’s subtly but clearly promoting one candidate at the expense of another.” While Baroody told the National Review that NAM did not endorse candidates, Baroody slammed 2004 Democratic nominees John Kerry and John Edwards as being “virtually in a league by themselves,” in terms of their credibility gap with manufacturers.

The White House has likely calculated that Baroody won’t pass the smell test in the Senate.  Tell the White House that a recess appointment of Baroody stinks.