Watchdog Blog

Time to Put an End to the Paper Chase

Though presumably most senators (or their campaign staff) now use computers, they continue to file their campaign contribution forms on paper -- preventing us from learning quickly and easily how their campaign coffers are being filled and by whom.  The Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act (S. 482) would require Senate candidates to submit their campaign finance forms electronically, as House candidates already do. 

The bill could finally be up for a vote this week or next.  But, in spite of strong public support for the measure, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) has taken up the mantle from (recently embarrassed) Sen. Ensign (R-Nev.) to try and kill it by attaching an irrelevant and unconstitutional amendment.  Unbelievably, the Ensign/Roberts amendment would force nonprofit organizations to expose their donors when they file ethics complaints against senators.  We can't imagine which senators would vote for that one, but I suppose it could be interesting to find out. 

Please call your senators today and let them know the Roberts amendment is unconscionable and it's time to pass S. 482.  If you have another minute, you also may want to call Sen. Majority Leader Reid's office and ask that he bring this bill to the floor for a vote:  202-224-3542.

from Angela Canterbury and Glenn Simpson

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.

Obama’s Swift Actions Will Hold Government Accountable

Today, Public Citizen president Joan Claybrook lauded President Obama for swift actions to hold the government accountable. The statement follows:

President Obama campaigned with the promise of change, a commitment to government openness and a pledge to uphold high ethical standards. On his first full day in office, the new president showed a willingness to turn rhetoric into action.

After eight years of government in the shadows and preferential treatment of corporate lobbyists under his predecessor, President Obama’s directives and executive orders on presidential records, the Freedom of Information Act, transparency and open government, and ethics are not only important in restoring public access to critical information and holding government accountable, but they serve to reaffirm the hope our nation has in his presidency. By issuing strict rules on the future lobbying activities of his administration, President Obama slowed the revolving door that has allowed so many high-ranking government officials to enrich themselves at the public’s expense. And by emphasizing the openness of government records, the orders help to ensure that abuses of power will not go unnoticed and uncorrected.

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.

Time for Devil in the Details to Go Digital

These days almost everything can be done electronically: paying bills, buying music, watching movies . . . the IRS even allows tax returns to be submitted online.

But not in the Senate. There, they prefer to waste taxpayer dollars on paper and keep voters in the dark about campaign dollars.

The current system for senators to submit campaign finance reports to the Federal Election Commission is a maze of back-and-forth between agencies that requires printing and re-typing the same information repeatedly.  The result is an annual $250,000.00 bill to taxpayers and the delayed release of information to the public.

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.

Whose Records are They?

Today's Washington Post published a letter to the editor written by our own Angela Canterbury, advocacy director for Public Citizen's Congress Watch, in response to an editorial about the battle for the Clinton White House records: 

The Feb. 8 editorial "Clinton Records Watch" pointed out that there is a process to follow regarding the release of presidential records. However, one cannot ignore the fact that the process has been altered to give former presidents, former vice presidents and their representatives veto power over the release of records.

In 2001, President Bush issued Executive Order 13233, an expansive order that eviscerated the post-Watergate Presidential Records Act, which made presidential records the property of the government, and then the public.

Legislation to repeal the order passed the House by a veto-proof margin but is stuck in the Senate. First Sen. Jim Bunning held and then released the bill, the Presidential Records Act Amendments (H.R. 1255/S. 886), and now Sen. Jeff Sessions is blocking it. A single senator should not be allowed to stand between the public and its right to know.

Moreover, all of the senators running for president should demonstrate their interest in transparency by co-sponsoring this bill. So far, Sen. Barack Obama is the only one who has done so. Sens. John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton should join him and help to pass the bill to show the American public that they truly believe presidential records belong to the people -- not the president.

Why is Sessions Keeping Bush's Secrets?

Some presidents just have more to hide than others. 

We have been working to expose the secrets of the current administration, but now another senator is standing in the way.  Senator Jeff Sessions is the latest to block a bill that would return the presidential records to the American people.   

Bush's Executive Order 13233 was a direct attack on the Presidential Records Act of 1978, a law passed in the wake of Watergate that makes presidential records the property of the American people.  A president should not be allowed to legislate and lock away his records with a stroke of a pen.

But this is not just about Bush.  It's about the records of ALL presidents.

The bipartisan bill to undo the Bush order has passed the House by a veto-proof margin and is close to becoming a law, but Senator Sessions is still standing in between the people and their right to know. 

What you can do: Call Senator Sessions' office and ask why he is blocking S. 886 and tell him to stop obstructing a vote.

Our Right to Know? Over Whose Dead Body?

Bush recently told Israeli reporters: “I'll be dead before the true history of the Bush administration is written.” 

Over his dead body?  Perhaps he meant that his "good works" would be told later, but as long as we let him keep his iron grip on presidential records, it could be several generations of Bushes before we know much of anything.

In 2001, Bush signed Executive Order 13233 to allow current and previous presidents to withhold documents and records without explanation INDEFINITELY.  What’s more, the order extends the presidents’ authority to control the records under to presidential family members, and vice presidents.

This unprecedented expansion of executive power flouts FOIA, precedent, and the principles of the Constitution.  The order, drafted by former Attorney General and close Bush friend Alberto Gonzales, eviscerates the post-Watergate Presidential Records Act, which made presidential records the property of the government, and then the public.  Our right to know should not be subject to the whims of the executive.

Legislation to repeal the order passed the House, but has been repeatedly blocked in the Senate.  First Senator Bunning was named as the holder. After feeling some pressure, Sen. Bunning removed his hold, and then friends of ours in the Senate attempted again to bring the bill up for a vote just before the holiday break.  It didn’t happen because, we are told, there is another objection from another unknown senator – no doubt carrying more water for the President. 

Sound familiar?

Meanwhile, the nation is consumed by one of the more thrilling primary elections in memory.  But where do the presidential candidates stand on the Presidential Records Act and presidential secrecy?  Senator Clinton recently was accused, perhaps unfairly, of preventing public access to Clinton Administration records.  Still, Senator Clinton is conspicuously not a cosponsor of the bill that would revoke the Bush Executive Order, the Presidential Records Act Amendments.

Why not? 

It’s been nearly two months since Philipe Reines, a spokesman for Clinton's Senate office, told the Tribune that "Senator Clinton believes that President Bush's 2001 Executive Order was wholly unnecessary and is inconsistent with the spirit of the Presidential Records Act, and therefore supports legislative efforts to reverse that order."

We’re still waiting for Clinton, and most of the other presidential candidates, to demonstrate that they believe the records belong to the people, not the President.  So far, only Senator Obama has put his name on the bill.

So while the world is enthralled with the presidential horse race, presidential records are hidden away and transparency transgressed again and again.  We can’t forget that much of our government remains in the hands of a few, until we take it back – again and again.

Clinton should back open-records bill

by Mike Dorning, Chicago Tribune

Democrats are fond of condemning President Bush for promoting a "culture of secrecy" in the federal government. And high on the list of criticism is an executive order he issued shortly after taking office that allows former and current presidents to indefinitely hold up the release of presidential papers from past administrations.

Hillary Clinton now finds herself in the middle of a controversy over the slow pace of her husband's presidential library in releasing White House papers that might shed light on the former first lady's role in his administration. Candidate Clinton has responded with explanations, examined in a Tribune article earlier this week, that the delays are caused by current archives laws and assurances that she and her husband are committed to transparency in their official papers.

But Public Citizen, a liberal-leaning open-government group founded by Ralph Nader, is now challenging Clinton on the point, arguing that if she were serious about opening up government she would throw her considerable political weight behind legislative efforts to overturn Bush's executive order on presidential libraries.

"If Sen. Clinton is really serious about transparency in the executive branch, she could demonstrate her interest in openness now by signing on to the bill to repeal the Bush Executive Order that is allowing the records to be kept out of the public domain. We hope Clinton and all of the presidential candidates will take a stand on presidential secrecy by supporting the bill," said Angela Canterbury, field and outreach director for Public Citizen's Congress Watch Division.