Washington Post: Bipartisan Support for Lame Duck Bill to Strengthen Whistleblower Protections
More news coverage of the bipartisan support displayed this week on behalf of federal whistleblowers at a House subcommittee hearing. GAP Legal Director Tom Devine detailed the remaining holes in legal safeguards for truth-telling federal employees. In response, representatives at the hearing committed to drafting legislation to strengthen whistleblower protections during the congressional lame duck session after the November elections. In their testimony, GAP clients Robert MacLean (TSA whistleblower) and Dr. Robert Van Boven (Department of Veterans Affairs whistleblower) made suggestions including strengthening the Merit Systems Protections Board and the Office of Special Counsel.
Additional coverage from the National Review highlights MacLean’s testimony, which revealed insight into the administration’s retaliation against national security whistleblowers post-9/11. MacLean is a former federal air marshal who was fired after revealing a TSA decision to cancel long-distance air marshal assignments after being warned of a terrorist hijacking plan in 2003. His case now heads to the Supreme Court.
Key Quote (Washington Post): Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project, listed several areas of “unfinished business from the WPEA” where work is needed to “achieve the act’s promise.”
One that drew considerable attention is the “sensitive jobs loophole,” which Devine said allows the government “uncontrolled power to designate any position as ‘sensitive.’ ” That designation prevents employees from appealing personnel actions against them to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
Key Quote (National Review): More than a decade later, the dedicated security expert has battled the feds who retaliated against him. He was forced into bankruptcy and shut out of law-enforcement jobs. His legal case heads to the Supreme Court this fall. God bless him. Despite the consequences, MacLean would do it all again in a heartbeat.
“I blew the whistle because I had to,” he testified this week. “I could not live with the tragedy risked if I had been the cynical silent observer.”
This is the third and final blog in Countrywide/Bank of America whistleblower Michael Winston’s three-part series detailing his ongoing retaliation story. Despite his case’s initial legal victory (which you can read about in yesterday’s blog), an appellate court unfortunately reversed the decision in 2013 – refuting the lower court’s finding of Countrywide’s serious violations of the law and the company’s wrongful termination of Winston. The financial whistleblower continues to seek justice in his case.
Key Quote: Why are the justices not focused on the real issues in this case? We documented hundreds of lies by witnesses for the defense … deliberate, egregious, blatant … and no one has been held to account. Are BofA and Countrywide above the law? Is the reversal of the jury verdict and court ruling just another example of unwillingness to punish too-big-to-fail firms? The Untouchables, indeed.
…
There is something very wrong here. The institutions set up to protect us and punish wrongdoers have instead protected wrongdoers and punished us. The wrongdoers must be held accountable. I am seeking a strong legal advocate to help me achieve justice.