WhistleblowerSupporter

Support Your Local “Occupy Your Town/City” Movement

I received an email today from someone who did not understand why I was not actively supporting the “Occupy” efforts across the country.  I’ve been watching news of these activities with interest. (The real news, not corporate owned media outlets who are NOT reporting it for the most part, and not accurately reporting it for the rest.)   A week or so ago I intended to go down and find out for myself what was going on, but work and several family disasters delayed my expedition down there.  Probably the same excuse, many of you have for not actively helping in some way or another.  

 

When you consider that the Occupy efforts appear to be a collaboration of committed individuals who have various concerns and complaints, many of which are caused by corporations, politicians, bureaucracy, greedy examples of those with more than most, etc.  The problems are social, economic, and political.  I can see my reader’s point

 

These are the same people who are helping to enable corporations and various hands and arms of government that are causing the very situations that are creating whistleblowers.  Greed, power mongering, cronyism, influence pedaling, unethical and criminal contracting activities, fraud, waste, abuse, and a host of other ills are examples.  Honorable people when confronted by this try to change it, report it, fix it and usually get the stuffing kicked out of them for their efforts in the climate we are dealing with in this country today. 

 

I agree that I should help promote the support of those who have the courage, determination and commitment to go be an active part of peaceful protest in events being staged across the nation.  Even if you cannot take part in the sign holding and waving, stop by and talk, find out why these people are down there and what they need to stay well and comfortable.  This is especially true in parts of the country that are now turning cold, wet and inhospitable.  My reader suggested donating supplies that are so critically needed like, warm coats, gloves, hats, food, especially things that can be cooked or heated under outdoor camping conditions.  Waterproof plastic storage boxes, tents, sleeping bags, cooking utensils, first aid supplies, those hand warmer sticks you can buy at sporting goods stores, and anything else that will keep up the volunteer’s spirits and energy.  

 

My reader reported that the Occupy Tacoma (in Washington State, south of Seattle, in a park on Pacific Avenue, downtown, at the cross street with the new bridge across the Puyallup River) is a neat and orderly effort showing a positively motivated cooperative of young and old that demonstrates a stellar example of the best of human effort.  They, who are giving the best they can to make a difference and to help the majority of us break out of our complacency and paralyzed condition, deserve our support and help. 

 

When those  with wealth and political control,  who continue to take and take and manipulate things to the detriment of the majority (working class and poor)  in this country are taken to task, and our society balances and rights itself again, we will also be reducing the number of whistleblowers, because there will be less crap and corruption to report,  and to fight against in our work places. 

 

Please take time this week or weekend and do what you can for your local “Occupy ____________” effort.  If you can report on your local Occupy activities, please comment here on this site; you are welcome to voice your observations and opinions. 

 

As for me, I am going to the coat closet, storage room and pantry right now! 

GFS

 

 

More on Judicial Corruption and why the game is rigged against DoD whistleblowers

Download MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RVIEW

 

From: Douglas Kinan [mailto:dougkinan@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 7:46 PM

Subject: Re: Today's press release: Judicial Corruption must be stopped!

 

All:

 

I'm rooting for all of you, but after 13 years of trying, I'm convinced you will not succeed. 

 

The court process for whistleblowers is rigged.  According to the published April 2008 boast by the  Department of Defense, none have gone to trial yet

 

Lawbreaking for cash is standard operating procedure in the courts. 

 

Based on my firsthand knowledge, corruption and crime in the courts is the norm and all of you have evidence to prove it.

 

For more evidence, see the attached pleadings.

 

Questions, comments and criticisms are welcome.

 

 

 

 

DSS Director Ignores DoD OIG Report and Recommendations: Why?

I hear through my sources that the DoD OIG completed a Title V investigation (Reprisal Office) and issued a report of findings in support of the federal employee whistleblower.  I have obtained a copy of this report from my sources in the DC area.  I am wading through it as we speak.  It would appear that Stanley Sims, DSS Director and Jay Freaude, DSS Counsel are purposefully refusing to acknowledge receipt of this report and responsibility to take constructive action to make the damaged employee whole, as directed by the DoD OIG. 

Is this how it will work?  Defense Security Service Director, Legal Department and Management will ignore investigative reports and pretend the investigation from DoD OIG simply does not exist and continue on their unethical and illegal path with impunity?  There are some very angry federal employees and civilian citizens regarding this cavalier attitude toward justice.  Not to mention questions about what appears to be DSS malfeasance in managing a federal agency and expenditure of taxpayer funds. 

If Defense Security Service oversight cannot be ethical in its own in-house matters, how can they be trusted to be ethical in doing their oversight job of policing government defense contracting and contractor corporations?

Anybody have more information or perspective? 

GFS

In Our Words: United Whistleblower Speak Sept 18, 2011

Please contact me for further information. Our website shows our agenda, our participants, and our goals:

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

We plan to release further press releases very frequently this week

http://www.opednews.com/articles/5th-Annual-Whistleblower-C-by-James-Murtagh-110831-261.html

Dr. James John Murtagh, FCCP

Co-chair, IAW

404 626 4520

 

 

 

In Our Words: United Whistleblower Speak Sept 18, 2011:

 

"Americans must be free to practice their trade and to tell the public the

truth." http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

 

WASHINGTON, DC – This September 18, the whistleblowers and persons of

conscience will hold the fifth annual gathering on Capitol Hill. As the

Nation's budget crisis continues to grow, lawmakers must look to corporate

and federal whistleblowers to stop out of control spending. The united

message is the nation’s top priority must be to protect whistleblowers so that

truth-tellers can protect the public, the public’s health, and our national

security.

 

Five years of concentrated advocacy led to this meeting. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand

(aka, “The Insider”) helped to found, guide and shape the International Association of

Whistleblowers (IAW). Other Advisors include Coleen Rowley, Reuben Guttman and

Cyrus Mehri. Our ranks are growing stronger everyday.

 

America knows what is said about whistleblowers. This conference is a chance to hear from the whistleblowers in their own words. A spectrum of statements include:

• NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake, recently revealed on 60 Minutes that 9/11 could have been prevented. The IAW demands an end to counter-productive policies that make America more vulnerable to future attacks:

 

"If recent history is any guide, coming forward with the truth and blowing the

whistle on evidence of gross waste, fraud, abuse, wrongdoing, corruption,

malfeasance, illegalities or dangers to public health and safety within public or

private institutions is increasingly viewed as a criminal act. In so doing,

whistleblowers not only risk their personal lives and professional careers they are

often relentlessly and maliciously dismissed, victimized, hounded and even

prosecuted out of reprisal, retribution, and retaliation for speaking truth to power – a clear and distinct 'shoot the messenger' syndrome. Whistleblowers are often the only witness to wrongdoing where they work. Existing laws are simply not sufficient to protect whistleblowers. http://www.whistleblower.org/blog/31/1128

• Navy whistleblower Kirk Wiebe vigorously supports the IAW message:

 

Whistleblowers are not a threat to government or to any organization, rather they

seek to ensure integrity of service to the people they serve. The IAW Conference

provides an excellent platform for whistleblowers to find their voice and to meet

one another in a positive environment of mutual support.

http://www.whistleblower.org/blog

 

NSA whistleblower Randy Kelly amplifies:

 

These are sad and dark days in the history of America. The American taxpayer has little or no confidence in our elected officials or government in general. The

American people should be outraged at the level of corruption and criminal activity within the federal government and politics in this country. It is easy to understand why many members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives do not want any level of whistleblower reform. Too many politicians fear they themselves will become publically exposed as to the atrocities they condone by being unwilling to take any action against the prevalence of fraud, waste and abuse within all levels and sectors of our government. All honest citizens are affected by government fraud, waste and abuse. These are intentional and criminal acts that benefit but a few. And, they are taking place to the detriment of, and at the expense of, the honest and hard working citizens of this country. It is the 'whistleblowers' that are trying to right the wrongs. Yet the term 'whistleblower' remains painted with a dark and sinister image. The American people must come to realize that the 'whistleblowers' of this country are some of the true patriots of America. Now, more than ever, whistleblowers need the understanding and support of the American people!

• Bill Binney points out the Constitutional issue:

 

When our Constitutional form of government does not function, that is, when

Congress does not have effective oversight of the agencies of the executive branch, those agencies set their own agenda and spend money accordingly. That is exactly what has happened at my former agency (NSA). Over the past 30 years, my former agency has made acquiring money the main objective - not solving operational problems. Their vision statement over these years has evolved into "Keep the problem going, so the money keeps flowing." In other words, don't solve the problem use the problem to keep getting more and more money.  This is and has been a disservice to our people and country. In effect, these agencies are trading our security for money.

• Mike McCray, co-chair of the IAW agrees:

 

Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known.  We encourage all 264 organizations and corporations that signed the Whistleblower letter to join us! We are already bonded by a shared principle that "whistleblower protection is a foundation for any change in which the public can believe. It does not matter whether

the issue is economic recovery, prescription drug safety, environmental protection, infrastructure spending, national health insurance, or foreign policy."

 

The IAW is independent, transpartisan, and non-aligned. It is united by a single principle: that Americans deserve to be protected by the truth. Only truth-telling patriots with extraordinary courage to tell truth to power can stop the barrage of preventable disasters that beset America. We are uniting to lobby Congress, and we will be heard. Every whistleblower will tell their story, and will be interviewed for U-tube. An extraordinary archive of these American and International stories will be collected.

 

All citizens who want to make America truly stronger are invited to:

 

Contact today Atlanta Whistleblower

Phone: 404 626 4520

INTERNATIONAL

ASSOCIATION

OF WHISTLEBLOWERS

(IAW) CAUCUS IN WASHINGTON DC

September 18, 2011

 

DC Public Library

Martin Luther King Jr. branch,

RoomA-5,

901 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20001

(202) 727-0321

 

Please post additional comments to:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/In-Our-Words-United-Whist-by-Carol-Czarkowski-110911-240.html

So, who is the Senator who killed the Whistleblower Protection Bill?

Here is some good information from Government Accountability Project (GAP) regarding the culprit who put a hold on the Whistleblower Protection Act, and is being aided and abetted by other Senators to evade taking responsibility.  GAP has been asking people to help pressure their Senators to get a definite yes or no on whether he or she was the Senator to place the hold.  Presently they have narrowed it down to three Senators.  Is one of them yours? 

-GFS

 

 

 

GAP Announces Results of Campaign to Identify ‘Secret Hold’ Senator

 

This weekend, GAP (Government Accountability Project) and On The Media will conclude our campaign to identify the senator who placed the anonymous hold on the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA), effectively killing the bill at the end of the last congressional term. GAP Legal Director Tom Devine will wrap up the campaign and its findings on On The Media.

 

Since the campaign began in early January, we were able to rule out nearly every senator as being a suspect. After the list of prospective senators was narrowed down to five (as a result of your steadfast advocacy!), over 1,000 people signed our Change.org petition urging these remaining senators to either confirm or deny placing the hold. This increased pressure allowed us to further eliminate Senator McConnell and Senator Vitter, leaving only Senator Risch, Senator Kyl, and Senator Sessions as potential suspects.

 

Please check with your local NPR station to see what time On The Media will air this weekend, and tune in to listen to Tom Devine speak about the conclusion of the campaign, and where we're going from here!

 

Additionally, GAP wishes to extend a heartfelt thank you to all of our supporters who participated in our campaign. Because of your efforts, whistleblower rights for all federal employees are closer to becoming a reality.

 

 

 

 

Senate Shenanigans

March 14, 2011 · By Shanna Devine

Secret holds are just an anonymous filibuster.

As its opening act this year, the Senate passed a bipartisan resolution to restrict--but not eliminate--a maneuver known as the "secret hold." The rules still allow a single senator to anonymously delay urgent legislation.

Even bills commanding overwhelming support can get stopped in their tracks when they face "unanimous consent," a procedure that allows for the quick passage of noncontroversial legislation. This is an affront to democratic principles.

Just how do secret holds work? A single senator can request a hold on any legislation--without justification or explanation--to his or her party's leadership. At that point, the legislation can't move forward unless the Senate Majority Leader intervenes.

Previously, senators could remain anonymous for six days, after which they were required to either lift the hold or be publicly identified. Now, thanks to a joint resolution led by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Susan Collins (R-ME), the identities of senators requesting holds will be recorded in the Congressional Record after two days.

The rationale for the rule's creation was simple and reasonable. The Senate gets extremely busy. During high-volume times, several bills and massive pieces of legislation are simultaneously pushed through the chamber. Often senators need extra time to read a thousand-page bill, gather information, thoroughly consider potential ramifications, and vote in their constituents' best interest. Guaranteeing short-term anonymity makes sense because senators could be wrongfully labeled as opponents of legislation when they simply want to cast an informed vote.

Unfortunately, senators have heavily abused this process. Working in tag-teams, they would often take turns placing holds every five days, because on the sixth day their identity would be revealed. This tactic allowed both senators to remain anonymous while assuring that the bill would not move forward. This is our democratic process at its worst. Furthermore, if senators decided to place a hold with fewer than five days remaining in the congressional session, they got to kill legislation without stepping forward at all. Effectively, secret holds have become an anonymous way to filibuster.

Case in point: in the last hour of the previous session of Congress, one senator placed a secret hold on the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, which would have have strengthened rights for federal employees when they report waste, fraud, and abuse. This sorely needed legislation was ripe for passage. A similar version of this legislation had passed in the Senate just two weeks prior by unanimous consent. Over the next several days, due to unfounded concerns related to WikiLeaks, the legislation's scope was reduced to exclude federal intelligence workers.

Other than deletions, not a word was changed from the version the Senate had already approved. Through a rare agreement between former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and then-Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), it also passed the House by unanimous consent. Then a senator--we don't know who, of course--put a secret hold on it hours later. There's a strong, ongoing campaign to determine which senator placed the hold. Hopefully, that information will surface.

The overwhelming majority of Congress understands the true value of whistleblowers. Lawmakers came close to strengthening their rights in December. It's no wonder this legislation enjoyed so much support from both sides of the aisle--it would have curtailed government malfeasance by providing federal whistleblowers with safe channels to speak out. But so far, Congress still hasn't approved the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act.

The Senate has faced heavy criticism for using secret holds. This practice is the antithesis of government accountability and transparency. When the amendment reduced the amount of time from six days to two, some senators claimed good government reforms had triumphed.

Unfortunately, even with that change, lawmakers may still place secret holds just hours before Congress adjourns. There's nothing to stop future good-government bills from meeting an untimely death at the hands of anonymous senators.

Until Congress sets more reasonable standards for secret holds, individual senators, or a group of them taking turns, can secretly stonewall any bill that's subject to unanimous consent.

 

Link to original:    http://www.ips-dc.org/articles/senate_shenanigans

 

Failing Inspector Generals Do Not Go Unnoticed

This was sent in today by a reader.  Thank you Old Navy Man, again.  -GFS

 

G. Florence

Federal government agency officials are going to do everything they can to ensure that these Inspector General reports are marginalized, or that they never come to the attention of the taxpaying public.  More times than not, these cases involve the misconduct of federal officials, acts of retaliation against whistleblowers trying to do the right thing, and the fraud and the waste and the abuse of taxpayer dollars.  Cover up and minimization of Inspector General investigations within the Department of Defense is rampant.  But don’t take my word for it, check the case statistics! 

An Old Navy Man

 

Watch Blog

POGO: The Case of the Missing Inspector General Reports

Posted at 10:28 am, November 4th, 2010

By Michael Smallberg,  (cross-posted with the Project On Government Oversight)

Inspector General (IG) investigations expose some of the most egregious examples of misconduct by federal officials—everything from whistleblower retaliation to the abuse of taxpayer dollars—and the public has every right to see the (non-classified, non-redacted) results of these investigations. Yet in many cases, agencies have been known to over-redact, delay, or completely block the release of IG investigative reports. As we discussed in our 2008 report on IG independence, restricting public access to these reports undermines the important work performed by IGs, and creates a significant barrier to holding agency officials accountable.

A few weeks ago, Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) released letters from 13 IGs describing how their agencies have interfered with investigations. Among other things, the senators asked the IGs to provide “biannual reports on all closed investigations, evaluations, and audits conducted by your office that were not disclosed to the public.”

As the senators continue their review, we hope they take a close look at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which has a troubling history of withholding records from the public, including investigative reports issued by the IG.

On the SEC IG’s website, you won’t find any investigative reports issued prior to 2009, and there are only eight reports posted since then. Yet the IG’s semiannual reports to Congress describe dozens of investigative reports that have been issued to SEC management over the past two years.

To be fair, most of the SEC IG’s audit and evaluation reports dating back to 1994 have been posted online. But when it comes to investigative reports—in which the OIG’s Office of Investigations looks into “allegations of violations of statutes, rules and regulations, and other misconduct by Commission staff and contractors—very few have ever been released to the public.

After reviewing the IG’s semiannual reports, we’ve counted at least 27 investigative reports issued since 2009 that have not been posted online. These reports cover everything from insider trading by SEC employees to botched investigations of fraudulent companies. There are at least two reports—one on the SEC’s bungled investigation of Allied Capital, and one on allegations of whistleblower retaliation at the SEC’s Ft. Worth Regional Office—that have been redacted and released, but are nowhere to be found on the SEC or IG’s websites.

Even when the IG’s reports are released to the public, the SEC can still diminish their impact. In the case of the Allied report, for example, the SEC redacted the name of the official who became a registered lobbyist for Allied after he left the SEC and illegally attempted to access hedge fund manager David Einhorn’s telephone records, even though his name had already been disclosed in Einhorn’s book and various media reports.*

The SEC also has a troubling history of releasing IG reports on slow news days. As reported by the AP, the IG identified this problem in its latest report on the timing of the SEC’s charges filed against Goldman Sachs (the IG was investigating whether the timing was politically motivated or intended to overshadow the release of another IG report on the SEC’s botched investigation of the Stanford Ponzi scheme):

[SEC Office of General Counsel Attorney] sent an email to a personal friend on the day that the Goldman action was announced and the OIG Stanford Report was released, stating about these two matters, “What a coincidence that those two stories came out today. ”

…These suspicions were likely fueled by the recent history of the SEC releasing OIG reports that criticized the agency on “slow” news days… The SEC released the OIG’s 457-page Report of Investigation (“ROI”) concerning the failure of the SEC to uncover Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme after 5:00 p.m. on September 4, 2009, the Friday before a three-day holiday weekend….The SEC then released the hundreds of exhibits supporting the OIG’s ROI concerning Madoff late on Friday, October 30, 2009.

…In addition, the OIG ROI concerning the SEC’s failure to vigorously pursue Enforcement action against W. Holding Company, Inc., and Bear Sterns & Co., Inc., was made public on Friday, October 10, 2008….Consistent with this pattern, on the same Friday that the OIG Stanford Report was publicly released and the Goldman action was announced, April 16, 2010, the SEC also publicly released the OIG’s ROI concerning the SEC’s failure to timely investigate allegations of financial fraud at Metromedia International Group, Inc., which had been submitted to the SEC by the OIG almost two months earlier.

As the report suggests, it’s the agency—specifically, the Office of General Counsel—that’s in charge of redacting IG investigative reports, and the reports can only be released through a vote by the SEC commissioners. The IG elaborated on this issue at a September hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, stating that his office does not have the authority to make decisions on nonpublic information by itself, even though it has asked for such authority.

In recent testimony before the House Financial Services Committee, POGO’s Angela Canterbury recommended that “[d]eterminations of FOIA exemption applicability to OIG reports, particularly regarding investigations, should be independently reviewed by the FOIA office or a FOIA officer within the OIG, not by the Chair or OGC.”

We’re hopeful that the next Congress will be receptive to strengthening IG offices across the government.

– Michael Smallberg

 http://blog.niemanwatchdog.org/?p=1737

New Government Hires Don't Stay Long

Attrition is high among new workers at many government agencies

By Joe Davidson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 4, 2010; 6:51 PM

As soon as Uncle Sam finds good employees, he loses a bunch of them.

Nearly a quarter of new federal government hires leave their jobs within two years, according to a report released Thursday.

"The government is losing too many new hires - the same talent it is working so hard to recruit and bring on board," says the report, "Beneath the Surface:Understanding Attrition at Your Agency and Why it Matters."

Overall, 24.2 percent of new hires left government from fiscal year 2006 to 2008, but at some agencies the situation was worse. More than a third of the new hires at the Departments of Treasury, Commerce and Homeland Security weren't there two years later, according to the report prepared by the consulting firm of Booz, Allen, Hamilton and the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service, which has a content-sharing relationship with The Washington Post.

Commerce attributed its attrition rate to the turnover of part-time temporary workers in its field offices.

Treasury said approximately 80 percent of employees who stay at the department for three years, stay at Treasury for their full career.

A disturbing 72 percent of Homeland Security career executives left that agency between 2003 and 2007, Max Stier, the Partnership for Public Service's president and chief executive, told federal officials gathered for release of the report.

"No one was paying attention to it," Stier said.

It's scary to think that an agency so important to the security of the United States was being run by so many people with so little experience. Perhaps it's no coincidence that on the Partnership's 2010 list of Best Places to Work, Homeland Security ranks 28th out of 32 agencies in its category.

Fortunately, other critical agencies do better.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission was the best agency at keeping new talent, with a recently hired attrition rate of 10.8 percent. NRC also ranks first in its category on the Best Places list. The State Department, the Office of Management and Budget, the Air Force and NASA also do relatively well, with rates ranging from 14.5 percent to 15.7 percent. The report did not have private sector newly-hired attrition rates for comparison.

Generally speaking, Sam does a good job of keeping his people on the job. Job security is a well-known attraction of government employment. The report says overall federal attrition rates were 7.6 in fiscal 2008 and 5.85 in 2009, compared with a private-sector rate of 9.2 in 2008.

The generally low government rates can mask deeper problems, according to Ron Sanders, a senior executive adviser with Booz Allen. Agencies should not "be lulled to sleep by an historically low attrition number," he said.

Losing newly hired workers may point to more serious issues at the agency.

"For example, while attrition of recently hired employees means a loss of the considerable investment expended to bring them on board - literally money down the drain - it also can indicate weaknesses in the agency's recruiting, hiring and on-boarding processes, as well as shortcomings in supervision," the report says.

Following the release of the report, the Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen conducted a workshop for government officials designed to help them understand and prepare for attrition at their agencies.

One part of that is examining attrition related to positions that are critical to the mission of an agency. Government employees in transportation safety, including air traffic controllers and highway, railroad and aviation safety specialists, have an attrition rate of nearly 30 percent, for example. Federal nurses, Border Patrol agents, mine safety workers and those in several other critical occupations have attrition rates far above the government average.

The attrition rate for transportation security officers, the screeners at airports, "has always been high," David Tumblin, a workforce analyst in the Transportation Security Administration, told the briefing.

The reasons are understandable. Screeners are on their feet all day, people get upset with them, and they don't make a lot of money. Transportation security officers also are the focal point of attempts to secure collective bargaining rights by the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union.

Through "a sustained effort," Tumblin said the attrition rate for TSA is now in the 8 percent range.

As the report notes, attrition can be good or bad.

People leaving makes space for new blood, new energy and new talent. Attrition allows workers who perform poorly to be replaced and provides promoti on opportunities for the young and ambitious.

But too much attrition can also mean the loss of experienced workers with institutional knowledge and may indicate employee dissatisfaction.

If officials focus only on an agency's general attrition rate, Sanders said, "it's very misleading."

 

Link to original:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/04/AR2010110406799.html?wpisrc=nl_fed