By Shaun Waterman
UPI Homeland and
National Security Editor
The Federal
Employees Disclosure Act was scheduled to be marked up Thursday by the House
Committee on Government Reform.
"We wanted
to talk more to the Democrats" about the bill's provisions, said Robert
White, spokesman for the committee, explaining the delay.
The bill, say its
drafters, is designed to enhance protections for federal employees who go
outside their agencies or departments in order to reveal waste, fraud, abuse or
bungling by government employees.
The Whistleblower
Protection Act, which became law in 1989, created mechanisms for federal
employees to report such misbehavior, and granted them protection from
retaliation. But advocates say it has been gravely undermined by the way courts
have interpreted it.
"There have
been a series of unfavorable court decisions since the (Whistleblower
Protection Act) was passed," said one congressional staffer, adding that
legislation had been introduced several years in a row "to put
whistleblower protections back where congress wanted them."
The bill would
clarify the categories of disclosure covered and reduce the standard of proof
of illicit activity that a whistleblower needs to have before they are entitled
to the law's protection.
The bill would
also outlaw non-disclosure agreements for federal employees that do not include
exemptions for whistleblowers, or that limit other disclosures allowed under
open government legislation.
Finally, it would
increase the burden of proof needed to discipline managers who allegedly
retaliate against those making disclosures.
But the bill would
also empower the president to designate broad categories of employees as exempt
from the law -- including "any executive agency or unit thereof the
principal function of which is the conduct of... homeland security."
Critics say that
provision actually the expands the exemptions available under the existing law,
which cover the FBI, the CIA and other intelligence agencies as well as
government departments involved in foreign intelligence or counter-espionage.
Lawrence
Halloran, a spokesman for GOP committee member Rep. Chris Shays of
"If
anything, these protections are needed more for employees of (the Department of
Homeland Security) because it is still finding its feet" and has been
beset by management problems, Halloran said.
A Democrat
staffer added that, as drafted, the exemption could cover people working in
other government departments, in addition to homeland security.
"There are
offices in (the Department of) Agriculture, in (the Department of health and
Human Services), all over the government, that deal with homeland
security," said the staffer. "Are they all going to be exempt, too?
As written, the bill gives (the president) that power."
One thing the
bill doesn't include is the so-called TSA fix -- an amendment which would
clarify that baggage and passenger screeners and other employees of the
Transportation Security Administration are entitled to whistleblower protection.
"That
amendment is needed," said Halloran, explaining that, during the passage
of the law that set up the Department of Homeland Security, there had been a
debate about whether its employees -- which include federal airport screeners
-- should be entitled to whistleblower protections.
Halloran said
that the clear sense of congress was that they should.
He added that
Shays had been unaware until earlier this week that there was no TSA fix in the
bill and that the homeland security exemption had been added.
"There's a
lot of 'he said, she said' about those provisions" and how they had been
included or excluded, he said.
Despite the
contretemps, committee staff remained confident that a bill would be reported
to the House floor soon.
"The bottom
line is, we will get a bill," the Government Reform Committee's Deputy
Chief of Staff David Marin told UPI. "Everyone on both sides of the aisle
wants these enhanced protections for whistleblowers."
Marin said the
committee's chairman, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., was open to negotiations on the
exemption clause. "If this language is viewed as too broad, we can talk
about that," he said.
"It is
important to strike the right balance between need to protect whistleblowers
and the need to protect our national security," Marin said.
But he hinted
that there might be less room for maneuver on the airport screeners' issue.
"We're not going to negotiate this bill in the media," he responded
when asked about the TSA fix.
Davis, who took
over the committee last congress, has consistently championed measures that
empower the executive by increasing the flexibility they have on personnel
issues. Many of these moves have met resistance from labor unions.
A similar bill,
which whistleblower advocates say contains stronger protections, is being
considered by the Senate, having been approved earlier this year by that
chamber's Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press
International