Whistleblower Protection Blog : Whistleblower Lawyer & Attorney : National Whistleblower Legal Defense and Education Fund : Whistleblower Protection, Fraud Claims : Washington DC

Back in April, when the Supreme Court denied certiorari for Murphy v. IRS, a lot of people were upset. Whistleblowers and other civil rights leaders knew that the DC Court of Appeals' terrible opinion (ruling that the 16th Amendment of the Constitution gives government the power to tax court-awarded compensatory damages as if they were income) was a slap in the face to victims of discrimination. We knew that this ruling would be a disincentive for people to blow the whistle or report civil rights violations.

We are finding out that we aren't the only ones who disagreed with the decision. There are a lot of scholars out there who feel that income tax itself is illegal under the Sixteenth Amendment, and they are speaking up as well. One of these individuals is a state representative from Ohio named Phil Hart, who wrote this article on the Murphy decision. Although Mr. Hart disagrees with the DC court for different reasons than the whistleblower/civil rights community, his article rightly points out how the "Murphy Court" disgracefully bowed to political pressure when they flip-flopped from their original decision (which was in favor of Ms. Murphy) to a more pro-government stance. 

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In March 2007 the House of Representatives passed HR.985, strong legislation to protect federal employee whistleblowers. The measure passed  by a margin of 331-94. 

In December 2007 the Senate unanimously passed S.274, its version of the law.

It is now August 2008, and Congress has not taken a single action to pass these reforms. Conference members have not been selected. The bills are just sitting on the desks of the party leaders, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid, and they have made no indication as to when or if they plan to push them forward. Until now.

Maybe it is just lip service, but in an interview with the Las Vegas Review Journal, Sen. Reid (who was discussing an egregious case of retaliation against TSA whistleblowers in Nevada) says that he is committed to seeing the legislation pass, but doesn't say when. Even though the bills passed with the required two-thirds supermajority, Democrats could be worried about their ability to override a presidential veto (which has been promised). But on the other hand, maybe they are a little concerned about protecting whistleblowers when there is a good possibility they will be in power in a few months... 

The bottom line is that these laws need to be passed. Whistleblowers are getting hammered left and right. The new law (at least the House version) would guarantee, among other things, jury trials in federal court and protection for national security whistleblowers (employees of the FBI, CIA, etc.). Congress recently passed strong private sector coverage for 20 million manufacturing employees who blow the whistle on unsafe consumer goods, why shouldn't government employees have the same protection when they report waste, fraud, abuse, and national security concerns?  

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Today, with a stroke of his pen, President Bush ensured that over 20 million private sector employees would be protected when they report unsafe consumer goods. The protections are part of a bill that constitutes an overhaul of the Consumer Product Safety Reform Commission and places tough new regulations on manufacturers.
 

After hammering out the details in conference committee, Congress sent the bill to the White House on July 30. President Bush signed the bill into law despite having expressed concerns about some of the toughest provisions, including the whistleblower protections.
 

The National Whistleblower Center has issued a press release on this issue.
 

Click here to read the full text of the law

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link

This weekend the AP ran this article detailing the decade-long struggle of EPA whistleblower Dr. David Lewis. Lewis, an internationally renowned microbiologist, first ran into trouble at the agency when he questioned the science behind the policy of allowing farmers to use sewage sludge from wastewater treatment plants as free fertilizer. He was eventually forced from the agency because of his dissenting views on the subject, and since that time he has compiled research supporting his claims that this practice, although a financial boon for farmers, can cause illness or death in consumers.

Lewis sums up his case by saying:  "Science is getting trumped by politics and I want that fixed,"

More information about Dr. Lewis is available on the National Whistleblower Center website.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

It's been a week since our last post, and a lot has happened in the world of whistleblower protection since then. Here are some of the high (and low) lights:

• ITS OFFICIAL! The CPSC Reform Act (HR.4040/S.2663) will contain strong whistleblower protections for private sector employees who report safety violations to their managers or through the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The President is expected to sign the measure within the next week, and it will protect over 20 million employees.
  
  The New York Times published this August 5 editorial calling for the President's prompt signature.
  
  
• David Welch, who was the first whistleblower to obtain protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, was denied reinstatement by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, VA this week. This is a terrible result for Welch, who has been battling his former employer for over 7 years, and a bad precedent for Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblowers. Of nearly 1,000 SOX whistleblower complaints, not one whistleblower has been victorious in court.
  
  More information can be found about this case at the Workplace Prof's blog.
  

• Here is an interesting story about Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss and his rough treatment of a sugar plant whistleblower during a Senate hearing. It seems that Sen. Chambliss is blaming the whistleblower, company VP Graham H. Graham, for an explosion at his plant which killed  13 workers on February 7.
  
  Interestingly, it appears that Graham had only been working at the plant several weeks before the explosion, during which he had reported safety violations and was rebuffed by superiors. Also, the company, Imperial, is among Chambliss' campaign contributors.
  
  
• DoD contractor Pratt&Whitney has settled a False Claims Act suit, and over $52 million will be returned to US Taxpayers. The company was accused of manufacturing faulty engine parts for Airforce fighter jets which caused the june 2003 crash of an F-16. The company is also replacing parts for over 50,000 aircraft at its own expense. 
  

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link