Obama signs whistle-blower bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama signed legislation Tuesday that affords greater protection to federal employees who expose fraud, waste and abuse in government operations.

Source

I think everyone can agree that protecting those that expose waste and abuse in the government is a good thing. Maybe this will result in less of those, maybe not. I've heard of people in low level government jobs getting into trouble for questioning the status quo. I don't know why it takes a bill to help people make the right decisions, but I guess that is what it takes.

reply to post by Isee1111


It's less than a half measure;

The whistle-blower law makes it easier to punish supervisors who try to retaliate against the government workers.

It would appear that corporate whistleblowers are not protected. Meaning that if you blow the whistle on your private sector boss for his or her tax fraud, you are not protected. I have some experience with this, the "employer" if well connected enough (eg rich enough) can really screw up your life for a long time. This just appears to be another instance of Obama protecting his handlers in the military/industrial complex and bankster cartels.

Cheers - Dave

After the way whistleblowers have been punished up to now, this just seems like a gratuitous knife to the gut. They have no intention of protecting whistleblowers, only exposing malcontents. But it's good publicity for the "current resident of the White House," as I call him....

ETA: Oh, here. Let me add some support for that assertion. June 2012 article from Mother Jones magazine:

Obama's War on Whistleblowers

The Obama administration has been cruelly and unusually punishing in its use of the 1917 Espionage Act to stomp on governmental leakers, truth-tellers, and whistleblowers whose disclosures do not support the president's political ambitions. As Thomas Drake, himself a victim of Obama's crusade against whistleblowers, told me, "This makes a mockery of the entire classification system, where political gain is now incentive for leaking and whistleblowing is incentive for prosecution."

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


That's a problem, but this bill is directed only at the government sector. Maybe there should be a blanket law protecting anyone that finds waste, abuse, or corruption.

Originally posted by Isee1111
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

That's a problem, but this bill is directed only at the government sector. Maybe there should be a blanket law protecting anyone that finds waste, abuse, or corruption.

That's what I would hope to see, some simple and common sense like "one rule fits all." Unfortunately, we have rules for each and every group to keep us divided. One very interesting rule is that if you sell government secrets to a foreign entity, you are charged with treason, however, if a politician sells government secrets to a foreign entity, they get re-elected. Or if you sell out the country to a foreign entity, you get jail, but if a politican sells out the country to a foreign entity, they get the graft and the bonus.

It would be nice if that "one rule fits all" was actually used in regards to politicians and treason, the decorations at the end of ropes hanging from lamp posts might actually be considered "festive," especially if they were dressed in red or green hoods for the holidays.

Cheers - Dave

This is like the pot calling the kettle black. What difference does this bill make, when the next bill and others like it in that same stack exempts any secret gov base of any wrong doing. Area 51 and Proving grounds bases probably are dumping and open burning biological waste on a daily basis. All under the guise of training. Well you can't train for a biological weapon that you don't have. You start to put 2 and 2 together I mean seriously the commanders of the base are chemists. That's the US government for ya pointing fingers and demonizing everyone else, while at the same time probably breaking every rule there is with the Geneva protocol treaty.

reply to post by Ex_CT2


Is that the same Drake who is involved with David Wilcock?

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
reply to post by Isee1111

 

It would appear that corporate whistleblowers are not protected.

Wrong. There are already laws protecting whistle-blowers in the private sector. This one is intended to protect federal employees that were once covered by the existing laws, but that had been left "exposed" due to loopholes created by court rulings.

From the OP source:

Capping a 13-year effort by supporters of whistle-blower rights, the new law closes loopholes created by court rulings, which removed protections for federal whistle-blowers. One loophole specified that whistle-blowers were only protected when they were the first to report misconduct.

Originally posted by Isee1111

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama signed legislation Tuesday that affords greater protection to federal employees who expose fraud, waste and abuse in government operations.

Source

I think everyone can agree that protecting those that expose waste and abuse in the government is a good thing. Maybe this will result in less of those, maybe not. I've heard of people in low level government jobs getting into trouble for questioning the status quo. I don't know why it takes a bill to help people make the right decisions, but I guess that is what it takes.

edit on 27-11-2012 by Isee1111 because: (no reason given)

Obama protecting whistleblowers? Does nobody here know about Obama's abuse of the 1917 espionage act to subpoena journalists and whistleblowers?

Don't tell me the President who wants the power to kidnap Americans without due process is suddenly all up in 'guardian angel' mode for the whistleblowers.

What about Bradley Manning?

Well this is good, but haters are going to hate.

Time for the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal court system to create even more loopholes in this bill for the good of.....national security, national privacy, and the sanctity of our nation. Now excuse me while I go barf.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
What about Bradley Manning?

What about him? You're not comparing what he did to whistle-blowing? Pointing out waste or abuse to your superiors is legal and should be protected. Stealing state department secrets and giving it to a third party is illegal and should be treated accordingly.

Originally posted by LeatherNLace

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
reply to post by Isee1111

 

It would appear that corporate whistleblowers are not protected.

Wrong. There are already laws protecting whistle-blowers in the private sector. This one is intended to protect federal employees that were once covered by the existing laws, but that had been left "exposed" due to loopholes created by court rulings.

From the OP source:

Capping a 13-year effort by supporters of whistle-blower rights, the new law closes loopholes created by court rulings, which removed protections for federal whistle-blowers. One loophole specified that whistle-blowers were only protected when they were the first to report misconduct.

Excellent!. Now can somebody fix that in Canada? The courts here always side with the government and corruption, malfeasance and fraud within the government and NGO's is quickly signed into injunctions to prevent public disclosure.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


No. This is a different Drake altogether:

Thomas Andrews Drake (born 1957) is a former senior executive of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and a decorated United States Air Force and United States Navy veteran...

From Wikipedia

reply to post by Isee1111


Could also just be a ruse to get more of the tattle tales out in the open, they seem to have a history of suicide, drug over dose, drowning, or fatal car accidents anyway. ^^

could also be a measure to make asange feel more comfortable leaving the embassy thinking ok well they are at least trying to be lenient on whistle blowers here's my chance. And boom extradited. ^^

reply to post by ~widowmaker~


Assange also wasn't a wistle-blower. He was a foreign citizen that received and distributed sensitive state department information in a largely irresponsible way. They have other trumped up charges they're trying to silence him with but that's another story.

How is that even close to a government employee that points out the department uses too many paperclips and gets fired?

Originally posted by Isee1111

Originally posted by eLPresidente
What about Bradley Manning?

What about him? You're not comparing what he did to whistle-blowing? Pointing out waste or abuse to your superiors is legal and should be protected. Stealing state department secrets and giving it to a third party is illegal and should be treated accordingly.

yes, uncovering government wrongdoing is illegal.

They got you brainwashed pretty good, its the same crap that the Chinese Communist Party brainwashes their masses with too.

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Originally posted by Isee1111

Originally posted by eLPresidente
What about Bradley Manning?

What about him? You're not comparing what he did to whistle-blowing? Pointing out waste or abuse to your superiors is legal and should be protected. Stealing state department secrets and giving it to a third party is illegal and should be treated accordingly.

yes, uncovering government wrongdoing is illegal.

They got you brainwashed pretty good, its the same crap that the Chinese Communist Party brainwashes their masses with too.

What wrongdoing did he uncover? It was more about embarrassing the U.S. state department. Nothing illegal was even found, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. They didn't even go after other countries with even worse track records, so it was pretty obvious what was going on.

If some big conspiracy or illegal activity was uncovered I'd be right there with you, but there was nothing. What did I miss?

reply to post by Isee1111


i first said its probably to get the tattle tales to come out more, beacuse then the government can suicide them ^^

or "could also" be to make asange FEEL safer, since you know " wiki leaks, Its editor-in-chief and spokesperson is Julian Assange" im pretty sure they wont come out and say this new law is to make asange feel safer but since the wiki leaks dealt with whistle blower information and he is holed up in an embassy i dont think its that far of a leap to make now is it? so if they make it known in the public that they are helping whistleblowers now, he may feel it might be a good time to wrap up the problem to the north of him since the problem he is in is for helping OTHER WHISTLE BLOWERS.

also, i could give two #$%^# how you classify certain types of information. if my government is doing something heinous or illegal i want to know about it and it should be in the open. just because something is marked secret by a government doesnt mean its right/legal. if my government is raping babies as an example, i dont care what you call it treason or whistle blowing, id like to know and id like those people out of office that signed off on it.
thats why its called " whistle blowing" a duh