Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

What should happen in response to the violations of The Hatch Act?

The White House Office of Political Affairs during the George W. Bush administration violated the law by giving briefings to political employees, concludes a government report issued Monday.

The report says the electoral success of the Republican Party and possible strategies for achieving it often were on the agenda at some 75 political briefings at 20 federal agencies from 2001 to 2007. Prohibited political activities were prevalent in the months running up to the 2006 midterm elections, according to the report.

The Office of Special Counsel concluded that such briefings should take place away from the federal workplace during nonbusiness hours and that attendance should be completely optional.

 

Those who gave the briefings said they were intended to boost morale among political appointees and provide an overview of the "political landscape."

However, witness testimony, e-mail messages and PowerPoint slides used at some of the briefings indicate that the meetings were more overtly political.

"Because most of the briefings took place during normal business hours and in government buildings, many of the briefings implicated the Hatch Act's prohibition against engaging in political activity while on duty or in a federal workplace," the report found.

The Office of Special Counsel oversees compliance with the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity.

Hatch Act penalties call for violators, at most, to be removed from their government positions, so the report would appear to have no impact now that the Bush administration has been out of office for two years.

Answer Question
 
sweet-a-kins

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 3:34 PM on Jan. 25, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (18)
  • To put it in MORE current and relevent subject matter, "A report by a federal watchdog agency finding that officials in the administration of George W. Bush systematically broke a law against improper political activity in 2006 might intensify questions about the current administration's dispatching of officials to aid endangered Democrats in the last cycle."


     A slew of federal agency heads, including Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Energy Secretary Steven Chu, traveled extensively in 2009 and 2010 to make appearances with embattled Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. It could not be immediately determined how the agencies paid for those trips. OSC did not examine agency head travel under President Obama.

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:42 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • So your answer is its OK for repubs but heavens no for dems


    gotcha'

    sweet-a-kins

    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 3:43 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • Nope... My answer is, TRUE Accountability for ALL is a good thing....
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:44 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:45 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • ... the agency is not seeking any punishment of officials it concludes violated the Hatch Act because "those people are gone. They are no longer employed by the government."

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:46 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • Next Question..... Thanks for Playing.... ;o)
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:47 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  •  


    ... the agency is not seeking any punishment of officials it concludes violated the Hatch Act because "those people are gone. They are no longer employed by the government."


     


    So what of it? they are allowed to get away with this CRAP because they didnt get caught ??



    sweet-a-kins

    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 3:48 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • Obviously because the Obama administration would be subject to the same punishment
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 4:14 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • Obviously because the Obama administration would be subject to the same punishment

    They should ALL be
    sweet-a-kins

    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 4:14 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

  • Then why do you only mention the Bush administration? Sounds to me like it's one of those rules that can be broken without fear of punishment.
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 4:18 PM on Jan. 25, 2011

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.