Improving Protections for Whistleblowers

Whistleblower Statement before June 28, 2006 Government Reform Hearing on the Ceballos decision

Mr. Chairman, thank you for convening this hearing to better understand the Ceballos decision and its implications for whistleblowers.  Allow me to also thank you for your longstanding assistance and partnership with me to shore up and expand whistleblower protections for federal employees who courageously expose waste, fraud, abuse, or threats to the safety of our fellow citizens. 

Last year, on September 29, we passed out of this Committee bi-partisan legislation I introduced, H.R. 1317, "The Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act," to reinforce and extend protections for federal employees who blow the whistle on improper actions that undermine our government.  Companion legislation in the Senate, S. 494, was approved unanimously by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on May 25, 2005.  Last Thursday, June 22, Senators Akaka and Collins successfully incorporated S. 494 into the Senate's defense authorization bill.

In the Ceballos decision, the Supreme Court held that public employees blowing the whistle in their official duties are not protected by the First Amendment.  Instead, the speech in their official capacity is protected by whistleblower rights provided by law.  In opting not to create a right under the First Amendment for whistleblowers, Ceballos emphasizes the importance of the strength of existing protections provided by statute. 

The Ceballos decision is Congress' wake-up call to strengthen whistleblower protections under federal law.  Ceballos means that statutory protections are a whistleblower's one and only shot at due process and protection from retaliation.  The decision does not necessarily weaken federal whistleblower protections, but it certainly demonstrates the importance of reinforcing current protections.  In effect, Ceballos tells us that statutory protections are a whistleblower's last and sometimes only recourse to seek protection from retribution.  Congress, therefore, has a responsibility to ensure that federal whistleblower protections are clear, strong, and without loopholes. 

I am hopeful that this hearing will attract more attention to the importance of improving protections for whistleblowers.  It is my sincere hope also that this hearing will help us to move quickly to floor consideration of H.R. 1317.  The Ceballos decision has sent us a clear message to strengthen whistleblower protections, and I sincerely hope that we listen, and more importantly, that the House acts on H.R. 1317.  I yield back the balance of my time.