All Things Whistleblower: A GAP Blog

That’s a Bad Loophole

In a shocking display of the inadequacy of regulations regarding the food industry, the peanut producer in the middle of the latest salmonella scare “knowingly shipped out contaminated” product at least 12 times since 2007.

The really shocking part is that since the tests showing the positive salmonella were internal tests, the company was not required to report the findings to regulators (state or federal). Read the whole story from the Washington Post here.

-- Dylan Blaylock

New Info on Government Spying

Last night, Keith Olbermann interviewed Russell Tice, an NSA whistleblower from some years back, who revealed that: a.) the NSA has access to all Americans’ communications, and b.) journalists’ communications were specifically targeted. A transcript can be found here, but here's the actual video:

Peanut Butter Scare, and Coke Gets Sued

A couple of interesting food safety-related stories came out this weekend, and though important, they are probably lost on many because of the Obama inauguration. But people should be paying attention to the fact that peanut butter and related products have just become the next health scare. The Washington Post is reporting that six people have died nationally, along with 485 others being sickened by salmonella.

The FDA is saying, though, that “major national brands of jarred peanut butter are not affected.” (LA Times) So that’s a relief. But watch out for products that may use peanut butter. The FDA has created a searchable list online of tainted food, which includes bigger brands like Famous Amos, Keebler, Clif Bars, and LaraBars.

Also in the news over the weekend on the food safety front is the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s lawsuit against Coca-Cola for fraudulently marketing its VitaminWater products as healthy, which CSPI claims is “deceptive and unsubstantiated.”

CSPI is a great group, and GAP is interested to see where this lawsuit goes. CSPI is focusing on Coke’s claims that drinking VitaminWater reduced the risk of several diseases, while CSPI believes that the sugar content hurts consumers more than any benefit to help them.

-- Dylan Blaylock

Holding the Ultimate Government Officials Accountable

Today’s column by Paul Krugman of the New York Times argues for President-elect Obama to investigate the actions of Bush administration officials that possibly violated national and international laws. This has become a hot issue in the past few days, as Obama has sent out signals that he simply wants to “look forward,” and not hold officials accountable for illegal actions. The column details the numerous scandals which should be investigated.

After touching on the politicization of Justice Department hiring and the no-bid, no-accountability contracts handed out to Iraq contractors, Krugman pens:

There’s much, much more. By my count, at least six important government agencies experienced major scandals over the past eight years — in most cases, scandals that were never properly investigated. And then there was the biggest scandal of all: Does anyone seriously doubt that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into invading Iraq?

Why, then, shouldn’t we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?

Krugman argues that if Obama does simply turn the page, then…

…those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.

More importantly, however, is that non-action ensures recidivism by future politicians:

If we whitewash the abuses of the past eight years, we’ll guarantee that they will happen again.

Partnering up with this column is an op-ed in the Washington Post from House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr., also arguing that Bush administration officials must be held accountable, referencing (among many scandals) the systematic retaliation against whistleblowers:

There was its politicization of the Justice Department; unconscionable and possibly illegal policies on detention, interrogation and extraordinary rendition; warrantless wiretaps of American citizens; the ravaging of our regulatory system and the use of signing statements to override the laws of the land; and the intimidation and silencing of critics and whistle-blowers who dared to tell fellow citizens what was being done in their name. And all of this was hidden behind an unprecedented veil of secrecy and outlandish claims of privilege.

It would certainly be a victory for government accountability if Obama decides to hold government accountable. Anything less would be a defeat.

-- Dylan Blaylock

No Real Accountability at Justice (Except for Reports)

An internal Department of Justice report has found that a former official “routinely” (and unethically) hired only conservative candidates for what were supposed to be apolitical posts.

The former official, Bradley Schlozman, who helped lead the Civil Rights Division for about three years beginning in 2003, also gave false statements to Congress when he denied factoring politics into his hiring decisions, the report from the inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility at the Justice Department found. But last week federal prosecutors declined to bring criminal charges against Mr. Schlozman, who left the department in 2007 amid an uproar over accusations of widespread politicization.

Yep, no criminal charges, so probably no accountability thrust upon a key player who set the effectiveness and integrity of the Justice Department back for years. Just how bad did it get?

The report makes its case against Mr. Schlozman in his own words, drawn from e-mail and voice mail messages to colleagues and underlings, as he talked about reshaping the political makeup of the Civil Rights Division and doing away with “pinko” and “crazy lib” lawyers and others he did not consider “real Americans.”

In one e-mail message regarding a pool of job applicants, he wrote that “as long as I’m here, adherents of Mao’s Little Red Book need not apply.”

When a colleague reported that he had been given an office next to a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal affairs group, Mr. Schlozman responded in an e-mail message: “Just between you and me, we hired another member of ‘the team’ yesterday. And still another ideological comrade will be starting in one month. So we are making progress.”

Looking (a day) forward, as that seems to be chic right now, this report will probably come up during the confirmation hearing tomorrow for Attorney General nominee Eric Holder.

-- Dylan Blaylock

Getting Redundant on World Bank Security (But Still Important!)

In the wake of the Satyam cyber-security scandal, in which GAP played a significant role by exposing that company’s debarment, the World Bank has changed policy and decided to publish the names of companies it debars. From Reuters:

The Bank said the move aligns its disclosure practices for companies involved in wrongdoing that work on development projects financed by the World Bank and those that provide goods and services directly to the institution.

"This change was made in the interest of fairness and transparency," the Washington-based lender said in a statement.

--snip--

It said it debarred Satyam Computer Services…India's fourth-largest software company, for eight years in September 2008, and Wipro Technologies…India's No. 3 software company, for four years in June 2007 both for "improper benefits to bank staff".

In addition, it said it had also barred India's Megasoft Consultants for four years in December 2007 for "participating in a joint venture with Bank staff while conducting business with the Bank".

About time. The World Bank, notorious for its lack of transparency, seems to only move toward openness when it is absolutely forced to do so. This latest move was only made on the heels of investigative stories which prompted the Bank to begrudgingly admit (privately, to GAP) its troubled relationship with Satyam. From the India Times:

World Bank information security chief Robert Van Pulley admitted to the ban during a meeting with the officials of Government Accountability Project (GAP), a whistleblower protection organization in the US. The bank has handed over the case to the US Justice Department and the Treasury Department.

-- Dylan Blaylock

Even More on World Bank Security

The head of Satyam Computer Services, which has been at the center of the World Bank cyber-security mini-scandal, recently revealed that his company has been involved in a massive accounting fraud. This has caused a developing financial crisis in India.

GAP has been critical of the World Bank’s slow response in alerting other organizations about the company’s then-known problems. From the Wall Street Journal:

As early as 2006, the World Bank told the U.S. Justice Department it suspected Satyam may have been involved in bribery, according to bank officials. In February 2008, it temporarily suspended Satyam from bidding on new contracts, and then in September formally made the firm ineligible to bid on future contracts.

But it didn't announce the ban, called a debarment, until Dec. 23 -- and then only after press reports about it. "The bank should have been more responsible about reporting publicly on what they knew to be misconduct at highest levels of Satyam," said Bea Edwards, international reform director at the Government Accountability Project, a Washington, D.C., watchdog group.

This issue is a big deal for India, so much so that the Indian government is talking about a billion dollar bailout just for that company, which employs 53,000 people.

GAP will be monitoring the Satyam deal with the World Bank and trying to figure out the age-old question: What did the World Bank know, and when did it know it?

-- Dylan Blaylock