[ad_1]
Meanwhile, Virginia Democratic Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine said they heard from the feds that they are “afraid to share their own opinions for fear of being targeted for retaliation” or not knowing what what they are allowed to say. On Nov. 16 book in the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), they pushed the Biden administration for “clear guidance … on the disclosure of federal employees” and assurances that they will not face retaliation “for expressing their personal opinions in accordance with that policy.”
OSC issued a clear and confident advice last week. The agency enforces the Hatch Act, which defines what political activity is allowed and prohibited for federal employees. In particular, “talking about the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas is not a political act,” the OSC said, unless that act is tied to support or action. the elections. “And even if the speech is political, the Hatch Act only prohibits employees from engaging in that speech while on duty or in federal employment.”
Noting that President Biden did not call for a strike, Rubio made serious accusations against the workers. Without supporting evidence, he said “the letter shows the possibility of open frustration and misuse of taxpayer-provided resources by federal employees who are trying to use their role in the federal government is to work hard against the policies supported by Congress, the President, and the American people.”
Write to inspectors general and other officials in about twenty offices, Rubio said supports the cease-fire “only for the benefit of Hamas.” He identified the signatories as “disaffected workers who hide in anonymity while advocating for policies aimed at helping Hamas.” The feds behind the open letter remain anonymous, so Rubio can’t know their motivations, and he doesn’t offer anything to support his claims that they’re “disinterested” or supporters of Hamas.
Rubio’s comments prompted a push back from a federal labor leader, Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, who said in “the senator’s overwhelming response to the open letter, federal workers clearly have good reason to be concerned. This kind of speech to federal workers from a United States senator will certainly not help to alleviate their concerns.
If favoring a cease-fire means people who don’t like Hamas supporters, that means nearly two-thirds of the American public. A Nov. 29 Economist/YouGov poll It shows that 65 percent of American adults are in favor of a ceasefire, including 58 percent of Republicans. That strong cease-fire support is reinforced every day by the horrific images of destruction, death and destruction by Israel in Gaza, where at least 17,177 people have died, according to the Ministry of Health of Gaza. More than 1,200 people were killed in the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, marking the latest round in the decade-long war.
“Too many innocent Palestinians have been killed … Israel must do more to protect innocent people,” Vice President Harris said in Dubai last week, while condemning Hamas as a “terrorist organization” and supporting Israel’s right to self-defense.
Rubio, without proof, also said that it is “reasonable to suspect” that the feeding behind the letter “may have used their position and authority to delay, or even block, the implementation of the policies of the President to give aid to Israel.”
He called on the Inspector General to conduct a thorough investigation into the open letter and publicize the names of those who supported it. Rubio’s office did not respond to two requests for comment.
In his write to Karen GormanAs a special counsel to the OSC, Rubio made other unsupported claims, including that the workers may have been “coordinated … with partisan political parties and/or groups, such as DNC (Democratic National Committee), during the time of the government, to use the resources of the government. “
This is a “reasonable” suspicion, Rubio wrote, given the “unknown connections between the administration’s staff and the president’s political elite,” as if those connections were suspect. There is always a bond between the staff and the politicians appointed by the president because they work together every day. According to Rubio, the feds “were able to coordinate the book with the political parties … during the time of the government, using the resources of the government,” there is nothing to support that statement.
He urged the OSC to investigate the book for violations of the Hatch Act, which some political activities are forbidden to be fed from time to time by the government use government resources. But political workers are also allowed to act on their own time.
“As a federal employee under the Hatch Act, you are allowed to express your opinions about issues,” said Ana Galindo-Marrone, manager of the OSC’s Hatch Act Unit, in a discussion, adding “while in the course of work or duty, that is prohibited if the speech is subject to the expression of support for candidates or opposition to candidates or political parties.”
The OSC guidelines provide specific examples of what is and is not permissible for feds at work.
“For example,” the advisory said, “it is not political for a worker to say, ‘I support/oppose a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and encourage people All I know write their Senators and Representatives to build support for that. position.’ Likewise, it is not political for a worker to say, ‘I support/oppose the administration’s approach to the conflict between Israel and Hamas.'”
But federal employees will cross the line, the point is noted, when they say, “‘I support/oppose the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and encourage everyone I know to vote out any Senators or Representatives who disagree,’ or ‘I support/oppose the administration in the conflict between Israel and Hamas and will therefore vote for/against President Biden in 2024.’”
Scott Clement contributed to this report.