In WikiLeaks wake, whistle-blower bill set to pass

[Turborama]

Source: AP

By RICHARD LARDNER, Associated Press – 2 hrs 39 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Following the latest baring of U.S. secrets on the Internet, Congress is poised to pass legislation giving employees in the most sensitive government jobs a way to report corruption, waste and mismanagement without turning to outside organizations like WikiLeaks.

President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill, and it is viewed by supporters as a way to discourage leaks of classified information. It would give intelligence agency whistle-blowers a way to raise concerns within their agencies instead of giving classified materials to WikiLeaks or other outlets, which is illegal.

Without protections spelled out in law, whistle-blowers risk being fired or demoted for informing their chains of command about misconduct, according to Tom Devine, legal director at the Government Accountability Project. That leaves no alternative to anonymous — and potentially damaging — leaks unless whistle-blowers are willing to jeopardize their careers, he said.

"Until this law is passed, WikiLeaks will continue to be the safest option for whistle-blowers unwilling to engage in professional suicide," said Devine, who is coordinating support for the bill from a coalition of more than 60 public interest and advocacy groups.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_on_go_co/us_whistle_blower_protections

[Solly Mack]

1. k/r

[Tunkamerica]

2. didn't see that coming.

[mallard]

7. Re: 'didn't see that coming'.

Who could have? Making it possible to report malfescence in government without being tarred and feathered is a big sign of progressive development. Too bad this is just an exercise in convenient public-outrage-abatement cover for ... more business as usual.

Another security blitz still won't pay the bils, unfortunately. This is too convenient. under the economic circumstances, nevermind Wikileaks is a fairly certian inside scam whose planners are way ahead of the rest of us as to where it would all be leading.

Wait and see who gets the axe, then take a good hard look at who's doing the swinging. Chances are it will be aimed down the ranks, not up.

Another non-informative MSM story, in my opinion.

[RandomThoughts]

3. You can only call giving up a profession for something, suicide, if your work is your life.

Sort of fits the 'being a resource' thought pushed by many companies.

On a side note, there are different degrees of different actions, for instance leaking in secret, secrets, is an interesting concept. It can do good in many cases, not so much in others. The biggest problem is credibility of leaks can be hampered if done anonymously.

And someone losing their career is never the point, would keeping a career be the point of life?

There is an argument that in many cases both can be done, keeping some career and not doing what someone thinks is wrong, many people lighten the worse parts of many system while staying in them, so it could be different not better or worse.

Although if you reach an obvious point where you see that some job is trying to change who you are, then that is a pretty easy choice to make, although that also would be different for different people.

[EFerrari]

4. In this economy, "your work is your life" can mean something

more concrete. It can be the difference between eating or not, being indoors or not, keeping your family together or not.

[harvey007]

6. This brings to mind an old Charlie King song

"Our Life Is More Than Our Work"

http://www.amazon.com/Our-Life-More-Than-Work/dp/B002CBYNAI

Your job is not your work....your work is not your life.

[EFerrari]

8. Usually when people make that kind of declaration to others, they have heat

and enough to eat.

[No Elephants]

5. This bill does not seem to have anything to do with manning's leaks to wikileaks.

Would Manning have gone to military brass? Would Ellsberg?

I am not a mind reader, but the whole point in both cases seems to have been to make sure the taxpaying, voting public knew what was in the leaked document, Ellsberg for very obvious reasons--Manning, I really have no idea why.


But "in the wake" of the relatively unpopular Manning leaks is a good time to get something you wanted to do anyway through.

BTW, as head of the Executive Branch and CIC, Obama could easily have done this by Executive Order, just as the Pres. of any company could have changed internal reporting procedures. Not saying Obama should have done it that way. Just saying he easily could have.