Follow-up to NASA Chief Endorsing DeLay

[muse]

I had an email exchange with Michael Griffin, NASA administrator, a few days ago where he specifically told me I was dead wrong about his remarks at a Rotary event where he was quoted as endorsing DeLay. He also told me he did NOT violate HATCH laws and it is perfectly OK for him to endorse anyone he chooses. Our email exhange follows. Also follows is an excerpt from today's Houston Chronicle article totally contradicting almost everything in Griffin's email to me. I assume the recording of Griffin's speech has been found as he was SO hoping it would.

Makes for fun reading!

From: "Griffin, Michael D. (HQ-AA000)"
Date: March 28, 2006 7:45:55 PM CST
To:
Cc: "Morrell, Paul (HQ-AA000)", "Dale, Shana (HQ-AB000)", "Chase, Brian E. (HQ-NC000)", "Davis, Joseph H. (HQ-AA000)", "Mould, David R. (HQ-NA000)"
Subject: Re: concerns



Thanks for your note. Sorry you're upset.

First, the quote you attributed to me is in fact incorrect. The event was recorded. Though I was very complimentary to Mr. DeLay following his very generous introduction of me as the keynote speaker, and while I commented upon the fact that he has been a great friend to the space program and NASA, I did not issue the quote you cite.

Second, even if I did, it would be okay. The Hatch Act applies to the career civil service cadre. I am a political appointee, not a career civil servant. If I chose to "endorse" a candidate from my party -- and I have not -- there would be no violation of the Hatch Act.

Finally, Mr. DeLay cannot be considered "corrupt" until and unless the allegations you cite have been decided against him in court. Until and unless such an event occurs, he is a sitting Member of Congress, fully as deserving of my respectful treatment as any other Member.

I regret that you are disappointed.

Mike

-----Original Message-----

From:
To: Griffin, Michael D. (HQ-AA000)
Sent: Tue Mar 28 18:45:19 2006
Subject: concerns

Dear Michael Griffin,

I am concerned about your endorsement of Tom Delay as reported in this article of the Galveston Daily News:

http://news.galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=ae585de471dad9bf.

When you say that "every effort should be made to re-elect him to office" that sounds to me like a civil servant making an endorsement of a political candidate and a violation of the Hatch Act. I am a huge fan and supporter of the space program. It is hard for me to imagine why it is helpful to tie a corrupt politician to NASA, which needs more federal support, not less, especially when you just had to cut your science budget to shreds.

I am a tax payer and pay your salary and you do not speak for me when you publicly encourage people to re-elect someone who has become less effective since he has been indicted on felony charges. If another NASA employee had made this same speech, would he or she have been fired?



From today's Houston Chronicle article -

http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3757910.html:

WASHINGTON - Five days after NASA administrator Michael Griffin urged a Houston audience to keep U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay in office, a spokesman denied Wednesday that Griffin had made a formal campaign endorsement.

"The space program has had no better friend in its entire existence than Tom DeLay," Griffin said Friday of DeLay's legislative support of the agency. "He's still with us and we need to keep him there."

(Read the article for their interpretation of the HATCH law - VERY, very interesting. Griffin probably DID violate it.)

[johncoby2]

1. He might have!

He was on duty when he made the comments. Our tax dollars were used for travel.

If anyone want to contact Griffin, you can find his email address in Muse email to him.

[Gman]

2. If he is a political appointee

and not a civil service employee then I believe he is probably correct and he is not "Hatched" as they call it. That's always been my understanding. But I've been wrong on a whole lot of things before. (Please don't let my wife know I wrote that!)

[Texaroo]

3. Thanks for the update

At the very least, he backed off his "endorsement." None too bright to so highly praise and connect an indicted politician with your agency, though.

The Hatch Act is pretty lame anyway - teachers get into more trouble for expressing a political opinion than a government official...

[muse]

4. What Mike Griffin actually said (transcript)

from nasawatch.com

(Finally) What Mike Griffin Actually Said

Editor's note: Dean Acosta just sent me this excerpt at 5:28 pm EST. Contrary to the impression Mike Griffin gave at the NASA employee update, there is not an transcript of the entire event in NASA's possession, just this small portion. Why NASA sat on this for more than 24 hours utterly escapes me - unless they were afraid of what people might think once they read it. Well, based on the words below, this strikes me as someone saying that they hope that Rep. Delay stays in Congress. Seems like a tacit endorsement to me.

"Delay: And it's the reason a shiver shoots down our spines every time we close our eyes and imagine an American flag flying on the surface of Mars. Ladies and gentlemen, it is indeed my pleasure to welcome once again to Houston my good friend and the leader of America's space program, Dr. Mike Griffin.

APPLAUSE

Griffin: Good evening. Thank you for having me here. Mr. Delay and I were chatting over dinner and I said, you know the way it ought to work is that I should be introducing you and you should do the keynote speech. And I really feel like that would be more appropriate. The space program has had no better friend in its entire existence than Tom Delay. He's still with us and we need to keep him there. There just are no better people.

APPLAUSE

Mr. Delay was quite correct, the budget battle this year was..."

[PDittie]

5. Oh, but it wasn't an endorsement.

See, that's been clarified now. From the link above:

Griffin had no intention of soliciting votes for the 11-term lawmaker, NASA spokesman Dean Acosta said.

"He did not make an endorsement and will not get involved in any political campaigns," Acosta said. "If his words of thanks to Tom DeLay were misconstrued as an endorsement, then he regrets that."

And even if he DID violate the Hatch Act, well, Griffin was just "caught with a little egg on his vest, looking untidy."

So there you have it.

[cosmik debris]

6. here is info on Hatch act PDF format

http://www.osc.gov/documents/hatchact/ha_fed.pdf

Look on page three. Presidential appointees are exempt from most of the rules.

[muse]

7. But, I have a question

What does the part about "if the costs associated with the political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.? What does that mean exactly?

Isn't the point that Griffin can participate in political activity, but not if any part of that policitical activity is paid for by the government? For this Rotary event, Griffin's travel was paid by NASA, not by the Rotary club and he slipped up there. That's the general interpretation of his violation of the HATCH act here.

From page 3:

Employees paid from an appropriation for the
Executive Office of the President and employees
appointed by the President, by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate, whose position is located
within the United States, and who determine policies
to be pursued by the United States in relations with
foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of
Federal laws may engage in political activity: while
on duty; in any government room or building; while
wearing a uniform or official insignia; and while
using a government vehicle, if the costs associated
with the political activity are not paid for by money
derived from the Treasury of the United States.

[cosmik debris]

8. You may be right (I hope so)

But another hypothetical scenario would be like when the Pretzledent flies to Chicago to do a conference on how to steal money for the drug companies. Then he runs next door to do a fund raiser. The taxpayers pick up the tab for him to go to Chicago for the "health care" conference, and the cost associated with the fund raiser is the cost of going next door. It is just a bookkeeping entry.

So if he can write this up as a business meeting (which means he talked business with one person for one minute)he is off the hook.

There are huge loop holes here that have been used by both parties in their own time. I'll leave it up to the lawyers to sort it out, but it looks like a big fight for a small victory to me.