House, Senate spar on protecting DHS whistleblowers

House and Senate lawmakers offering legislation to protect federal government whistleblowers are split over whether the provisions should apply to workers at the Homeland Security Department.

Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee and federal employee unions are urging Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., to adopt the Senate's version of the measure, sponsored by Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine. That bill would apply to nearly all government employees -- except those who work in intelligence, counterintelligence or at the Transportation Security Administration.

But the House bill, sponsored by Government Reform Government Management, Finance and Accountability Subcommittee Chairman Todd Platts, R-Pa., also would make an exception for Homeland Security personnel. It would give those agencies the authority to determine if the provision applied to their employees.

The House panel was slated to consider the bill last month -- but postponed the markup because of concerns on the part of Government Reform ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and opposition from federal employee unions.

A Davis spokesman said negotiations are ongoing and the panel's leaders "remain open to working with the minority and whistleblower groups to get a bill that can be approved sometime in the near future." The spokesman added, "Agencies that primarily conduct foreign intelligence and counterintelligence activities have never had the same whistleblower protections as others because of national security concerns." But Waxman said he strongly opposes the "language allowing the president to waive whistleblower rights for employees who deal with homeland security."

Davis' spokesman declared, "As much as some folks would love to claim that we were pulling a fast one, the provision's been there since the bill's introduction and the committee unanimously reported a bill with the same provision during the 108th Congress." He said the markup was put off because "Democrats were confused and apparently didn't know what language had long been in the bill. We felt it was best to give them time to bone up on the legislation."

But Waxman said that provision was slipped into a manager's amendment during the markup last year. He said the majority's description of the amendment was inaccurate, adding, "If that provision had come to light last year, I would have strongly opposed the provision and fought to delete it from the legislation."

Meanwhile, union advocates say they are "taking their cues" from champions of the Senate bill -- Collins and Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii -- on what to expect in the final version. Beth Moten, legislative director for the American Federation of Government Employees -- the largest federal employee union -- said her organization is not willing to endorse the House bill as written but could not say what compromises are acceptable for the final version.