George Bush violates the Hatch Act (using fed building for campaign event)

[Stephanie]

BUSTED.


____________________


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28299-2005Apr5.html

April 6, 2005

The guardian of the nation's historical records has joined the fray over President Bush's plan for private Social Security accounts. Last week, it blocked a coalition of women's organizations from holding a Social Security forum at the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library in Hyde Park, N.Y., because the groups oppose Bush's proposed personal accounts.

****

Wrote Koch: "Changes to the Social Security system are now the president's highest priority on his domestic agenda in Congress; therefore, in order to be in compliance with the Hatch Act, I must require you to present a program that is balanced in presenting both sides of the Social Security debate."

Koch said the forum would be against federal regulations because it "may be perceived as being partisan."

A spokeswoman for the Office of Special Counsel, which enforces the Hatch Act, said it is not at issue because the groups' meeting on Social Security, a topic of public policy, "does not seem to involve a partisan campaign or activity."

The Hatch Act restricts partisan activities by government employees; it says federal buildings cannot be used for "campaign activities," defined as those promoting a political party, a political group or a candidate for partisan political office. The act does not prohibit policy-related activities.

____________________




President Bush delivers a speech on Social Security reform at the State House in Columbia S.C. Monday April 18, 2005. Left is House Speaker David Wilkins and right is Lt. Governor Andre Bauer. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050418/480/scgh10404181707

____________________


http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/11425202.htm

This tour has found Bush in the center of huge crowds in campaign-style surroundings. For instance, a crowd of 3,000 met Bush at Centenary College in Shreveport, La., and about 6,000 came to hear the president at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind.

In Columbia, it will be a much smaller crowd. The House chamber should include up to 169 state legislators, two U.S. Senators, the governor and a gallery that seats 194 people.

***

The White House only says Bush will make remarks on strengthening Social Security and that he chose the Statehouse because South Carolina is an outstanding example of a state legislature making decisions and keeping its fiscal house in order. White House spokesman Taylor Gross said he knew nothing about Bush talking about appointing Wilkins <as Canadian ambassador>.

Presidential visits before the Legislature are rare, but not unheard of in South Carolina. President Richard Nixon did so in 1972 as did Bush's father in 1989.

Workers spent hours last week polishing the gray and pink marble floors and getting carpets up to snuff. On Friday, walls of blue fabric on polls went up to create press areas in the lower Statehouse lobby.

With school tours canceled, lobbyists banished and reporters corralled, Bush will have a quieter visit to a place he's already left a mark on.

____________________

[in_cog_ni_to]

1. IMPEACH!!!!

Like that will happen anytime soon. :eyes: Laws/Rules do not pertain to the repuke party. Only the Democratic Party.

[Stephanie]

2. Two WEEKS ago they disallowed an event on Hatch Act grounds

Now they do exactly what they complained about. I am done crying hypocrite. I want an investigation. This is a clear violation, under their own ground rules.

[BurtWorm]

3. Except the SC statehouse is not federal property.

Technically.

[Stephanie]

4. Oh.

Dang.

[BurtWorm]

5. I still say we should impeach.

Burn him!

[Stephanie]

6. Agreed!

Anyway, isn't there a similar state act? There must be. But we'd have to search S.C. regs. This makes me furious!

[BurtWorm]

7. It would be worth looking into.

One thing not in favor of this being illegal is that legislatures are places reserved for the expression of political ideas.

I think the administration could get in trouble--and certainly should get in trouble--for putting anti-SS propaganda messages on the SS telephone system, which people put on hold are forced to listen to. That's an inappropriate forum for that message.

[Stephanie]

8. well, it seems to apply to state employees as well as federal

I am looking to see where the regs are WRT federal and/or state buildings.

http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm


*edit* This maybe?

_____

These federal and D.C. employees may not-

* use official authority or influence to interfere with an election
* solicit or discourage political activity of anyone with business before their agency
* solicit or receive political contributions (may be done in certain limited situations by federal labor or other employee organizations)
* be candidates for public office in partisan elections
* engage in political activity while:
o on duty
o in a government office
o wearing an official uniform
o using a government vehicle
* wear partisan political buttons on duty

[BurtWorm]

11. Political activity is all Bushhole is capable of.

(If "capable" and Bush can really be used together in a meaningful English sentence.) Why he hasn't been hauled off in chains already is a mystery.

[FreedomAngel82]

10. Dontcha know?

They change the rules just for them. Assholes.

[FreedomAngel82]

9. Of course

How many laws has he broken now??

[jbond56]

12. not the first time

read the Hatch act. Condi violated it in several states. Rules only apply if you have a D by your name.

[Stephanie]

13. yes I'm trying to read it here

but not sure if this actually violates it -

http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

[jbond56]

15. tell me how you interpret this

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm#agencies

Employees of the following agencies (or agency components), or in the following categories, are subject to more extensive restrictions on their political activities than employees in other Departments and agencies

National Security Agency

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm#may_not

campaign for or against a candidate or slate of candidates in partisan elections
make campaign speeches

Then look what happened.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/10/21/rice_giving_speeches_in_election_swing_states/

I'm no lawyer and concede I could be wrong but at the very least the timing was questionable. Condi was promptly promoted leaving ample room for motive.

[Stephanie]

14. Look at how BushCO has been using the Act against Dems >

Just turning things up as I search for more info on Hatch Act
- found this >



http://www.osc.gov/documents/hatchact/federal/fha-32.htm

Since issuing that opinion, we have learned of AFGE’s plans to
conduct voter registration drives in various agencies across
the country. We also now have more information regarding
AFGE’s political activities. We understand that at this time,
AFGE has not endorsed a candidate in the 2004 Presidential
election.1  However, since at least the election of 1984,2
AFGE has endorsed partisan candidates in federal elections,
including Presidential elections. Thus, over the years AFGE
has become identified with the success or failure of
candidates in partisan elections. The evidence we have
obtained, as explained further below, has led us to conclude
that, in the current election cycle, AFGE has become
identified publicly and repeatedly with the failure of a
Presidential candidate, namely, George W. Bush. Therefore, we
have concluded, as we did in 1984, that AFGE is unable to
conduct a truly nonpartisan voter registration drive. As such,
the Hatch Act would prohibit federal employees, while on duty
or in their workplace, from participating in a voter
registration drive conducted by AFGE.

     The information we have gathered from AFGE’s website
supports the conclusion stated above. For example, there is
information posted under the heading “Election 2004” about
AFGE’s 2004 Media Campaign and the two ads it is currently
running in South Carolina. Both ads are critical of the Bush
Administration on the issues of privatization within the
Veteran’s Administration and government contracts awarded to
certain corporations. One ad states, “And when contractors go
over budget or commit fraud? It seems as long as [big
corporations] keep writing bit [sic] contribution checks to
the Bush Campaign, they just keep getting more government
contracts.” In addition, posted under this same heading is the
statement, “Come back soon for more information on the 2004
Media Campaign and AFGE’s efforts to impact the outcome of the
presidential race.”

     Also posted on AFGE’s website is its publication, The
Government Standard. In the January/February 2004 issue of
this publication is a message from AFGE National President
John Gage that clearly advocates against the current
Administration. Mr. Gage makes comments about Congress being
“led by rogue Republicans,” and about “[t]he Administration’s
brass-knuckle tactics,” and states that, “[i]t is particularly
disgusting now to recall how this Administration repeatedly
raised the red, white and blue to justify their actions when,
in hindsight, it has become so clear that the only color they
really care about is green.” In addition, Mr. Gage states, “we
are targeted as a big red bulls-eye by this Administration.”
These statements by Mr. Gage were made in his capacity as AFGE
President and printed in an official AFGE publication.