[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 7912-7913]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         CLARIFYING THE ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE HATCH ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. TOM DAVIS

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, March 31, 2003

  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a 
bill on behalf of myself as chairman of the Committee on Government 
Reform and Representative Frank Wolf. This legislation will clarify the 
intent of Congress regarding the enforcement of the Hatch Act.
  The Hatch Act is a critical component of the system of laws designed 
to maintain the public's confidence in the professionalism of our 
nation's civil servants. The Act proscribes the types of political 
activity covered civil servants may engage in. The Act is intended to 
protect civil servants from political coercion by politically appointed 
supervisors. It is also intended to assure the impartial administration 
of Federal laws.
  Since 1993 the general posture of the Hatch Act has been permissive, 
allowing civil servants wide latitude to be involved in non-partisan 
political activities in their communities. Federal employees are 
restricted from using their official authority to interfere in an 
election, and from soliciting or receiving political campaign 
contributions as well as several other activities relating to the use 
of their public authority for partisan effect. Covered employees also 
may not run for elective office in most partisan elections. The Act 
states that the penalty for violating the Act is a 30-day suspension 
without pay or, for egregious violations, termination from the civil 
service.
  The Hatch Act is investigated and prosecuted by the United States 
Office of Special Counsel (OSC). This office is primarily charged with 
protecting civil servants from prohibited personnel practices, 
especially reprisal

[[Page 7913]]

for whistleblowing activities. The OSC also investigates and 
prosecutes, when appropriate, violations of the Hatch Act.
  Unfortunately, recent activities of the OSC have raised questions 
about the Office's interpretation of their prerogatives under the Hatch 
Act. Specifically, the OSC is attempting to prosecute an individual who 
is no longer an employee of the Federal government for an alleged Hatch 
Act violation. This action is clearly outside of the authority Congress 
granted under the 1993 Amendments to the Hatch Act since the only 
penalties are suspension or termination.
  The bill accomplishes two goals.
  First, it clarifies that a Federal employee who voluntarily separates 
from the civil service may not be penalized under the provisions of the 
Hatch Act. The bill also states that if that person rejoins the federal 
service the OSC may reopen that investigation should they so choose.
  Second, this bill strikes two regulations promulgated by the OSC as 
routine use exceptions to the Privacy Act. These two exceptions allow 
the OSC to release private information for almost any reason as long as 
the records are used to defend the Office of the Special Counsel. The 
Privacy Act describes a routine use under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552a (7) as 
``the use of such record for a purpose which is compatible with the 
purpose with which it is collected.'' Since the OSC does not collect 
and develop its investigation files for the purpose of defending its 
reputation, these regulations are clearly inappropriate.
  54,000 federal employees live in my district. These women and men 
provide much of the talent and energy that makes the local community 
work. In 1993, Congress amended the Hatch Act to create a very simple 
standard for behavior with very limited proscriptions for political 
behavior. The hope was to create an environment where these citizens 
would feel free to fully express themselves in the non-partisan 
political arena.
  The zealous prosecution by the OSC is beginning to erode this 
framework of limited proscriptions. At a time when fewer and fewer 
people bother to participate in local government the Congress should 
re-affirm its commitment to local communities and to its own employees 
by reinforcing the limited, permissive character of the Hatch Act.

                          ____________________