Yesterday morning I was told by a "confidential informant" that Congressman
John Dingell was going to be holding hearings about "whistleblower" firings
over the past seven years and particularly the fact that they were required
to sign an agreement to never again seek government employment as a
condition of getting a cash settlement from the government.  My "informant"
suggested that they might like to hear from me since I had to sign such an
agreement eight years ago as a condition of receiving a cash settlement
after 10 months sitting at home with no duties.  Frankly, I smiled to myself
and agreed that I would see if I could help and would call Dingell's office.
I did not hold out much hope of being of assistance but I would try.

That was over 24 hours ago and it is now clear to me that I will not have my
call returned.

What I am about to relate isn't really about me or even the good
Congressman, it is about the current state of political affairs in this
nation.  This state of affairs is what we each need to focus on rather than
the latest "decision" by some bureaucrat or lawyer in the Interior
Department about the definition of "habitat" or what some Regional Director
or Wolf "Coordinator" just said at a meeting.  To bring animals and the
environment back under our control through our elected state governments and
to reassert our property rights and the proper Constitutional role of the
Federal government REQUIRES fundamental amendment or repeal of most of these
recent (+/- 40 years) LAWS.  That requires an electorate placing committed
politicians in office.  Anything short of that is merely "lipstick on a pig".

So I called Congressman Dingell's office and asked to speak to the staff
person handling this hearing.  The young lady was pleasant and said it "was
probably something to do with 'the Committee' and she would forward me".
The next young lady was equally pleasant and said the person wasn't "located
here" but was located in the Ford Building.  (Think of how wonderful it must
be to have a building [even such an 'out-building'] or a refuge or a bridge
or whatever named after you!  Why it is almost enough to make one want to
take up politics.  Note that was a joke.)  The next young lady said the
fellow I wanted was busy and would I want to leave a message?  I said I did
and left my name and phone number and mentioned the circumstances of my
"whistle blowing" and subsequent "agreement" conditions.  I concluded that I
had several insights about those "agreements" that might be useful to him if
he had a few minutes.

Enough time has now passed that I no longer expect to have my call returned.
I am not surprised nor am I disappointed.  I am glad I made the effort
because like "the dog that did not bark" in the Sherlock Holmes mystery, the
silence says much.

Congressman Dingell is a Michigan Congressman from a District South of
Detroit.  This District encompasses some of the most famous duck marshes and
decoy collecting areas in the upper Midwest.  The Detroit River and Lake
Erie marshes are legendary waterfowl areas with a rich history.  His father
was a long-term Congressman from this same District and like his son a
reputed "big hunter and fisherman".  His father is famous for sponsoring the
"Dingell-Johnson tax" collected on fishing tackle and distributed to State
fish and wildlife agencies (by the US Fish & Wildlife Service) for SPORT
Fish Restoration.  The Congressman lists one of his former jobs (the other
is "Attorney") as "Park Ranger".  All in all he seems like my kind of guy
but I learned long ago that nothing is as it appears here in fantasyland.

The good Congressman has been in this office for 40 some years.  He
originally was a big advocate for hunting and fishing but years ago he
morphed into a compliant accomplice (to government agencies) in annual
government land purchases for refuges and parks and forests et al.  He
steadily accumulated "seniority" like his Senate counterpart, Senator Byrd
of West Virginia, and has come to wield enormous power that helps some and
crushes others.  What is that old saying about "power" and "absolute power"?
His District has evolved to a point of where he actually had a close race
last time due in no small measure to an influx of many Middle Eastern-origin
voters whose expectations and interests are not necessarily those of the
blue collar workers that loved him and his Dad for the past (how many??)
years.

When I testified twice before Congress about the US Fish & Wildlife Service
administrators stealing money from the (Pittman-Robertson excise taxes on
arms and ammunition AND THE DINGELL-JOHNSON excise taxes on fishing tackle)
hundreds of millions of dollars earmarked by law for State hunting and
fishing programs; the Congressman was quiet.  When the General Accounting
Office confirmed that $45 to 60 Million had been stolen in just the two
previous years, the Congressman was no help to me.  When the State fish and
wildlife agencies did not request that the funds be replaced in the State
hunting and fishing programs (they didn't want to anger the Federal hand
that they were hoping would begin feeding them Federal Appropriated Funds
one day); the Congressman was evidently busy with other things.

Now in fairness to the Congressman, he and his partisan colleagues, were
reluctant to join the Republicans like Young, Pombo, & Chenoweth in going
after Democrat appointees under President Clinton.  Several Democrat
Congressmen did support the probe but it was in the shadow of impeachment
and sex scandals.  The Congressman and his staff probably view me as some
sort of Republican and not to be trusted as a result.

Now before I tell you what I wanted to tell the Congressman's point
staff-person about whistleblower agreements I must mention two things.
First, my informant mentioned "over the past seven years", why seven?  Time's
up.  Why that is only under the Bush watch.  If the subject is
"whistleblowers" and "conditions" in "agreements": why only look at the last
"seven" years?  I leave that to you to figure out.

Second, why even mention a condition about never seeking government
employment again?  That is just plain silly.  What bureaucrat in his or her
right mind would touch any whistleblower with a ten-foot pole?  It is next
to impossible to unload a worthless employee on someone else without lying
and any whistleblower carries a public reputation.  Does anyone really think
that any whistleblower applying for a government job would get anything more
than the knowledge that he raised the heart rate of some moribund
administrator?  Get real.  Of course this is not to say that the current
hiring "standards" would not still apply.  Looking at the US Fish & Wildlife
Service (the only one I am reasonably familiar with) the "standards" for
hiring and promoting to high levels are things such as your parent is a
Senator (like Dingell was a Park Ranger, hmm?), your wife is the Director,
your husband is a top Washington Administrator, your father is a Regional
Director, and on and on.  Who would want to jeopardize such things?

So what was it I wanted to tell the staff person about cash settlement
"conditions"?

What stunned me when I was offered a cash settlement to retire was the
clearly spelled out item that I would get three equal payments over a three
year period AND IF AT ANY TIME IN THOSE THREE YEARS I SPOKE ABOUT OR WROTE ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF MY SEPARATION TO ANYONE THE AGREEMENT WOULD BE VOIDED.  To say that such a "condition" catches your attention is an understatement.

Think about this: your tax money is used by YOUR bureaucrats to pay
hush-money.  In my case, I could not advocate replacing the stolen taxes nor
could I explain how US Fish & Wildlife Service policies AND State agency
cooperation was undercutting hunting and fishing and trapping.  I could not
explain how US Fish & Wildlife Service administrators (career and appointed)
were publicly supporting fish and wildlife management while secretly
advancing the agendas of environmental and animal rights radicals.  No
Administrator was called to task for the theft of the money.  No public
explanation of the disposition of those funds was ever made.  No one was
fired or even missed a bonus.  All went on to greater things and warm
welcomes at State meetings from hunting and fishing organization
representatives.  I on the other hand was dismissed as "kooky" or a
"political hack" or "bitter" or just plain "nuts".

My point here is not the residue on me: my point is that BECAUSE I WAS
MUZZLED (by the "condition" in the agreement) there was no public debate and
the matter was allowed to simply disappear.  There was never any opportunity
for the media or interested groups to get my side of the story and compare
it to the agency "side" in order to decide what was happening and what
needed to be done.  Not unexpectedly, misuse of the money and unimagined
power flowing to this particular agency continued and has gotten worse.
Worst of all, YOUR TAX MONEY WAS USED TO KEEP YOU IN THE DARK AND TO FEATHER THE NESTS OF BUREAUCRATS, POLITICIANS, AND A COTERIE OF RADICALS PUSHING ANTI-AMERICAN AGENDAS.  Therefore:


To Whom It May Concern:

Federal agencies should be prohibited from requiring, through a cash
settlement or written agreement or any other means, that any whistleblower
or former government employee remain silent about any non-classified matters
surrounding said employment or any factors leading up to a cash settlement
or separation.

I say this as a former whistleblower that was forced to retire and as a
United States citizen convinced, as were the Founding Fathers, that the free
exchange of information and the public debate of ideas and policies are
vital to maintaining a free Republic.  Stifling debates that allow for
public decisions only leads to totalitarianism under those removing such
debate from the public forum.

Sincerely,

Jim Beers
20 March 2007

- If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

- This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://jimbeers.blogster.com   (Jim Beers Common Sense)

- Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak.  Contact:
jimbeers7@verizon.net

- Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist,
Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.
He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and
Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western
Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the
Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security
Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress;
twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60
Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to
expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Centreville,
Virginia with his wife of many decades.