There are many laws on the books that are no longer enforced and should probably be repealed. Is the Hatch Act one of these?
I worked under the Hatch Act for over three decades as a Department of Defense employee. The restrictions seemed reasonable at the time and not unduly burdensome. I could argue politics at the Thanksgiving dinner table all I wanted and could even go door-to-door handing out fliers for a political candidate. I just couldn’t do so while wearing my employee ID badge or anything with my agency logo. I also couldn’t do anything political at work like wear a “GOP” hat or sell tickets for the Democrat dinner to co-workers during my lunch break while still on government property.
A finding that one committed a violation of the Hatch Act could result in a range of disciplinary actions, including removal from federal service, reduction in grade, disbarment from federal service for a period not to exceed five years, suspension, letter of reprimand, or a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000.
Headquarters sent reminders — especially during election years — about approved and forbidden activities. My IT supervisors and I reminded employees regularly that their government-issued cell phones and computers were never to be used for anything partisan. If we wanted to engage in political activity on our lunch break, we had to not only use our own cell phones, we had to leave the premises, and that included the parking lot.
Arguing that you didn’t know better was the equivalent of driving 90 mph on Interstate 70 and saying you didn’t know there was a speed limit. Still, there were occasional reports of violations, and these were always and consistently followed by thorough investigations and sometimes seemingly harsh actions that were possibly intended to be a “wake-up call” to other employees.
Whenever rumors of a Hatch Act violation circulated, we’d usually see a spike in queries about deleting files and questions about how long backups were retained. It was the equivalent of tapping the brake and checking the speedometer after seeing someone pulled over for speeding.
I frequently cringe while reading the news and seeing Hatch Act violations shrugged off with a report that “the employee was counseled.”
That’s the equivalent of just stopping the speeding driver and telling them to slow down and have a nice day. Not even a warning ticket.
I realize that elections have consequences and that many voters said they wanted to shake up the status quo, but did they really intend to tear down the firewall that has existed since 1939 between politics and governance?
Apparently they did.
Just recently, the Republicans used the White House for their national convention with governmental and political activities so thoroughly mixed that I doubt the general public could distinguish one from the other.
Carl Atwood Hatch’s grave was probably spinning too fast to clock with a police radar gun.
White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said, “Nobody outside the Beltway really cares.” If this is true, why keep the law on the books? Kellyanne Conway violated it so frequently and overtly that the independent Office of Special Counsel recommended she be fired in 2019. Instead, nothing happened to her or apparently anyone else in this administration whose actions are supposed to be governed by the Hatch Act.
(The President and Vice President are exempt. Those who work for them in government capacities are not.)
A law that is not enforced seems pointless, so perhaps it’s time to repeal this law and allow government employees to perform political tasks with taxpayer funds openly, without violating a law that citizens no longer care to see enforced.
Personally, I think it’s a bad idea and would prefer the Hatch Act be adequately enforced, but what do I know? I’m just a retired DoD employee who views today’s extreme partisanship with sadness and regret.
Linda Dunn is an author and lifelong resident of Hancock County. Send comments to [email protected].
