Andrew Lapin | February 3, 2012 | 0 Comments

Senator steps up scrutiny of FDA over whistleblower treatment

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

A Senate Republican is once again pressuring the Food and Drug Administration on its treatment of whistleblowers, after current and former employees filed suit over alleged improper monitoring of emails to Congress.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a five-page letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg earlier this week opening an investigation into the agency’s surveillance of the emails. He demanded that Hamburg disclose who at the agency had authorized the monitoring of whistleblowers’ personal emails to Congress, including his own office, as well as how many employees were under surveillance and whether FDA obtained personal passwords in the process.

Grassley’s interest in FDA’s handling of whistleblowers is long-standing. In March 2009, the senator wrote then-acting Commissioner Frank Torti in response to internal FDA memos warning employees not to spread confidential information. Grassley said he feared management retaliation against whistleblowers would escalate under the policy.

“I have serious concerns that your memorandum goes beyond legitimate privacy concerns and appears to run contrary to many statutes protecting executive branch communications with members of Congress,” he wrote in 2009.

FDA began monitoring emails sent by the scientists and doctors represented in the lawsuit from their work computers to Congress and the news media as early as January 2009, according to Stephen Kohn, the attorney representing the whistleblowers and the executive director of the National Whistleblowers Center. The surveillance came in response to a 2008 letter from the employees to President Obama’s transition team regarding the agency’s lax approval processes for potentially ineffective medical devices, he said.

Following these events, the inspector general at the Health and Human Services Department, which houses FDA, began a review of general FDA conduct, briefing congressional staffers along the way, according to Grassley’s office. Due to personnel turnover, the senator’s office was unable to verify whether his staff members were among those being briefed.

The IG ultimately relayed in a letter to FDA managers that the whistleblower communications were protected, according to Kohn. But the IG failed to properly follow up with an investigation into unlawful management monitoring of emails, he said.

“The IG is a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” Kohn told Government Executive. “On the one hand, they were going against the whistleblowers and the other times they were going for the whistleblowers . . . The IG at the end of the day had significant information about public health and safety and did nothing and they, in my view, are disqualified from any involvement in this particular case.”

Ineffective or dangerous FDA-approved medical devices that the agency’s employees sought to draw attention to included underperforming mammograms and CT scans that posed radiation risks to patients, according to reports by The Washington Post and The New York Times.

All six employees were either harassed or dismissed from work following the surveillance, the lawsuit claims. FDA declined to comment on anything related to the ongoing investigation.

Though FDA had intercepted employee correspondence with the senator’s office, a spokeswoman for his office clarified that Grassley is less concerned with his own privacy rights than he is with how the monitoring interfered with his job.

“We have an interest that was violated, but we wouldn’t call it ‘privacy,’ ” the spokeswoman wrote to Government Executive on Thursday. “It is in [sic] an intrusion into our inherent constitutional power to conduct oversight for the executive branch to interfere with our ability to have direct, confidential communications with executive branch employees in the course of our oversight duties.”

In the letter sent Wednesday, Grassley said whistleblowers “are often treated like skunks at a picnic,” even though they “have played a critical role in exposing harmful government actions and retaliation against whistleblowers should never be tolerated.”

His office compared the situation to a 2011 case involving Gary Aguirre, a whistleblower for the Securities and Exchange Commission who wrote to Grassley regarding the agency illegally destroying 20 years’ worth of documents related to Wall Street criminal investigations. According to the senator’s office, the Justice Department, representing the SEC inspector general, called for a subpoena of Aguirre’s emails with Grassley, but eventually backed down.

“The same principle we were defending in that case is at issue here,” Grassley’s spokeswoman said about the current FDA investigation. “Except rather than using legal process (which would have given us an opportunity to object), they simply intercepted the emails.”

Comments
JOIN THE DISCUSSION

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by Brocade

    Best of 2016 Federal Forum eBook

    Earlier this summer, Federal and tech industry leaders convened to talk security, machine learning, network modernization, DevOps, and much more at the 2016 Federal Forum. This eBook includes a useful summary highlighting the best content shared at the 2016 Federal Forum to help agencies modernize their network infrastructure.

    Download
  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    GBC Flash Poll Series: Merger & Acquisitions

    Download this GBC Flash Poll to learn more about federal perspectives on the impact of industry consolidation.

    Download
  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

    Download
  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

    Download
  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    A DevOps Roadmap for the Federal Government

    This GBC Report discusses how DevOps is steadily gaining traction among some of government's leading IT developers and agencies.

    Download
  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

    Download
  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

    Download
  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.

    Download
  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    Joint Enterprise Licensing Agreements

    Read this eBook to learn how defense agencies can achieve savings and efficiencies with an Enterprise Software Agreement.

    Download
  • Sponsored by Cloudera

    Government Forum Content Library

    Get all the essential resources needed for effective technology strategies in the federal landscape.

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.