Another Federal Whistleblower -- Is Anyone Listening?

Written by Teresa Chambers

Continued from page 1

Imaginerepparttar outcry if I had previously stayed silent and if one of those symbolic monuments or memorials had been destroyed orrepparttar 136068 loss of life had occurred to someone visiting one of those locations. I did not want to be standing with my superiors amongrepparttar 136069 ruins of one of these icons or in front of a Congressional committee trying to explain why we hadn't asked for help.

Despiterepparttar 136070 serious First Amendment and security implications of my case for each American, there has been no Congressional intervention, no Congressional hearings, no demand of accountability by elected officials for those who took action to silence me and who have ignored all warnings aboutrepparttar 136071 perils to which I alerted them. Following my termination andrepparttar 136072 publicity that accompanied it, it is unlikely that any current Federal employee will be willing to speak up with straightforward, accurate information aboutrepparttar 136073 realities of any danger we face.

Our legal appeals continue, and some ofrepparttar 136074 administrative charges placed against me have already been thrown out. Through it all, it is becoming clear that Federal employees have little protection for simply tellingrepparttar 136075 truth.

My story is told on a website,, established by my husband in December 2003 and maintained by him so thatrepparttar 136076 American people could “witness”repparttar 136077 issues in this case. The website has provided transparency to my situation by making key documents available for viewing, includingrepparttar 136078 transcripts of depositions of top officials and their testimony during a key administrative hearing.

Suppression of information is spreading – gag orders, non disclosures agreements, andrepparttar 136079 government’s refusal to turn over documents. In agencies that span Federal service, conscientious public servants are struggling to communicate vital concerns to their true employers – you,repparttar 136080 American public. Is anyone listening?

Teresa C. Chambers

Teresa Chambers devoted nearly 28 years to law enforcement service. She most recently served as Chief of the U.S. Park Police, responsible for protecting national parks, monuments, and parkways in the Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and New York City areas. Park Police officers also provide protection for the President and others as well as myriad functions in the agency’s role as one of only a few uniformed federal law enforcement agencies.

Famous Filibusters in Political History

Written by Garry Gamber

Continued from page 1

On April 24, 1953, Senator Morse began to filibuster against Tidelands Oil legislation. He keptrepparttar floor for 22 hours and 26 minutes, breakingrepparttar 136050 filibuster record of 18 hours held by his mentor, Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette.

Senator Morse is remembered through numerous colorful stories. For example, Clare Booth Luce, former U.S. Senator and Ambassador to Italy had to resign her appointment when she maderepparttar 136051 insulting but funny remark that her problems with Senator Morse began when he was kicked inrepparttar 136052 head by a horse.

Senator Strom Thurmond

About 9 p.m. on August 28, 1957, Senator Strom Thurmond rose beforerepparttar 136053 Senate and announced, "Mr. President, I rise to speak againstrepparttar 136054 so-called voting rights bill, H.R. 6127." His own staff had not been informed about Senator Thurmond's intentions to filibusterrepparttar 136055 bill, but they knew something was up when they saw Thurmond gathering considerable reading material.

Senator Thurmond had prepared himself for a long filibuster onrepparttar 136056 Senate floor. Earlier inrepparttar 136057 day he had spent time inrepparttar 136058 Senate steam room, dehydrating himself so that he would absorb allrepparttar 136059 water he drank without having to visitrepparttar 136060 restroom. His wife packed a steak sandwich lunch for him and she stayed inrepparttar 136061 family gallery throughoutrepparttar 136062 night. Thurmond brought a quantity of malted milk tablets and throat lozenges from his office.

Senator Thurmond began his filibuster by reading each state's election statutes. He later read and discussed an opinion by Chief Justice Taft. He also read and discussedrepparttar 136063 Declaration of Independence,repparttar 136064 Bill of Rights, and Washington's Farewell Address. His staff, concerned for Senator Thurmond's health, was finally successful in getting him to leaverepparttar 136065 floor.

After 24 hours and 18 minutes, a record that still stands, Senator Thurmond concluded his remarks with, "I expect to vote againstrepparttar 136066 bill." The bill was defeated.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964

On June 10, 1964, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia finished his address begun onrepparttar 136067 previous day, slightly more than 14 hours earlier. He filibustered againstrepparttar 136068 Civil Rights Act of 1964, an act which was debated by Byrd and others for 57 working days, including 6 Saturdays.

Senate President Hubert Humphrey from Minnesota needed 67 votes to be able to carryrepparttar 136069 motion for cloture. Minority Leader Senator Everett Dirksen,repparttar 136070 always eloquent senator from Illinois procuredrepparttar 136071 Republican votes necessary to passrepparttar 136072 cloture motion. "Stronger than allrepparttar 136073 armies is an idea whose time has come," he said. "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!"

The final roll call vote on cloture resulted in 71 votes in favor and 29 votes opposed. It wasrepparttar 136074 first time in history that cloture had been invoked on civil rights legislation. The 1964 Civil Rights Act wasrepparttar 136075 most sweeping of its kind in our history.

Justice Abe Fortas

In June of 1968 Chief Justice Earl Warren notified President Lyndon Johnson that he would be retiring fromrepparttar 136076 Supreme Court. This move gave President Johnson time to nominate a successor since he was not planning to seek re-election as President. Johnson nominated Associate Justice Abe Fortas to replace Warren. Atrepparttar 136077 same time Johnson nominated Texas Appeals Court Justice Homer Thornberry to replace Fortas, a move that was designed to satisfy southern senators.

President Johnson counted on Senators Everett Dirksen and Richard Russell for their support ofrepparttar 136078 nomination. When Abe Fortas testified at his own confirmation hearing, an unprecedented occurrence, it was revealed that Fortas worked uncomfortably closely withrepparttar 136079 White House staff andrepparttar 136080 President. Later it was learned that Fortas was being paid a large sum, privately, to teach an American University summer course. At this point Dirksen, Russell, and other senators withdrew their support.

Thoughrepparttar 136081 committee recommended confirmation of Justice Abe Fortas, a filibuster ensued onrepparttar 136082 Senate floor to block his confirmation,repparttar 136083 first filibuster in Senate history on a Supreme Court nomination. On October 1, 1968,repparttar 136084 Senate was unable to tallyrepparttar 136085 67 votes needed to invoke cloture and President Johnson withdrewrepparttar 136086 nomination.

The use ofrepparttar 136087 filibuster has increased from 16 filibusters inrepparttar 136088 19th century to 66 inrepparttar 136089 first half ofrepparttar 136090 20th century to 195 inrepparttar 136091 period from 1970 to 1995. It is likely thatrepparttar 136092 filibuster will continue to play an important role inrepparttar 136093 American political process.

Garry Gamber is a public school teacher. He writes articles about politics, real estate, health and nutrition, and internet dating services. He is a founding member of and the owner of

    <Back to Page 1 © 2005
Terms of Use