Election E-Mails Can Either Punish or Fire You in the Office.

It's so easy. A friend sends an e-mail about the presidential campaign and you forward it to an office buddy.

With that click of the mouse, you are at risk of being fired. For a Hatch Act violation.

E-mails, blogs and campaign Web sites can be cyber-traps for federal employees, especially those accustomed to using their government computer for personal matters, such as trading messages with children or sharing jokes with friends.

The Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency that investigates and prosecutes allegations of improper political activities by government employees, is getting calls these days from federal workers who are confused about the rules or worried they may have committed an "e-Hatch" violation, said Ana Galindo-Marrone, chief of the Hatch Act Unit at the OSC.

Much of the employee interest has been stirred by the presidential campaigns, which have spawned Web sites to raise money, distributed e-mails by the thousands and urged supporters to use blogs and social networking sites to get out political messages.

For the OSC, the movement of politics into cyberspace has led to a rethinking of how to interpret the Hatch Act, which was written in 1939 to limit partisan activities by government workers and substantially amended in 1993.

The law prohibits federal employees from engaging in political activity while on duty, wearing campaign buttons in the office and putting campaign bumper stickers on a government car. It also bans soliciting, accepting or receiving political contributions, and prohibits employees from using their official positions to influence or interfere with an election. Violators are usually punished and can even lose their jobs.

The last Hatch Act debate in Congress, in 1992 and 1993, occurred just as the Internet revolution was starting. There was nary a word about the potential power of Web sites and e-mail to shape political opinion.

Today, of course, political messages, campaign solicitations, cartoons and satire whiz across the country via e-mail. Federal employees cannot control what pops into their e-mail inbox. However, forwarding an e-mail that urges a vote for a specific candidate or seeks to raise campaign money is a Hatch Act violation if done inside a federal building, the OSC has determined.

The OSC takes into account what the e-mail says and how many people receive it, since those factors help determine whether a federal employee may have engaged in electioneering in the office, using a government computer network and e-mail account.

Blogging about politics at work falls into the don't-do category, but blogging from home may also get a federal employee in trouble.

Presidential campaign Web sites, for example, encourage supporters to create blogs on the site to advocate the candidate's positions. They also usually carry a link for campaign donations, and that can be trouble for a federal employee, even when using a home computer. The OSC may view the donate button as soliciting for political contributions, another no-no under the Hatch Act, and set off an investigation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/20/AR2008042001563.html

Here is federal employees' policy under the Hatch Act from the OSC:

Permitted/Prohibited Activities for Employees Who May Participate in Partisan Political Activity
These federal and D.C. employees may-

• be candidates for public office in nonpartisan elections
• register and vote as they choose
• assist in voter registration drives
• express opinions about candidates and issues
• contribute money to political organizations
• attend political fundraising functions
• attend and be active at political rallies and meetings
• join and be an active member of a political party or club
• sign nominating petitions
• campaign for or against referendum questions, constitutional amendments, municipal ordinances
• campaign for or against candidates in partisan elections
• make campaign speeches for candidates in partisan elections
• distribute campaign literature in partisan elections
• hold office in political clubs or parties

These federal and D.C. employees may not-

• use official authority or influence to interfere with an election
• solicit or discourage political activity of anyone with business before their agency
• solicit or receive political contributions (may be done in certain limited situations by federal labor or other employee organizations)
• be candidates for public office in partisan elections
• engage in political activity while:
o on duty
o in a government office
o wearing an official uniform
o using a government vehicle
• wear partisan political buttons on duty

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm

What the writer doesn't discuss further about the Hatch Act is that we have several government officials, current and former, that violated the Hatch Act. One example is Lorita Doan who is still currently working at the GSA:


In June 2007, Lurita Alexis Doan, Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration, was found by the United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC) of violating the Hatch Act when she took part in a video conference with Karl Rove and other White House officials, and sent letters asking how to help Republican politicians get elected, and was accused by Special Counsel Scott Bloch of lying to deliberately mislead investigators.

Second example is the White House missing emails. From CREW:

Missing emails

Hatch Act Excuse: The administration has claimed that Rove, Jennings and other staffers use RNC accounts to avoid violating the Hatch Act. This is untrue. The Hatch Act prohibits White House staff from using official resources for purely “political” purposes. “Political” refers to the president’s role as either a candidate for office or as the leader of his party. Email communications regarding presidential appointments for U.S. Attorney and Interior Department positions clearly fall within the PRA as making appointment is an official presidential function and does not relate to the president’s role as party leader.

Thirdly is Scott Jennings and his email account of gwb43.com:

Scott Jennings E-Mails. Scott Jennings, the deputy director of political affairs in the White House, and his assistant used “gwb43.com” e-mail accounts to communicate with the General Services Administration about a partisan briefing that Mr. Jennings gave to political appointees at GSA on January 26, 2007. When Mr. Jennings’s assistant emailed the PowerPoint presentation to GSA, she wrote: “It is a close hold and we’re not supposed to be emailing it around.”

Jennings' New Job Appointment E-Mails. Mr. Jennings also appears to have used his “gwb43.com” account to recruit applicants for official government positions through the “Kentucky Republican Voice,” an internet site that describes itself as “the best source for Kentucky Republican grassroots information.” One posting from May 2005 advertised 17 vacancies on assorted presidential boards and commissions. A second posting from May 2006 sought applicants for various boards within the Small Business Administration. In each case, these postings encouraged applicants to contact Mr. Jennings at his “gwb43.com” address.


<--Remember this email from Jennings? From the DOJ dump documents.