Homeland Security Dropping Pledge of Secrecy for Workers

[Rose Siding]

Workers at the Department of Homeland Security will no longer be required to sign a controversial secrecy pledge prohibiting them from sharing sensitive but unclassified information with the public, DHS officials announced this week.

The three-page nondisclosure agreement, required since May for all 180,000 department workers and contractors, had been criticized by federal employee unions and government watchdog organizations. They called it an unprecedented clampdown on free-speech rights.

Jack Johnson, chief security officer at DHS, said in an interview yesterday that the agreements were always intended to be temporary until agency officials developed training for handling sensitive information.

"Was it perfect? -- no," Johnson said. "But it was decided that was an interim measure to ensure that employees had the appropriate amount of awareness as they were safeguarding this information. . . . Were they told specifically that it was going to be temporary? Probably not."

The form defined as "sensitive" any information that could "adversely affect the national interest or the conduct of federal programs" or violate a person's privacy -- a lower barrier than damaging national security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4959-2005Jan12.html

[denverbill]

1. It was intended to be temporary. Just til after the election.

God knows they didn't want anyone with any knowledge of the facts leaking info about Bush's failures prior to 9-11 or intelligence lapses about Iraq.

[NYC]

2. This is good news.

It isn't progress, but less "retrogress".

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. kick

[ohtransplant]

4. This is good news.

and a good example of how we must be vigilant in sniffing out these practices. Their new personnel system has a similar bad smell.

There's a lot more that stinks at DHS though. Lavish awards ceremonies, junkets, questionable relationships with lobbyists, etc. Where's their IG? Where are the whistle-blowers at DHS?