Rep. Holt Adds Funds for IC Whistleblower Support
Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ) devised an amendment to the 2015 Defense Appropriations bill that would earmark $2 million for investigation of intelligence community whistleblower complaints. The amendment was approved by the House of Representatives on June 18.
The money was taken from the intelligence community management account and allocated to the IC whistleblowing and source protection directorate within the IC Office of the Inspector General.
“Currently, this directorate is literally a one-man operation,”Rep. Holt explained on the House floor.
“Given the fact that there are tens of thousands of Federal employees and contractor who work for the intelligence community elements, it is not realistic to expect the IC inspector general to be able to receive and investigate effectively any and all valid complaints from conscientious internal whistleblowers through a single investigator, no matter how talented that investigator may be.”
“This $2 million reallocation of funds will help the community whistleblowing and source protection directorate hire more needed additional investigators and support staff and will fund outreach and education efforts across the intelligence community,” Rep. Holt said. “This amendment will ensure that they have resources to respond to legitimate concerns.”
The amendment was approved on a voice vote.
Rep. Holt stressed the need for improved protections for intelligence agency whistleblowers in a May 30 op-ed we co-authored on MSNBC.com.
Congress should establish a Modeling, Analysis, and Technical Talent for Energy Regulation Hub (MATTER Hub) within the Department of Energy (DOE).
Western states functionally manage trillions in global climate risk (permafrost, forest carbon, etc.) and can do so in ways that drive state economic development.
Implementation will not be easy. Several of the plan’s critical strategies challenge established utility business models.
AI’s high-stakes outputs directly shape American economic, industrial, and technological outcomes. They must not be accepted entirely on the basis of institutional faith rather than verifiable evidence.