| UUSC joins suit to protest 'anti-terrorist' rules |
|
|
|
UUSC withdrew from the CFC, a workplace-giving program, in protest of the new federal policy that requires participating organizations to certify they do not employ or provide funds to people or organizations identified on lengthy government lists as suspected terrorists. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, states that the policy is vague and misleading, that it violates the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and that the government did not follow appropriate procedures in creating it. The lawsuit argues that the policy is “a misguided, unduly burdensome process that is vulnerable to abuse for political purposes. It leaves the door wide open for politicians and bureaucrats to misuse the lists to retaliate against political opponents, since there is no accountability or oversight regarding who is put on the blacklists.” For many years, UUSC has been a member of Global Impact, a coalition of 50 of the most respected international charities. It is through Global Impact that UUSC has established its connection to the Combined Federal Campaign and other workplace giving programs. UUSC had anticipated receiving nearly $125,000 from its participation in Global Impact this coming fiscal year, approximately $80,000 of which is in jeopardy because of our decision to withdraw from the Combined Federal Campaign. UUSC has received nearly $1 million from Global Impact over the past 10 years. The Office of Personnel Management requires that organizations review the following two lists: Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control Specially Designated Nationals List and U.S. Department of State Terrorist Exclusion List. The method by which the screening lists are developed is very questionable. The lists contain many common names that can cause confusion. The lawsuit articulates the discomfiting questions that organizations face amid the confusion and the lack of guidance: “If a participant organization with an employee named Steven Smith were to discover that the name ‘Steven Smith' appeared on one of the specified lists, must it fire the employee within 15 days in order to remain eligible for participation in the CFC? Are there steps that the participant organization must or may take to determine whether its employee is the same person as the person whose name is on the list? If the participating organization had an employee named Steven A. Smith, and discovered that the name ‘Steve Smith' or ‘Steven B. Smith' appeared on one of the lists, would the organization be required to do anything? If so, what?” In addition, there is no clear, established method by which a person can appeal his or her listing. A case in point, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., was recently prevented from boarding a plane because his name appeared on the federal “no fly” list of suspected terrorists. The senator sought help from Tom Ridge, then the director of the Department of Homeland Security, but it still took several weeks for his name to be removed from the list. We can only imagine what a baffling and hopeless process those of us of lesser stature would follow if we were “matched” with a name on a list. UUSC does not condone any human rights abuse, including actions defined by the International Criminal Court or other international institutions as acts of international terrorism. Terrorism is antithetical to our mission. However, these lists bring to mind the government's anti-communist witch-hunts of the late 1940s and 1950s when people's names were placed on “blacklists” and their reputations and livelihoods were often shattered without being given a chance to defend themselves. In withdrawing from the federal giving program, UUSC hopes to ensure that the lessons learned by its forebears during the era of the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy are not forgotten. Posted Jan. 31, 2005 Updated Mar. 22, 2005 |
Federal Employees |
|
