|
 After
securing a legal victory against vague and misleading new
“anti-terrorist” regulations, UUSC reentered the Combined Federal
Campaign (CFC) in the fall of 2006.
UUSC’s withdrawal from the CFC resulted in a loss of approximately
$80,000 over the course of 2005. Many federal employees around the
country were unable to give paycheck contributions to UUSC over that
year.
In November 2004, UUSC joined more than a dozen organizations,
including the American Civil Liberties Union and Amnesty
International USA, in withdrawing from the CFC and pursuing legal
action in response to new list-checking requirements. A change in
federal policy required participating organizations to certify that
they do not employ or provide funds to people or organizations
identified on lengthy government lists as suspected terrorists.
The lawsuit, filed on November 10, 2004, in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia, stated that the policy was vague and
misleading, that it violated the First and Fifth Amendments to the
U.S. Constitution, and that the government did not follow
appropriate procedures in creating it.
The lawsuit argued that the policy was “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.”
The outcome of the lawsuit was a new policy published in the Federal
Register that provided greater clarity and privacy guarantees and
does not mandate list-checking.
A major fault of the screening lists was the mystery surrounding
their creation and maintenance. The lists contain many common names
that can cause confusion. The lawsuit articulated 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?”
The lists brought to mind the government’s anticommunist 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 their being given a chance to defend themselves.
In withdrawing from the federal giving program, UUSC hoped to ensure
that the lessons learned by its forebears during the era of the late
Sen. Joseph McCarthy were not forgotten.
UUSC does not condone any human rights abuse, including actions
defined by the International Criminal Court and other institutions
as acts of international terrorism. Terrorism is antithetical to our
mission.
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.
|
|
