By Matt Underwood Watchdog group files Hatch Act complaint over federal agencies blaming Democrats for shutdown.
Here’s the situation: a watchdog group has filed a Hatch Act complaint because they believe federal agencies are unfairly blaming Democrats for the government shutdown. It seems like a familiar tune, doesn’t it? The Hatch Act is meant to keep federal employees from playing partisan politics. The general consensus is that the Hatch Act is a law that’s difficult to enforce, especially when those in power are the ones who would need to enforce it. There’s a real frustration here, a sense of the rules not mattering.
The process for dealing with Hatch Act violations involves a few different organizations, all under the president’s control. They decide if a violation occurred and recommend disciplinary action. But here’s the catch: the president isn’t obligated to follow those recommendations. We’ve seen this play out before, particularly with the previous administration. Even when violations were verified, the response was essentially, “Cool, but it benefited me, so no punishment.” It’s a toothless system, at least when the person in the White House isn’t playing by the rules. It’s like a never-ending game of “stop hitting yourself.”
The core of the problem is that the person who can declare a Hatch Act violation has the power to effectively ignore the consequences. It’s not about the law; it’s about the power dynamic. The irony is thick, especially when you remember the past. It is really quite sickening when there are never any consequences. This really brings to mind the Goya situation, which was a direct violation of U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, another thing they don’t seem to care about.
The sentiment is a mix of outrage and resignation. There’s a feeling that these complaints will just be tossed aside. There is a clear understanding that the current environment doesn’t seem to value the law anymore, and democracy isn’t fundamentally intact. Instead, it feels as if one side plays by the rules and the other is living in some kind of dystopian reality. It is a frustrating thing to witness.
The Hatch Act does nothing, and they know this. The only thing they have is making a record of the lawlessness. Even then, what can this record realistically accomplish? We’re almost a decade into this, and the results are… well, not great. In the past, violations have happened with little consequence. There’s always something blocking accountability and justice for the political class. On one side, we have laws and rights. On the other side, there’s a lack of jurisdiction, no enforcement, and no separation between those making the judgments and those being judged.
The idea is that there will be a paper trail, and this can eventually be used when they are out of office. There is a call to make sure you submit complaints about people who are violating the law. If there were a remedy to the corruption, it would be impeachment. But, as long as congress refuses to do this, these people have no accountability.
The Hatch Act generally prohibits executive branch employees, excluding the president and vice president, from engaging in certain political activities. The problem isn’t a misunderstanding of the law. The problem is that the system isn’t designed to protect us, and that’s the point. It has always been designed to crush the people and protect those in power.
There’s a definite sense of pessimism. The question is whether anything will happen. “If” and “can” carry a lot of weight here. “The Hatch Act does not only apply to election campaigns.”
It’s easy to understand the sentiment when you have a system that refuses to take action against those who are in power. People just want to ensure that they do not lose their apartments and their cars. There’s an understanding that there will be no accountability. The general sentiment is that if the other side ever leaves power, the laws will finally have teeth. The response by the opposition seems to always be: “Let’s just move forward and put it behind us”.