NASA Employees Can Now Invoke The Hansen Precedent

Heh. With the new Administration now in place, I'm sure he can speak out against global warming. But let a NASA employee publicly promote pro-life or tax breaks and see how far he/she gets. ;-)

This publicity seeking propagandist continues to embarrass the agency. If there were any backbone at NASA, this guy would have been fired when he traveled to England to testify in support of a group of eco-terrorists. Now he is bringing that sordid strategy to the homeland.

I'm sure many of our posters will try to find words to defend Hansen, but advocating civil disobedience is indefensible, even if his climate conjectures prove to be correct.

I think you're over-reacting. If Hansen were engaged in overt partisan political activity ("I'm the famous Jim Hansen, from NASA! And I urge you to vote for the only honest candidate in this election, James Smith, a Libertarian, for senator!" he'd likely be violating the Hatch Act.

But he isn't. He's a US ciitizen with a cause to push and enough knowledge to merit attention. He's got the same basic rights to speak and demonstrate as say a parent who wants to stop measles vaccinations in the belief that they cause autism. You may not like this. You may think he's poisoning the well for every other NASA employee with a grievance. You may think he's linking NASA and anthropogenic global warming in the eyes of many voters and that this is undesirable for various reasons. All of which may be true. But as a ctizen, Hansen has the right to do what he is doing, even if it proves embarrassing to NASA, to him, and to the rest of us.

There are surely other, better, deader horses to beat on.

-ms

Northcross:

You said it as well as it could be said.

A response to Mr. Shupp.

I respectfully disagree. The event that triggered this debate is advertised as "civil disobedience". That sounds noble, but is in reality nothing other than deliberately breaking the law. Recent activity by Dr. Hansen proves that he believes his cause is above the law; that is dangerous territory, because having crossed that line, any act may be justified. Dr. Hansen has a level of notoriety that does not allow him to participate without it embarrassing NASA. The grown-ups need to step in.

Mr. Shupp has it absolutely right. Hansen is fully allowed under the laws of the United States to say whatever he wants as a private citizen. If you don't like it then write your representative and try to convince them that a government civil servant should not be allowed to speak their mind as a private citizen. I would guess they would tell you to dwell on the system once called The Soviet Union, since that is what other people are advocating here.

"Grown ups" understand the meaning of "civil disobedience." Children run around bloviating on blogs. Hey, I've still got a few seats open on the Orbiting Idiot Observatory!

When NASA was originally structured, it had, and has, the unique distinction of allowing employees to speak to the press without going through their boss or the PAO. I doubt if this is what they had in mind, but it is a rule which was in existence back when Hansen was still doing science.

As noted above, the Hatch Act (amended in 1993) covers this in some detail. No one needs a "Hansen precedent" to justify such actions.

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm

Hansen has some lines he can't cross, and I'm sure his lawyers have considered the Hatch Act in advising him. All federal employees should familiarize themselves with this legislation that protects their rights.

Not clear what activity Hansen did that is truly illegal. "Urging Americans to take a stand" is certainly not.

Hmm, that's the problem with Fox News, they don't really care much about getting facts straight.

Reading through the article in detail, I don't see that Hansen actually did advocate civil disobedience. Read the article again and this time only pay attention to the direct quotes from Hansen-- he says citizens should "take a stand," but says nothing about civil disobedience.

Oh, and I notice that the Fox people call John Theon "one of Hansen's former supervisors." That statement has been throughly refuted: Theon at no time was Hansen's supervisor. Hansen is and was at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)-- Theon was never in his line of management.
(In the original article, Theon had said he was "effectively" Hansen's supervisor, where "effectively" meant "not exactly." Funny how this "effectively" got lost in the blogosphere, and on Fox.)

Personally, I think Hansen would do better if he'd leave NASA and speak on his own. However, I have to agree with the quote from the NASA spokesman, as to what he does as a private citizen on his own time, as long as it's not partisan activity (which is forbidden by the Hatch act), "You don't give up your rights to free speech by becoming a government employee."

"Civil disobedience?" You've got to be kidding. If it were "disobedience," there would be some type of rule against it, right?

"The right of people to peaceably assemble." I think it's in the constitution.

I agree with Northcross. If a federal employee is allowed to call for any breaking of any laws, then what has the government become other than a job from which people preach to others about how their lives need to be controlled by those with power?

The law is the law. Hansen is more than a disgrace to NASA. He is a disgrace to law-abiding citizens everywhere. I vote for Hansen as the 3rd Antichrist.

"Dr. Hansen has a level of notoriety that does not allow him to participate without it embarrassing NASA. The grown-ups need to step in."

The grown0ups cannot step in lest they be accused of silencing a global warming scientist. Hansen will have to clearly violate the Hatch Act for anything to happen (and maybe still not then). He came somewhat close in 2004.

It is interesting that Hansen, by making himself such a celebrity, has created a politically correct shield around himself. It's not clear that this would apply to, for example, an Ares 1 critic inside KSC or JSC.

We should also note that nothing like this exists in the private sector. Not only can you not publicly disagree with your employer, but heaven forbid you say anything that might run afoul with your customer.

In the immediately previous regime, that included AIAA conference papers pulled from presentation/publication at the last minute, not because they criticized ESAS, but because they hypothesized that something other than Ares 1 could carry a human being, even for private customers.

This particular instance of protest and potential civil disobedience does not make a lot of sense to me. Is the short term goal to shut down this particular power plant? I expect the folks living in DC would have something to say about that, especially in February. Is the long-term goal to shut down all coal-burning plants?

Unfortunately, there is currently no viable alternative to maintaining acceptable levels of power generation in this country. In the future? Conservation + solar + wind simply do not add up to the megawattage an industrialized country needs.

If Hansen and his supporters were serious, they would call on the R&D necessary for reliable, safe nuclear power generation and waste storage - truly the only near-term "green" solution that does not involve the US becoming a third-word country.

Northcross says "... advocating civil disobedience is indefensible..."

You must be joking. Not only is civil disobedience defensible, it might turn out to be the only way to affect real change in an otherwise broken process (Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat and ... oh no ... she **broke the law**, a law that needed to be broken before it could be fixed).

Hansen should leave NASA. He is the poster child for what is wrong at NASA. They are bottom feeding for dollars, and using political propaganda to do it.

People are growing tired of Hansen and NASA. They should clean house before it's to late.

Northcross says "... advocating civil disobedience is indefensible..."

So what you are saying is 'The Constitution of the United States of America is indefensible'. Bravo. Heckava job.

"If Hansen and his supporters were serious, they would call on the R&D necessary for reliable, safe nuclear power generation and waste storage - truly the only near-term "green" solution that does not involve the US becoming a third-word country."

Um, that's precisely what Hansen called for:

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081121_Obama.pdf

"Prompt development of safe 4th generation nuclear power is needed to allow energy options for countries such as China and India, and for countries in the West in the event that energy efficiency and renewable energies cannot satisfy all energy requirements.

Deployment of 4th generation nuclear power can be hastened via cooperation with China, India and other countries. It is essential that dogmatic ‘environmentalists’, opposed to all nuclear power, not be allowed to delay the R&D on 4th generation nuclear power. Thus it is desirable to avoid appointing to key energy positions persons with a history of opposition to nuclear power development. Of course, deployment of nuclear power is an option, and some countries or regions may prefer to rely entirely on other energy sources, but opponents of nuclear power should not be allowed to deny that option to everyone."

It's not so much that private sector employees can't criticize their employers. Just that private employers have the right to fire most employees whenever they want.

Civil servants were protected from this by law to reign in the "spoils system" (i.e. new administrations firing and hiring en mass to reward their party members). This reform (enacted at least a century ago I believe) has its pros and cons, but, overall, it means that it is very hard to fire a civil servant for anything including incompetence. It is also one of the reasons that government bureaucracies are very hard to change or reduce. This is also the reason that many (if not most) federal government employees are actually private contractors. They have no such protections.

I strongly doubt that Hansen would be so outspoken if he were a contractor. For better or for worst, he would probably be just another anonymous source.

Hansen needs to go do his true passion as an alarmist activist. Leave NASA and work for Gore or something.
But obviously his title at NASA gives him "street cred".
Hansen is about Hansen. Pretty obvious.

Here is a better act of civil disobedience: Cutt off all the sill emissions crap on your vehicles. Poor folks can't afford catyltic converters worth more than the car.

Hansen isn't going to be happy until he puts SUV owners in concentration camps.

We need more power plants not less.

Hansen reminds me of the green who wanted to nix the new Heathrow runway. As if having airplanes endlessly circle due to lack of infrastructure doesn't pollute.

Hansen's mouth the biggest source of hot air there is. Too bad he can't make like William Proxmire.

Hansen isn't going to be happy until he puts SUV owners in concentration camps.

That's not true. It's easier to demonize someone when you make up stuff about them then hate them for it.

We need more power plants not less.

Hansen would not disagree. Read his writings. He would just say that those plants need to avoid emitting carbon and we need to replace the ones we've already got. He is in favor of advanced nuclear reactors and advocated strongly for them. He probably pissed-off a lot of environmentalists by saying that.

People are growing tired of Hansen and NASA.

I think you are trying to say is 'Josh' is growing tired of Hansen and NASA. 'America' is now a nation where 'people' are allowed to speak for themselves. Hansen is doing just that.

Funny no one has used the "Hansen precedent" to call Griffin's bs about his Aries rockets being "twice as safe" as any current rocket. Even his own charts say that's a lie, but no one calls him on it. Waiting to see which way the political winds blow, maybe? No, certainly not. NASA scientists have complete autonomy, right?