101st Congress, 2d Session House Document 101-203

VETO OF H.R. 20

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

HIS VETO OF H.R. 20, A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 5, UNITED STATES

CODE, TO RESTORE TO FEDERAL CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES THEIR

RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE VOLUNTARILY, AS PRIVATE CITIZENS,

IN THE POLITICAL PROCESSES OF THE NATION, TO PROTECT

SUCH EMPLOYEES FROM IMPROPER POLITICAL SOLICITATIONS,

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

TRANSMITTING

J u n e 18, 1990.—Ordered to be printed.

39-011

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON *. 1990
To the House of Representatives:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 20, the 

“Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1990/' This bill would alter 

unacceptably the provisions of Federal law, commonly known as 

the Hatch Act, that bar Federal employees from active participation in partisan politics.

As one who has devoted much of his life to public service, I take 

great pride in the integrity of our Federal work force. Thus, to protect Federal employees from political pressure and preserve the impartial, evenhanded conduct of Government business, I am obligated to disapprove H.R. 20.

Originally enacted in 1939 as a bulwark against political coercion, the Hatch Act has successfully insulated the Federal service 

from the undue political influence that would destroy its essential 

political neutrality. It has been manifestly successful over the 

years in shielding civil servants, and the programs they administer, 

from political exploitation and abuse. The Hatch Act has upheld 

the integrity of the civil service by assuring that Federal employees 

are hired and promoted based upon their qualifications and not 

their political loyalties. It also has assured that Federal programs 

are administered in a nonpartisan manner, which is critical to 

maintaining the public’s confidence and trust in the operations of 

Government.

H.R. 20 would effectively repeal the Hatch Act’s essential prohibitions on partisan political activity by Federal civil servants. It 

also would convert the present rule that partisan politicking by 

Federal civil servants is prohibited, into a presumption that such 

partisan campaigning should be encouraged.

Under this legislation, Federal employees would be able to participate actively in partisan political campaigns and hold official 

positions in political parties; actively endorse partisan political candidates in the public media; and solicit political contributions in 

most situations from other employees who are members of the 

same “employee labor organization” for that organization’s political action committee. The obvious result of the enactment of H.R. 

20 would be unstated but enormous pressure to participate in partisan political activity.

History shows that such a reversal in the role of partisan politics 

in the ethic of public service would inevitably lead to repoliticizing 

the Federal work force. The sanctions provided in the bill would 

add little if anything to the effectiveness of existing criminal prohibitions. Moreover, experience with enforcement of criminal anti-patronage laws shows that the Federal criminal justice process is illsuited to the task of protecting Federal employees from subtle political coercion. Public servants who are subjected to direct or indirect partisan political pressures understandably would often be reluctant to file criminal complaints against their superiors or peers,

(1)
2

possibly putting their livelihoods in jeopardy. They deserve better 

protection than that.

Overt coercion is difficult enough by itself to guard against and 

detect. The more subtle forms of coercion are almost impossible to 

regulate, especially when they arise in a climate in which the unspoken assumption is that political conformity is the route to 

achievement and security. Such a climate leads inexorably to 

subtle, self-imposed pressures on employees to conform, or appear 

to conform, to whatever political tendency will assure greater job 

security.

After all the debate, no real need to repeal the existing Hatch 

Act has been demonstrated. Under present law, the Hatch Act 

allows Federal employees to engage in a variety of forms of political expression. Only forms of active participation on behalf of partisan political causes and candidates are barred. The Supreme 

Court has twice determined that these limits on active partisan political activity are constitutional. These rules provide reasonable 

balance between participation in the political process by Federal 

civil servants and the need to protect them from harassment and 

coercion that would jeopardize the fair and impartial operation of 

the Government. H.R. 20 poses a grave threat to that delicate balance.

Indeed, the lack of any grass-roots clamor for repeal of the Hatch 

Act either now, or at any time during its 50-year existence, testifies 

to the support this statute has received within the ranks of the 

Federal civil service and among the general public.

I am firmly convinced that any appreciable lessening of the current protections afforded to Federal civil servants by the Hatch Act 

will lead to the repoliticization of the civil service and of the programs it administers. We cannot afford, in the final decade of this 

century, to embark on a retreat into the very worst aspects of 

public administration from the last century.

George Bush.

The White House, June 15, 1990.