FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE JANUARY 25TH, 2012 CONTACT: KEVIN ELKINS 1-718-983-5009 KEVINELKINZ@YAHOO.

COM STATEN ISLAND DEMOCRATS SLAMS GRIMM FOR SPONSORING ANTI-WHISTLEBLOWER LEGISLATION Congressmans bidding for big corporations weakens shareholders, whistleblowers, and law enforcements ability to combat fraud Staten Island, NY The Staten Island Democratic Party slammed Congressman Michael Grimms (NY-13) for introducing legislation that would devastate whistleblower policies enacted to protect whistleblowers and shareholders from corporate fraud. The legislation, H.R. 2483, would destroy an employees anonymity in reporting a companys fraudulent behavior, weaken law enforcements ability to protect shareholders, and discourage employees from reporting criminal activity. In fact, employees who report fraud would not even be protected from retaliation by their employers. The National Whistleblower Center called Congressman Grimms legislation an act of war on whistleblowers. Congressman Grimm has once again done the bidding for big corporations on the backs of American employees and consumers, said Kevin Elkins, the Staten Island Democratic Partys Deputy Executive Director. Grimm's actions on behalf of Wall Street border quid pro quo. Instead of working to combat fraud in the financial sector that got us into this mess, he wants to promote a culture of fraud, silence, and fear among employees who witness serious fraud violations. This puts all Americans at risk.

For more information on Congressman Grimms legislation that would decimate safeguards that were put in place to protect the American people from another meltdown, see the following list which was provided by the National Whistleblowers Center.
Gag orders legalized -- The bill permits companies to enforce, "any established employment agreements, workplace policies, or codes of conduct" regardless of the impact on the right of an employee to report corporate crimes. This means that companies can force employees to sign agreements forfeiting their whistleblower rights. Retaliation legalized -- "Any adverse action taken against a whistleblower for any violation of such agreements, policies, or codes shall not constitute retaliation" (emphasis added). Law enforcement crippled -- The Grimm Act requires the SEC to, "promptly notify any entity that is to be subject to [an investigation" before beginning an investigation. Tipping off companies suspected of violating the law allows the corporations to intimidate witnesses and tamper with evidence before the investigation begins. Anonymity destroyed -- The Grimm Act allows, and in most cases requires, the SEC to, "disclose to the employers audit committee such information provided by the whistleblower" This means that the SEC would not only be unable to guarantee confidentiality, but it would be required to turn whistleblowers over to the very corporations accused of wrongdoing. Accountability minimized -- The Dodd-Frank Act provides incentives for companies to selfreport violations, including reduced fines and penalties. The Grimm Act creates a gaping loophole, allowing companies to claim they self-reported even when a whistleblower makes a report to the SEC. This applies even if the company initially covered up problems and retaliated against the whistleblower. Whistleblowers disqualified -- The Dodd-Frank Act reasonably excludes persons found guilty of fraud from obtaining the benefits of the new SEC whistleblower program. However, the Grimm Act disqualifies employees who in any way "participated in" the violation. This means that lowand mid-level employees, such as a secretary who took a phone call or a clerk who made a photocopy, are excluded from the whistleblower program. This subtle-but-deliberate language would cut out the vast majority of whistleblowers from protection, as almost every whistleblower "participates" in the violations they uncover. Awards program broken -- The Grimm Act makes whistleblower awards discretionary, returning the SEC whistleblower program to its pre-Dodd Frank Act status. The old program was completely discredited by a 2010 report by the SEC Inspector General. This document reported that the SEC helped only five people and awarded only $159,537 during 20 years of operating a discretionary program. The report lamented that the discretionary program was, "not fundamentally well-designed to be successful" and made recommendations that were implemented by the Dodd-Frank Act. The Grimm Act turns back the clock.

###