Richard Sternberg Affair

Steve Reuland at the Panda’s Thumb points out how egregiously bad the OSC has become under Special Counsel Scott Bloch, and how that led to its poor handling of the Sternberg affair: Bloch is a far-right wing activist and a notorious homophobe. Upon taking office Bloch immediately removed references to sexual orientation discrimination from the OSC website. Bloch has indicated that he will not protect gays from discrimination in contradiction of White House policy. Bloch is alleged to have used the OSC for partisan political purposes by ignoring claims made against Republicans while vigorously pursuing complaints lodged against Democrats. Bloch doubled the number of political appointees in the OSC, giving high paying salaries to many of his friends and fellow right-wing activists who have no relevant experience. He has simultaneously eviscerated the OSC’s professional staff, much of whom has either been fired for not relocating on short notice or resigned in frustration. James McVay, who wrote the preliminary report concerning Sternberg, is one of Bloch’s more controversial political appointees. He has no experience in employment law, whistleblower law, or federal-sector work. Many hundreds of meritorious cases, which by all accounts should have been investigated, were dismissed without investigation by Bloch’s office. Meanwhile, matters over which OSC has no jurisdiction have been pursued rigorously. (Sound familiar?) According to the OSC’s own polling, Federal employees are extremely dissatisfied with the work being done by the OSC, and effectively no whistleblowers have received relief as a result of the complaints they filed. When complaints were made about Bloch’s behavior and mistreatment of the staff, Bloch not only dismissed the complaints, he allegedly retaliated against the people who made them and issued a gag order preventing the OSC staff from speaking to anyone outside of the agency. Ironically, it is precisely this type of retaliation and intimidation of whistleblowers that the OSC is tasked with investigating. As a result of OSC failing to discharge its duties and taking revenge on aggrieved staff, former staff members and numerous whistleblower protection groups have filed a complaint with the Office of Personnel Management, which has launched an investigation (still on-going, as far as I can tell). Additionally, two Senate committees were forced to hold hearings concerning Bloch’s behavior. It almost couldn’t get worse. There is a long and sordid history since Bloch took over the OSC of cronyism, political bias, shirking, and unfair treatment of staff. Scott Bloch makes former FEMA director Michael Brown look like a brilliant leader and seasoned professional by comparison. ...

Ed Brayton reviews the new report to Rep. Mark Souder which argues that Richard Sternberg of the Smithsonian Institution, former editor of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, was a victim of persecution. The evidence in the report itself fails to support that conclusion, which appears to be politically motivated. Brayton finds that: 1. What little ill-treatment Sternberg may have gotten (in fact, all of the comments expressing distrust and anger at Sternberg and urging his dismissal were made not to his face, but in private emails that he never saw) was largely self-inflicted, the result not only of his violation of procedures in regard to the Meyer paper, but in regard to several other instances of professional malfeasance and prior examples of poor judgement as PBSW editor. ...

Daniel Morgan has posted a response to Jonathan Witt’s criticism of his summary of the Sternberg Saga. Morgan has admitted where he’s made mistakes–can Witt and the Discovery Institute give that a try? Andrew Staroscik (2006-12-09): Hi Jim,just stopping by to thank you for blogging. I never find much need to comment here because I generally agree with your views but I enjoy stopping byandrew ...

Daniel Morgan has assembled a very nice list of five “lingering questions” for Richard Sternberg to answer regarding his publication of Stephen Meyer’s paper supporting intelligent design. It would be nice to see them answered, but I won’t hold my breath.

Daniel Morgan has put together a good summary of the facts and myths of the Richard Sternberg saga. Sternberg was the editor of The Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, the journal which published Stephen Meyer’s paper on intelligent design (“The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories”). Historical Comments nsfl (2006-12-09): I appreciate the promo. I am going to be trying to find out just who those three reviewers of Meyer's paper were from the PBWS. I think with some smart reporting, I can pull it off. I hope to break the story. I have read some of your Biblical criticism and appreciate your scholarship. ...