The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is taking steps to fire an employee who warned in a television interview that the federal shutdown would have negative impacts on those who rely on the government for food assistance. The employee, Ellen Mei, appeared on MSNBC on Oct. 2, saying she was “anxious” about the shutdown’s potential impacts.
According to documents first reviewed by The Washington Post, USDA officials informed Mei the day after the interview aired that they had begun the process to remove her. The department accused Mei, a program specialist at the Food and Nutrition Service, of discussing USDA programs without authorization.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
The Post said the USDA did not respond to a request for comment.
What did Mei say?
During her four-minute interview, Mei said that she and her co-workers were “anxious because we’re hearing about the risk potentials and office closures that are looming over USDA as this shutdown kind of drags on,” according to The Post.
She also said that the federal government would fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in October, but things could “get a little dicey if this drags on into November.”
The information Mei shared with MSNBC was already publicly available. Two days before the interview, the USDA released a memo saying that SNAP funding would lapse because of the shutdown. It also said that the Office of Management and Budget would use contingency reserves to pay for SNAP in October. However, the USDA removed the memo from its website in late October.
Can Mei appeal her removal?
Mei, who is also the president of the National Treasury Employees Union’s Chapter 255, has 30 days after the government’s reopening to contest her firing. She and other unionized federal workers plan to appear at a news conference on Friday to protest the decision.
She said the department had no justification in retaliating against her.
“As I was and have been speaking in my personal capacity and in my capacity as union representative, I am not required to ask for permission to speak on behalf of me or my co-workers,” Mei told The Post. “Especially speaking on behalf of my co-workers as the union president, that is a right that I am granted by the Federal Labor Management statute. So I do not need to ask for permission.”
Debra D’Agostino, a federal employment attorney, told The Post that Mei could have a strong case against the department’s decision. She said the First Amendment and the Whistleblower Protection Act protect Mei’s speech.
The Supreme Court has previously ruled in favor of a Transportation Security Administration employee whom the government accused of revealing “sensitive security information” to a reporter. The court decided that the Whistleblower Protection Act covered the staffer’s activity, since it allows federal workers to report misconduct or anything that poses a substantial danger to public health and safety.
“Given that we’re talking about food for Americans, that is a pretty clean argument about a specific danger to public health,” D’Agostino told The Post. “I think [Mei] has a very clean argument; this is a protected disclosure.”
