Members search for end to House censure battle

WASHINGTON — The House has a lot on its plate after reopening the government — including bad blood.

After a week of censure threats on the floor, many are grumbling about wasted time and an endless cycle of revenge. But that cycle could be hard to break, as members increasingly turn to punishment tools they once used only sparingly.

“It’s become a political baseball bat, and not a way to seriously discipline members for misconduct. And it’s making it meaningless,” said Rep. Jennifer McClellan, D-Va.

Asked about the censure spree, Congress’ newest member said it made for a strange first few days at work. “It feels a little bit chaotic, like a high school cafeteria, or like some sort of soap opera,” said Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz.

Some are floating concrete ideas to stop the tit for tat. Reps. Donald S. Beyer Jr., D-Va., and Don Bacon, R-Neb., unveiled a resolution on Friday that would require 60% of House members to agree to censuring or reprimanding a colleague, instead of a simple majority. The rules change would also apply when booting members off their committees.

The higher threshold would discourage lawmakers from forcing overly partisan votes to scold their colleagues, they said. An even higher threshold of two-thirds is already required to expel a member from the chamber, the most serious penalty the House can inflict on its own.

Beyer and Bacon’s resolution has 29 additional co-sponsors so far, according to a statement, spanning the political spectrum.

Supporters point to a growing list of knuckle-rapping attempts, including five this week alone. Del. Stacey Plaskett, D-V.I., and Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., were targeted for censure, though the efforts were unsuccessful. The House formally disapproved of Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García’s conduct. And GOP Rep. Greg Steube first threatened to censure, then expel, a fellow Floridian, Democratic Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick.

The fad now seems to be “Well, they did one, we’re going to do one,” said Rep. Joseph D. Morelle, D-N.Y. “And it’s taking up more and more time when we have serious problems that we’re not addressing.”

The Constitution gives Congress wide latitude to determine what counts as good behavior for its members and punish them for anything “disorderly.” But some object to the current trend of bypassing the House Ethics Committee and trying to quickly shame members by bringing privileged resolutions to the floor.

The alleged misdeeds of members vary widely. García, for one, is said to have timed his retirement announcement to pave the way for his chief of staff to inherit his seat. Plaskett is said to have texted with now-deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing in 2019. Mills has been dogged by suggestions of stolen valor and allegations that he threatened to circulate sexual images of an ex, among other things. Cherfilus-McCormick was indicted this week for allegedly funneling Federal Emergency Management Agency overpayment funds toward her congressional campaign.

“There’s bad behavior up here that people do, but we’re not the deacons of the church,” said Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va. “There are a lot of due process issues. There’s a lot of tit for tat.”

The best way to keep House members in line, some argue, is to encourage a robust internal ethics process that relies on evidence, nonpartisan investigation and careful deliberation, instead of outrage in the moment.

But in a highly polarized Congress, that ideal could be hard to reach. Even before this week, efforts to call out colleagues were on the rise. Four different lawmakers have been censured since June 2023 — more than in the 20 years prior to that combined.

Reprimands and censures essentially amount to public shaming. Censured members are often required to stand on the floor to hear the scolding, and according to rules set by each party, committee chairs may have to step aside from their positions. But that’s about it.

Sarah Binder, a professor of political science at George Washington University, said forcing a vote on a censure resolution may appeal to rank-and-file members because it’s one of the few things they can do on their own.

“You don’t have a lot of control, or any, as a rank-and-file member, but this is open to you,” she said.

Any member can go to the floor and raise a question of the privileges of the House, a category that includes matters related to conduct, and sometimes the goal is simply to make a point.

“I don’t know that an ethics process is what many of these members are seeking,” Binder said. “I think what they’re seeking is an easy, quicker fix and an effort to take a position.”

That dynamic was on display this week in the House, as rank-and-file members railed against the powers-that-be.

“This place is dirty. It’s corrupt, and I’m tired of these elite politicians getting away with their scandalous affairs,” said Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., who backed a push led by Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., to censure Mills, a fellow Republican.

Mace accused leaders in both parties of cutting “backroom deals” after Democrats backed off their own threat to censure Mills, apparently using it as a “bargaining chip” to protect members of their own caucus.

Asked about the censure attempts at a news conference this week, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said, “Democrats are not going to unilaterally disarm, and there’s a long list of Republicans worthy of censure.”

“Not enough time in the legislative calendar if Republicans want to go down this road of censuring members or throwing them off committees,” he added, appearing to acknowledge a retaliatory cycle.

In the case of Mills, who has denied the allegations against him, the matter is already before the House Ethics Committee, which has been probing him since last year and on Wednesday announced it had formed an investigative subcommittee.

The typically secretive and slow-moving Ethics Committee is charged with investigating misconduct, with an equal number of Republicans and Democrats on the panel. It came under scrutiny last year over its handling of its probe into former Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, sitting on a report for months as other members tried to legislatively wrest it from their hands and make it public.

The committee ultimately released a report in December saying it found “substantial evidence” that Gaetz solicited prostitutes, used illicit drugs like cocaine and ecstasy and may have violated Florida’s statutory rape law.

While the Ethics Committee does not publicly comment on ongoing investigations, some members defended its pace and process this week.

“If people decide they want to bring things to the floor, that’s their prerogative, but certainly we take our work very seriously, and I know the group cares deeply about making sure we have good outcomes that are fair,” said freshman Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., who sits on the panel.

“I think being censured is still a big deal,” he added. “I know some people are concerned that it’s losing its meaning because of so many censures, and certainly that’s fair. But it’s still a big deal to me.”