A Period of Reprimand: Examining the Congressional Historic Session
This past year in the House of Representatives has been one for the annals of history. Lawmakers broke benchmarks for the longest floor speech and the longest vote, and oversaw the longest cessation of government operations.
Additionally, they spent a great deal of effort attempting to discipline colleagues through disciplinary motions, the chamber's primary tool for rebuke. A search of legislative databases shows no fewer than 17 attempts since the year's beginning to formally disapprove of a member via a formal condemnation or a more informal statement of disapproval.
If a censure measure passes by a most members, the subject of the resolution must stand before the House dais as the presiding officer notifies them that they have been punished for their improper actions. Those are the extent of the actual penalties – they keep their position and their right to vote, but likely harming their public image.
Though almost none of these gained approval, the flurry grew so severe that by the year's close, a bipartisan group suggested altering the rules to make it more difficult for condemnation motions to pass. “What if we stop the circular firing squad in the House?” questioned one of the bill's sponsors.
Below is an examination at the alleged misdeeds at the heart of the flood of condemnation attempts:
Labeling a Figure a ‘Insult’
The earliest censure attempt of the year was introduced in February aimed at a member of the Democratic Party lawmaker. The measure alleged the member of “inciting violence against a designated official”. It pointed to an event during a congressional hearing where the lawmaker uttered a crude remark about the individual in a somewhat indirect fashion, as well as a later statement about employing “physical force” to a partisan battle. The House ultimately did not voting on it.
Yelling at the Commander-in-Chief
During an address to a gathering of Congress, a Democrat representative disrupted the president, yelling “he lacks a popular mandate” while pumping a walking cane in the air. The presiding officer ordered the member escorted out. In the aftermath, multiple reprimand motions were introduced against the disruptor. Shortly thereafter, the legislature voted for one of these motions, with some members of the representative's party voting in favor alongside the other side. This remains the single reprimand to be successfully passed during the year.
Resorting to Derogatory Characterizations
Just days after the earlier reprimand, a motion was proposed against a congressperson for statements made about the disruptive colleague. The proposal charged the member of using language that was “offensive, belittling, and racially charged toward another fellow lawmaker”. This proposal did not receive a consideration by the entire body.
Making light of a Governor's Disability
One more condemnation attempt focused on alleged disrespectful remarks made by a representative about a chief executive who is a wheelchair user. The comments were viewed as profoundly inappropriate and resulted in a formal condemnation that also did not come up a vote.
Confrontation with Federal Agents
A number of condemnation motions were filed against a lawmaker after she was taken into custody and indicted following an confrontation outside a federal detention facility. One of these motions was considered in the House, but was blocked thanks to a alliance of one party and a few of members from the party that introduced it. This represented the beginning of multiple times where representatives voted across the aisle to stop a condemnation effort.
Allegations of Discrimination
A lawmaker was the focus of separate reprimand efforts over the summer for bigoted remarks made about public figures of color. The statements included offensive monikers and calls for removal from the country. Neither measures was brought to the floor.
Questioning a Late Activist Legacy
In the following period of a well-known activist's death, a censure resolution was introduced against a congresswoman for comments that were considered “derogatory” toward the activist and those grieving for him. Once again, the resolution was blocked with the help of a handful of members from the party that introduced it. One of those who blocked the censure commented that the correct approach to “objectionable comments” is not censorship, but “further debate”.
‘Subverting the Process of a Democratic Election’
The flurry of reprimands peaked late in the year when, in the middle of a pivotal vote, a congresswoman took to the chamber to accuse that a fellow Democrat had orchestrated his retirement in a manner to practically guarantee a chosen replacement would be elected to replace him. The disapproval motion voiced condemnation of this conduct for “subverting the system of a democratic election”. This measure generated controversy but ultimately passed, with backing from the majority of the other party and a significant number of members from the complainant's political affiliation.
Communicating via Text Jeffrey Epstein
As legislation to mandate the publication of sealed records related to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein was close to approval, it was revealed that a lawmaker had texted with Epstein during a official proceeding. Capitalizing on the situation, political opponents lawmakers proposed a reprimand motion against the delegate. This measure failed thanks to united opposition from the lawmaker's party and the votes of a small number of lawmakers from the resolution's authors.
A Wide Range of Supposed Wrongdoings
One lawmaker was the subject of several different condemnation motions throughout the year, which resulted in {allegations|claims
