A Year of Reprimand: Assessing the House's Record-Breaking Year
The last twelve months in the U.S. House has gone down in the historical record. Legislators set records for the longest floor speech and the longest vote, and presided over the lengthiest government shutdown.
Furthermore, legislators spent a great deal of effort trying to reprimand each other through formal condemnation measures, the House's formal procedure for disciplinary action. A review of congressional records indicates no fewer than 17 attempts since the January to condemn another lawmaker via a reprimand or a less formal disapproval resolution.
When a condemnation resolution is approved by a simple majority of the House, the member in question must stand before the speaker's podium as the speaker informs them that they have been punished for their improper actions. Those are the extent of the actual penalties – they retain their seat and their voting privileges, but potentially damaging their reputation.
While nearly all of these gained approval, the barrage intensified so severe that by the conclusion of the session, a group of lawmakers from both parties introduced a bill to modify the standing orders to create a higher bar for condemnation motions to pass. “How about we halt the mutual recrimination in the House?” inquired one of the proposal's backers.
What follows is a review at the alleged misdeeds at the center of the flood of condemnation attempts:
Calling a Individual a ‘Offensive Name’
The initial reprimand motion of the year occurred during February targeting a member of the Democratic Party representative. The proposal accused the member of “encouraging hostility against a designated official”. It cited an event during a committee hearing where the lawmaker uttered a crude remark about the individual in a particularly creative fashion, as well as a subsequent comment about using “physical force” to a ideological conflict. The House did not end up voting on it.
Yelling at the President
In the midst of a presentation to a joint session of Congress, a Democrat representative heckled the president, shouting “he lacks a popular mandate” while waving a cane in the air. The Speaker of the House directed that the congressperson escorted out. In the aftermath, a number of condemnation resolutions were filed targeting him. Two days later, the chamber approved one of these measures, with several members of the disruptor's own party supporting it alongside the opposing party. This remains the only censure to be successfully passed during the year.
Using Racial Stereotypes
A mere few days after the aforementioned condemnation, a resolution was proposed aiming at a congressperson for remarks made about the disruptive colleague. The proposal accused the member of using language that was “insulting, demeaning, and bigoted toward another fellow lawmaker”. This resolution was not a vote on the House floor.
Making light of a Governor's Disability
One more condemnation attempt centered on alleged derogatory comments made by a lawmaker about a governor who is a wheelchair user. The comments were viewed as highly offensive and led to a formal condemnation that also was not brought to a full chamber decision.
Altercation with Immigration Authorities
A number of condemnation motions were filed against a lawmaker after she was taken into custody and indicted following an incident outside a immigration detention center. One of these resolutions was considered in the chamber, but was killed thanks to a combination of lawmakers from the other side and a small group of representatives from the resolution's party of origin. This marked the first of several instances where members defied party loyalty to block a censure attempt.
Accusations of Bigotry
A representative was the subject of separate reprimand efforts over the warmer months for offensive statements made about public figures of color. The statements included derogatory nicknames and calls for deportation. Neither proposals was brought to the floor.
Questioning a Deceased Figure Actions
In the wake of a controversial activist's death, a reprimand proposal was filed against a lawmaker for statements that were deemed “derogatory” toward the deceased individual and those mourning him. For another time, the resolution was blocked with the help of a few of members from the resolution's originating party. One of those who voted against the censure commented that the correct approach to “reprehensible speech” is not punishment, but “additional dialogue”.
‘Compromising the Process of a Free and Fair Election’
The barrage of condemnations culminated late in the year when, during a crucial legislative action, a congresswoman took to the chamber to accuse that a colleague had orchestrated his retirement in a manner to guarantee a chosen replacement would be win his congressional seat. The measure voiced condemnation of this action for “undermining the process of a open electoral contest”. This resolution generated controversy but ended up being approved, with backing from most the other party and a notable group of members from the alleging member's party.
Exchanging Messages with a Notorious Figure
As legislation to force the disclosure of official documents related to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein was approaching a vote, reports emerged that a lawmaker had exchanged text messages with Epstein while attending a 2019 hearing. Seizing the moment, the other party lawmakers filed a reprimand motion against the delegate. This measure failed thanks to a unified front from the delegate's political allies and the support of a few of members from the sponsoring party.
A Myriad of Claimed Transgressions
One congressman was the subject of several different condemnation motions throughout the year, which wound up sparking {allegations|claims
