🔗 Share this article

This past year in the House of Representatives has been one for the annals of history. Congresspeople set new marks for the lengthiest continuous address and the most protracted roll call, and managed the longest cessation of government operations.

Additionally, they allocated a great deal of effort attempting to formally criticize one another through censure resolutions, the chamber's formal procedure for punishment. An examination of congressional records indicates no fewer than 17 attempts since the January to reproach a colleague via a reprimand or a simpler statement of disapproval.

Should a reprimand measure passes by a majority of the chamber, the member in question is required to stand before the rostrum as the chair announces to them that they have been punished for their bad behavior. Those are the extent of the actual penalties – they keep their congressional office and their voting privileges, but perhaps not their standing.

Though almost none of these passed, the flurry grew so severe that by the end of the year, a bipartisan group introduced a bill to modify the standing orders to create a higher bar for condemnation motions to pass. “What if we halt the internal warfare in the House?” asked one of the measure's authors.

Below is an examination at the claimed misconduct at the core of the censure spree:

---

Calling a Person a ‘Derogatory Term’

The initial censure attempt of the year was introduced in February aimed at a member of the Democratic Party congressperson. The resolution charged the legislator of “provoking aggression against a special government employee”. It cited an event during a committee hearing where the lawmaker uttered a crude remark about the figure in a rather roundabout way, as well as a follow-up remark about employing “actual weapons” to a ideological conflict. The full body never considering the measure.

---

Yelling at the Chief Executive

In the midst of a presentation to a gathering of Congress, a Democratic representative disrupted the president, exclaiming “he has no mandate” while pumping a walking cane in the air. The presiding officer ordered the member forcibly removed. Subsequently, a number of reprimand motions were filed aimed at the lawmaker. Two days later, the legislature voted for one of these measures, with a number of members of the representative's party casting yes votes alongside the other side. This remains the single reprimand to be successfully passed during the year.

---

Employing Derogatory Characterizations

Just days after the aforementioned condemnation, a motion was filed aiming at a congressperson for remarks made about the previously censured member. The resolution charged the official of using language that was “insulting, demeaning, and bigoted toward another fellow lawmaker”. This resolution did not receive a full chamber vote.

---

Disparaging a Governor's Physical Condition

Another reprimand effort focused on alleged derogatory comments made by a representative about a state governor who uses a wheelchair. The remarks were viewed as deeply disrespectful and led to a formal condemnation that also did not come up a floor vote.

---

Incident with Law Enforcement

Several reprimand proposals were filed against a congresswoman after she was arrested and charged following an altercation outside a immigration detention center. One of these measures was brought up in the chamber, but was defeated thanks to a alliance of lawmakers from the other side and a handful of representatives from the party that introduced it. This marked the initial instance among many instances where members defied party loyalty to block a condemnation effort.

---

Allegations of Discrimination

A lawmaker was the focus of two censure resolutions over the warmer months for bigoted remarks made about public figures of color. The posts included insulting labels and calls for expulsion. Neither resolutions was considered by the full House.

---

Criticizing a Individual's Character

In the aftermath of a prominent figure's death, a reprimand proposal was filed against a congresswoman for comments that were considered “disrespectful” toward the deceased individual and those grieving for him. Yet again, the motion was defeated with the help of a handful of lawmakers from the sponsor's own party. One of those who blocked the censure remarked that the right answer to “objectionable comments” is not silencing, but “more speech”.

---

‘Subverting the Process of a Free and Fair Election’

The flurry of reprimands reached a high point late in the year when, during a crucial legislative action, a lawmaker went to the House floor to allege that a colleague had orchestrated his retirement in a manner to practically guarantee a particular individual would be elected to replace him. The measure expressed disapproval of this behavior for “subverting the system of a open electoral contest”. This measure provoked anger but was voted into effect, with backing from the majority of the other party and a sizable bloc of members from the alleging member's party.

---

Communicating via Text a Convicted Sex Offender

As legislation to compel the release of sealed records related to convicted criminal Jeffrey Epstein was nearing passage, news broke that a delegate had exchanged text messages with Epstein in the midst of a congressional hearing. Seeing an opportunity, the other party lawmakers proposed a censure resolution against the member. This attempt was defeated thanks to solidarity from the member's own party and the support of a few of members from the sponsoring party.

---

A Broad Spectrum of Supposed Wrongdoings

One representative was the focus of several different condemnation motions throughout the year, which resulted in {allegations|claims