🔗 Share this article

This past year in the House of Representatives has gone down in the historical record. Lawmakers broke new marks for the most extended oration and the most protracted roll call, and managed the lengthiest government shutdown.

They also devoted a great deal of effort seeking to formally criticize one another through censure resolutions, the House's formal procedure for rebuke. A review of congressional records indicates a minimum of 17 attempts since the year's beginning to condemn another lawmaker via a formal condemnation or a simpler statement of disapproval.

If a censure resolution is approved by a majority of the chamber, the member in question must stand before the rostrum as the chair announces to them that they have been punished for their improper actions. That's as far as the consequences go – they keep their seat and their right to vote, but potentially damaging their public image.

Though almost none of these passed, the flood became so pronounced that by the conclusion of the session, a cross-party coalition proposed changing the procedures to raise the threshold for reprimands to be approved. “Perhaps we should stop the mutual recrimination in the House?” questioned one of the proposal's backers.

Below is an examination at the supposed transgressions at the core of the wave of reprimands:

---

Calling a Figure a ‘Offensive Name’

The initial censure attempt of the year came in February targeting a Democratic representative. The resolution accused the member of “inciting violence against a specific federal appointee”. It cited an occasion during a panel session where the lawmaker made a derogatory comment about the person in a particularly creative way, as well as a follow-up remark about using “real arms” to a ideological conflict. The chamber ultimately did not considering the measure.

---

Yelling at the Commander-in-Chief

During an address to a meeting of Congress, a member of the opposition lawmaker heckled the nation's leader, shouting “he lacks a popular mandate” while waving a staff in the air. The House speaker ordered the member escorted out. Subsequently, multiple reprimand motions were introduced targeting him. Shortly thereafter, the legislature voted for one of these resolutions, with some members of the representative's party voting in favor alongside the other side. This was the only censure to actually win approval during the year.

---

Resorting to Ethnic Tropes

A mere few days after the previous censure, a resolution was filed against a lawmaker for statements made about the disruptive colleague. The resolution charged the member of using language that was “disparaging, derogatory, and racist toward another member of Congress”. This measure was not a vote on the House floor.

---

Mocking a State Executive's Disability

Another condemnation attempt centered on claimed disrespectful remarks made by a representative about a state governor who uses a wheelchair. The remarks were considered profoundly inappropriate and resulted in a disciplinary motion that also was not brought to a vote.

---

Incident with Federal Agents

Multiple censure resolutions were filed against a lawmaker after she was arrested and charged following an confrontation outside a federal detention facility. One of these measures was brought up in the House, but was blocked thanks to a coalition of lawmakers from the other side and a small group of members from the sponsor's own party. This signaled the first of several times where representatives voted across the aisle to stop a condemnation effort.

---

Charges of Bigotry

A lawmaker was the focus of two censure resolutions over the mid-year period for offensive statements made about political leaders of color. The posts included derogatory nicknames and calls for expulsion. Neither measures was brought to the floor.

---

Disparaging a Late Activist Character

In the wake of a well-known activist's death, a reprimand proposal was proposed against a lawmaker for statements that were viewed as “derogatory” toward the deceased individual and those mourning him. For another time, the resolution was blocked with the votes of a handful of lawmakers from the resolution's originating party. One of those who opposed the censure stated that the correct approach to “reprehensible speech” is not silencing, but “additional dialogue”.

---

‘Compromising the Integrity of a Open Election’

The barrage of condemnations culminated late in the year when, during a pivotal vote, a congresswoman went to the House floor to claim that a fellow Democrat had orchestrated his retirement in a manner to practically guarantee a specific successor would be elected to replace him. The measure registered dissent of this conduct for “undermining the process of a open electoral contest”. This resolution generated controversy but ultimately passed, with votes from the majority of the opposing party and a significant number of members from the complainant's political affiliation.

---

Texting a Notorious Figure

As congressional action to force the disclosure of sealed records related to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein was nearing passage, it was revealed that a congresswoman had texted with Epstein during a congressional hearing. Seizing the moment, opposition party lawmakers filed a censure resolution against the member. This measure failed thanks to united opposition from the lawmaker's party and the votes of a few of lawmakers from the party that introduced it.

---

A Wide Range of Claimed Transgressions

One representative was the focus of three separate reprimand efforts throughout the year, which wound up sparking {allegations|claims