Three lawmakers accused of serious ethical lapses have been forced to resign in just a week, even as members of the House Ethics Committee have raised questions about whether the panel is up to the task of policing its own.
The committee is taking this time as it seeks to prove itself ready, willing and able to root out bad behavior in its ranks. It has spent the past year and a half rebuilding its reputation after internal disagreements over how to handle an ethics report on the former representative. Matt Gaetz jeopardized the credibility of the bipartisan panel by going public.
Now, amid the high-profile resignations of Representatives Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) and Sheila Cherfilas-McCormick (D-Fla.), members who sit on the highly secretive committee are opening up — eager to share their perspectives, acknowledge their limitations, and defend their work.
“The reality is that we are still very slow, and I believe we must move faster. I have expressed some of my recommendations about how we can do this for the workforce,” Rep. Suhas Subramaniam (D-Va.), who joined the Ethics Committee this Congress, said in an interview. “I wish people would take the ethics committee more seriously.”
In extended interviews Monday and Tuesday, Ethics Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.) said his panel is hampered by the institutional bureaucracy of the House.
“I’ve been asked, you know, would the Ethics Committee, if additional resources were provided to the committee, would that have helped us move cases forward more quickly? And of course, the answer is yes,” Guest said. “But you know, it should be up to the leadership. It’s up to the speaker and the minority leader as to how many staff members they would like to assign to the ethics committee.”
His comments come amid questions about how Gonzales and Swalwell were able to serve in office unchecked for so long: Both were accused of engaging in sexual misconduct with former staff, with Swalwell accused of rape. Each stepped down before the ethics committee had a chance to conclude wrongdoing and impose punishment.
Cherfilas-McCormick also resigned shortly before the Ethics Committee was scheduled to meet Tuesday afternoon to consider punishment for the determination that she illegally funneled millions to support her campaign, which could have resulted in a recommendation for removal.
Now the focus is turning to Rep. Corey Mills (R-Fla.), who is accused of multiple violations, including illegally engaging in government contracts while in federal office and threatening to release a nude video of an ex-girlfriend. He has said that he has no plans to resign as his case before the Ethics Committee is pending without resolution.
In November, the House ethics panel quietly requested the Office of Congressional Conduct — the semi-independent office that investigates complaints against members and staffers from the public — to close its investigation into Mills, according to a person with knowledge of the ethics process who was granted anonymity to describe the confidential process. The message was transmitted to the OCC on the same day the House voted to effectively veto a resolution introduced by Representative Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) to censure Mills for various alleged improprieties.
The OCC was established in 2008 by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and supporters say it provides a necessary, largely independent set of eyes — including to ongoing investigations. Critics view the OCC as an unreliable political group; It languished for months in this Congress before Speaker Mike Johnson introduced an informal measure on the House floor that would have established the ability to initiate investigations by appointing its board.
Guest declined to discuss the details of the Mills case, but did not deny that such a request was made, saying that “it was standard practice for Ethics to take the reins of an investigation from the OCC once an investigative subcommittee was established.”
He acknowledged that at times the Ethics Committee may work slower than some would like, but the process was thoughtful and thorough. “If members want this to be an accelerated committee, where we have two weeks to present a report and return that report back to the body, then I am not the right person to serve in that room.”
He said he hoped to discuss with Johnson how to improve the operation of the panel. An ongoing challenge for members is the loss of jurisdiction after a legislator resigns from Congress, which historically means the committee closes its investigation and does not issue a report of its findings. Guest proposed a new policy where a report could be made public upon the resignation of an MLA, meaning bad actors cannot always leave office to avoid revelations about their misdeeds.
The top Democrat on the Ethics Committee, Representative Mark DeSaulnier of California, said the committee could better handle sexual misconduct cases and that he has talked to Democratic leadership about modernizing the panel.
She said, “I think on sexual harassment, (the) thing that strikes me is that there needs to be a place to go that is clear to report, that has adequate staff, and is very well trained in the subject area, so that people feel there is a place they can go and be safe, secure.” “And then there is a proper process that responds in a way that is deliberative, but under the urgency of the circumstances.”
This is an area where the Ethics Committee has found itself struggling to respond to public pressure in recent weeks. When the House was set to vote in March on a measure introduced by Mace that would have forced the committee to make public information on sexual harassment claims, Guest and DeSaulnier said in a statement that it would have a chilling effect on victims. Ultimately the proposal was presented.
On Monday, the panel issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to taking allegations of sexual misconduct seriously — and released a list of publicly disclosed sexual misconduct investigations since 1976. Many of those cases were closed without resolution because the member under investigation resigned before the committee could conclude the case.
One lawmaker who served on the Ethics Committee, who requested anonymity to describe the panel’s private operations, argued that disclosure of sexual misconduct cases could harm potential victims who might not want their cases brought before the panel in the first place.
That explanation is largely falling on deaf ears among members who want more transparency and accountability, however, with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) calling Monday’s release of previously disclosed sexual misconduct allegations against House members an inadequate “cleanup.”
Ethics Committee member and former federal prosecutor Representative Glenn Ivey (D-MD) suggested that reforming the panel’s internal systems for handling sexual harassment claims may be a lost cause.
“I think the ugly truth is that there is no process that can handle this well that I’ve seen, whether it’s state courts, federal courts, internal corporate investigations, Congress or the Senate,” he said.
