2026-06-02T08:00:08.329Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/02/politics/women-fear-reporting-harassment-capitol-hill-ethics-committee-vis
几年前白宫记者协会晚宴后，一名国会议员邀请另一位办公室的年轻女职员参加三人性行为。几个月后，他将这名职员拉到自己腿上并试图强吻她。
2023年，一名男性幕僚长给一位求职的前国会实习生发送信息，提出性交易，称他将“掌控”她，并提出如果她顺从就通过Venmo给她打钱。
2017年，一名国会议员在能看到她的情况下，给一名高级领导层职员发短信询问她内衣的颜色。
这三位向CNN分享这些性骚扰经历的女性都没有选择向众议院道德委员会或其他众多处理国会山不当行为的办公室举报，她们担心自己不会被相信，且职业生涯会被毁。
CNN采访了十几位现任和前任女性职员，她们都称曾遭遇众议院议员或国会高级职员的性骚扰，其中几乎所有人都没有举报这些事件，至今仍害怕公开指认骚扰者。她们的故事——在匿名条件下讲述，CNN通过采访、短信、照片证据和和解文件尽可能进行了核实——揭示了国会山女性员工常常面临国会的结构性和文化缺陷，这些缺陷削弱了职员举报不当行为的意愿。
这些女性职员告诉CNN，她们常常对提出投诉感到气馁，担心自己会被列入国会未来就业的黑名单，且自己的匿名性无法得到保护。那些确实站出来举报性骚扰的人必须在错综复杂的办公室体系中摸索，这些办公室负责处理职场投诉——尽管对议员最严厉的问责由道德委员会负责，但职员们表示，这一漫长且定义模糊的流程往往以无果而终。
“我们保持沉默，不是因为伤害不够严重——我们沉默是因为我们知道，自己身处一个沉默比开口更安全的环境，”一位曾遭遇上司骚扰的女性职员说道。
“职业放逐的风险——无论是被贴上‘问题职员’的标签，还是被塑造成戏剧中心——总是比获得问责的可能性更直接、更确定，”她说道。
近十年前，在#MeToo运动期间，国会通过了改革法案，旨在帮助虐待受害者并追究骚扰者的责任。但最近众议员埃里克·斯沃威尔和托尼·冈萨雷斯因被指控与职员发生不当性行为而辞职，这给华盛顿仍然普遍存在的这一问题带来了严峻的现实考验。
由10名现任议员组成的众议院道德委员会只是受害者可以选择的一条途径，但职员们表示，整个流程可能会拖上数月甚至数年。
然而，为道德委员会流程辩护的人表示，需要足够的时间和自由裁量权，以便议员在处理严重指控时获得正当法律程序。
职员们还可以向国会职场权利办公室、国会行为办公室、员工宣传办公室和员工援助办公室求助，这些机构提供包括心理咨询、可能的法律代理或对指控进行调查在内的资源。
但即使是2018年全面改革后改组的这些办公室，也存在自身的缺陷：冗长的截止日期、日期安排和听证会流程，有时最终会让受害者签署关于其指控的保密协议。这些女性向CNN表示，这些五花八门的选择往往成为她们站出来举报的障碍。
“如果不幸发生了什么事，她们有一大堆门可以敲——但这并不合理。你应该有一个一站式服务点，”佛罗里达州共和党众议员凯特·卡马克说道，她正与两党同事共同领导一个新的特别工作组，旨在解决国会中的性骚扰举报问题。
一名前国会职员告诉CNN，在遭到幕僚长骚扰后，她寻求了国会山提供的心理咨询。她被告知，如果之后想要举报，需要记录所有骚扰事件，但咨询师明确说明了 hurdles，暗示现行体系很少能成功实现问责，且会带来巨大的个人和职业代价。
最终，她认为进一步采取行动不值得，最终离开了国会山。“它帮助我梳理了一切，但远远没有实现问责，”她说道。
另一位曾考虑举报前经理虐待行为的年轻女职员表示，她曾寻求法律咨询以了解自己的权利，但最终没有提出投诉，因为她觉得自己的匿名性无法得到保护。当她致电众议院道德委员会时，对方要求提供她的姓名和工作办公室，这让她感到不安，也促成了她最终放弃索赔的决定。
许多选择不举报性骚扰的女性表示，她们害怕在这个彼此联系紧密的国会山圈子里被排挤。
“国会山是个非常小的地方，如果你提出索赔，很容易就能查出是谁举报的，”那位详细讲述了在职议员发给她关于内衣颜色的令人不适短信的高级领导层职员说道。“如果我站出来，我想背负这样的名声吗？除了象征性的警告之外，真正的后果是什么？”
她说，这根本“不值得费心”。
女性们告诉CNN，她们没有走官方举报渠道，而是常常主动脱离可能导致不良后果的处境，并依靠值得信赖的女性之间的非正式情报网络，来甄别某些议员或职员是否可靠。
“当你的幕僚长、执行主任或其他任何高级职员——他们也都有着保护所有议员的相同心态——时，你很难想要站出来，”那位称一名国会议员邀请她参加三人性行为的前职员告诉CNN。
这位前职员回忆称，几个月后，在一次饮酒社交会议后，这名议员要求她送自己返回国会山参加深夜投票，随后在他的私人办公室里将她拉到腿上并试图强吻她。
她表示，考虑到流程漫长，且举报议员会在办公室传开，她甚至从未想过去找道德委员会。
“即便到那时，一旦正式启动调查，就彻底陷入绝境了，”这位前职员说道。
众议院道德委员会可以独立启动调查或接收转介，建议对议员进行制裁、谴责、申斥或开除。该委员会经常调查性骚扰指控，并发布调查结果报告。但批评人士表示，该委员会常常为同僚规避问责提供保护。
“道德委员会的历史绰号是‘议员保护服务机构’，”一位了解国会道德程序的消息人士说道。“他们的存在是为了保护领导层的政治特权，这意味着票数计算。”
众议院道德委员会拒绝置评。在斯沃威尔和冈萨雷斯辞职后的上月一份声明中，该委员会表示，其“有着悠久的历史，调查众议院议员的性骚扰指控，从刑事性行为到涉及民事就业歧视法的行为，再到更普遍的行为标准”，并承诺“优先保护证人的保密性和安全”。
如果职员不想前往道德委员会，他们可以转而求助国会职场权利办公室，该办公室前身为合规办公室，负责处理从歧视到性骚扰的员工投诉。这同样伴随着复杂的流程和截止日期结构，该办公室本质上相当于自成一派的法庭。
在该办公室，职员必须在指控的不当行为发生后180天内提交投诉。一旦启动该流程，就会经历包括初步审查、行政听证会以及任何一方提出要求时的调解在内的环节。可能的结果有多种，包括民事诉讼、欠薪或保密和解。
“通过国会职场权利办公室，职员可以咨询保密顾问，他们可以在保密且受特权保护的环境中，解释员工根据法律享有的权利和保护措施，说明其案件将通过该办公室的投诉流程进行裁决的过程，甚至可以讨论员工案件的总体是非曲直，”该办公室发言人南希·巴尔迪诺说道。
国会职员还可以通过员工宣传办公室聘请律师，该办公室是2018年通过的改革法案设立的。
曾处理过多起该流程案件的律师莱斯·奥尔德曼告诉CNN，这需要丰富的知识、组织能力和清晰的思路，职员几乎不可能独自完成。
温索姆·帕克被认为是迄今为止获得金额最高的公开国会性骚扰和解金的人，她于2010年最初通过合规办公室（现为国会职场权利办公室）提出指控。
经过四年的抗争，帕克与前民主党众议员阿尔西·黑斯廷斯就多起性骚扰指控达成了22万美元的和解。根据CNN查阅的文件，作为和解的一部分，她同意辞去工作，她告诉CNN，此后再也无法在该领域找到工作。
“我不会说我的人生被毁了。但基本上，我失去了家园，失去了原有的安全感，我失去了我的国家，”帕克说道，她告诉CNN自己已经不再居住在美国。“我失去了太多。我的健康也受到了很大影响。我敢肯定，如果你深入调查，会有很多其他女性因为站出来而遭受了同样的后果。”
黑斯廷斯当时否认有不当行为，并于2021年去世。
另一位最终和解信息被公开的女性劳伦·格林最初就前共和党众议员布雷克·法伦特霍尔德的指控联系了道德委员会，但被转介到合规办公室，最终在那里达成了8.4万美元的和解。
她说，她是在被国会解雇后才迈出举报骚扰的一步——回想起来，这可能是她决定寻求救济的一个因素。“我不知道如果我当时还在职，会不会去这么做。作为在职员工，这太令人望而生畏了。所以，我是以被解雇员工的身份去的，”她说道。
法伦特霍尔德于去年去世，他否认了部分指控，并在面临道德调查时于2018年辞去了国会职务。
女性还可以向国会行为办公室提出投诉，该办公室独立调查不当行为指控，并将其转介给道德委员会。
该办公室没有诉讼时效限制，个人可以随时提出索赔。一旦启动指控调查，国会行为办公室必须在89天内完成调查。该办公室的董事会每月开会批准调查，当有证据表明议员存在不当行为时，将对最终报告进行投票，最终予以公开。
但该办公室存在多个局限性：它也没有传票权，除了转介给道德委员会之外，没有任何法律补救措施，而转介给该委员会的案件通常首先由委员会主席和少数党资深成员审查，大多数案件永远不会进入全体委员会调查环节。
国会行为办公室的一位发言人拒绝为本文置评。
根据CNN对该办公室2009年以来公开报告的分析，在道德委员会最初收到该办公室的转介后，仅13%的案件会成立调查小组进一步调查。超过一半的转介案件最终陷入被称为“18(a)”的不透明流程中，由委员会主席和少数党资深成员独立审查，没有时间限制。
在道德委员会上一届国会的行动总结报告中，该委员会辩称，两条路径“仅在程序上不同，而非实质内容上”，并表示“委员会成员可以，也确实会在‘18(a)’和[调查小组]调查中自愿出席并参与对证人的采访”。
2023年曾就一名议员的骚扰行为提出投诉的一名前职员向CNN回忆称，每一步都像是“死胡同”。
她指控称，三年前的2020年2月，当时22岁的她还是刚到国会山的实习生，加利福尼亚州民主党众议员吉姆·科斯塔在加州州协会的派对上接近她，邀请她跳舞并和他“扭摆”。第二天在众议院办公楼里，这名国会议员问她有没有男朋友，在说自己也是单身时眨了眨眼，根据CNN查阅的她2023年接受国会行为办公室（前身为国会道德办公室）调查人员采访的 transcript 显示。
这名女性最初以笔名提交了投诉，并在几年后成为全职职员时重新举报。但在2023年6月接受国会调查人员采访后，她没有收到关于调查的进一步消息，直到道德委员会通知她，投诉因“证据不足”被驳回。
由NOTUS率先报道的对科斯塔的道德调查此前并未公开，因为国会行为办公室和道德委员会没有发现证据证实这些指控。
在给CNN的一份声明中，科斯塔的发言人丽莎·奥尔蒂斯表示，道德委员会和国会行为办公室的行动“不言自明”。
“科斯塔议员完全配合了几年前由国会合规办公室和众议院道德委员会开展的调查。合规办公室建议驳回，道德委员会一致投票否决了此事，”奥尔蒂斯说道。
这名职员表示，道德程序令人生畏，她在没有律师或其他支持的情况下接受了采访。
初次采访后，当她得知调查人员计划联系与她案件相关的其他人进行跟进时，她感到不安。她询问调查人员是否可以放弃此事。
“我想我们应该就此结束，牵涉的人太多了；我不想继续下去了。非常抱歉，”这名职员在给调查人员的信中写道，根据CNN查阅的电子邮件显示，调查人员回复称理解她的担忧，但也必须完成调查。
2018年，国会通过改革法案，取消了《国会问责法》中规定的投诉提交前必须经过的强制性“冷却期”、心理咨询和调解要求。它还终止了纳税人资助的和解。
这些改革“姗姗来迟”，前法伦特霍尔德职员格林说道。“但我也认为，还有很长的路要走。”
如今，在撼动国会山的高调丑闻之后，一个由两党女性议员组成、得到领导层支持的团体正着手彻底改革整个流程。
在谈判的早期阶段，民主党和共和党妇女核心小组的领导人正在考虑各种方案，从简化举报流程到研究是否由国会之外的独立实体最适合受理投诉。
“议员们往往高估了自己，他们的团队从不想说‘不’，总是想达成‘是’——有时这会导致职员将自己置于风险之中，”共同领导该特别工作组的佛罗里达州共和党议员卡马克说道。
该特别工作组还在讨论如何具体改革道德委员会流程。道德委员会主席、密西西比州共和党人迈克尔·格斯特最近告诉CNN，他正在争取更多资金、更多人员，甚至计划将国会行为办公室并入他的委员会。
但一位前众议院道德委员会成员告诉CNN，需要在通过道德程序的议员指控的严重性之间取得平衡。虽然极为罕见，但道德委员会的报告和调查结果可以成为驱逐投票的依据。
“这些人确实拥有正当法律程序权利。我真的希望人们能多一点理解，道德委员会不是无所事事，他们努力在做正确的事情，”这位议员说道，他指出该委员会“努力在公平对待所有人的需求与加快程序的需求之间取得平衡”。
尽管斯沃威尔和冈萨雷斯的辞职让两党都能指出这是问责的一刻，但一位向CNN讲述自己遭遇骚扰的前国会职员表示，她对两党领导层如何处理后续事件感到担忧。
“这个体系似乎并不是为受害者设计的，”这位前职员说道。“我能想到的最贴切的词是，很多时候感觉非常糟糕。对女性来说，很多时候就是忍气吞声、挺过去、坚持下去，直到撑不下去为止。这是一个巨大的警钟。”
CNN的帕梅拉·布朗和艾米丽·康登为本报告做出了贡献。
‘Silence feels safer than speaking’: Women fear reporting harassment on Capitol Hill
2026-06-02T08:00:08.329Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/02/politics/women-fear-reporting-harassment-capitol-hill-ethics-committee-vis
After the White House Correspondents’ Dinner several years ago, a congressman asked a young female staffer from another office to have a threesome. A few months later, he pulled the staffer onto his lap and tried to kiss her.
In 2023, a male chief of staff messaged a former congressional intern looking for a job and propositioned her sexually, writing that he would “own” her and offering to Venmo her money if she complied.
A member of Congress texted a senior leadership staffer in 2017 asking the color of her underwear while she was in his sight line.
The three women who shared these experiences of sexual harassment with CNN chose not to come forward to the House Ethics Committee or the myriad other offices that handle misconduct on Capitol Hill, concerned that they would not be believed and their careers could be damaged.
CNN spoke with more than a dozen current and former female staffers who say they’ve faced harassment from House members or senior congressional staff, nearly all of whom chose not to report the incidents and still fear publicly naming their harassers. Their stories — told under the condition of anonymity over concerns of retribution and corroborated by CNN to the extent possible through interviews, text messages, photo evidence and settlement documents — reveal how women working on Capitol Hill often face structural and cultural shortcomings in Congress that disincentivize staffers from reporting misconduct.
The female staffers told CNN they often felt discouraged about making a complaint, fearful they would get blacklisted from future jobs in Congress and that their anonymity could not be protected. Those who do come forward to report harassment have to navigate a convoluted labyrinth of offices that help with workplace complaints — even though the most serious accountability for members lies with the Ethics Committee, a lengthy and ill-defined process the staffers said often leads to dead ends.
“We’re not silent because the harm wasn’t serious enough — we’re silent because we know we work in an environment where silence feels safer than speaking,” said one female staffer who faced harassment from a supervisor.
“The risk of professional exile – be it from being labeled a ‘problem staffer’ or cast as the center of drama — has always felt more immediate and certain than the possibility of accountability,” she said.
Nearly a decade ago, Congress passed reforms intended to help victims of abuse and hold harassers accountable amid the #MeToo movement. But the recent resignations of Reps. Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzales amid allegations of sexual misconduct with staffers offered a stark reality check on what remains a pervasive problem in Washington.
The House Ethics Committee, which is made up of 10 sitting members, is just one path a victim can choose, though staffers say the process can drag on for months or even years.
Defenders of the Ethics Committee process, however, say sufficient time and discretion are necessary to provide members with due process in addressing serious allegations.
Staffers can also go to the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, the Office of Congressional Conduct, the Office of Employee Advocacy and the Office of Employee Assistance, which offer resources including counseling, potential legal representation or investigations into allegations.
But even those offices, which were revamped as part of the 2018 overhaul, present their own shortcomings: a lengthy list of deadlines, dates and hearings that can end at times with victims signing nondisclosure agreements about their allegations. The alphabet soup of options is often a barrier to coming forward, the women who spoke to CNN said.
“If something, God forbid, were to happen, they have a litany of doors to knock on — but that is not OK. You want to have a one-stop shop,” said Florida Republican Rep. Kat Cammack, who is co-leading a new, bipartisan task force to address sexual harassment reporting in Congress.
One former congressional staffer told CNN that she sought therapy available on Capitol Hill after she was harassed by her chief of staff. She was told to document any instances of harassment if she wanted to later report the case, but the counselor was clear about the hurdles, implying that the system, as structured, was rarely successful in providing accountability and came at a great personal and professional cost.
Ultimately, she decided it was not worth it to pursue further action, eventually leaving Capitol Hill. “It helped me process everything, but it stopped way short of accountability,” she said.
Another young female staffer who considered reporting mistreatment against a former manager said she sought legal advice to learn about her rights, but she ultimately did not lodge a complaint because she didn’t feel like her anonymity would be protected. When she called the House Ethics Committee, they asked for her name and the office she worked for, which made her feel uncomfortable and contributed to her decision to ultimately not move forward with the claim.
Many of the women who chose not to report their harassment said they feared being ostracized across the often-interconnected network of Capitol Hill offices.
“The Hill is a very small place, and if you do move forward with a claim, it is incredibly easy to figure out who made that allegation,” said the senior leadership staffer, who detailed to CNN the uncomfortable text messages she received about her underwear from a sitting lawmaker. “If I come forward, do I want that to be my reputation? What are the real consequences aside from a slap on the wrist?”
It was simply “not worth the trouble,” the staffer said.
Instead of going through the official channels available to them, women told CNN they instead often removed themselves from situations that could lead to bad outcomes and relied on an informal whisper network of trusted women to gut check certain members or staffers.
“It’s hard to want to come forward when your chief or your executive director or anybody else who is a senior staff member — they also have the same mindset to protect all the members,” the former staffer who said that a congressman asked her to have a threesome told CNN.
That former staffer recounted the same lawmaker a few months later pulling her onto his lap and trying to kiss her in his private office after he asked for a ride back to the Capitol for late-night votes following a networking meeting over drinks.
Going to the Ethics Committee didn’t even cross her mind, she said, given the lengthy process and that it would become known in her office if she reported the lawmaker.
“Even then, once an investigation is officially opened, it’s just no man’s land,” the former staffer said.
The House Ethics Committee, which can independently launch investigations or receive referrals, recommends sanctions, censures, reprimands or expulsions of members. The committee has regularly investigated allegations of sexual misconduct and issues reports on its findings. But its critics say the panel too often shields fellow members from accountability.
“The Ethics Committee’s historical nickname is the member protection service,” a source with knowledge of the congressional ethics process said. “They’re there to protect the political prerogatives of leadership, and that means vote counts.”
The House Ethics Committee declined to comment. In a statement last month after the Swalwell and Gonzales resignations, the panel said that it has “a long history of investigating allegations of sexual misconduct by Members of the House, ranging from criminal sexual activity to behavior implicating civil employment discrimination laws and more general standards of conduct” and vowed to “prioritize witness confidentiality and safety.”
If staffers don’t want to go to the Ethics Committee, they can instead turn to the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, formerly the Office of Compliance, which handles employee complaints from discrimination to sexual harassment. That, too, comes with a complicated process and deadline structure, and the office essentially functions as its own court.
In that office, a staffer has to file a complaint within 180 days of alleged misconduct. Once that clock starts, it moves through a process that can include a preliminary review, an administrative hearing, and mediation if any party requests it. There are multiple possible outcomes, including civil litigation, back pay or confidential settlements.
“Through OCWR, a staffer can consult with a Confidential Advisor who can, in a confidential and privileged setting, explain the employee’s rights and protections under the law, the process by which their case would be adjudicated using OCWR’s complaints process, and even discuss the general merits of the employee’s case,” said Nancy Baldino, a spokeswoman for the office.
Congressional staffers can also access lawyers through the Office of Employee Advocacy, an office that was created by the reforms passed in 2018.
Les Alderman, a lawyer who has worked on several cases that have gone through the process, told CNN it requires extensive knowledge, organization and clarity that would be nearly impossible for a staffer to navigate on their own.
Winsome Packer, who is believed to have received the largest publicly known congressional sexual harassment settlement to date, initially brought her allegations in 2010 through the Office of Compliance, which is now the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.
After fighting for four years, Packer settled her allegations of multiple instances of sexual harassment against former Democratic Rep. Alcee Hastings for $220,000. As part of that settlement, she agreed to leave her job, according to a CNN review of the documents, and she said she has since been unable to find work in the field.
“I refuse to say that my life is ruined. But basically, I’ve lost my home, I’ve lost the security that I had, I lost my country,” said Packer, who told CNN she no longer lives in the US. “I’ve lost so much. I’ve lost a great deal on my health. And I’m sure if you look into it, many other women have suffered as a consequence of coming forward.”
Hastings denied wrongdoing at the time and died in 2021.
Another woman whose eventual settlement became public, Lauren Greene, initially contacted the Ethics Committee with allegations against former GOP Rep. Blake Farenthold but was referred to the Office of Compliance, where she ultimately reached an $84,000 settlement.
She only took the step of reporting the harassment after being fired from her congressional job, she said — in hindsight, a possible factor in her decision to pursue relief. “I don’t know if I would have gone to that. That’s so intimidating, as a current employee. So, I went as a terminated (employee),” she said.
Farenthold, who died last year, denied some of the allegations against him and resigned from Congress in 2018 while facing an ethics probe.
Women can also take their complaints to the Office of Congressional Conduct, which independently investigates allegations of misconduct and makes referrals to the Ethics Committee.
With no statute of limitations, individuals can bring forward claims to the office at any time. Once moving forward on an allegation, the Office of Congressional Conduct has 89 days to complete an investigation. The office’s board meets monthly to authorize investigations and, when there is evidence of lawmaker wrongdoing, votes on final reports that are eventually publicized.
But the office has several limitations: It also does not have subpoena power or any legal remedies available beyond referrals to the Ethics panel, and cases referred to the committee are often first reviewed by the chairman and ranking member, with most never reaching a full panel investigation.
A spokesperson for the Office of Congressional Conduct declined to comment for this story.
According to a CNN analysis of the office’s publicly available reports since 2009, the Ethics Committee establishes investigative subcommittees to further look into allegations only 13% of the time after it initially receives referrals from the office. More than half of the referred cases end up under the opaque process, known as 18(a), with no timeline where the committee’s chairman and ranking member review them independently.
In the Ethics Committee’s report summarizing its actions in the last Congress, the panel argued that the two paths “differ only in process, not substance,” and said that “Members of the Committee can, and do, attend and participate in voluntary interviews with witnesses in both 18(a) and [investigative subcommittee] investigations.”
One former staffer who filed a harassment complaint against a lawmaker in 2023 recalled to CNN that every step felt like a “dead end.”
She alleged that three years prior in February 2020, as a 22-year-old intern new to Capitol Hill, California Democratic Rep. Jim Costa approached her at a California State Society party and asked her to dance and “shimmy” with him. The next day in the House’s office buildings, the congressman asked whether she had a boyfriend and winked as he said he was single, too, according to a transcript reviewed by CNN of her 2023 interview with investigators in the Office of Congressional Ethics, which is now the Office of Congressional Conduct.
The woman initially filed her complaint under a pseudonym, reporting it several years later when she was a full-time staffer. But after being interviewed in June 2023 by congressional investigators, she did not hear anything further about the probe until the Ethics Committee notified her that the complaint was being dismissed because there was “not enough evidence” against Costa.
The ethics investigation into Costa, first reported by NOTUS, was not previously made public because the Office of Congressional Conduct and the Ethics Committee did not find evidence to substantiate the allegations.
In a statement, to CNN, Costa spokeswoman Lisa Ortiz said the actions of the Ethics Committee and the Office of Congressional Conduct “speak for themselves.”
“Rep. Costa fully cooperated with a review conducted by the Office of Congressional Compliance and the House Committee on Ethics several years ago. The OCC recommended dismissal, and the Ethics Committee unanimously voted to dismiss the matter,” Ortiz said.
The ethics process, the staffer said, was daunting, and she was interviewed without a lawyer or other support.
After her initial interview, the staffer was alarmed when she learned that investigators planned to reach out to others tied to her case to follow-up. She asked the investigators whether she could drop the matter instead.
“I think we need to end this, it’s too many people; I don’t want to continue. I’m really sorry,” the staffer wrote to investigators, who responded that they understood her concerns but also had to complete the investigation, according to emails reviewed by CNN.
In 2018, Congress passed reforms that removed the mandatory “cooling-off period,” counseling and mediation requirements under the Congressional Accountability Act before complaints could be filed. It also ended taxpayer-funded settlements.
Those reforms were “a long time coming,” said Greene, the former Farenthold staffer. “But I also think that there’s a long way to go.”
Now, in the wake of high-profile scandals that roiled Capitol Hill, a bipartisan group of female lawmakers blessed by leadership is looking to take a scalpel to the entire process.
In the early stages of their negotiations, leaders in the Democratic and Republican Women’s caucuses are considering everything from streamlining the reporting process to looking at whether an independent entity outside of Congress may be best equipped to take in the complaints.
“Members have often an inflated sense of self, and their teams never want to say ‘no’ and they always want to get to ‘yes’ — and sometimes that leads to situations where staff will put themselves at risk,” said Cammack, the Florida Republican co-leading the task force.
The task force is also discussing how to reform the Ethics Committee process specifically. Ethics Chairman Michael Guest, a Mississippi Republican, recently told CNN he is pushing for more money, more staff and to even absorb the Office of Congressional Conduct under his committee.
But there is a balance, a former member of House Ethics told CNN, given the severity of allegations against members that make it through the ethics process. While exceedingly rare, the Ethics Committee’s reports and investigations can be grounds for an expulsion vote.
“These people do have due process rights. I really wish people were a little more understanding that it is not just that Ethics is sitting around doing nothing but they are trying to do the right thing,” the member said, noting that the panel is “trying to balance the need for being fair to everyone with the need for things to be expedited.”
While the resignations of Swalwell and Gonzales allowed both parties to point to a moment of accountability, one former Hill staffer who spoke to CNN about her harassment said she was left feeling concerned about how leadership in both parties has handled the fallout.
“It doesn’t really seem like the system is set up to benefit the victims,” the former staffer said. “The best word I can use is it feels very gross a lot of the time. For women, a lot of it is just suck it up, bear it, get through it, stay until you can’t anymore. It’s been a massive wake-up call.”
CNN’s Pamela Brown and Emily Condon contributed to this report.