Senators approved a new anti-harassment policy Thursday that would make lawmakers, rather than taxpayers, responsible for paying settlements — but the Senate version has less teeth than a House proposal that provides better protections for complainants.
The Senate bill cleared on a voice vote Thursday, just a day after it was introduced, in what the chamber’s leaders declared was a major bipartisan accomplishment.
“This is an important and meaningful reform, and the result of a broad bipartisan consensus that we should do more to hold people accountable, protect staff, and help prevent harassment in the first place,” Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said in a joint statement.
But the bill is already not aging well.
Key House members, who wrote their version of the bill more than three months ago, said the Senate version lets lawmakers off the hook for payments in discrimination and retaliation cases, as well as harassment settlements.
Anti-harassment advocates also questioned the Senate’s timing. They said the chamber, after falling months behind the House, sped the new bill through in just one day, short-circuiting lawmakers’ chances to study what they were voting on.
“While the Senate proposal would make many important and positive changes to the current system for handling sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination, we are concerned that in several instances it appears to create uncertainty or weaken provisions in the House bill,” said Kristin Nicholson and Travis a Moore, co-founders of Congress Too.
The Senate bill does allow for the federal government to deduct the sum of any federal funds used in settlements from a senator’s finances if he or she does not repay the money to the U.S. Treasury within 180 days. The House bill requires repayment within 90 days and also allows for a member’s finances, possibly even their Social Security, to be garnished if they fail to do so.
The Senate bill also would require the ethics committees in both chambers to review settlements, which some critics fear could give lawmakers a chance to protect each other. Only after the committee found harassment would lawmakers be required to foot the bill for a settlement, said critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
The House bill would make lawmakers liable even without an ethics committee ruling.
Solving settlement payments is a major goal of both bills.
Until now, harassment and discrimination settlements reached by members of Congress have been generally paid out of official funds, meaning taxpayers are on the hook. Several lawmakers who resigned amid harassment accusations promised to repay the funds, and one, former Rep. Patrick Meehan, did repay $39,000 to taxpayers.
But former Rep. Blake Farenthold has reneged on a promise to repay $84,000, drawing fierce condemnation.
The House ethics committee said that’s one reason any final bill must ensure lawmakers are liable for settlements, and that the liability apply even after they leave Congress.
Senators defended their bill.
“This bipartisan deal empowers victims to report sexual harassment and helps bring their perpetrators to justice,” said Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican. “It will strengthen procedures available to victims of workplace sexual harassment, and — critically — puts an end to the shameful practice of taxpayer-funded secret settlements by members of Congress.”
The bill also eliminates a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period before someone could pursue a harassment complaint against a lawmaker. The cooling off period has been a particular target for anti-harassment crusaders.
“Its sole purpose is to provide for a delay, in hopes that the victim will lose the strength to bring the complaint forward,” said Donna Lent, president of the National Women’s Political Caucus.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.