Should be retroactive with names and the actual crime.
No. A lot of the cases presumably involve very gray area and "he said, she said" situations in which the promise of confidentiality significantly affected decision making on both sides. Would the "victim" have come forward with a sketchy claim if she (usually a she) had to do so publicly? Possibly not. Would Congressman X have settled to make an embarrassing mess go quietly away? Possibly not. Absent confidentiality, I think we will see fewer claims, and we will almost certainly see most Members stoutly dispute the charge.
Keith Ellison cases will be rare. Generally what we will see will be Member-staff or Member-lobbyist liaisons, often fueled by alcohol, in which repeated flirtations lead to sexual relations with professional entanglements. This happens in all kinds of organizations, not just on Capitol Hill. And sometimes people get vengeful post-breakup. Retroactively breaking a promise of confidentiality would be unfair.
I hope Judicial Watch files an FOI request for a full accounting of the congressional “slush fund” complete with all names and amounts paid out.
I’d also like to see names of those who filed ‘false’ claims.
Great idea.