Nancy Mace calls on Congress to release sexual harassment records, wants an 'avalanche of resignations'

Rep. Nancy Mace is calling for a reckoning in the halls of Congress after the resignation of Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell. She accused the political establishment of shielding predators to protect their own power and introduced a resolution to stop it.

Mace joined "Saturday in America" to discuss the resolution she put forward for the House Ethics Committee to release its records on sexual harassment by lawmakers.

"I think there should be an avalanche of resignations," Mace said. "I want every single predator that’s in Congress now to be forced to resign. I don’t care how long it takes. If we can do it fast, let’s do it now, regardless of party."

Mace’s renewed action comes after Swalwell resigned from Congress and ended his California gubernatorial bid earlier this month following multiple sexual misconduct allegations. At least five women have accused him of misconduct, including Lonna Drewes, who alleges he drugged and raped her in a hotel room in 2018.

Since the allegations surfaced, some journalists and political operatives have said Swalwell’s behavior was widely known on Capitol Hill. Mace said she wants to end the culture of silence on both sides of the political aisle.

"Both parties decided that they would vote against revealing the sexual harassment records of their own party," Mace said of a previous vote that failed on the issue.

"What happens is both parties will protect the other because they don't want their skeletons out there," she added.

Message from Jim Robinson:

Dear FRiends,

We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.

If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you,

Jim

False accusations — and the several gray areas surrounding them — are indeed the problem. In a highly politicized environment, any accusation will be taken at face value and hyped. Some accusations will be totally false. Some will be from disgruntled employees seeking to retaliate. Some will be he said-she said situations, alcohol will likely be involved, and some will be rooted in regrets that arise days, weeks, or months later. Some will be from third parties seizing on rumors and innuendo.

There is a lot of crap floating around that should be seriously vetted before anything is made public. Think about what was done to Clarence Thomas or Brett Kavanaugh.

Always believe the woman is not a sound principle. Maybe the House Ethics Committee has lost its credibility as the gatekeeper. But we still need a gatekeeper. Police investigatiry records aren’t released unless and until chargws are filed, and even then it is unlikely that everything will be made public. The same goes for grand jury proceedings. The same goes for background investigations for senior government appointments or security clearances.

"Slush fund."

That is the settlement account administered by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995. It draws from the U.S. Treasury—meaning taxpayer dollars—to cover awards and settlements for workplace disputes involving congressional employees, including cases of sexual harassment, sex-based discrimination, and other claims.

This fund has disbursed $17-18 million since its inception across hundreds of cases. While it addresses a range of workplace issues beyond sexual misconduct, a portion of the payouts has gone toward resolving sexual harassment allegations against members of Congress and their staff. The process often involves confidential mediation, which has led to criticism that it functions as a de facto protection for accused individuals by shielding their identities and sparing them direct personal financial liability.

Critics argue the structure lacks sufficient transparency and accountability, effectively using public funds to manage reputational and legal risks for lawmakers. Reforms proposed over the years, including attempts to eliminate taxpayer funding for sexual misconduct settlements and require disclosure of involved parties, highlight ongoing bipartisan concerns about the fund's role in perpetuating a culture of impunity. Despite its intent to provide workplace protections equivalent to those in the private sector, the fund's application in high-profile misconduct scenarios continues to fuel debate over whether it prioritizes institutional shielding over genuine justice for victims.

The congressional fund draws from taxpayer money via the U.S. Treasury to pay settlements for workplace claims in Congress.
It covers sexual harassment, discrimination, and other disputes involving members and staff.
$17-18 million has been paid out across nearly 300 cases since 1997.
Confidential mediation has drawn criticism for shielding accused lawmakers from personal consequences.
Reform efforts seek to ban taxpayer funds for sexual misconduct cases and increase transparency.

Multiple watchdog organizations, lawmakers, and citizen-driven advocacy efforts have pressed for the release of detailed records from the congressional settlement fund. These initiatives gained momentum during the #MeToo era and continue into 2026, focusing on greater transparency around taxpayer-funded payouts for workplace claims, including sexual harassment and misconduct.

The nonprofit OpenTheBooks has repeatedly highlighted the lack of detailed disclosure in reports since at least 2021, arguing that after millions in payouts, taxpayers deserve specifics on how the funds were used.
Legislators including Rep. Nancy Mace have introduced resolutions and motions to subpoena OCWR records of pre-2018 settlements tied to member misconduct, with victim names redacted; one such motion passed the House Oversight Committee in early 2026.
Privileged resolutions to force the release of names of members who used the fund for sexual harassment settlements have been brought to the House floor, though they were often referred to committee or voted down by large margins.
Bipartisan legislation such as the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act sought to bar future taxpayer funding for sexual harassment settlements, void nondisclosure agreements, and require public reporting of past payments (without victim identities).
Individual lawmakers from both parties, including Reps. Anna Paulina Luna, Kat Cammack, and others, have publicly called for full disclosure, sometimes linking it to potential resignations or accountability measures.

While annual aggregate reports on recent settlements are now published by the OCWR, comprehensive historical details—especially names of accused members—remain largely shielded, prompting ongoing criticism that institutional protections outweigh public accountability.

As ClearCase_guy wrote, "It’s a big club. And WE ARE not in it."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.