Surprise! Taxpayers Have Been Footing The Bill For Sexual Misconduct In Congress

Authored by Simon Black via,

On January 23, 1995, President Bill Clinton signed into law a piece of legislation that had been almost unanimously approved by both the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.

It was called the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 - CAA.

The idea behind the CAA was to force Congress to abide by the same rules of workplace health and safety that private companies have to follow.

And one notable example was sexual harrassment; until the CAA was passed, sexual harrassment rules didn’t really apply to Congress.

Here’s where it gets crazy, though: the CAA established an agency called the Office of Compliance to adjudicate various workplace complaints.

And the law further directed the Treasury Department to allocate taxpayer funds to pay claims and damages resulting from such workplace complaints.

In other words, for nearly a quarter of a century, taxpayers have been footing the bill to settle monetary damages every time a member of Congress was caught groping an intern.

What’s more, section 416 of the CAA requires that all mediation, hearings, and deliberation in sexual harrassment claims (or any other workplace complaint) be kept strictly confidential, i.e. NOT disclosed to the public.

Plus a lot of the settlements come with strings attached. In one case of sexual harrassment against former Congressman John Conyers, the legal settlement required the complainant sign an agreement with strict non-disparagement clauses:

“Complainant agrees that she will not disseminate or publish, or cause anyone else to disseminate or publish, in any manner, disparaging or defamatory remarks or comments adverse to the interests of Representative John Conyers . . .”

They’re finally in the midst of passing a law to change this.

There’s a new bill that was recently introduced in the Senate called the CAA Reform Act which aims to heavily revise the originaly 1995 bill.

Among other provisions, section 111 of the CAA Reform Act will require members of Congress to pay their own damn legal settlements… so they’ll no longer be able to grope interns on the taxpayer’s dime.

It’s amazing that this was actually the law of the land for more than two decades.

The United States fancies itself as having the most advanced republican democracy in the world. But this is banana republic stuff, plain and simple.



Captain Nemo d… Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:27 Permalink

That should not be a surprise. They are footing the bill for everything that goes on in Congress and thereabouts.

Although ... if the people in their infinite wisdom elect such representatives ...who is to argue with them paying for their actions

nmewn Ms No Mon, 06/18/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

I can't possibly be the only one who finds the dripping nanny state irony of Bill Clinton (of ALL PEOPLE! signing into a law, a procedure and process whereby making those entirely unknowing of...and not responsible in any way for, damages inflicted by, congresscritters on their subordinate staff & acquaintances. 

That is to say, it's a third party (the taxpayer!) who picks up the tab?

Fucking burn it. 

In reply to by Ms No

Zerogenous_Zone Deep Snorkeler Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:47 Permalink

myopic, slanted, MSM view...


but hey, if it gets you off, you're happy, right?!  and there-in lies the main problem in this world...triggering of undereducated snowflakes...


i bet every president in the last 50+ years has had multiple whores/mistresses...and i for one could care less...IF they are working on the "people's" problems...but we know that has only been a sham



In reply to by Deep Snorkeler

serotonindumptruck Zerogenous_Zone Mon, 06/18/2018 - 17:04 Permalink

At the risk of over-generalizing, are there no women left in society who use their sex to advance their political or professional careers?

Some attractive women might still be willing to grant sexual favors to their male colleagues in exchange for a seat at the boardroom table.

It only becomes "sexual harassment" when the blackmail is no longer effective.

In reply to by Zerogenous_Zone

Ms No Deep Snorkeler Mon, 06/18/2018 - 17:05 Permalink

I am both impressed and curious how you know about the grunting in the ear phenomenon.  Do men know these things?  Maybe so.  The most depraved mofos do that. 

Its super creepy because when the come from behind you wonder if they are about to rub one out.  First you hear it and then second you look to see where the hell their hands are.  That is on the top of the list of the most unattractive things a man can do.  You'll never see puss run so fast.  They types that do that know that though so it just makes it weirder.

In reply to by Deep Snorkeler

Totally_Disill… Looney Mon, 06/18/2018 - 17:47 Permalink

Sorry - all names to be made public along with amount paid for their predation including a repayment agreement that if not signed they face impeachment and subject to criminal complaint by the woman they assaulted.  It's bad enough my tax dollars pay for the little blue pill for illegals, I refuse to pay taxes for some throwback politician who can't respect females.  How dare these lowlifes think they can secret off a tidy little account to buy off their sexual assault.  

In reply to by Looney

malek Cryptopithicus Homme Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:35 Permalink

Well Karl Denninger stuck a fork in it in November 2017 already - but better late than never (for Simon Black.)
As it is not available online anymore, I repost it in it's entirety:

The 'Harass Your Sexatary Act Of 1995'

Recall the caterwauling from various Senators related to Moore, candidate for Jeff Session's seat from Alabama.

The allegations against Moore have become ever-more salacious and ever-thinner in terms of evidence, however.  It even appears that one of the pieces of alleged "evidence" was intentionally tampered with -- that is, manufactured, and what's even worse is that one of the people making the allegations seems to have a personal reason to go after the guy.

But let's put that singular incident aside for a minute to discuss sexual harassment and even rape in the context of our Federal Government.  You see, our government is fantastic when it comes to finding ways to evade the very laws they impose on everyone else.  You can pretty-well define an action of Congress to be the exact opposite of its title; "PPACA" being one of the prime examples (Obamacare.)  Not only were there damn few protections in the alleged "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" there's nothing affordable about the 200+% rate increases some people are seeing this year.

Well, in 1995, which I remind you was right at the time Bill Clinton was playing with stinky cigars in the Oval Orifice, Congress decided to pass a law which can be properly called "Congressional Protection For Sexual Assault Act of 1995." Of course it's not really entitled that; it's allegedly called "The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995."

This law was debated and passed in the House 429-0.  It then went to the Senate and was passed by unanimous consent and was signed by then-President Clinton.

You got it -- not one "No" vote between either chamber.

This must have really been a good law, right?

Well, for Congress it was -- if they liked to diddle their sexatary, pages, or other people in their offices.

Gee, I can see why Bill Clinton liked that bill too!

Let's look at it.

The bill says that all these other laws (discrimination, sexual harassment, OSHA regs, etc) do apply to Congress.  Wow, what a subject for a bill!  I thought we had a 14th Amendment that guaranteed equal protection of the law already; for what purpose did we need this bill?

Well, that shall become clear, I suspect, in a minute.

You see, Congress just ignored laws it didn't like for itself, or exempted itself.  This is unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment to the extent it prejudices someone's rights, for example, if a Congressional employee is sexually harassed or assaulted by a member of Congress.  But naw, we can't follow the Constitution so we pass this.

It provides more protection (which might be Constitutional) -- right?

Uh, no.

First, it shreds the Statute of Limitations for all such conduct, capping it at 180 days.  Period.  181 days, tough crap cookie, your complaint goes in the round file.

Second, you are then (as an alleged victim with a complaint) required to undergo "counseling" for 30 days.  No, I'm not kidding:

(a) In General.--A congressional employee alleging a violation of a law made applicable to the legislative branch of the Federal Government under this Act may request counseling through the Office. The Office shall provide the employee with all relevant information with respect to the rights of the employee. A request for counseling shall be made not later than 180 days after the alleged violation forming the basis of the request for counseling occurred.

(b) Period of Counseling.--The period for counseling shall be 30 days unless the employee and the Office agree to reduce the period. The period shall begin on the date the request for counseling is received.

That's right -- you have to attend "counseling", and it must be for 30 days.  Miss one, tough noogies, your complaint goes in the round file.

It doesn't end there.

If you're still unhappy (gee, you think you might be if you got harassed or assaulted?) you then must, within 15 days of the end of the counseling, file a request for mediation.  Said mediation must include the person who harassed or assaulted you, and goes on for another 30 days, which may be extended for 30 more.

I'm sure that spending 30 or 60 days in the same room with someone who harassed or assaulted you attempting to "mediate" your dispute, which incidentally doesn't include a right for you to have counsel present (unless you pay for it out of your own pocket at the going rate, likely $300/hour+), is going to be perfectly fine.

Let's say you jump through both of those hoops.  You now have a fork in the road in front of you.  You can ask for a "formal complaint" and hearing, or you can sue in district court.  Note that if you fail to complete both of the above steps to the board's satisfaction your ability to pursue the complaint ends before you get here.

Now let's say you go for the hearing.  It's non-judicial, but the results are supposed to be published.  Have you ever seen such a decision?  Neither have I.  Are you telling me there have been no such hearings?  Hmmmm...

That's good enough to get out the wood chippers, but it gets better.  Irrespective of the offense or severity the member involved is completely immune from any financial penalties or costs.

That's right -- the Congressperson in question not only cannot be financially penalized and the taxpayer is forced to cover the bill for their proved unlawful acts their legal fees, if any, are paid by the taxpayer as well even if they're found guilty!

(h) Remedy Order.--If the decision of the hearing board under subsection (g) is that a violation of a law made applicable to the legislative branch of the Federal Government under this Act has occurred, it shall order the remedies under such law as made applicable to the legislative branch of the Federal Government under this Act, except that no Member of the House of Representatives, Senator, any other head of an employing office, or any agent of such a Member, Senator, or employing office, shall be personally liable for the payment of compensation. The hearing board shall have no authority to award punitive damages. The entry of an order under this subsection shall constitute a final decision for purposes of judicial review under section 11.

(i) Funds.--There shall be established in the House of Representatives and in the Senate a fund from which compensation (including attorney's fees) may be paid in accordance with an order under subsection (h) or as a result of judicial review under section 11 or a civil action under section 12. From the outset of any proceeding in which compensation may be paid from a fund of the House of Representatives, the General Counsel of the House of Representatives may provide the respondent with representation.

Oh, and unless the actions of this board are clearly arbitrary or an abuse of discretion, or procedure wasn't followed, you cannot recover in a suit following such a decision either.

Now let's say you decide to sue instead of going before this "board."  You can do that too (but not both), however the same rules apply when it comes to judgments.  The member of Congress or his/her staff cannot be compelled to pay anything, no punitive damages can be awarded and the member's legal fees are covered where yours are "possibly" awardable if you win.

Incidentally if you're not well-versed in civil law the odds of you obtaining a fee judgement to cover your legal costs in nearly all civil actions are approximately equal to the odds of being hit by an asteroid as you retrieve your mail this afternoon.  Got $50,000 or more for counsel you can afford to see go "poof" like a fart in a Church?  That's the opening bid on costs, by the way -- in a civil action with discovery and such at $300/hour it's not hard to wind up with a $100,000+ legal bill which you have to be able to pay yourself, with the likely retainer ask being anywhere from 20 to 50 large up front?  If not?  No lawyer for you!

Oh, and if that's not good enough?  Counseling, mediation and hearings are all confidential.  The public has no right to know.  At all.  The only exception is of course if you sue, since courtrooms are open and anyone can show up and watch.

Now let's review.

This law can best be described as the "Assault Your Secretary And Get Away With It Act of 1995."  It prohibits a member of Congress or his or her staff from being held personally responsible for their unlawful conduct.  It dramatically shortens the Statute of Limitations (unconstitutionally) for anyone who works for Congress in regard to these actions, it forces someone who has been violated by a member to mediate said dispute in their presence, it places absolute bars on filing suit unless you have first been "counseled" and "mediated" to the satisfaction of said board and finally, it forces the taxpayer to pay for all costs the member incurs, including legal fees and judgments if found responsible, while the person who brings the complaint is entitled to nothing, must hire their own counsel and pay them with their own money with a near-zero chance of recovering anything, ever.

Oh, and by the way, despite all these roadblocks this fund has actually paid out some $15 million anyway (in other words, after all those hoops some people have won) yet there is no public record, anywhere, of which Congresscritters got nailed, for what, and what the penalty imposed that the taxpayer picked up for each of them was.

You can talk about to me about "outrage" in Congress in regards to sexual harassment or even outright sexual assault when this crap law is repealed, the 14th Amendment is enforced with respect to all laws regarding sexual assault, harassment and employment law in general and every member of Congress, in either the House or Senate, who was present in 1995 and thus voted for this unconstitutional piece of crap that effectively authorized systemic sexual assault and harassment against anyone working for a member of Congress resigns, forfeits their pension and all other federal benefits and then drinks a can of Drano on television in public.

Until then, ladies and gentlemen in Congress, whether present in 1995 or not, you can all **** off. (defunct)

BTW, after reading this I had to research if Ron Paul had been a member of congress in 1995 - he wasn't.

In reply to by Cryptopithicus Homme

philosobilly malek Mon, 06/18/2018 - 21:08 Permalink

holy monkey balls batman, that is genuinely frightening. but we all assumed it was going on. i mean which ever side of the divide you fall on or ideological spectrum in a very real pragmatic way most of the people in washington, the media, big companies are really jsut full of shit, and serfdom never ended, they just re-branded it and were stupid in general. i say the fulcrum is govt, because without it, welfare, warfare, and crony capitalism couldn't be enforced via the law via coercion, because govt necessarily has a monopoly on coercion due to the law- theya re literally the law. here in the US its actually our duty to overthrow the govt when they become tyrannical, hence the second amendment. chaining the federal govt down with the bonds of the constitution is what made our ancestors unique in human history, now were lost until were not again, history is cyclical.

In reply to by malek

Noktirnal Giant Meteor Mon, 06/18/2018 - 20:25 Permalink

Yep. Stop participating.

Only when the people stop playing along with the .gov's delusional "games", will any meaningful reform be a able to take place. My opinion is that it is beyond reform. There just isn't a solution for working within the current system.

My advice: Get out! Not necessarily physically, but financially for sure. Stop funding terrorists.

In reply to by Giant Meteor

Ms No Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:36 Permalink

They are all psychos.  The men have probably gang raped each other under Podesta's cannibal painting in between catching Epstein Air.  Containing their behavior has to be a huge job.  All of them..

Dr. Acula Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:43 Permalink

>they’ll no longer be able to grope interns on the taxpayer’s dime


Oh gosh, if intern groping is forbidden, what kind of blackmailable people will intelligence agencies be able to install in the US government?


Mittens is a god Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:46 Permalink

Not only do we foot the bill for them fucking each other but we get to pay them to fuck us too!! Specially those fucking republican trumptard Nazi's. Now don't get all mad cause I call you retards Nazi's that is exactly what you are, say it with pride and stop pretending your not, you are.

dirty fingernails Mon, 06/18/2018 - 16:47 Permalink

Again we see how the 2 parties who "hate" each other can come together real damned quick to benefit themselves. Such seamless cooperation when the peons are getting fucked over.

Don't forget to vote! Team A is the good guys/gals! Team B are bad guys/gals. Stern words! Furrowed brows! Gesticulation! Big smiles, serious looks and pretending to listen when you aren't carrying a suitcase of cash or missing children!