House Votes to Bury Ethics Committee Records on Sexual Harassment — and Both Parties Made It Happen

The House voted 357–65 on March 4, 2026, to refer H.Res. 1100 back to the Ethics Committee — a procedural move that effectively killed Rep. Nancy Mace's push to force the public release of congressional sexual harassment investigation files. The motion to refer drew support from majorities of both parties, making this a rare moment of bipartisan agreement — to keep the records sealed.

Why It Matters

H.Res. 1100 would have directed the House Ethics Committee to preserve and publicly release records from its investigations into members accused of sexual harassment under House rules. The resolution was sparked by allegations involving Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX) and sexual harassment of a congressional staffer, as reported by iHeartMedia/WLAC and Roll Call. At its core, the bill asked a simple question: Should the American public know which members of Congress have been investigated for sexual misconduct? The House answered — overwhelmingly — that the Ethics Committee should handle it behind closed doors.

The resolution specifically targeted clauses 9 and 18 of House Rule XXIII, which govern sexual harassment and the broader Code of Official Conduct. Had it passed directly, it would have represented a historic shift in how Congress handles ethics records preservation and public disclosure of misconduct investigations.

The Big Picture

Mace introduced H.Res. 1100 as a privileged resolution — a procedural tool that forces a House floor vote on ethics-related matters within two legislative days. She had previously filed a nearly identical measure, H.Res. 1072, which was referred to the Ethics Committee without floor action.

The maneuver forced every member to go on the record. But the bipartisan leadership of the Ethics Committee moved quickly to neutralize it.

The other side: Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS) and Ranking Member Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA) issued a joint statement arguing the resolution "could chill victim cooperation and witness participation in ongoing and future investigations" and would hamper the committee's ability "to investigate and eliminate sexual misconduct in the House."

Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY) — a newly seated Ethics Committee member elected via H.Res. 213 — moved the motion to refer, which passed with 175 Republicans and 182 Democrats voting yes.

No hearings were held on H.Res. 1100 before the floor vote. The Trump Administration did not issue a Statement of Administration Policy, which is expected given this is an internal House resolution with no executive branch implications.

Partisan Perspectives: What Members Said About the Ethics Committee Records Vote

The 65 members who voted against the referral — effectively supporting Mace's transparency push — were vocal. Those who voted to bury it were largely silent.

Mace framed it as a cover-up in a post-vote statement on X: "Both parties colluded today to protect predators."

She had warned before the vote: "Any Member voting against this is voting to shield sexual harassers instead of supporting survivors."

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) wrote on X: "Go home and tell your daughters what you've done."

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) called it "the swamp protecting itself" and pledged to pursue subpoenas through committee channels.

Rep. Aaron Bean (R-FL) posted: "No quiet settlements. No hush funds. No NDAs. Full transparency."

Mace also alleged that "Republican leadership is actively whipping against" the resolution — a claim that the 175 Republican "yes" votes on the motion to refer appear to corroborate.

Members who voted to refer the resolution back to committee did not surface significant public statements defending their position, ceding the communications battle almost entirely to Mace and her allies.

The Vote Breakdown: Who Broke Ranks on the Congressional Ethics Investigation

The 65 "nay" votes came from an ideologically diverse coalition: 38 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

Republican defectors included Freedom Caucus-aligned members like Reps. Andy Biggs (AZ), Boebert, Thomas Massie (KY), Chip Roy (TX), and Scott Perry (PA), but also moderates like Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and leadership figures like Rep. James Comer (KY) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (NY).

Democratic defectors included Progressive Caucus members like Reps. Pramila Jayapal (WA) and Ro Khanna (CA), alongside swing-district members like Reps. Jared Golden (ME), Josh Riley (NY), and Patrick Ryan (NY).

Rep. Brad Knott (R-NC) was the sole "present" vote.

Political Stakes

The winners here are the institutional players — Ethics Committee leadership and party bosses on both sides — who preserved the committee's traditional confidentiality. The losers are transparency advocates and, potentially, staffers who filed complaints expecting accountability.

Mace's threat to pursue the issue through alternative channels — she floated using the DOGE oversight committee's subpoena power in a February 26 post — means this fight is not over. Luna echoed that pledge.

For the administration, this is a non-event. The White House has no formal role in internal House governance.

The Bottom Line

The House floor vote on ethics records exposed a tension that cuts across party lines: institutional self-preservation vs. public accountability. Both party leaderships chose the institution. The 357-65 margin was not close.

But the resolution sits within a broader 119th Congress ecosystem of ethics and accountability measures — from the rules package addressing anti-harassment policies to S.307, the Prison Staff Safety Enhancement Act tackling sexual misconduct in federal prisons. Congress is willing to demand transparency from other institutions. Demanding it of itself remains a different matter.

The procedural referral means H.Res. 1100 now sits with the very committee it sought to compel — a committee funded at up to $9.27 million via H.Res. 131 and staffed by members who voted to take jurisdiction over it. The fox is guarding the henhouse, and both parties handed it the keys.

Worth Noting

The only outside organization identified as lobbying on bills related to this cluster is AFGE Local 4070, which spent $60,000 lobbying on S.307 (the prison staff safety bill) — not on H.Res. 1100 itself. The AFGE PAC's 2026-cycle contributions flow almost exclusively to Democrats, with top recipients including Rep. Hakeem Jeffries ($5,000), Rep. Jared Golden ($5,000) — who voted against the motion to refer — and Rep. Steny Hoyer ($7,500). The sole Republican House member receiving AFGE PAC money in the 2026 cycle: Rep. Robert Bresnahan (R-PA), who received $2,500. No lobbying disclosures were filed on H.Res. 1100 directly — unsurprising for an internal House governance measure, but notable given the public interest in congressional ethics investigation transparency.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.