ICYMI: Top reads on Congress

Katherine Tully-McManus, “IG Report: Some members of Congress sexually harassed night-shift custodians,” Roll Call:

“Members of Congress allegedly sexually harassed night shift custodial staff while they cleaned their offices. Sexual harassment prevention training went off the rails. And the Architect of the Capitol has no unified system for effectively tracking complaints and resolutions of sexual harassment cases.”

Stephanie Akim, “Trickle-down equality: More women in Congress means less sexism for staffers,” Roll Call:

“Women in Congress have been getting attention recently for calling out casual sexism on the Hill — and female staffers say it’s making their jobs easier.”

Naomi Lim, “House Democrats slow-walk rollout of compulsory anti-harassment training: GOP,” Washington Examiner:

“More than 100 days into the 116th Congress, House members and staffers are yet to take anti-harassment training, a key reform rolled out as part of lawmakers’ response to a slew of #MeToo allegations made on Capitol Hill.”

Matthew Green, “How the House Freedom Caucus found an unlikely ally: Donald Trump,” Washington Post:

“Presidents usually look to longtime allies, close friends and family members for political and policy guidance. But a new account of the most recent federal government shutdown suggests President Trump takes advice from an unusual source: a small group of Republican backbenchers in the House of Representatives.”

Peter J. Wallison, “The Judiciary Can Restore the Power of Congress,” Law and Liberty:

“This is about as clear a restatement of Hamilton’s view in Federalist 78 as one could wish for, and suggests that the new Supreme Court majority has the fortitude to restore the importance of Congress by limiting the powers it can delegate to the executive branch.”

Brett Bernhardt, “There’s More To Keeping Talent On The Hill Than Pay,” Hillfaith Blog:

“While pay is important, it is not the most important tool Congress has at its disposal, as Burgat notes. One could argue that the Hill actually does offer, in some cases, more financial incentives than the competition does for good staffers to stay.”

Tom Hamburger, Karoun Demirjian, Josh Dawsey, Rachael Bade, “Trump moves to resist House inquiries, setting up fight over congressional subpoena powers,” Washington Post:

“President Trump’s attorneys and the White House are moving to resist a growing number of congressional requests for information, increasing the likelihood of a protracted legal fight that could test the power of congressional subpoenas.”

Don Wolfensberger, “Is messaging a massage or a partisan body slam?” The Hill:

“However, it is beginning to seem that in the run-up to the 2020 elections, both parties are avoiding making any major policy decisions that might provoke a veto showdown or retaliation at the polls. It is so much easier to force votes on non-binding wedge issue resolutions that have no real impact beyond the chambers’ walls.”

Simone Pathe, “With less Lululemon and less partisan sniping, campaign staffers adjust to the Hill,” Roll Call:

“These staffers worked on 2018 House and Senate campaigns and now find themselves immersed in the official side in Congress. Cycling on and off the Hill every two years is common. But for those who have never held official-side jobs before, the first 100 days of the 116th Congress have been an interesting transition period.”

Lesley Clark, “A Kentucky progressive finds himself in the middle of the House,” McClatchy:

“Rep. John Yarmuth is a lifetime liberal but today finds himself feeling like a moderate in a Congress that’s just had a fresh infusion of progressive lawmakers.”