“DC Executive Watch: Taxpayers have Funded Over $18.2 million Over the Past 25 Years to Settle Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Cases” (Texas Metro News)
Welcome to The Congressional Slush Fund!
Hidden inside the U.S. Treasury, this is the account Congress has secretly used for decades to settle workplace misconduct claims against… itself.
Let’s break it down:
WHO
Members of Congress and their offices.
Also involved: the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (formerly the Office of Compliance), which administers workplace complaints under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995.
The other key party in this arrangement: You. (The taxpayer.)
WHAT
For years, settlements for harassment, discrimination, and other workplace violations on Capitol Hill are being paid out of a taxpayer-funded Treasury account rather than by the politicians responsible.
Since the late 1990s, more than $18 million of your money has been paid out across hundreds of cases involving congressional offices and related agencies.
The payouts were secret and the identities of the lawmakers involved were usually hidden.
WHERE
The system operates entirely within the machinery of Capitol Hill.
Complaints are filed through a specialized dispute process under congressional workplace law rather than through the standard federal employment system.
In practice, that means allegations are resolved quietly—with money from the Treasury.
WHEN
The system dates back to 1995, when Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act. (Of course—just like they pass salary increases for themselves.)
This Act came under scrutiny during the 2017–2018 #MeToo era when it was revealed that millions had already been paid out in confidential settlements.
Some lawmakers are demanding that the names of members who benefited from the settlement fund be released, while most others have voted to keep those records within congressional ethics channels.
“Congress Votes to Keep Sexual Harassment Settlement Records Secret” (San Antonio Today)
WHY
Because Congress designed a system to handle its own misconduct complaints.
In theory, the idea was to give staffers a faster, less adversarial path to justice.
In practice, the system has a different effect: Confidentiality. As in, cover up.
HOW
The process works like this:
1. A congressional employee files a complaint.
2. The case goes through mediation and administrative procedures rather than to court.
3. If a settlement is reached, payment comes from the Treasury fund.
4. Confidentiality ensures the lawmaker’s identity is kept out of public view.
Bottom Line
Washington constantly lectures the rest of the country about workplace conduct.
But for years Congress has been running a system in which:
• Staffers accused lawmakers
• Taxpayers paid the settlements
• The public never learned the names
The scandal isn’t just their misconduct.
It’s that the American taxpayer is expected to help cover it up miscreant behavior.
“Hollywood Enters Oscars Weekend in Existential Crisis” (Bloomberg)
Lights, Camera, (Not Much) Action
Hollywood spent decades lecturing the world about power, morality, and social justice.
Now it’s discovering something far less cinematic: The money is drying up.
Behind the champagne smiles at the Oscars lies an industry grappling with layoffs, fewer productions, and weakening ticket sales—evidence that the entertainment machine that once dominated global culture is now sputtering.
Theater-goers are sparse. Steaming economics are shaky. Studios are cutting jobs. Production is slowing.
Even the Oscars—once Hollywood’s annual coronation—now feel like a lavish awards show for celebrities shrinking behind the curtain. (And if they talk politics, for viewers it’s like listening to shrunken heads.)
Hollywood built a business model that assumed the audience would always show up.
But audiences now have alternatives (Netflix et al) and old studio gatekeepers no longer control the screen.
Bill Maher's Take on Hollywood Diversity Quotas
“Sean Penn was right to skip this sorry Oscars circus” (The Telegraph)
Good opening segment, heart-felt tributes to Rob Reiner and (especially) Robert Redford (kudos to “Babs”).
Otherwise, a less than stellar evening of dimming stars and black holes.
Sean deserved his Oscar. His preference for being elsewhere (some suggest Ukraine, where he previously gave one of his trophies to Zelenskyy) was prescient.
Breaking: Just spied Oscars host Conan O’Brien leaving Pavilions supermarket at Montecito Country Mart from my dining perch at Merci. He looked somewhat burned out. I don’t think he’ll be hosting next year—maybe Ricky Gervais? (One can only hope.)
But probably not as…
“Ricky Gervais gives shock two-word response to fans wanting him to host the Oscars” (Daily Mail)
(No need to repeat it here.)
Ricky Gervais Hosting Golden Globes
(If you never saw the best opening monologue I’ve ever seen at an awards program—click the link above—you’re missing out big-time. Spoiler alert: Ricky could give a crap about Hollywood-sized egos. And he did.)
“Gavin Newsom’s taxpayer-funded PR blitz” (NY Times)
California’s problem, according to Gavin Newsom, is not rampant corruption.
The problem is he hasn’t yet found a PR company able to put a cap on news about corruption and his disastrous policies.
But he’s trying anyway—and in the process wasting $19 million (your money) in a failed attempt to cover up his ineptitude.
“Obama Presidential Center wants 100 unpaid volunteers — while CEO Valerie Jarrett makes $740K” (NY Post)
Dem policy in a nutshell: The bigwigs grow rich and the people get shat on.
“Can scientists really resurrect the dodo?” (The Guardian)
Jeez, isn’t that what they did with Joe Biden in 2020?
“Trump’s UFO release could include videos, photos of non-human craft proving we aren’t alone: source” (NY Post)
Every decade produces its own “historic UFO revelation.”
Roswell. Area 51. Project Blue Book. Navy videos. Congressional hearings.
Yet the end result is usually the same:
More mystery. Nothing definitive.
“How Starmer’s inner circle colluded to see no evil, hear no evil on Mandelson” (The Telegraph)
This is just the kind of political enabling that allowed Jeffrey Epstein and all his powerful pedo pals to flourish without fear of prosecution.
“How Epstein lured girls to his Zorro Ranch and kept authorities away” (NBC News)
The real obscenity here isn’t just what Epstein did.
It’s how long the system allowed him—and the well-connected men orbiting him—to operate without consequence.
“Russia Shuts Off Internet in Moscow as It Tests Nationwide Censorship System” (WSJ)
The step you take when you don’t want your citizens to know how badly you’re screwing up.
“‘Beatrice can’t stop crying and Eugenie has her head in the sand’: Royal insiders tell why the King is distancing himself from Andrew’s ‘highly strung’ daughters” (Daily Mail)
The real story is not ex-prince Andrew’s bawling daughters.
It’s about how the Anti-Slavery Collection trustees lavishly spend donor money.
Very little trickles down to putting an end to slavery.
The Anti-Slavery Collective, co-founded by Eugenie in 2017 to raise awareness of modern slavery and sex trafficking, had raised a hefty £1 million for its highly-commendable cause.
Two-and-a-half years on, however, and with the bulk of that money – £650,000 – still sitting in a fixed-term deposit account, there are concerns over the charity’s ‘disproportionate’ spending on administrative costs versus its impact, with nearly £200,000 paid to staff to manage less than £100,000 in charitable programmes last year.
The Anti-Slavery Collective’s inaugural ‘Force For Freedom’ gala in November 2023 was a glittering and hugely successful affair.
Seems that philanthropy these days—especially when “royals” are behind it—is just an excuse for throwing glamorous galas at donor expense.
And finally…
Brit Arrested at UK Airport for FaceBook Post
Growing up in London, I enjoyed my regular Sunday visits to Speakers Corner in Hyde Park.
Anyone from anywhere could climb onto a soapbox and spout off about whatever they pleased. The more profane, biased, or outrageous the better.
The language could be blistering. Sometimes deeply offensive.
A cloud would gather. Some would clap. Others would heckle. Many would laugh.
If you disagreed strongly enough, you found your own soapbox and joined the cacophony—voices of every race, religion, and culture colliding in open air.
Peacefully.
If your feelings got hurt, well, no one said you had to be there. London offered plenty of other things to do.
That was the London I loved.
People didn’t weep, grow angry, or dig trenches over disagreeable opinions.
You laughed. Shrugged it off. Maybe argued back.
Mostly you learned something important: humanity is united in its ability to be diverse, opinionated, contradictory, and occasionally absurd.
And that’s fine.
Humans are not robots programmed to think the same way. How boring the world would be if this were the case.
Freedom of belief is sacred.
The freedom to say what you believe is even more sacred.
In 1906, writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall, summarizing the philosophy of Voltaire, captured the principle perfectly:
“I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
What a week—whew!
And you should too.
What would DC be without CORRUPTION ? Can you imagine the Congressmen and Senators there because they wanted to make America a great pleace to be and live? And at the same time they were'nt selfishly trying to stuff their own pockets ??
ATB, Robert, ,,,AKJ in WA