Image: Rep. Jackie Speier
Congresswoman Jackie Speier made a statement last tuesday about two members in congress that she knows have sexual harassed staffers. She declined to reveal the names but she did say that one was a democrat and the other a republican.
Speier stated, "I'm respecting that nondisclosure agreement and the victims wishes".
Earlier this week she stated that republican representative John Conyers was not one of the people she referred to. Conyers is facing allegations from a buzzfeed report that details harassment from the congressman. Speier feels that the allegations are serious and should be investigated.
Discussion:
Do you agree with representative Speier's decision on withholding the names of harassers in congress? Why or why not? What punishment should these harassers face?
Links
CBS
CNN
Congresswoman Jackie Speier made a statement last tuesday about two members in congress that she knows have sexual harassed staffers. She declined to reveal the names but she did say that one was a democrat and the other a republican.
Speier stated, "I'm respecting that nondisclosure agreement and the victims wishes".
Earlier this week she stated that republican representative John Conyers was not one of the people she referred to. Conyers is facing allegations from a buzzfeed report that details harassment from the congressman. Speier feels that the allegations are serious and should be investigated.
Discussion:
Do you agree with representative Speier's decision on withholding the names of harassers in congress? Why or why not? What punishment should these harassers face?
Links
CBS
CNN
7 comments:
I understand what Speier is trying to do here especially in trying to respect the victims’ wishes. However, I believe that she should, at the very least, state the names of the harassers without alluding to the victims in any way. As the media has made clear, charges of sexual assault/harassment are more prevalent than people initially believed. Coming clean about who acted in this way would definitely protect anyone else that could become a potential victim to harassment at the hands of these staffers. Though this may tarnish the reputations of the accused politicians, they, of all people, should have known that their government positions do not deem them to be above the law in any way, regardless of whether they are a high-profile politician or a “lowly” staffer. I don’t have an idea as to what exactly should be done to the harassers since I do not know the nature/degree of harassment, but they should be held fully accountable for their actions. For example, they ought to possibly be removed from their jobs or have some sort of sanction imposed upon them; really anything so long as it brings justice to the victims.
I agree with Angelique that while Speier is trying to respect the victims, not revealing the names of the congressmen seems to help protect them and there should be transparency between the government and the people about issues such as these, because it is the government's responsibility to condemn them for their actions. However, I understand that it is most likely not within her authority to reveal their names and there may be legal issues involved. The government needs to show that this type of behavior is not acceptable and the harassers should be fired from their positions.
I don't agree with the concept of keeping the names of sexual harassers hidden in general, but I think that in this case, Jackie Speier was obligated to do so because of a nondisclosure agreement she made and the victim's wishes to keep the names of their harassers private. However, if this was not the case, I believe she should have made their names public in the name of transparency, as previous commenters mentioned. I also agree with previous commenters that these two Congress members should be held fully responsible for their actions.
I agree with Emma's perspective on the matter. While it would be ideal to know which members of Congress are sexual harassers so that they can be held accountable, it's important to respect the wishes of those who have been harassed. I also feel like it's a bit of a power move, saying that she knows people in both parties who have harassed women. Now any man in Congress who has harassed women, as I'm sure it's more than just the two, fears that Speier might know about what they've done.
I agree with her decision to withhold the names because from what I read it seemed like the victims wanted her to keep it secret. Even though the harassers should be brought to light and be punished for their actions, I believe that the victims choice should be upheld. I think the best way to deal with this situation is to punish the harassers but keep it lowkey.
I agree with her decision to withhold the names for several reasons. One being that it is important to respect the wishes of the victims, and if they do not want the attention of the public on this case, than I respect Speier's decision. Second, I don't think that every case needs to be public. I think that it is acceptable for these cases to be handled outside of the public eye. Ultimately, I think it is up to the victims to make this decision.
Although the victims want the names to be withheld, it is not fair for the public to not know who the people are. By not knowing the people's names, the people who harassed the victims will most likely be prompted to strike again.
Post a Comment