US House ethics panel recommends censuring North Carolina’s Chuck Edwards

North Carolina congressman’s campaign rejects committee finding that Edwards ‘engaged in sexual harassment’

The US House of Representatives ethics committee on Monday recommended that Chuck Edwards, a Republican congressman, face censure after determining he “fostered a hostile work environment and engaged in sexual harassment” by giving gifts and lavishing attention on two young female staffers.

The bipartisan panel began investigating the second-term North Carolina congressman earlier this year, after receiving complaints about his conduct. In a report approved by Democratic and Republican committee members, they determined there “was substantial reason to believe” Edwards broke House rules by singling out the two unidentified aides for special treatment that made them uncomfortable and harmed relations with other employees.

While the investigation uncovered no evidence that Edwards engaged in sexual activity with the staffers or suggested it, his behavior likely violated provisions in the House code of conduct that prohibit sexual harassment and unwanted advances. The congressman “acknowledged at least some of the behavior at issue could be viewed as inappropriate”, but “has not acknowledged or taken responsibility for the harm he caused”, the committee wrote in its report.

“A member of Congress should not single out a staffer and isolate them from other staff, make frequent comments regarding that person’s appearance and weight, send messages in the middle of the night, text staff deeply personal and seemingly romantic thoughts, intrude on personal occasions without invitation, pay for personal vacations, and spend thousands of dollars on gifts for staffers,” they continued.

Edwards’s re-election campaign criticized the report, arguing its findings “completely exonerate” the congressman while saying ethics committee staff “have taken it upon themselves to write their own rules based upon an interpretation that is inconsistent with the written rule of law or House rules”.

“Representative Edwards looks forward to having his name cleared and will work to ensure that the full light of day is brought on this process and that every member of Congress and the public can see the attempt to harm the congressman who has brought no harm to others,” the campaign said in a statement.

If the House agrees to censure Edwards, he would have to stand in the well of the chamber while the text of a resolution rebuking him is read aloud.

The congressman was already viewed as vulnerable to losing re-election to his western North Carolina district in the November midterm elections. Last week election forecaster Sabato’s Crystal Ball announced it was rating his race a “toss-up” in a sign of improving Democratic chances.

“My heart goes out to the young women who took these roles to serve our community,” his Democratic opponent, Jamie Ager, said following the report’s release. “We deserve leaders with the moral character western North Carolina can be proud of.”

Elected in 2022 after ousting the scandal-plagued Madison Cawthorn in the Republican primary, Edwards, a former state senator, left most of the hiring for his new office up to his chief of staff, but insisted on bringing “three young women” into his operation, according to the report. This group included a woman who was still in college and identified by the committee as “Staffer 1” and a second in her early 20s, identified as “Staffer 2”.

“Both young women were subject to increasingly unusual attention from the congressman while they worked for him, creating an environment where both they and their coworkers felt uncomfortable,” the committee found.

These behaviors included Edwards bringing Staffer 1 to a White House event without telling the rest of his staff, buying her flowers and texting her in advance that he was “so excited about tonight” and wanted it to be “perfect”. After the event, the staffer said Edwards tried to “pressure” her into continuing the night together, which the congressman told the committee he did not recall.

He invited both staffers to private dinners, and at one point told Staffer 2 to ensure the event was not put on his calendar by his office scheduler. He would also send both “personal texts” later in the evening about planning events together or expressing “personal sentiments”, the committee found.

Edwards also planned lengthy and elaborate trips with the two staffers either together or individually, at one point suggesting to Staffer 2 that they “go to Annapolis for lunch, meditate by its water, stroll about town, find a day spa, see a movie, or wipe out the casino”.

“I’m probably over thinking being impulsive but I really want you to enjoy our time together nearly as much as [I] know [I] will,” he wrote in a text message to the staffer released by the committee.

His actions made the two staff members uncomfortable, and when a senior employee of his office spoke to Edwards on their behalf, that staffer told the committee the congressman “got very angry” and said she “didn’t understand the unique relationship” he had with the two women.

Both staffers later resigned because of his behavior, but gave Edwards other reasons why when they departed.

The behavior affected the morale of his office, the committee found, with one senior aide telling investigators Edwards “lashes out at everyone on the team except” the two women. The congressman denied yelling at his staff. Another staffer said they had told Edwards that an “unfair standard existed” in his office, which he said was caused by employees being “jealous”.

Even after she left his employment, Staffer 2 agreed to a trip to Las Vegas with Edwards, saying she felt pressured to do so in part because he had influence over her being hired for another job in civil service.

He paid for her flights, accommodation at the Bellagio hotel and a show at the Sphere. After receiving a bouquet of flowers upon arrival, Staffer 2 texted Edwards: “I’m almost ready and just got the flowers – they’re very pretty. Thank you! I did want to flag that the message made me uncomfortable. Just want to make sure this trip isn’t meant to be anything it’s not?”

“Understood, and agree. I’m sorry it made you uncomfortable. Nothing was meant by it, other than what was intended to be a cute play on the name of the arrangement,” Edwards responded.