Republican Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado is calling on Congress to strip former lawmakers Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzales of their federal pensions following their resignations this week. Both members departed under the cloud of separate sexual misconduct allegations, prompting Boebert to argue they should face financial consequences beyond their exit from office.
"They Should've Been Expelled"
Speaking to CNN's Manu Raju outside the Capitol on Tuesday, Boebert expressed her view that resignation was an insufficient outcome. "I think they should've been expelled and not resigned," she stated. She continued, advocating for a more punitive approach: "And I think that we actually need to look into ways to censure, with other aspects to say you can't have your pension, you can't leave here with all your taxpayer-funded benefits after such shameful acts that cause you to bow out and resign from Congress."
Swalwell, a California Democrat, and Gonzales, a Texas Republican, both formally ended their congressional careers on Tuesday. Their simultaneous departures mark a rare bipartisan moment of scandal, triggering a renewed reckoning over misconduct on Capitol Hill. The Democratic caucus is now grappling with the fallout from Swalwell's resignation, which has sent shockwaves through the party.
The Legal Hurdles to Pension Forfeiture
Boebert's proposal faces significant legal and procedural obstacles. Members of Congress become eligible for retirement benefits after five years of federal service, a threshold both former members meet. The details of their potential benefits depend on which federal retirement plan they participated in, but both are 45 years old and would not receive payments for several years under standard rules.
Critically, expulsion or censure does not automatically trigger the loss of retirement benefits. Under current federal law, a member of Congress can be stripped of their annuity only if convicted of specific felonies related to their service. Neither Swalwell nor Gonzales has been convicted of a crime. The Los Angeles District Attorney has confirmed a criminal investigation into the allegations against Swalwell, but no charges have been filed.
Boebert has been vocal about the allegations. Last week, she announced she would introduce a resolution to censure Swalwell, writing on social media that, "According to 4 witnesses, including a former employee, Rep. Swalwell has been sexually harassing and raping women." She added that he "is exactly why Americans hate politicians and I am going to make sure that every member has an opportunity to condemn his conduct." In a subsequent post, she argued Swalwell's pension "should be redirected to his victims."
Historical Precedent and Political Context
The historical record shows how rare formal congressional punishment is. Only six representatives have ever been expelled from the House in U.S. history, and just 28 have been censured. Some members who resigned preemptively have been censured retroactively. Boebert's focus on financial penalties adds a new dimension to these traditional disciplinary tools.
The swift departures of Swalwell and Gonzales have removed the immediate possibility of expulsion votes, but the political aftermath continues. Other members facing ethics scrutiny have sought to distance themselves; for instance, Representative Mills has publicly stated he is 'not in the same category' as the two resigned lawmakers. The situation underscores the ongoing challenges Congress faces in policing its own members and administering consequences for misconduct that falls short of criminal conviction.
It remains unclear what specific legislative mechanism Boebert would employ to attempt to revoke the pensions, and her office did not immediately respond to requests for clarification. The proposal highlights a persistent tension in congressional ethics: the disconnect between political disgrace and tangible financial penalty for members who leave under a cloud but avoid formal expulsion or felony conviction.
