I happened to be reading some of the contemporaneous news coverage of the censure of the late Rep. Gerry Studds, and noticed this passage in a July 21, 1983 New York Times article, “House Censures Crane and Studds for Sexual Relations with Pages,” by Steve Roberts:

Some lawmakers who supported the milder penalty [reprimand rather than censure] were bitter at the House action. Later, one California Democrat called the vote ”disgusting” and said the representatives were ”trying to show how pure they are.” Another West Coast Democrat added that a vote for the harsher penalty would be ”easier to explain” to constituents.”A lot of people out there worry what happens when the Moral Majority uses a 30-second spot against them,” an Eastern Democrat added.

If by some chance these members were still in the House, it would be interesting to compare their statements then to whatever they may have said about the Mark Foley scandal, would it not?Too bad Steve Roberts and the New York Times decided the public had no need to know the names of these Congressmen.