In the latest bizarre development in the drama of George Santos, this mysterious lawmaker has been appointed to the House’s small business and science committees. As a former House committee chairman, I can see the situation. The position of seats is determined by seniority. As a new member, Mr. Santos will be placed at the far end of the dais, which normally means he will receive no attention from his peers and no media coverage. Every time Mr. Santos speaks or asks a question, however, the media will focus on him, bringing humiliation to him and unwanted attention to the committee and the Republicans who placed him there. How do committee witnesses respond to his questions? How do committee members tolerate this man’s presence?

To be effective as a member of Congress, whether through legislation, committee work, deal-making, favor-trading, or assisting a constituent, you must have contacts. It is incredibly difficult to accomplish anything alone. Meaningful accomplishment begins with a degree of collaboration with coworkers based on friendship, philosophy, party affiliation, shared interests, prior collaboration, or a mix of these factors. And mutual trust is virtually always the foundation of these relationships.

Having served in Congress for 28 years, I cannot see how Mr. Santos, if he considers it at all, believes he can be a successful House member. I cannot recall another freshman politician in modern times who entered office so deficient in colleagues’ trust and regard. I cannot imagine members of either party working or cooperating with Mr. Santos, with the possible exception of a few ineffective outliers. And without it, you’re basically faking your way through the workweek, something Mr. Santos appears to be rather adept at.

How does it feel to be disgraced and rejected as a member of Congress, to be an outcast among your peers? Mr. Santos brings us into uncharted ground, as we have so few examples. Mr. Santos appears to have made practically all of this up. New members of Congress get to know one another by sharing stories about where they grew up and attended school and by exploring areas of mutual interest. New members meet with senior members who can show them the ropes and assist them in achieving early legislative victories; which senior members will want to work with this individual?

Typical House members are constantly bombarded with 100 tasks, including calls to make and answer, prioritising and delivering client services, delivering good and bad news to their districts, and making choices. Getting folks on the phone or in a meeting to get the answers or results you require is often crucial to your capacity to accomplish all of this. Who will answer the phone when George Santos calls, and who will take him seriously?

Obviously, not every member of Congress is a candidate for sainthood or a paragon of virtue, but when a member is under investigation or suspicion, there is typically a pattern of behaviour to examine. In 2010, although New York Representative Charles Rangel was under investigation by the Ethics Committee, he continued to work productively with many of us. During his prior 40 years in Congress, he had a reputation for keeping his word, and he had an experienced staff that collaborated with colleagues’ staffs to serve the district well. Representative Rangel may have been subjected to a strong media glare and was less gregarious than normal, but he did not go into hiding and was not shunned. Even many of those who ultimately voted to reprimand him viewed his transgressions as malum prohibitum rather than malum in se. (Only two Republicans voted against his censure, including me.)

Other lawmakers, embroiled in much more grave scandals, resigned quite quickly: Rep. Mark Foley of Florida resigned in less than 48 hours following allegations that he sent sexually provocative communications to underage boys who served as congressional pages. In 2011, New York Representative Anthony Weiner resigned three weeks after his sexting scandal surfaced. Both men appeared to see the writing on the wall: Against the backdrop of investigations into probable criminal activity and the heinous nature of the charges against them, they realised they were no longer effective. I do not know Mr. Santos, but it is difficult for me to view him as anything other than delusional if he believes he can function or that his ongoing service will accomplish anything other than increasing his own humiliation.

When you have no trusted colleagues or friends on Capitol Hill, you rapidly become isolated, and the voters pay the price. Representative Weiner had capable employees in his Washington and district offices who were able to continue serving his residents during the weeks he was under pressure and after he resigned, despite the controversy. Given that Mr. Santos’s staff is very new on Capitol Hill and most people will have a hard time trusting that his office will keep its word if the congressman is a fake, this is difficult to imagine. Some municipal and county authorities from the Third Congressional District have already stated that they will not engage with Mr. Santos or his office due to a lack of confidence. This is a formula for calamity.

As a result of this albatross known as Santos, there is also a potential political calamity brewing for the House Republicans, who run the risk of losing their majority. The Republicans may not have won the House in 2022 if New York had not suddenly gained four seats. Nonetheless, if congressional Republicans continue to support Mr. Santos, these four seats and at least four others might be in grave danger in 2024.

Editors’ Choice

A French city asks Madonna for information about a long-lost painting.

Explore Boston by Reading It

What Oscar Nominees Will Be Announced on Tuesday? What Is Not?
Continue reading the primary narrative
New York’s freshly elected Republicans have demanded Mr. Santos’ resignation. The leaders of the Republican congressional caucus must make it plain that they, too, want him out of office and immediately request an exhaustive investigation by the Ethics Committee, which has the jurisdiction to recommend expulsion. Failure to do what is morally and politically correct could result in New York voters punishing Republican officeholders during a presidential election year because the G.O.P. could not find a way to fire Mr. Santos.

The truth is that Mr. Santos is damaging the House, which many of us cherish, and driving the Republican caucus to a disgraceful position. He does not belong in that position, yet there is no indication that he will retire. The stranger the revelations, the further he digs. Expulsion would need a vote of two-thirds by the House following a hearing and findings by the Ethics Committee or a criminal indictment and conviction. In any event, that would not occur for months. As long as Mr. Santos is in Congress, he will be incapable of accomplishing anything for his constituents. For at least this one point in his life, Mr. Santos must confront reality, do the right thing, and quit his congressional seat.