Rep. Don Davis (D-NC), one of the most vulnerable House Democrats on the ballot this year, is facing questions about the management of his congressional office after anonymous reviews alleged workplace dysfunction, high staff turnover, and that employees were asked to perform campaign work during regular office hours.
The allegations appeared on “Scoop,” a recently launched service offered by CNCT, a congressional staffer connection platform. The tool allows congressional staffers to anonymously evaluate their offices in categories including leadership, workplace culture, work-life balance, compensation, advancement opportunities, appreciation, and whether their work was rewarding.
CNCT promoted the service as a confidential forum for congressional accountability, stating in a July 14 social media post that “good bosses on the Hill deserve to know it. Bad ones deserve to hear it too.”
Five reviews attributed to Davis’s office and posted in July 2026 were provided to Breitbart News. Every reviewer answered “no” when asked whether they would recommend the office, while the overall ratings ranged from 1.3 to 3.4.
Although Breitbart News could not independently confirm the reviewers’ identities or allegations, CNCT founder David Tennent said the platform verifies that reviewers currently work or previously worked in the offices they evaluate.
“Every review is submitted to CNCT’s review system before it goes live,” Tennent told Breitbart News. “The identity of the reviewer is verified by a human on CNCT’s team and we ensure they actually worked in the office they are reviewing.”
Tennent said most reviewers verify House or Senate email addresses through the platform, and CNCT then conducts additional research to confirm their identities. He said users may review a particular office only once and that the reviews attributed to Davis’s office underwent the platform’s standard verification and moderation process.
CNCT does not independently verify every factual claim, Tennent said, but reviews are moderated for compliance with its policies and reflect the experiences of verified current or former employees.
Congressional offices may raise concerns with CNCT, which may edit or remove content that violates its policies but does not remove a review solely because an office disputes it. Tennent said the platform will not disclose reviewers’ identities in response to complaints, calling staffers’ peace of mind its “number one priority.”
The lowest-rated review gave the office an overall score of 1.3 and ratings of one out of ten in nearly every category, including the member rating, office leadership, office culture, work-life balance, clear path to promotion, whether employees’ work was appreciated, and whether the work was rewarding. Pay received a score of three out of ten.
The reviewer called it “the most toxic work environment I have ever experienced” and alleged that the chief of staff “didn’t do any work” and attempted to turn the member against the staff. The person further claimed staffers were expected to work until 2:00 a.m. and wake up at 7:00 a.m. the following day for seven consecutive days, and were given a day off only if they used a sick day.
A second reviewer gave the office an overall rating of 2.4, including scores of one out of ten for leadership, culture, and whether the work was rewarding. Pay received a comparatively high score of seven out of ten.
“It all starts from the top in this office,” the reviewer wrote, alleging “terrible management all around” and “a severe lack of respect for staff at every level.” The person claimed some highly paid employees “barely show up” while other staffers were held to different standards.
The reviewer also described work-life balance as “a talking point, not a practice” and warned prospective employees to expect a highly stressful environment at least five days per week.
Another review assigned an overall score of 2.0 and blamed an “incredibly poor chain of command,” alleging that power struggles involving Davis, his chief of staff, and his legislative director created “confusion and instability within the office.”
The reviewer claimed the chief of staff sought to exercise authority over all office and legislative operations but was “woefully ignorant and incompetent” in those areas. The reviewer also alleged that an unidentified employee came into the office for only two hours per month, adding, “We won’t see her until October when August recess starts.”
A fourth review, with an overall score of 1.9, said the office offered “great substantive work” but described the chief of staff as “extremely toxic.”
The person alleged that the chief made false statements about employees and swore at Davis, conduct the reviewer claimed the congressman allowed to continue. The review also said employees’ locations were tracked through timesheet software.
The highest-rated of the five submissions gave the office an overall score of 3.4. The reviewer rated Davis seven out of ten, pay six out of ten, and advancement opportunities five out of ten, but assigned scores of one out of ten for work-life balance and employee appreciation.
That reviewer alleged the office may be the only congressional workplace using timesheets and claimed the legislative director contacted employees who arrived even one minute late. The person also alleged that the chief of staff was frequently absent and that the legislative director served as the office’s de facto chief.
The most consequential allegation involved a purported mixing of congressional and campaign work.
“Staff is asked to work on the campaign side during regular work hours and not compensated for it,” the anonymous reviewer wrote.
The allegation, if substantiated, could raise questions under House ethics restrictions governing political activity by congressional employees.
The House Ethics Manual states that congressional employees may perform campaign work only on their own time, outside congressional space, and without using House resources. It also prohibits employees from being compensated with public funds for campaign or other nonofficial activities.
The same anonymous review alleged that Davis’s office had already gone through “three whole communications teams and one legislative team so far.” It also alleged that “everything in that office is generated by ChatGPT” and criticized what the reviewer described as a lack of racial representation within the office.
Records provided to Breitbart News identify three members of Davis’s House staff as also appearing in campaign disbursement records: Chief of Staff Hannah E. Spengler, Scheduler and Executive Assistant Zoey J. Young, and Staff Assistant Taylor Ramsey Dinota.
Spengler appears in congressional staff records as Davis’s chief of staff from January 1 through January 2, 2026, and from January 3 through March 31, 2026. Davis’s campaign paid Spengler $10,000 for fundraising, according to the campaign disbursement information.
Young appears as Davis’s scheduler and executive assistant during those same periods. Dinota similarly appears as a staff assistant during the first two days of January and from January 3 through March 31.
Their appearance in both sets of records does not establish that they performed campaign work during official hours. The anonymous reviewer did not identify which employees allegedly conducted campaign activity while working on congressional time.
Neither Davis’s congressional office nor his campaign responded to requests for comment before publication.
A Breitbart News report from July 2025 stated that Davis raised approximately $689,000 during the second quarter, with 93 percent coming from outside North Carolina and nearly half coming from California, New York, and Massachusetts. Republican challenger Sandy Roberson, who is seeking to unseat Davis in North Carolina’s First Congressional District, raised $2.3 million during the same period.
The report stated that Davis voted for a 24 percent tax hike that would affect his constituents, opposed tax provisions intended to assist farmers and small businesses, voted “present” on legislation barring males from competing in girls’ sports, and voted against hurricane relief funding for North Carolina. It also reported that Davis reversed course on the SAVE Act after previously signaling support for stronger immigration enforcement. Roberson campaigned on his record of improving public safety, launching job-training programs, championing a local ethics transparency law, and pledging to advance President Donald Trump’s agenda.
