A majority of Alabama's U.S. House delegation appears to be on board in support of federal legislation requiring more transparency in sexual harassment settlements on Capitol Hill.

The measure comes as the Republican-controlled Congress braces for the Dec. 12 Senate special election in Alabama, in which GOP nominee Roy Moore faces allegations that he sexually pursued teenage girls when he was in his 30s decades ago. Polls show Moore locked in a tight race with Democrat Doug Jones.

At least one political observer in Washington, D.C., believes that the Alabama election could be a watershed moment in how Congress addresses a swelling national issue of concern.

"I think that if Roy Moore is elected, that Republicans, in particular, want cover to distance themselves from his actions," said said Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women & Politics Institute and a professor of government at American University in Washington, D.C. "They don't want 2018 to be a referendum on what happens in Alabama. They want to be prepared, that should he win, that they fought tooth and nail to have a better policy in place and that members of Congress should not behave this way."

She said, "The clock is ticking and they want something done prior to the special election on the 12th."

'Completely transparent'

Hearings are expected in December to determine whether the Office of Compliance - the body that handles harassment complaints involving the U.S. House - should reveal settlement details that are part of $17 million in taxpayer-funded payouts to victims since 1997. That amount includes all settlements, not just related to sexual harassment, but also discrimination and other matters.

But very little is known about the payouts. The Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 mandates that settlements be secretive and that taxpayers pick up the tab.

"We need to make the process transparent from the beginning to the end," said U.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne, R-Fairhope, who previously practiced employment law. "Certainly, the way the funds are paid out of this special fund to settle these claims, that needs to be completely transparent."

Said U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Huntsville: "Sexual harassment settlements on Capitol Hill should be public whenever the accusation is made against a congressman or senator."

Reps. Terri Sewell, D-Birmingham; Gary Palmer, R-Hoover; Robert Aderholt, R-Haleyville; and Mike Roger, R-Saks, all favor more transparency in the process, according to their offices.

A spokesman for Rep. Martha Roby, R-Montgomery, said that she supports requiring sexual harassment training for members of Congress and their staffs, but that she has not "signed onto any specific" transparency legislation. The U.S. House passed a resolution Wednesday requiring the training.

JUST IN: By unanimous voice vote, U.S. House passes resolution mandating sexual harassment training for all members and staff, @AlexNBCNews reports — NBC News (@NBCNews) November 29, 2017

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-California, and Rep. Barbara Comstock, R-Virginia, are spearheading an effort to rid the 1995 law of secrecy provisions, instead mandating that any lawmaker who settles a claim as a harasser repay the U.S. Treasury from their own personal finances. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is pushing a similar proposal in the Senate.

The issue is being propelled by a host of resignations and firings of media, political and entertainment celebrities - all men -- newly accused of sexual wrongdoing by women who've been emboldened to speak up.

At Capitol Hill, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minnesota, has been accused of groping several women, and Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, temporarily lost his position on the Judiciary Committee after it was revealed that he paid out settlements to end harassment cases brought by female aides.

"I think people are scared in Washington because it seems like every day there is someone else who is falling from a result of this," said Richard Fording, a political science professor at the University of Alabama. "I think this movement has taken off throughout the country."

Fording predicted that Congress, which has stalled on many issues through partisan divides, could have a bipartisan incentive to move ahead with changing how it polices itself when it comes to sexual harassment claims.

"Republicans are already struggling with women voters, so they cannot afford to backslide on that," Fording said. "It's an easy one, I think for them and for the Democrats, of course, to get behind."

Retroactive revelations?

A debate is likely to surface on whether the reforms should apply retroactively, which means those who have paid past settlements would now be identified.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and the House Democratic leader, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that an unmasking of past claims should be handled with caution as it could reveal the identity of victims who wanted to remain private.

Byrne and Brooks are supportive of retroactively applying the law. Said Byrne, "To the maximum extent we can make it transparent as far back as we can make it transparent, we should do so."

But Byrne said that victims ought not to have to grapple anew with old wounds. He said that Congress shouldn't "violate any sort of confidentiality agreement" reached between parties years ago. "That is why we have to look at each agreement," he said.

William Stewart, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Alabama and a longtime political observer, said that the opening of sealed cases will, obviously, expose the perpetrators to public censure. But it could be even harder on the victims, he explained: "For the most part, they are not public figures who possess numerous resources to put before the public 'their side of the story.'"

Lawless said it could become tricky "both legally and politically" to include retroactive language into federal legislation.

"You have women who have accepted an agreement and who want to move on," she said. "At the end of the day, this is about the women who have been victimized and assaulted."

And then there is the Alabama factor. Moore has denied allegations of wrongdoing, and state Republican leaders have said they intend to vote for him, among them Gov. Kay Ivey. But national Republicans, including Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, have distanced themselves from Moore.

Derry Moten, chairman of the Department of History and Political Science at Alabama State University, said the "unanswered question" for him is whether women "will continue to show their disdain for piggish male behavior by voting sexual harassers out of office."

Stewart said Dec. 12 will be the "first opportunity" for Alabama voters to weigh in.

He said, "Do you believe the women who claim that a major party's nominee for a high position in the federal government behaved in a sexually unacceptable way toward them? Or do you believe the man previously regarded as a strong advocate of stringent moral law and elected previously to high public office based mostly on his claims to moral leadership?"