["I don't really know the definition of censure," said Rep. George Rauscher ... "I don't know what the punishment should be."]
It seems that Rep Rauscher was focused more on punishment than on consequences.  A censure isn't punitive in nature but consequential.  No loss in pay, position, etc. is involved with a censure.  It's like the difference between a warning and a fine for speeding.
But that also begs the question, what is the correct "punishment" that the Republican minority should have acted on?  It's been days and the Republican House caucus had plenty of opportunity to act in a manner of "cleaning their own house."  Did they just sit on their thumbs hoping for the bi-partisan majority to mete out some punishment (for which they could take "righteous indignation" on chilling free speech) only to find a toothless censure?