- cross-posted to:
- politics
- cross-posted to:
- politics
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/54121073
Incoming senators are nearly 15 years younger than departing ones, on average. But the chamber’s overall age isn’t shifting much.
Nov. 7, 2026Updated 3:17 p.m. ET
When the new Senate convenes in January, it will welcome some (relatively) young new legislators. A few are even millennials, including James Talarico of Texas, 37, and Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan, 42, two Democrats who may have energized young voters to turn out.
But their effect on the average age of the Senate — which has crept up over the last few decades — will be small. The senators of the 120th Congress will be less than a year younger, on average, than the Senate’s current members were at the start of the 119th Congress two years ago. That’s because so many sitting senators are old, and getting older.
These numbers assume that Mary Peltola and Scott Colom will win their races in Alaska and Mississippi; they were both ahead in the vote count Saturday. (If both lose, the Senate’s average age will land at 63.6.)
You have to be at least 30 to be in the Senate, but because its a much more prestigious office than Congress, most Senators were in Congress or something similar before making it to the Senate. This puts the younger senators being in their mid/late 30s and that’s not even super common. That tied with a Senate seat being 6 years, means you’re looking at the average being in the mid 40s even if people are elected relatively young.
If those senators win one re-election, they’d basically be in their 50s by the end of their second term.
Should we get more churn in the Senate, absolutely. However, I don’t think you’ll get it much lower than the mid 50s even with term limits, just due to the nature of the position. I think term limits would put upward pressure on the youngest voted in, but put more pressure downwards on the oldest voted in. So you would probably shrink the standard deviation, but only get the mean to mod/high 50s.
All great points. But I still believe in a mandated retirement age. Yes, some do well. Love Bernie. He’s one of the few that give a shit, and one of those vital elderly who will probably be running circles around 60 year olds at 90. But yes, even him, and he is. He’s in his last term.
Ginsberg tried. She was active. Even so, she died in office at 87. Scalia died in his sleep at 80.
Breyer was another one who exuded an energy and vitality, but he stepped down and made sure Biden appointed his replacement rather than lingering on. Guy will probably run circles around 60 year olds in his 90s. Even so.
Look at Feinstein. That was horrifying. I consider it elder abuse, and yet, our leadership was somehow allowed to engage in abject elder abuse and no one did a thing to stop it. Horrifying.
Biden. Clearly hitting Dimentia. The stare, late at night. This is a wax and wane condition. Inertia matters, and he was a career politician so sure, probably fine for a high percentage of the time, but fraying, slowly fraying as time progressed.
Do we even need to mention Trump? Deteriorating health, and a diagnosable personality disorder combined with cognitive decline. The anger side of it leans more towards Alzheimer’s but it’s hard to say. He’s clearly fraying too.
Mitch McConnell. Again. Elder abuse. Let the man go home.
I think we should have mandatory retirement. 75. A safeguard of sorts.
That’s fair, but I’m always hesitant for hard limits on things like this. If setting term limits didn’t resolve the issue I would reconsider.
With two term limits to get an 80 year old in the Senate they’d have to be elected for the first time as a 68 year old (I guess technically you could serve non-consecutive terms, but whatever).