At the end of 2024, it was revealed that an 81-year-old member of the House was living in an assisted living facility and experiencing “dementia issues” after missing months of votes. In 2023, a then-90-year-old senator had to be told how to vote after appearing confused during a committee markup. At the time, these episodes brought new questions about the age of members of Congress. But since then, little has changed.
The current Congress is the third oldest in the nation’s history, and the eldest members are showing few signs of stepping aside. Of the 24 members age 80 or older, more than half are seeking another term in November. Establishing an age limit for members of Congress would help narrow this mounting gerontocracy gap and create a legislature that is more inclusive, reflective, and responsive to the people it serves.
There are and will continue to be many talented, capable people over a certain age, just as there are among younger people. There is no perfect age cutoff. But we should not have an octogenarian government when the median age of Americans is decades younger.
Members of Congress are on average nearly a decade older than members of other legislatures around the world. At times, it shows. In today’s Congress, some members have displayed signs of cognitive decline that have led people to question their ability to carry out their duties and represent their constituents. Studies have shown that about half of people over 80 suffer from dementia or other cognitive impairment. When members of Congress are unable to do their job, their constituents are left without adequate representation — or, in some cases, without representation at all.
A Congress without any age limits also translates to fewer opportunities for younger people to serve in office. The average House member serves about four terms (8 years) and the average senator serves two terms (about 11 years). Meanwhile, many members remain in effectively safe seats for decades. The incumbency advantage and the sheer amount of money needed to run for office make the system very difficult for young new politicians to penetrate. Political scientist Lee Drutman compared running for national office in the United States to “waiting along a single-track railway line for a single-car train to come along. Sometimes decades pass. No train comes. The obviously abandoned ticket booth has a sign: ‘Closed Until Incumbent Retires.’”
With a Congress that is not descriptively representative of the ages and lived experiences of our country, it should not come as a surprise that so many young people are losing faith in government. According to a recent poll, only 16 percent of young Americans think democracy is working well for young people. That disillusionment often translates into disengagement. In fact, less than half of eligible voters under the age of 30 voted in the last presidential election.
The American people can have, and deserve, a more functional and more representative Congress. What can be done?
One place to start would be to adopt a constitutional amendment setting a maximum age limit for members of Congress. As an example, the absolute upper limit could be 80 years old. The Constitution sets minimum age limits for the House (25), the Senate (30), and the president (35). Establishing an upper limit would address an issue that was not a factor in the founding era. The Constitution was written at a time when the average life expectancy was about 40 years. Today, that number stands at 79 years. As human longevity has increased, the case for maximum age limits makes sense.
In 32 states and the District of Columbia, there are maximum age limits for judges. Age limits for federal elected officials are also popular, with support from 82 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Democrats, according to a 2023 poll.
