Our Government is Too Old

From left to right: Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. (Source: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc); Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. (Source: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc); Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa (Source: Paul Morigi via Getty Images); and President Joe Biden (Source: Olivier Douliery via AFP/Getty Images).

By Eunice Lee ‘27

Since the ratification of the Constitution nearly 250 years ago, the constitutional provisions that govern presidential and congressional candidates’ ages have been strictly limited to minimums: candidates must be 35 years old and 25 years old, respectively. However, despite the alarmingly high average age of our Presidents and members of Congress, the Constitution sets no maximum age limits for candidates. According to the Pew Research Center, the median age for all U.S. presidents on the day of their first inauguration is 55 years old, with the youngest being Theodore Roosevelt at 42 and the oldest being Joe Biden at 78. The average age for members of the Senate is currently 65.3 years, and for members of the House of Representatives, the number is 57.9 years. These numbers have only been increasing, and in turn, the modern United States is facing an outdated, unresponsive government that fails to understand the complexities of the larger population. 

As people age, their brains change, and the performance of cognitive functions such as memory, learning, and processing decline. This deterioration is evident in the recent political scene. President Joe Biden has been nicknamed “sleepy Joe” for his alleged physical and mental incapacity to serve as President after being caught on numerous occasions falling asleep during meetings or interviews. He has often “frozen up” at important events such as during his comments on Congress bills or as Commander in Chief at the Wreath Laying Ceremony during Official Veterans Day. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has also been facing backlash about his health after freezing up at two events in the past summer. Videos of McConnell halting mid-sentence at a news conference on Capitol Hill while standing in silence for 21 seconds only to be led away from reporters have sparked discourse on whether he should finally step down. He has refused to address these questions on his political future other than reiterating his determination to finish his term. California Senator Dianne Feinstein, who passed this past September, remained the oldest member of the Senate at the age of 90 whilst missing much of the session due to her health issues. At the age of 89, Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley returned to work at the U.S. Capitol in a wheelchair after undergoing surgery to repair a fracture in his hip. The 118th Congress is the third-oldest since 1789 with the oldest members being born in the early 1930s. How are people born during the Great Depression Era or before the Civil Rights Movement able to represent the modern political issues that plague society? 

Higher levels of participation amongst older Americans do justify some differences between the age of U.S. representatives and the nation as a whole. Certainly, the United States should not ignore the voices of senior citizens. However, only 17.3% of the nation’s population are above the age of 65, and the median age of American adults is just under 39 years old. A lack of generational diversity in Congress parallels the inadequate representation of the remaining 82.7% of the nation. It would also be foolish to discredit the years of real-world experience and connections older members bring to the job. However, this argument becomes an issue when these legislators or presidential candidates reach the age at which citizens become wary of whether their wisdom will be able to sufficiently address younger voters. Generational differences cannot go unnoticed, and a congressional body or nation’s leader that is losing touch with modernity is simply negligent. Think of it this way: elderly leaders are making national decisions that will affect future generations for years to come. Are older members more likely to care about climate change than younger leaders who will have to face those warmer temperatures and rising sea levels? This disregard for pressing modern-day issues from older generations translates into misconceptions or poor representation of constituents by older lawmakers. 

A low 20% of Americans say that they trust the government to do the right thing for the nation. With these continuous geriatric episodes comes an increasing loss of confidence in our governing bodies, not to mention a change in how other nations perceive the United States. The effects of old age are prominent in our leaders—whether through mental deterioration or being out of touch with the modern population. Completely alienating the older generation for a congressional body or executive branch that is all in their 30s is not the solution. However, the lack of procedure to determine cognitive ability or constitutional limit on maximum age is detrimental to the health of democracy.

Setting a maximum age limit is not an unpopular proposition to the general public; in a recent study, nearly 72% of respondents endorsed the policy. Almost two-thirds of those surveyed agreed upon the maximum age of at least 75, which would effectively kick out President Joe Biden, Republican Donald Trump, 14 of the 100 sitting senators, and 33 of the sitting representatives. A maximum age limit for elected officials would require an amendment to the Constitution. Amending the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, followed by a ratification by three-quarters of the states. These thresholds are understandably difficult to reach, let alone overcome, but it is evident that many Americans agree with this proposal. This challenge begins with amplifying the voices of America, whether it be through petitions or widespread opinion articles. Citizens need to acknowledge that bringing in younger candidates who are better equipped to communicate and address the issues that the U.S. faces will better prepare us for the future.