Brandon Granger, son of Texas Republican Rep. Kay Granger, informed the Dallas Express his mother has been battling “some dementia issues late in the year” and had been residing in an assisted-care facility for the last half year. The most- recent vote she casted on the House floor was in July, and she has been absent for more than 300 votes since then.
While that is alarming news, Granger is hardly an anomaly.
The median age of senators in the incoming 119th Congress will be 64 years old. In the House, the average age is 59. A majority of our Supreme Court is past or approaching retirement age. Do senior officials possess the mental capacity or innovation crucial to lead the country?
President Biden was just one example of the frailty of officials who demonstrated a decline in motor skills. The late Sen. Dianne Feinstein was a prime and depressing example of someone who should have stepped down before she was visibly impaired. Mitch McConnell, who was the victim of a few sporadic frozen public episodes, stepped down from Senate leadership but will remain in office until his term expires in 2026.
The senility situations of a sizable segment of numerous powerful and influential leaders in Washington is a quiet but growing scandal. Increasing public concern about leaders who are defiant and resist any suggestion to exit while their mental faculties are intact is amplified by a Congress that appears to be psychologically indifferent and confined to the days of yesteryear bereft of the political acumen crucial to effectively combat modern problems. Many are devoid of the ever-increasing social media platforms that are essential in effectively connecting with a younger as well as middle-aged voting blocks. Yet they still keep being re-elected as voters know the longer they serve the more power they have.
A number of polls this year showed public unease about the ages of Biden and recently elected 78-year-old President Donald Trump. Polls show upwards of 70% of Americans support the idea of implementing an age limit on candidates for president and Congress, and a mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court justices, potential legal challenges notwithstanding.
In the early 1990s, certain activists employed such an initiative process to ratify passage of term limits on Congress in more than 20 states, without a single loss. In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 that states cannot arbitrarily impose such term limits. Almost three decades later, the idea remains overwhelmingly popular. If you have to be a certain age to run for certain offices, which makes sense, then shouldn’t there be an age limit to prohibit people from inhabiting certain positions?
Many high-ranking members of Congress have amassed colossal donor networks that provide them unchallengeable job protection, so they routinely recite the same fatigued-filled arguments against establishing term limits. Many of them claim it would result in staff and underlings running government, only that’s largely happening now. Most senators born before 1950 (and there are a disproportionate number of them) struggle with acute memory loss, cognitive decline and other health issues.
It is highly obscene for our nation to let a potentially vibrant and well-received reform such as term limits for Congress be stifled by members’ refusal to relinquish power. No one is saying that “no one over 60 need apply.” Some elderly members would be very effective in serving in advisory capacities. Nonetheless, the nuts and bolts coupled with the daily demands of an increasingly complex nation and larger world require men and women who possess the energy, vision, technological skills and physical stamina pertinent to effectively deliver such demands.
Some critics of younger members argue that they are “too aggressive” or should “wait for their turn” to pursue certain positions. But they are members of the Millennial and Gen Z generations who are being directly affected by the current state of affairs. They are well aware that the nation is heading in a downward slope, they cannot afford to “wait” and that the “turn” that is needed is a sharp, decibel screeching U-Turn.
Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.
