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.)

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    65 should be the maximum for newly elected officials, forced retirement at 70, and strict term limits. They can hold advisory roles after that, but should be excluded from directly making decisions which they’ll never experience the consequences of.

  • TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Generally, the longer they’ve been in office, the more likely they’re corrupt. And, as a side effect, they’re older.

    Age correlates with corruption, but does not cause it. Money is power and power corrupts.

    Term limits would help mitigate corruption. It’s why we have term limits for the President, and we should have the same for Congress.

    • IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Isn’t that when corporations have decided that you are no longer useful and you are forced to retire. Finding a new job at that age is laughable.

        • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I still think Congress should have a mandatory age limit at whatever they set Social Security at.

          They chose when that age should be, they need to adhere to it. Not sure what the mechanism would be to prevent them from raising that just to let them stay longer though, gotta think of some sort of negative that would balance it out.

          While we’re at it, they get the same Medicare coverage as anyone else, not the super special cover everything plan they do now. Again, they get what they determined is good enough for everyone else.