Why is Congress filled with old people?

It's not only the presidential candidates who’re old.

According to my very own data, nearly 20 percent of members of the House and Senate are 70 or older, compared with about 6 percent who’re under 40.

Voters in North Dakota recently approved a ballot initiative that will set an age cap for congressional candidates from that state. If the bill survives likely court challenges, it might prohibit anyone from North Dakota who’s 81 or older from serving in Congress. The motivation behind the measure: to correct the big generational imbalance in Congress.

With a variety of top-class American politicians at or over 80, including the likely presidential candidates of each partiesIt is not any wonder that measures like those in North Dakota are attracting attention.

But what exactly explains the Congress's advanced age? And what, if anything, could contribute to a balance between the generations?

Some essential causes

There are many reasons for the advanced age of Congress, a few of that are unavoidable.

First, if it seems like Congress is getting older over time, it's because Americans are, too. According to historical data on members of Congress, the typical age of lawmakers has increased 10% since 1960—from 52 to 58. An analogous increase has been seen within the Senate: the typical age has risen from 57 to 63.

But the typical American Life expectancy – 79 out of 70 – has increased much more during this time, namely by about 13%. And in response to the U.S. Census BureauThe average age of Americans has increased much more during this era, by over 30%, from 30 to 39.

While North Dakota is proposing some form of age limit, the U.S. Constitution already sets a lower age limit. Members of the House have to be no less than 25 years old until they take office; Senators have to be 30So if the typical age of members of Congress mentioned above seems high, it’s partly because of artificial inflation through minimum age limits.

Young candidates are hard to seek out

But natural trends and constitutional requirements don’t fully explain why younger generations are so severely underrepresented in Congress.

Another vital reason is that younger potential congressional candidates face a steeper path and must make greater sacrifices than older candidates.

Even in the event that they are inquisitive about running for Congress, for instance, Americans of their twenties and thirties shouldn’t have as many opportunities to determine themselves in secure jobs as older generations. This means less access to the political networks and connections which, in response to political science research, are crucial for the success of congressional election campaigns.

More importantly, it improves access to Money and potential donors. If I spoke last yr with US Representative Maxwell Frost, a Democrat from Florida – the primary member of Congress from Generation Z – he explained why his success was the exception and never the rule.

“It's really tough,” Frost told me. “The system is not designed for young people to run for office.” Just being a candidate, he said, means “a year without a salary. If you're already rich, it's no big deal; then everything's fine, you have savings. That leads to young people not being able to run.”

Young potential candidates usually are not only scuffling with money but in addition with a time deficit. Compared to later years, the 20s and 30s normally involve more vital life events and changes, equivalent to professional transitions, Geographical mobility and starting a family. As a result, politics occupies less space within the lives of young people than in older generations, who’ve more time, personal stability, and skilled and financial security.

Age brings benefits

Meanwhile, older Americans inquisitive about running for Congress enjoy some crucial electoral benefits.

Advanced age brings with it longer careers – political or otherwise – which voters often interpret as proven experienceor years of skilled experience, which may definitely translate into effectiveness as a member of Congress. In other words, older generations have had more time to prove their quality within the eyes of voters. Younger candidates may appear inexperienced by comparison.

Political science has also found the issue of ousting incumbents in Congress. Almost all members of Congress who run for re-election find yourself winning. The so-called “incumbent advantage” advantages all incumbent members of Congress, not only older ones. However, it limits the variety of open seats which might be most definitely to bring younger generations into Congress.

Are there solutions?

Frost and others emphasize the importance of generational balance in Congress for each representation and laws.

The excellent news is that any progress on this area pays off in the long term. Political science shows that seeing people who find themselves “like us” in Congress or other offices helps us feel well represented and to view our political institutions as more legitimateThe success of younger candidates encourages other young people to make the leap, setting in motion a virtuous cycle of representation.

While among the aspects that favor older candidates are unavoidable, there are things that may very well be done to encourage young people to run for office. In our conversation, Frost suggested giving candidates more generous Scholarships from their very own campaign funds to ease the burden on younger, less financially powerful candidates. And after all, age limits like those in North Dakota could potentially help younger generations to run.