When even Democrats start calling for ethics investigations into the mental and physical fitness of their own elderly lawmakers, you know Congress has a problem too obvious for even the left to ignore.
At a Glance
- Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) demands House ethics oversight of aging lawmakers’ fitness to serve
- Deaths of elderly Democratic members have directly changed legislative outcomes in 2024-2025
- Proposal would require formal standards and reviews for cognitive and physical competence in Congress
- No current mechanisms exist for assessing members’ health or fitness to serve
Democrats Admit: Congress Has a Senior Problem
The left’s favorite pastime has always been pretending their own house is in order while accusing everyone else of corruption, incompetence, or bias. But the recent death parade in the Democratic caucus—eight members averaging 75 years old since November 2022—has finally forced them to face reality. When your party’s ability to pass a tax bill hinges on whether or not another octogenarian survives until roll call, it’s way past time for some soul-searching. Of course, it’s not like this issue is unique to Democrats, but let’s not kid ourselves: they’re the ones who make a virtue out of “lived experience”—until that experience includes forgetting what year it is.
Watch a report: Chaos erupts with MTG, Dems over speaking time at House hearing
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) is leading the charge, proposing that the House Appropriations Committee budget include a provision for the Office of Congressional Conduct to set standards on a member’s “ability to perform the duties of office unimpeded by significant irreversible cognitive impairment.” In other words, Congress might soon have to do what every private employer in America already does: make sure the people making decisions still know what those decisions are. She’s not mincing words, either. Her constituents, she says, are “sick of staffers running the legislative process in place of incapacitated members.” Welcome to the club, Marie. We’ve been saying that for years.
No Rules, Just Power: Why Congressional Fitness Never Mattered (Until Now)
For decades, the House Ethics Committee and Office of Congressional Conduct have focused on the stuff that makes headlines—bribery, insider trading, sexual misconduct. But ask whether a member can still string a sentence together or find the restroom without help, and that’s suddenly “ageist.” There’s no mandatory retirement age. There are no cognitive or physical fitness standards. There’s not even a process for initiating a review if a member is obviously unable to perform basic duties. Lawmakers have simply chosen to look the other way—until the votes start slipping away and their majority starts to wobble.
That “see no evil” approach has led to a series of embarrassments. The late Sen. Dianne Feinstein served until age 90 despite widely reported cognitive decline. Rep. Kay Granger was checked into an independent living facility with months left in her term. And now, after a string of deaths left the Democrats short-handed, the party’s younger members are suddenly demanding change. Funny how quickly principles shift when political power is on the line.
Will Ethics Oversight Fix Anything—or Just Become Another Tool for Political Games?
Gluesenkamp Perez’s proposal is simple: set objective standards for cognitive and physical function, then allow for investigations if a member appears unfit. If adopted, it could lead to immediate reviews, forced retirements, and a drop in the average congressional age. Some, predictably, are already warning about “ageism” and “politicization” of the process. As if letting unelected staffers run the show because the elected boss can’t remember the agenda isn’t already the ultimate insult to democracy.
The public wants accountability. They want lawmakers who can do the job they’re paid for—not just keep the seat warm while the staff runs the place. Democrats, after years of ignoring the obvious, now find themselves in the awkward position of having to fix a mess of their own making. The real question is whether Congress can ever be trusted to police itself, or if this is just another case of politicians pretending to act while doing nothing substantial. Because if history is any guide, the only thing Congress does faster than spending your money is circling the wagons to protect its own.
