Is there a "Too Old" in American Politics?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

Sen. Mitch McConnell will return to the US Senate today after a six-week absence stemming from a fall the Senate Minority Leader endured.  McConnell, famously private about his personal life, said little during his time away from the Senate, and let wild speculation run rampant of whether or not he would return.  This is happening in the wake of a similar situation on the other side of the aisle that is not resolved-the continued medical absence of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

Feinstein's medical situation has been documented throughout the media for years, including on this blog, but for those out of the know, the senior senator from California, currently the oldest sitting member of Congress, has publicly suffered from a mental health decline, potentially exhibiting signs of dementia that are all but an open secret in Congress.  Though most of it has to be conjecture, the reality is that two members of her own party, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Dean Phillips (D-MN) went so far recently as to state that she needs to resign, as she is no longer able to fulfill her duties and is holding up a number of critical judicial nominations in committee.  Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary committee, is a key vote in a closely-divided Senate, and there are several judicial appointments that can't get out of committee without her breaking the tie.  Additionally, in a Senate that's 51-49, but also includes political mavericks Kyrsten Sinema & Joe Manchin in the majority, Feinstein's absence presents a problem for Chuck Schumer as he moves as many judgeships through as humanly possible before he (likely) loses said majority next year given a very red map.

Feinstein, though, has a number of defenders.  Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has stated that she thinks that the calls for Feinstein to resign are rooted in sexism, and her colleague Rep. Norma Torres (another California Democrat) agrees.  Other senators have been more diplomatic to the situation, but have not gone to the same degree that Khanna & Phillips have.  Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for example, said it was Feinstein's decision exclusively on what to do, but supported Feinstein's decision to step away from the Senate Judiciary.  Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) said the same, though was more tempered in her statement about revisiting the situation if Feinstein still can't get to Washington, and the Democrats' agenda stalemates as a result.

This opens up a few quandaries I want to get my thoughts out on about Feinstein, and it basically breaks out into four questions.  First, is it sexist to call for Feinstein's removal?  Second, are we at the point where it'd be premature or inappropriate to call for her resignation?  Third, why are Democrats, particularly firebrands like Sanders, willing to give up a potentially enormous advantage for their cause to defer to Feinstein, hardly the portrait of progressive activism?  And fourth...is it time to talk about age limits in American politics?

I picked the sexism question first because I think it's the easiest.  Feinstein, Pelosi, & Torres are trailblazing women in politics-they know FAR more about sexism and what it's like to endure it than I (a Millennial white man) is ever going to know.  But Pelosi is categorically false when she says that there were not questions about the competence or calls to resign for other male politicians in similar situations.  You can do the quickest of google searches and find calls for John McCain, Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, & Strom Thurmond to resign during their final terms, when it became clear that their health issues were causing them to never be able to resume their duties in the Senate properly.  Feinstein is one of a long line of politicians who stayed in office longer than their health allowed, and in Feinstein's case, given that she's almost 90-years-old, this should've been something that she should've seen coming.  So no, it's not sexist-it's practical and precedented.

Secondly, I don't think we're at the point where this was premature, and I do think this is different than calls for, say, John Fetterman or even Mitch McConnell to resign due to health issues.  Feinstein's issues are clearly related to her age, and exhibit the symptoms of illnesses that don't get better (i.e. dementia).  If she doesn't have dementia or doesn't have clear cognitive issues that are impacting her ability to serve the people of California, she's had months, quite frankly years, of this sort of talk to tamp down speculation.  Joe Biden, Chuck Grassley, & Nancy Pelosi are all in their eighties and people don't question their capacities (or at least not to the same degree) largely because they do public speeches & interviews constantly, whereas Feinstein's public interviews have been limited or frequently not in person.  Feinstein has been given every opportunity to disprove these rumors and we've gotten to the point where members of her own party in Congress want her out...we're past the date when we should be asking for her resignation, it's certainly not too early to tell.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

The third is a more intriguing question.  Despite their compatriots in the House frequently acting like buffoons (the land of Marjorie Taylor Greene & Matt Gaetz is hard to make sterling), the Senate still remains a clubby, exclusive bunch.  It's not surprising to me that even a senator like Bernie Sanders, famously contrarian (he refused to endorse Feinstein in 2018, which is unheard of for a sitting senator to do against a sitting senator of his same party), is willing to back Feinstein up in the Senate.  But it has to be pointed out what this is costing the Democrats.  McConnell will have a moment where he will either need to stand against Feinstein being replaced on Senate Judiciary (the leader only has unilateral ability to replace a sitting senator if they resign or leave office, not if they just step away-committee assignments are set for each Congress) or give in to Senate decorum, but face an uprising from his right, specifically from people like Tom Cotton & Josh Hawley who will surely want to take advantage of the Democrats' quandary.  There is an extremely strong possibility that either Biden or Schumer (or both) will not hold the majority come 2025...any appointment that they leave on the table is basically giving the Republicans a free seat.  At this point, Feinstein not resigning is tantamount to Ruth Bader Ginsburg not retiring, and those arguing in her favor will look as foolish as RBG's supporters did when it results in a world where we have more Amy Coney Barrett's on the bench hurting progressive causes.

The fourth & final question is maybe related to Bernie Sanders' reasons, which might not totally be about congeniality, but instead out of self-preservation.  Bernie Sanders is up for reelection in 2024, and has so far not announced if he will run for a fourth term in the Senate.  Bernie Sanders is also 81-years-old, and would be roughly the same age as Feinstein is now by the end of a next, hypothetical term.  Sanders is one of several senators up next year on the Democratic side including Ben Cardin, Angus King, Tom Carper, Mazie Hirono, Elizabeth Warren, & Joe Manchin who will all be 80 years of age or older by the end of a next, hypothetical term.  In several cases (Warren & Hirono), they've already announced that they'll run again, while others remain on-the-fence.

This is absurd.  2024 is looking like a great year for Democrats in blue states (which all but Manchin, whom Democrats need to run again to have any chance, are from of the senators I just listed) to retire given that it's a presidential race and they are likely to face a polarizing candidate on a national level in Donald Trump.  Maryland, Maine, Vermont, Delaware, Hawaii, & Massachusetts are basically guaranteed to go blue next year, and that's the perfect time to trade into a younger senator rather than wait to run an open seat in a midterm like 2030.  I've long said that I don't approve of age limits in politics (I think, in a similar fashion to term limits, they are a lazy answer stupid people give to a complicated question), but I am more apt in the shadow of Feinstein's inability to do what's best for the country to consider age being a bigger factor in races.  If a senator's advanced age is going to stop them from doing what's best for the Republic (i.e. step aside when that becomes a huge hindrance to the future of our country), it's worth asking if it's appropriate for people like Sanders, Cardin, & King to stay on beyond the age where most other vocations they would have been retired for 15+ years.  I don't necessarily think that age can stop you from speaking for all generations (all senators, regardless of their age, need to represent issues beyond their own experience), and certainly some older members of Congress remain effective (Pelosi, for example, or Ed Markey & Chuck Grassley come to mind, and certainly Joe Biden has been an outstanding president despite being less than 10 years Feinstein's junior), but in a world where aging politicians refuse to bow out gracefully when they're causing damage to their party's larger cause...I think age is a question we should talk about in a congressional primary we're heavily favored to win in the general.