227
90 years old. Why do people keep voting for fossils?
I like Bernie Sanders and his views are younger than his age, but he's 82 now. He needs to pass the torch as well and endorse someone to replace him. He's done his service.
Because anyone without 50 years of seniority won't have the pull to get those sweet, sweet, pork barrel projects.
Committee assignment is via seniority. So yes, they can add shit to bills, but they can also do so much more.
For assholes like Grassley, that equates to being able to do a lot of damage.
That's some bullshit law if I ever saw one.
It’s supposed to keep assholes like the tea partyers or guys like Gates and Greene from getting control in committees until they’ve been there more than 1 term. it’s also why they offset congressional terms. So a state won’t likely end up with all its reps getting replaced at the same time.
I don’t support octogenarian+ politicians (even Bernie needs to pass the torch), but I do support rule makers having to learn how shit works before getting committee power to decide national security or health funding and decisions.
load more comments
(1 replies)
He has the magic R next to his name (and because we're idiots)
Think about the 80 and 90 year olds in your life.
Now imagine them making laws and policy and regulations on things like tiktok, social media, artificial intelligence, student loans, minimum wage, housing or literally anything that impacts the millions of people under 40.
He's been in office longer than people under 40 have been alive. He was born in 1933. He legit remembers WWII (in his lucid moments). He could have purchased a home from a Sears catalog with his paper route money.
Being old doesn't necessarily mean you are out of touch--it could just mean you are wise and have tons of experience but add in the fact that you are an old senator who has been in office since 1981--and I can almost certainly say you are out of touch.
What do you have in common with the average Iowan at this point? Would could you possibly have in common?
Now imagine them making laws and policy
In fairness, they're mostly just in position to hit the "Yes"/"No" buttons. The actual written policy is produced by think tanks and lobbyists, then passed on to the legislators to submit under their own names.
load more comments
(10 replies)
The US forces military personel to retire as early as age 62, with officers being forced out at 64 unless they're a two star or higher, in which case POTUS can defer retirement until age 68. Yet you let your politicians and judges stay if they don't die? SMH... New rule proposal: if you are going to turn 70 in the next term, then you're not eligible for election. And judges are retired the month after their 70th birthday.
10 USC §1253 subsection a: "Unless retired or separated earlier, each regular commissioned officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps serving in a general or flag officer grade shall be retired on the first day of the month following the month in which the officer becomes 64 years of age."
Subsection b abridged: "[...] a grade above major general or rear admiral, the retirement under subsection (a) of that officer may be deferred [...] by the President, but such a deferment may not extend beyond the first day of the month following the month in which the officer becomes 68 years of age [...]"
This is smart and would benefit American people
Therefore, it shall not be done.
Cue the people screaming “you can’t do that it’s ageist policy! What if they’re actually in good shape?”
Doesn’t matter. The ones in poor shape who refuse to give up the throne outweighs the few who somehow manage to stay relevant. It’s being out of touch with the 90% of the population below you in age, and that’s compounded by the bubble politicians live in already with their political games and maneuvering. All designed to keep themselves and their party in charge instead of actually giving a fuck about the country, willing to sacrifice their constituents for a corporate ~~bribe~~ campaign contribution.
People would be fine doing this for those in the service while crying about personal liberties when it affects them. People wouldn't wear masks to preserve the life of your cancer-laden grandmother and they certainly won't retire early and give up their power.
load more comments
(2 replies)
90 and still fucking people over. I certainly hope nothing goes bad for him while he's in the hospital...
I hope he gets the exact level of care he voted for in his career
Let's face it, he'll get the best care available because the stuff he voted for/against doesn't really affect him.
I'm hoping for the best—one less Republican senator.
It's not like any replacement has any hope of not being a Republican.
his replacement is literally his grandson
Ah yes, have a revolution to get rid of the king, then set up your own hereditary political dynasties to rule over the land.
Ok, one less Republican, then.
Just leave you old fucks. Why do we keep electing geriatrics? It’s so fucking stupid.
Iowa just voted for Trump again. A whole lot of stupid up in there.
Well it was the Republican caucus so there weren't exactly good options
load more comments
(1 replies)
Let's hope it's nothing innocous.
A clear reference to how power could be addictive. True walking tombs still trying to stay in power
Can't wait for him to incoherently tweet about it.
Republicans don’t usually xweet about untreated chlamydia
90
Wow
Karma, come and take him away already.
Thoughts and prayers
I SAID THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS!!
Yeesh what else ya want from us?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who is 90 years old, is being treated at a hospital in Iowa for an infection, his office announced Tuesday.
“Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is receiving antibiotic infusions at an area hospital to treat an infection,” his office said in a brief statement.
“He is in good spirits and will return to work as soon as possible following doctors’ orders.”
Grassley’s absence comes just days before a deadline for a partial government shutdown.
Congressional leaders have agreed to a deal to keep the federal government funded into March, but both parties will need to supply votes to pass the legislation through both chambers before the Friday deadline.
The Senate is slated to take a procedural step to move the government funding resolution along later Tuesday night.
The original article contains 130 words, the summary contains 130 words. Saved 0%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Hypothetical question: If we Thanos snapped every government official over 75, how many would we lose? And in this alternate America, would you think it'll be better or worse?
Average age of the Senate is 64 and for the House is 57.
68 Senators are over 60. Pelosi was 83 when she quit the House.
As of August last year, 15 Senators were over 80. 4 Senators are over 80, 1 is 90+, (D) Dianne Feinstein but she passed on Sept. 29th.
Pelosi will seek another term in 2024 because fuck the younger generations.
So it looks like 50 senators are 65 and older. Literally half of them are retirement age or older.
126 of the 439 members of the 118th congress are over 65. 65 more are "retirement eligible" from 60-64.
So a third of our House sees geriatric doctors and half of our Senate should be retired.
16 senators should probably start considering nursing homes.
That said, being old isn't itself a problem. Remember, Ben Franklin was in his 80s during the Constitutional convention. There is a lot of wisdom and experience that comes with age. My parents and in-laws for example are in that 60-65 range and they incredibly sharp and have lots of experience and a perspective that you can only get with age. But they are often out of touch with the plight of my generation and the generations behind me, don't have a great handle on modern life from the lense of a 30 year old. But obviously they are empathetic and willing to seek to understand. But I'd say their life experiences are pretty different from your average Congress member who are (generationally) wealthy and have been in politics since their parents were.
I think age + other things like being rich AF, coming from a wealthy and powerful family, being in office for decades, and being in politics in general too long.
Neither party is incentivized to address this problem because seniority gets you the primo spots on committees andincumbents win reelection over 95% of the time. So, naturally you aren't going to oust an old timer for a new young one until you absolutely have to because you'll lose your key committees or possibly have a seat flip. Even constituents enjoy the benefits of the seniority of their rep so voters don't necessarily want to vote them out either.
And let's be clear, if the people of Grassleys state wanted him out, he'd be out.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Your periodic reminder that US Congress is the oldest legislative body in the world.
We need term limits, age limits, and competency tests, and we’ve needed them since at least the 1970s
I'm hoping for a speedy resign NOW.
Sure would be sad if it were a fatal infection.Not.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
227 points (95.6% liked)
politics
18601 readers
3888 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS