The late Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly was, by all accounts, one of the kindest members of Congress, and he will be missed personally by his colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Normally, the death of a congress member would not be noteworthy other than on a personal level. But Connolly was the third Democrat in the House to die since the 119th Congress gaveled into session less than five months ago.
Perhaps this is just a mere sad run of misfortune for Democrats, but it seems more significant than that. Of the past nine congressional deaths, eight have been Democrats. The lone Republican who died was killed in a car crash, which no one could have foretold. Looking back further, of 45 members of Congress who have died in office since 2000, 30 have been Democrats and only 15 have been Republicans. The numbers are obviously lopsided. Democrats don’t hold two-thirds of the seats, so why do they account for two-thirds of the deaths?
After a presidential election in which the incumbent president was forced to leave the ticket because of age and increasingly obvious infirmity, and after party leadership helped clear the primary field for him, it must be pointed out that Democrats keep their senior members in power too long — so long that it becomes obvious younger alternatives are preferable.
Before dismissing ideological or partisan components of this phenomenon, consider that Republicans have pushed for decades to establish term limits on all committee chairmanships. Democrats have fought against this to let seniority rule and keep superannuated members in their positions.Â
There is some commonsense justification for valuing seniority over fresh leadership and new ideas. But only up to a certain point. Democrats, especially at the federal level, prioritize institutional knowledge and expertise that senior members are more likely to have. Seniority also provides stability and allows party leaders to focus on developing projects and problem areas over time, as opposed to new leadership constantly chasing whatever might be the hot topic of the day.
Less charitably, it should be noted that relying on seniority rewards loyalty and helps enforce party discipline. Members who know they will be rewarded if they toe the party line and wait their turn are likelier to vote the way leadership wants. This can cause problems, such as when party leaders refuse to acknowledge realities obvious to people outside the party, such as when the southern border has been erased or the party’s presidential nominee isn’t up to do the job.
DEMOCRATS MUST ADDRESS THEIR CREDIBILITY CANCER
Then there is the fact that when you have a party so driven by interest groups and identity, as Democrats do, seniority is often the most objective way to determine how power should be allocated among competing factional representatives. When the choice is between a woman, a member of a racial minority, a member of a religious minority, or a labor leader, selecting by longevity can be the path of least resistance.
However, giving too much weight and deference to seniority douses initiative and energy and leads to a high mortality rate. Connolly’s death at age 75, following that of the late Democratic Reps. Raul Grijalva, 77, of Arizona, and Sylvester Turner, 70, of Texas, made it easier for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to pass President Donald Trump’s signature legislation on taxation and spending. Each Democrat who dies in office is a lost vote. Until the party learns to shed its seniority addiction, it will suffer from a lack of energy, innovation, effectiveness, and, more simply, sufficient numbers to win key votes.