End the geriatric oligarchy: New bipartisan bill seeks to make Congress family-friendly
Let’s be honest — Congress is old.
When the 119th Congress was sworn in earlier this month, it became the third-oldest in history, with an average age of nearly 59 in the House and 69 in the Senate. Only 14 percent of its members are under the age of 45.
It’s no wonder former Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.), once described Washington as being run by a “geriatric oligarchy.” One big reason this trend keeps worsening is the systemic hurdles that make it harder for young people — and especially young parents — to serve.
However, there’s hope. A new bipartisan push led by Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) could break one of those barriers. Together, they’ve introduced a measure to allow members of Congress who are pregnant or with newborns to vote remotely by proxy for up to 12 weeks. Proxy voting allows members to have their votes cast by another representative when they cannot attend in person.
As I write this, Pettersen, who is nine months pregnant, can’t travel to Washington on the advice of her physician (flying after 36 weeks is incredibly risky for both mother and baby, which is why many airlines won’t let pregnant women close to due date fly). As a result, her constituents are left without a voice in Congress. This bill would fix that, ensuring new moms and dads can care for their families while still doing their jobs.
Remote voting isn’t radical or unprecedented. Congress adopted proxy voting during the pandemic. Although some members misused it, the system proved secure and effective. Luna and Pettersen’s proposal improves on this by restricting proxy voting to legitimate parental needs, with safeguards such as medical documentation. It is a practical, family-friendly solution for modern challenges.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) opposes the bill, calling proxy voting “unconstitutional.” Here’s the irony: Johnson himself cast nearly 40 proxy votes during the pandemic — often for reasons far less compelling than caring for a newborn. On multiple occasions, he used proxy voting for non-COVID issues, all of which Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the lead Democrat on the Rules Committee, documented in a thread on X, including when Johnson voted by proxy for an entire week around the holidays. As McGovern put it, “Proxy voting is good enough for Speaker Johnson to make his life easier but not for new parents representing their constituents.”
Even if we put aside the incredible hypocrisy, the constitutionality argument doesn’t hold up. Federal and appellate courts have upheld proxy voting, and the Supreme Court declined to intervene. The Constitution grants Congress the clear authority to establish its own rules and procedures, leaving little basis for Johnson’s objections.
We’ve seen this before — resistance to change often masquerading itself as constitutional purism. Consider the debate over electronic voting, which began in the late 19th century. Thomas Edison demonstrated his vote-recording machine to Congress in 1869, but it was dismissed as a threat to the minority’s ability to influence legislation.
For nearly a century, opponents resisted electronic voting, arguing it would be too costly, too disruptive or too fast for deliberation. It was finally adopted in 1973, nearly a century later. Today, it’s essential to the 435-voting member body. The arguments against proxy voting for new parents feel just as outdated and shortsighted as the ones for electronic voting.
Only 13 members in U.S. history have given birth while serving in Congress. It’s not that surprising considering Congress is a system designed centuries ago by men who never had to consider balancing family responsibilities with public service. The lack of family-friendly policies discourages young, talented people — especially women — from running for office.
The result isn’t just unfair to members — it’s unfair to their constituents who are being denied representation when there is a tested, secure and constitutional solution with broad bipartisan support right in front of us.
Modernizing Congress to support families is good for democracy and good for the country. Passing this bill would show that public service and family life can coexist, sending a powerful message to younger, more diverse leaders: your voice matters, and you belong in government. It’s time to pass this bill and show that Congress is ready to support families — building a stronger, more resilient nation led not by a geriatric oligarchy, but by a vibrant and youthful democracy.
Brad Howard is a Democratic strategist who is the founder and president of Corcoran Street Group. An Obama administration alumnus, he previously served as chief of staff to former Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.), and as spokesperson for the House Blue Dog Coalition; Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.); and New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu.