Lawmaker Age, Issue Salience, and Senior Representation in Congress

• Author: Matthew R. Haydon,James M. Curry
• DOI: 10.1177/1532673X18754557
• Published date: 01 July 2018
• Date: 01 July 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18754557

American Politics Research

2018, Vol. 46(4) 567 –595

© The Author(s) 2018

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1532673X18754557

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Article

Lawmaker Age, Issue

Salience, and Senior

Representation in

Congress

James M. Curry1 and Matthew R. Haydon1

Abstract

Political scientists have demonstrated the importance of lawmakers’ identities,

showing that race, gender, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation

affect legislative and representational behavior. Is the same true for age? We

argue it is, but the effect is conditioned by the salience of different “senior

issues.” Analyzing the bill introductions by members of Congress during the

109th and 110th Congresses, we show that older lawmakers are more likely

to introduce legislation addressing lower salience senior issues than their

younger colleagues. In contrast, sizeable senior constituencies in a district

influence lawmaker attention to higher salience senior issues, regardless of

a lawmaker’s age. These findings have implications for our understanding

of senior power and personal roots of representation in the United States.

Keywords

Congress, seniors, representation, descriptive representation, age

Elected members of Congress are much older than most Americans. In 2015,

the average senator was 62 years old, with 40% of senators 65 years of age or

older. In the House, the average representative was 58, with 26% at least 65

years of age. By comparison, according to the 2010 Census, among those

1University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

Corresponding Author:

James M. Curry, Department of Political Science, University of Utah, 332 South 1400 East,

Room 223, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.

Email: james.curry@utah.edu

754557APRXXX10.1177/1532673X18754557American Politics ResearchCurry and Haydon

research-article2018

568 American Politics Research 46(4)

eligible to run for Congress (25 years of age or older), just 19% are 65 or

older. More importantly, almost one third of the older-than-25 population is

younger than 40 years, while in recent congresses, less than 5% of members

of Congress have been younger than that age. In fact, in 2015, just one sena-

tor was younger than 40, with the vast majority of lawmakers at least 50

(78% in the House and 86% in the Senate). In recent decades, Congress has

grayed, with the average age of representatives and senators increasing by

roughly a decade since the early 1980s.

The age bias among our national lawmakers is well known, but its conse-

quences for the legislative behavior of elected officials have not been closely

studied.1 Many scholars argue that issues important to American seniors

receive disproportionate attention because older Americans have strong

political interests and vote, donate, and generally participate in politics at

higher rates than younger Americans (Binstock, 1997; Bramlett, 2015; Cutler,

1977; Day, 2014; Pratt, 1993; Rix, 1999; Schulz & Binstock, 2008; Street,

1997; Wolfinger & Rosenstone, 1980). We argue the prevalence of seniors in

the halls of Congress may also contribute to the attention paid to “senior”

issues.

Political scientists have long noted the importance of legislators’ identi-

ties and life experiences for their actions in office, finding that race (Bratton

& Haynie, 1999; Gamble, 2007; Haynie, 2001; Minta, 2009), gender

(Frederick, 2010; Gerrity, Osborn, & Mendez, 2007; Swers, 2002), and

socioeconomic class (Carnes, 2013) affect legislative behavior. Drawing on

a data set of every bill introduced to the House of Representatives from

2005 to 2008, we find evidence that the same is true for a lawmaker’s age.

Specifically, we find that a lawmaker’s age influences his or her attention

to “senior issues”—those of importance to American seniors—but that this

dynamic is conditioned by the relative salience of each issue. Our analyses

show that the characteristics of a lawmaker’s constituency drives his or her

efforts to introduce legislation addressing higher salience senior issues,

such as Medicare and other health care issues that receive considerable

public attention. On these issues, the senior power thesis appears to have

explanatory power. However, a lawmaker’s age influences the likelihood

he or she will devote time and effort to crafting and introducing legislation

on other, lower salience senior issues, such as elder abuse, late-life housing,

assisted living needs, and continuing education. On these issues, a law-

maker’s age is highly predictive of such action, irrespective of constitu-

ency. These findings suggest the graying of Congress may have important

consequences for how it represents Americans of all ages.