
Biden's Cancer and a Lawmaker's Death Keep Focus on Democrats' Age Problem
In the last three months alone, three Democratic House members have died in office, former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. announced a serious cancer diagnosis and a new book stoked fresh scrutiny of his declining abilities while serving as commander in chief.
For a party struggling with a litany of problems, perhaps no subject in recent years has been more painful, delicate or politically perilous than the matter of age — an issue that keeps rearing its head in 2025 as party leaders now acknowledge the problem but remain hesitant to directly call out aging colleagues.
The subject arose yet again on Wednesday, as the family of Representative Gerald E. Connolly, a Democrat from Virginia, announced that he had died at 75. He was the sixth House Democrat to die in office in the last year or so, according to what the House press gallery calls its 'casualty list' of deaths, resignations and retirements.
Just a few months ago, Mr. Connolly beat out one of the youngest members of Congress, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, 35, in an internal contest to lead their party on the House Oversight Committee. He said at the time that the idea that there was generational change underway in the caucus was a 'false narrative.'
His death, after a public battle with esophageal cancer, prompted an outpouring of grief from colleagues. But as Democrats strain to project energy in fighting President Trump, some in the party also saw it as another harsh reminder of the risks the party faces when it prizes seniority and loyalty above all else.
Former Representative Joe Cunningham, 42, a South Carolina Democrat, supports age and term limits for political office and publicly urged Mr. Biden not to seek re-election. In an interview, he spoke warmly about Mr. Connolly.
But, he said, emphasizing that he was speaking more broadly, 'a lot of these elected officials should have another escape hatch from politics other than death.'
'You can take a look at folks who are up there, who've been up there for 30, 40, 50 years, and say, 'Look, it's probably best time that you move on and create a bit of a room for some new leadership,'' he said. 'Considering where the Democratic Party is now, I think it's a big problem.'
He cited the deaths of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, and alluded to Mr. Biden's decision to seek a second term, which he would have concluded at the age of 86.
Polling long showed that voters, including many Democrats, had grave worries about Mr. Biden's age and believed he was too old to seek re-election. But party leaders defended him and went to great lengths to emphasize his vigor. They changed course only after a disastrous debate roughly four months before Election Day, when it was too late for a robust and competitive primary campaign.
All of those issues are being re-litigated now with the release of the book 'Original Sin' by Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, which aims to illuminate how Mr. Biden's advisers shut down discussion of his age-related limitations.
'All of that hammers home how important it is to have this conversation in public, even when it's messy, even when it's walking over land mines, even when it can feel painful, because we can't assume that it's happening in private,' said Amanda Litman, who leads Run for Something, a progressive group that recruits younger Democrats to seek local office. 'We can't assume that the individual elected is going to know when it's their time.'
She praised several older Democrats who have decided to retire on their own terms.
'They are being patriots, and when they do move on, they open up the floodgates for new leaders up and down the ballot,' she said. 'The ones that are refusing are being primaried, and those primaries are going to be personal. Like, it's not going to be a fun primary that they're going to romp to victory on.'
Mr. Connolly, for his part, had said late last month that he would not seek re-election and would step aside from his leadership position on the Oversight Committee.
In a statement, Mr. Connolly's family emphasized a long list of his accomplishments during his decades in public service.
'We were fortunate to share Gerry with Northern Virginia for nearly 40 years because that was his joy, his purpose and his passion,' the statement said. 'We are proud that his life's work will endure for future generations.'
While voters and pundits often express enthusiasm for term limits or age limits, a common practice in the corporate world, many politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to recoil from the idea, stressing instead the value of experience.
And concerns about age are nothing new in Congress, where Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, a Republican and for decades an avowed segregationist, stoked questions about his health and abilities toward the end of his nearly half-century in office. (He died at age 100 and was eulogized by Mr. Biden.)
More recently, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, has had several health scares. He stepped down as his party's leader and plans to retire. Mr. Trump will be 79 next month and has faced his own questions about age.
Some next-generation Democrats are already thinking about the next presidential primary race, which is expected to be a raucous and crowded contest featuring a long list of younger party leaders.
But first, the party owes voters a transparent conversation about age, suggested Mr. Cunningham, whose state is likely to be influential in deciding Democrats' 2028 nominee.
'Now, even, some people say it's not a good time to speak out, but this is a family meeting that needs to occur,' he said. 'The party has to go through some form of counseling or something. You know? Like, these areas have to be acknowledged, and there has to be some honest conversations.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk-Trump spat on X is a distraction from the failures of DOGE
Elon Musk stepped down from his position as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on May 30, only months after promising to transform government by cutting trillions of dollars from the federal budget and eliminating so-called 'waste, fraud and abuse.' Just a week later, Musk's relationship with President Donald Trump ― the man Musk spent nearly $300 million to elect — went up in flames, as Americans watched the drama unfold in real time on X and Truth Social. Trump publicly denounced Musk as 'disloyal' for criticizing the president's signature legislative effort, the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' while Musk called the bill a 'disgusting abomination' and openly called for Trump's impeachment. The spectacle of the richest man in the world and the president of the United States exchanging insults online may be remembered as DOGE's final chapter in the public imagination. But it should not obscure the damage Musk wrought when he commanded one of the most powerful positions in the Trump administration. More from Freep Opinion: Democrats better hope Michigan Gov. Whitmer changes her mind about presidential run To start, Musk's promised savings never came. The DOGE website currently claims to have saved the public $175 billion through a range of actions like eliminating 'fraud and improper payment' and cancelling grants. But even that sum — which is believed to be falsely inflated through a combination of guesswork and suspect arithmetic — is less than 3% of the federal budget, and less than 9% of the $2 trillion in cuts Musk promised upon assuming his role. In other words, DOGE failed on Musk's own terms. What did materialize is an unprecedented attack on public institutions, beginning with the people who carry out the work of public service. According to the latest data, around 260,000 federal employees have either been forced out, been slated for cuts, or chosen to leave their posts since DOGE began its work. These aren't faceless 'bureaucrats.' They are the people who test our water for contaminants, inspect our food for harmful bacteria, and ensure air travel is safe, among other public services. The department with the highest number of planned terminations is Veterans Affairs, with up to 80,900 personnel serving our nation's veterans slated for future cuts, according to the New York Times. Many of these jobs are health care workers who care for veterans directly. More from Freep Opinion: I'm a gay man in Detroit. Celebrating Pride feels more important than ever In cutting both people and programs that provide essential services, DOGE attempted a bargain that Michiganders are painfully familiar with: treat government like a business, and attempt to cut public services to balance the books no matter the risks to public health, the economy or democracy. During our state's era of emergency management, decision-making power in several cities and school districts like Flint and Detroit shifted from democratically elected local officials to appointees of the governor. In Flint, a series of emergency managers focused on cost-cutting to address the city's financial crisis, including the ill-fated decision to switch the city's water source. The result was the worst man-made environmental catastrophe in American history. Flint should have been a warning to the country that 'efficiency' without regard for public welfare is a dangerous proposition. Yet DOGE was a far more extreme expression of this logic. Like Flint, the DOGE experiment is a grave warning about what happens when democracy is treated as a private enterprise rather than a public trust, when billionaires think they know best what people need in their own communities. And while it may take decades to account for the potential harms DOGE's actions might produce, we are already seeing some. Here in Michigan, DOGE reportedly canceled $394 million in federal public health grants, money that ultimately supports local health initiatives statewide. These cuts are not abstract. They will be felt in people's bodies and the broader society. Local health providers will have to cut back on critical services such as vaccine administration and interventions for substance use disorder. According to a 2019 study, every dollar invested in public health departments yields as much as $67 to $88 of benefits to society. DOGE also cut $15 million in AmeriCorps funding for our state, impacting programs that offered tutoring, support for seniors, and assistance for homeless residents. At a time when Michigan ranks 34th in the nation in overall child wellbeing, students in more than 60 school districts may see tutoring support disappear. This begs the question: Who ultimately benefited from Musk's relentless cutting? The clear answer is Elon Musk, who is $170 billion richer since endorsing Trump in the summer of 2024, even accounting for the drop in Tesla's stock attributed to the public backlash over DOGE's actions. (How this most recent fiasco will affect Musk's bottom line remains to be seen.) Meanwhile, DOGE spent months attempting to 'delete' entire agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which stops predatory banks from scamming veterans, seniors, and consumers in general. And it destroyed the IRS' ability to audit wealthy tax cheats, forcing workers and families to shoulder more of the nation's tax responsibility. DOGE has also made us less free. The initiative's most significant legacy may be what the writer Julia Anguin described as 'a sprawling domestic surveillance system for the Trump administration ― the likes of which we have never seen in the United States.' In agency after agency, Musk and his lieutenants accessed the most sensitive data about Americans and handled it with reckless disregard. Information like Social Security numbers and bank accounts that once stood in the relative safety of government silos are now being merged to create more sweeping surveillance tools than ever before. They could be used to further crack down on immigrants' speech, or to simply make it easier to target political enemies. This is what we're left with. A public more exposed to harm — from preventable diseases, from corporate predation and scams, from toxins in our air and water—and a small group of wealthy elites more empowered to dominate our government and our democracy. Perhaps this is why a solid majority of Americans disapprove of Musk's job performance, arguably accelerating his departure from government. The American public deserves a government that is fit for purpose and delivers on its promises. But Elon Musk never intended to create that. DOGE was built on the fiction of Musk's mastery of all things, one of the many myths attributed to the ultra-wealthy. What it concealed was a public sector novice who failed to understand the basic mechanics of the institutions he railed against. On the day Musk announced his departure, a lawsuit against him and DOGE was cleared to proceed, accusing him of wielding unlawful power over federal agencies, contracts and data without democratic oversight. It was a fitting coda. Musk left behind no durable reform, only institutions hollowed out, public trust frayed, and a template for how easily government can be turned against the people it exists to serve. Even this spectacular fallout with Trump should not distract from the wreckage he leaves behind. Bilal Baydoun is Director of Democratic Institutions at the Roosevelt Institute, a national policy think tank devoted to building on the legacy of FDR. A version of this column was previously published on the Roosevelt Institute's Substack. Submit a letter to the editor at and we may publish it online and in print. Like what you're reading? Please consider supporting local journalism and getting unlimited digital access witha Detroit Free Press subscription. We depend on readers like you. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Elon Musk-Trump spat is a distraction from DOGE failures | Opinion


Washington Post
20 minutes ago
- Washington Post
AP Decision Notes: What to expect in the New Jersey primary
WASHINGTON — Nearly a dozen candidates will compete in New Jersey on Tuesday for the chance to succeed term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy . Voters will also pick nominees for the state General Assembly. New Jersey is one of only two states, along with Virginia, with a gubernatorial race on the ballot this year. Historically, presidential politics has cast a long shadow over the two contests, with the president's party frequently losing one or both seats. Although Democrats have long dominated New Jersey's federal offices as well as the state Legislature, the governor's office has changed hands regularly between the two major political parties for most of the last century. The last time a party held the governorship for more than two consecutive terms was in 1961.


Chicago Tribune
21 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Elon Musk and President Donald Trump break up, and Washington holds its breath
WASHINGTON — Maybe it was always going to end this way, with two billionaires angrily posting about each other on social media, fingers flying across pocket-sized screens as their incandescent feud burned hotter by the minute. But even if the finale was predictable, that didn't make it any less shocking. After long months when Donald Trump and Elon Musk appeared united in their chaotic mission to remake Washington, their relationship imploded this week like a star going supernova. It began with Musk complaining about the centerpiece of Trump's legislative agenda, which the president at first took in stride. Eventually Trump let slip that he was disappointed in his former adviser, prompting Musk to unleash a flood of insults and taunts. He accused Trump of betraying promises to cut federal spending, shared a suggestion that the president should be impeached and claimed without evidence that the government was concealing information about his association with infamous pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Perhaps most viciously, Musk insisted that Trump wouldn't have won last year's election without his help. Trump, not one to slouch from a fight, could hold back no longer. He posted that Musk had been 'wearing thin,' that he had 'asked him to leave' his administration, that the tech titan had 'gone CRAZY.' Maybe, Trump threatened, he should save taxpayer money by canceling government contracts and subsidies for Musk's companies. On and on it went, as liberals savored the spectacle of their most despised political opponents clawing at each other's digital throats and conservatives reeled at the prospect of having to pick sides. Laura Loomer, a right-wing provocateur and conspiracy theorist, saw an opportunity to position herself as the voice of reason. 'This fight should be taken offline,' she said — on social media, of course. The question now is whether Trump and Musk find some way to step back from a battle that is tearing apart one of the most consequential relationships in modern American politics. If they don't, there's little telling how far the fallout could spread from a collision between the world's most powerful man and its wealthiest. At stake are the future of Musk's companies, including electric automaker Tesla and rocket manufacturer SpaceX; government programs that rely on the billionaire entrepreneur's technology; legislation for advancing tax cuts and Trump's other priorities in Congress; Republican chances in next year's midterm elections; and an entire political ecosystem that has orbited around Trump and Musk's deteriorating partnership. 'It's like India and Pakistan,' said Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana, referring to two nuclear-armed nations that recently skirmished along their border. 'It just escalates and neither one of them seem to back down and understand the strength of each other.' Trump and Musk were always an odd pairing, with contrasting world views and deep generational and stylistic differences. Trump, 78, comes from old-school New York real estate and never appears in public without a suit and tie unless he's on the golf course. Before running for president, he became a household name as a reality television star. Musk, 53, is an immigrant from South Africa who struck it rich in Silicon Valley. In addition to running Tesla and SpaceX, Musk owns the social media company X. He's fashioned himself as a black-clad internet edgelord, and his wealth vastly outstrips Trump's. But Trump and Musk are kindred spirits in other ways. They're experts at generating attention who enjoy stirring the pot by riling up their opponents. Each has sought more power to accomplish existential quests. Trump assails the federal 'deep state' that resisted him during his first term, while Musk warns about the country going bankrupt from excessive spending and promotes an interplanetary future powered by his rocket technology. Musk endorsed Trump after the Republican candidate was nearly assassinated in Butler, Pennsylvania, and he began spending millions to support him. His social media megaphone was a powerful addition to Trump's comeback campaign, magnifying his efforts to court tech leaders and young, very online men. Trump rarely tolerates sharing the spotlight, but he seemed enamored with his powerful backer, mentioning him in stump speeches and welcoming him onstage at rallies. After the election, Musk was a fixture around Mar-a-Lago, posing for photos with Trump's family, joining them for dinner, sitting in on meetings. Instead of growing tired of his 'first buddy,' Trump made plans to bring Musk along to Washington, appointing him to lead a cost-cutting initiative known as the Department of Government Efficiency. Musk tried to establish himself as the president's omniscient and omnipresent adviser. He held court in Cabinet meetings, slept over in the Lincoln Bedroom and helped himself to caramel ice cream from the White House kitchen. The federal bureaucracy practically trembled before Musk, who oversaw layoffs and downsizing with his team of acolytes and engineers embedded in various agencies. Musk appeared thrilled at his opportunity to tinker with the government and exulted in his bromance with Trump, posting on Feb. 7 that he loved the president 'as much as a straight man can love another man.' Trump returned the favor on March 11, allowing Musk to line up Tesla vehicles on the White House driveway as his company was struggling with declining sales. Trump made a show of choosing a cherry red electric car for himself. But cracks were emerging, especially as Trump pursued tariffs that could raise costs for Musk's businesses. Musk said Peter Navarro, the president's trade adviser, was 'truly a moron' and 'dumber than a sack of bricks' on April 8. The billionaire entrepreneur, who had never before worked in public service, seemed to be souring on government. He suggested there wasn't enough political will, either in Congress or in the White House, to adequately reduce spending. Trump started signaling that it was time for him to leave even though Musk said he would be willing to stay. Shortly before announcing his departure, Musk said he was 'disappointed' by legislation that Trump called the 'big beautiful bill' because it would increase the deficit. The measure includes tax cuts, more money for border security and changes to Medicaid that would leave fewer people with health insurance. 'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful,' Musk said. 'But I don't know if it could be both.' The criticism didn't prevent Trump from giving Musk a send-off in the Oval Office, where he presented his outgoing adviser with a ceremonial key. 'Elon is really not leaving,' Trump said. 'He's going to be back and forth.' Musk said, 'I'll continue to be visiting here and be a friend and adviser to the president.' It's hard to imagine that now. Musk escalated his attacks on the legislation Tuesday, calling it a 'disgusting abomination,' and Trump tried to fend off the criticism. 'He hasn't said bad about me personally, but I'm sure that will be next,' the president said Thursday in the Oval Office during a meeting with the German chancellor. It was. Musk quickly took to X to vent his anger at Trump, saying his tariffs 'will cause a recession in the second half of this year' and accusing him of lying. He also said it was 'very unfair' that the legislation would eliminate tax incentives for electric vehicles. Trump fired back in real time as he tried to maintain momentum for his legislation, which faces a difficult debate in the Senate. 'I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,' the president posted. 'This is one of the Greatest Bills ever presented to Congress.' Meanwhile, some of Trump's allies plotted revenge. Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser who hosts an influential conservative podcast, said the president should direct the U.S. government to seize SpaceX. He also encouraged Trump to investigate allegations that Musk uses drugs and 'go through everything about his immigration status' in preparation for potential deportation. 'We'll see how good Elon Musk takes a little of that pressure,' Bannon said, 'because I happen to think a little of that pressure might be coming.'