4 ms·
It’s unfortunate to not see life expectancy explicitly mentioned. There does seem to be a correlation between average age of the congressman and average years
by dfee 8y ago
It’s unfortunate to not see life expectancy explicitly mentioned.
There does seem to be a correlation between average age of the congressman and average years served, though. I’m assuming that reflects the life expectancy piece.
- duxup 8y agoAlso quality of life (if that can be measured). You can be alive, but not doing very well to the point that you retire or etc.
- daxorid 8y agoMy understanding of historical life expectancy is that, adjusting for infant mortality and wars, we aren't significantly longer-lived now than in the 19th century. Specifically, once you've made it to 40, you're nearly as likely to make 76 then as now. I will try to dig up a source and edit as soon as I find time. edit: Found a very useful source, though it only weakly corroborates my initial comment. The vast majority of gains in life expectancy have indeed been for infant mortality and early-life infections, but there is still roughly a seven year differential in the life expectancy of of a forty year old: https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
- moultano 8y agoThe gains are more modest at 40 than at birth, but still significant. https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Life-expectancy-by-age-in-the-UK-1700-to-2013.png https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Life-e...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- whoopdedo 8y agoBut more people are making it to 40 and thus surviving longer, making the average age of the population higher. The two prominent changes in age come at the end of the 19th century when sanitary practice was introduced into medicine, and the middle of the 20th century when antibiotics began to be used. This indirectly increases the age of members of congress. I agree with what Alex3917 says above, that it has to do with needing to win votes from more and older voters. The graphs in the second half of the article also show that incumbency has increased, because longer living voters will support the familiar name. Then there was a dip in the '70s I assume from a combined factors of many of the older members retiring at the same time there was significant cultural change happening. Also on the graph of members of the House, there's a sudden rise in age at the start of the 21st century. The Senate graph has no corresponding change. I can only make a wild guess but that would be the amount of money that can be made in the private sector is so much more now that younger people are staying away from public service.
- scj 8y agoThe average age of the voting population is also increasing due to multiple factors.
- Alex3917 8y ago> It’s unfortunate to not see life expectancy explicitly mentioned. I think it has more to do with the number of constituents per district. You need to be a lot further in your career to win an election with 500,000 voters than one with 20,000 voters.
- danso 8y agoFor House seats, the districts should have roughly the same population (if the Census is doing its job properly).
- Alex3917 8y agohttps://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/enlarging-the-house-of-representatives/ https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/enlarging-the-...
- linkregister 8y agoDistricts are much larger in population than they were at the outset of the 20th century.
- danso 8y agoAh, I misread the comment obviously.
- forapurpose 8y agoLife expectancy in the U.S., uniquely of advanced countries, is going down last I heard.