Why so many members of Congress are calling it quits

House Members Return To Washington, DC After Midterm Election
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) walks to the House Floor on Capitol Hill on Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Washington, DC.  | Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times / Getty Images

Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy joins a growing number of lawmakers who are eyeing the exits.

Wednesday, former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) became the latest lawmaker to announce his departure, adding to a wave of retirements and resignations in both the House and the Senate this term. McCarthy will resign before his term is over, leaving House Republicans with a narrower majority and his California seat up for a special election. Thus far, 37 House members and seven senators have announced that they’re leaving.

At this point, these departures are in line with past trends. The number of House retirements this cycle — people who will finish their term but won’t run for reelection — is on par with 2020 and 2022, according to Ballotpedia. The figure in the Senate is slightly higher. The announcements are also surging around the same time they typically do: right around candidate filing deadlines when lawmakers have to decide if they’re in it for another cycle. If these retirements continue at such a rapid pace, however, it’s possible the total number this cycle will exceed past records.

Additionally, although these departures follow some recent patterns, there are also unique characteristics in the types of lawmakers who are choosing to leave this term. In the House, several Republicans who’ve announced retirements or resignations are longtime lawmakers known for adhering to congressional norms and traditions rather than the more disruptive tactics of the far right. Some of the GOP retirees in both chambers have also expressed concern about the increasingly Trump-centric and extremist direction their party is taking. Multiple lawmakers who are retiring have cited general congressional dysfunction, from difficulty passing major legislation to petty infighting, as a central reason for their departure.

“I’m sure the leadership chaos on the Republican side is not helping keep members in Congress,” says Kyle Kondik, a political analyst and managing editor at Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia. “Overall, though, the House just does not seem like a very pleasant place to be.”

McCarthy’s departure feels driven by a combination of these factors, with his ouster as leader — which was led by the right flank of his own party — likely influencing his decision to leave. For a number of other lawmakers, personal ambitions are a key motivator, including many House members eager to pursue Senate and gubernatorial runs. And for older lawmakers, age and a push for generational change were also part of that decision.

As these departures continue to pile up, here are a few of the reasons lawmakers are eying the exits.

Party polarization

As the House and Senate GOP conferences have become more alt-right friendly, a number of moderate and institutionalist (meaning those interested in preserving norms and traditional procedures when it comes to passing policy) Republicans have decided to call it quits, with some signaling that there’s a limited place for their vision in their party.

Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado, one of the few House Republicans to condemn his party’s election denialism, cited the GOP’s extremism on this issue as a specific reason for his retirement. “Too many Republican leaders are lying to America, claiming that the 2020 election was stolen, describing January 6 as an unguided tour of the Capitol, and asserting that the ensuing prosecutions are a weaponization of our justice system,” Buck said in a video announcing the decision.

McCarthy and his ally Rep. Patrick McHenry — who served as acting speaker after McCarthy was deposed and who is also leaving — are among the Republicans who, though they backed Trump, were slightly more institutionalist as well. Both members opposed shutting down the government as leverage for funding cuts, for example, and both struggled with the demands of an ascendant far right that made it clear the duo’s style of politics was out of fashion. Rep. Kay Granger, the head of the House Appropriations Committee who’s long been steeped in policy-making processes, is among those stepping down, too.

“What’s very pronounced for 2024 is we’re seeing a raft of retirements on the part of more institutionalist members,” Cook Political Report’s David Wasserman told Axios in November. “I think that list on the Republican side will grow in the next month.”

In the upper chamber, Sen. Mitt Romney (UT), the only Republican to vote to convict Trump in his impeachment trial twice, is also a notable retirement on the GOP side who has openly criticized the former president and his influence on the party.

“Look, my wing of the party talks about policy, and about issues that will make a difference to the lives of the American people,” Romney told ABC News’s Rachel Scott. “The Trump wing of the party talks about resentments of various kinds and getting even and settling scores and revisiting the 2020 election.”

Dysfunction

A byproduct of the political polarization in Congress has also been an increased level of dysfunction. This past term, that dysfunction has been especially apparent in the House, where members struggled to elect a speaker, threatened to enable a debt default, and deposed McCarthy over his unwillingness to shut down the government.

Frustration coupled with polarization has led to an increasingly toxic environment, with members on both sides calling each other names, accusing members of the other party of being hatemongers, using procedural tactics to punish one another, engaging in bullying, and even reportedly participating in altercations.

“Right now, Washington, DC, is broken,” Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) said in a statement about her departure. “It is hard to get anything done.”

Multiple lawmakers have referenced this dysfunction as they’ve discussed their departures, emphasizing that the lack of productivity is related to their dissatisfaction with the job. “The growing divide between Democrats and Republicans is paralyzing Congress and worsening our nation’s problems,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said in a video announcing his retirement.

That dysfunction has compounded some lawmakers’ willingness to take on the sacrifices that come with the role, which includes extended amounts of time away from family, long hours, and a contentious work environment.

This is the “most unsatisfying period in my time in Congress because of the absolute chaos and the lack of any serious commitment to effective governance,” Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI) told the New York Times. “This feeling that the sacrifice we’re all making in order to be in Washington, to be witness to this chaos, is pretty difficult to make.”

Personal ambition

Others who’ve announced their departures are doing so for a simple reason: They’re interested in higher office.

In the House, nine of the Democratic members who’ve opted out of reelection are now vying for the Senate, including Reps. Katie Porter, Adam Schiff, and Barbara Lee in California; Rep. Ruben Gallego in Arizona; Rep. Elissa Slotkin in Michigan; Rep. Colin Allred in Texas; Rep. David Trone in Maryland; Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester in Delaware; and Rep. Andy Kim in New Jersey. On the Republican side, Rep. Alex Mooney in West Virginia and Rep. Jim Banks in Indiana are similarly vying for Senate seats next year.

Some lawmakers are also pursuing other state-level offices including Democratic Rep. Jeff Jackson and Republican Rep. Dan Bishop, both of whom are running for attorney general in North Carolina. Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger in Virginia is running for governor and Democratic Rep. Dean Phillips has thrown his hat into the presidential primary against President Joe Biden.

This pattern is less evident on the Senate side, in which six of the seven retirees are not seeking public office; just Republican Sen. Mike Braun has said he’s running for Indiana governor. In the House, 16 of the members who are retiring aren’t seeking public office.

Electoral challenges

Finally, some retirements are related to members getting drawn out of their districts by gerrymandering, which has made it impossible for them to win reelection. Others were poised to deal with contentious primaries and general elections as party polarization has gotten worse.

North Carolina Democratic Rep. Jeff Jackson has discussed the issue candidly, saying, “I’ve officially been drawn out of my congressional district by a small group of politicians,” in a video on the subject. His North Carolina district has since been redrawn by the legislature to lean much more heavily to the right, a change that takes effect this year. Rep. Kathy Manning, another Democrat of North Carolina, has seen the same thing happen to her district and announced that she won’t run for reelection.

“Politicians should not choose their voters; voters should choose their representatives,” she said in a statement. Both their cases underscore how a Republican-led state legislature is attempting to skew electoral maps in favor of their party’s candidates.

Other lawmakers among the retirements would have faced fierce reelection fights, with Sen. Joe Manchin likely to face an intense battle in the heavily red state were he to run again. Sen. Mitt Romney was also among those who were set to have an aggressive conservative primary challenge if he decided to pursue another term.

Related articles

Trump has NIGHTMARE FRIDAY AM as he IS REPUDIATED PUBLICLY

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald...

Town Board Meeting 10.14.25

https://www.youtube.com/embed/RZlPKoGNTqc

Trump LOSES CONTROL as US Troops SENT TO WAR

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald...

Justice Amy Coney Barrett admits Trump could be beyond the Supreme Court’s control



In an interview released on Thursday, Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Comey Barrett had to be asked twice what the nation’s highest court would do if Donald Trump turned up his nose at an adverse ruling and refused to abide by it.

In a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times’ Ross Douthat, Barrett was first asked about the extent of the president’s power over the government that has been a central tenet of Trump’s second term as his inner circle has pushed the so-called “unitary executive theory" that slots him above the legislative and judicial branches of government.

According to Trump’s last appointee to the court, who replaced the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020, “It would imply strong presidential power over executive agencies. There has been a lot of debate and some new originalist scholarship debating right now whether indeed it has sound originalist credentials. But yes, it is one that has traditionally been associated with originalists.”

She then noted that debate is currently being addressed “in some of the cases on the court’s docket now.”

With that looming over the court as an avalanche of challenges to the current president are overwhelming federal courts, Douthat pointed out to the justice, “The Supreme Court does not command the power of the purse, doesn’t command the military, doesn’t have police powers. What it has, in a sense, is prestige, public support, a historic constitutional role.”

Adding, “... we’re in a moment — and we don’t have to make this specific to the Trump White House — when it’s very easy to imagine, from either the left or the right, some present or future president deciding to test the court, Andrew Jackson-style, saying: Interesting ruling, Justice Barrett. Good luck enforcing it,” he proposed, “How do you think about that potential challenge, as a member of the court?”

Admitting the NYT columnist was correct, Coney Barrett attempted, “... just as the court must take account of the consequences on the institutional dynamics, say, between a current president and a future president, the balance of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch, that of course, those same kinds of institutional concerns for the long run are ones that play a part in the court’s separation of powers decisions and always have, because they also are reflected in concerns of the constitutional structure.”

Unsatisfied with the lack of clarity in her answer, Douthat pressed, “OK, let me try that again: If a president defied the Supreme Court, what would you do?”

Coney Barrett then admitted that the court’s hands would be tied because there is no enforcement mechanism at their disposal.

“Well, as you say, the court lacks the power of the purse. We lack the power of the sword,” she conceded. “And so, we interpret the Constitution, we draw on precedents, we have these questions of structure, and we make the most with the tools that we have.”

You can read her entire interview here.