So if a company demoted a 74 year old person with cancer in order to promote a person in their 30's what would we say

[dsc]

about that company? I get Nadler, he was clearly not good at running the committee when he was doing so. Connolly on the other hand has no issue in that regard. He is clearly able to speak well, he is good at running his office, and he has done a good job on the committee. The two, and only two issues, are his age and his cancer. Again, if a company did this we would roast them, and deservedly so. Now, if the cancer makes him incapable of doing his job (something that wasn't true for Raskin), then we might need to make a change. But without evidence, I don't see the problem.

[msongs]

1. an organization where people in love with power refuse to withdraw becomes ossified & will collapse.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. Policy is FAR more important than age; why we should place those promoting progressive populism in positions of power...

regardless of age!!

[RockRaven]

2. If part of the job was public relations and being the face of the company, and

the younger person was charismatic and popular with the target customers, we would say that it was a no-brainer and just good business.

That being said, the actual decision which occurred here reveals who the majority of members think their most important constituents are. For better or for worse.

[Mike 03]

3. If that is how it is supposed to be in the House, why even have

a vote? Why not just say, "So and so, by seniority, will be the next ranking member of this committee." What is even the point of voting on it? Then, once people are told they are free to vote as they choose, tell them how to vote?

[jaxxon20]

4. not a corporation

This is not a corporation. This is a political conference with voting on positions that will influence policy of the entire conference. People are moved in and out of chairmanships and ranking member positions for the good of the conference all the time. The only considerations here are will the person voted help move the policies of the conference forward will they better reflect the wishes of the party, including the voters who do and will support them and will they enable better results in 2026 midterms.

[Gore1FL]

5. Everyone in the House gets fired every two years.

Some are rehired. The analogy doesn't work here.

[BannonsLiver]

6. Spoiler alert: He doesn't work for a company, he works for the people.

[onenote]

23. Spoiler alert: the people elected him over younger opponents by a sizable margin.

[BannonsLiver]

37. Looks like more people here agree with me.

And pardon me if I’m not in awe of our congress critters lately. They’ve been on an exceedingly bad run. Maybe you’re impressed by that. 🤷‍♂️

[LeftInTX]

7. He wasn't fired. He was rehired in November

[doc03]

9. Most people in the private sector wouldn't

be working at 74 with cancer.

[KT2000]

10. At 74 he is a politician

who I am sure has thought about retiring. I know people who opted to retire from their private employment for reasons such as giving the younger people a shot. Politicians should have the grace to do the same. If the Dems continue to give the oldsters their due - we will all drown. It happens in all organizations that reward positions rather than give them to people with new ideas and energy.

I am sure he is a nice man who won his election over a republican but we are in trouble. He can be an effective resistance without the added stress of oversight chair.

[Emile]

11. Our government is not a corporation. It's an

elected body sent to Washington to REPRESENT US!

[dem4decades]

12. Maybe he's a better fit for the job?

[betsuni]

13. I wonder what huge tremendous differences there would be depending on the age of the person doing that job.

We have to assume worst case scenario that this older person will never go away, cling to "power" for decades and only be, like, old forever? I thought being the establishment was bad, anyway. If leadership is all based on youth then they'd better be perfect. It'll be whining about broken promises and not being progressive enough because legislature needs votes and Republicans control Congress. People are much happier bashing leadership for being old because they can't prove there's a big difference. Like bashing Democrats for being Republican lite neoliberals without a shred of evidence.

[Skittles]

14. when the work contract I was on was hijacked

I was recruited (yes, as a senior) by the new company but declined so a younger coworkers could stay employed

I think it is way past time for a lot of these politicians to pass the baton, DEMOCRATS NEED NEW LEADERSHIP

[Prairie Gates]

40. YES!

[SocialDemocrat61]

15. If the leadership of a company

lost the company’s three biggest clients, should those leaders continue to be kept in power and blindly followed?

[dsc]

16. actually she had more of leadership role on that committee when that loss happened

than he did.

[SocialDemocrat61]

17. I was talking about party leadership

But the fact that they leapfrogged a white man over a woman of color makes what they did even worse.

[Ursus Rex]

18. Depends on which one was better at the job.

That’s a bad analogy because corps DGAF about age per se. If the 74 yo would only do the job in a way that a few people liked and generally dragged down the enterprise, they would most likely very soon be out in a position where they wouldn’t be embarrassed but where the other more qualified associate would shine.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

19. Not a fan of running the government like a business, myself.

[Trenzalore]

20. Time will tell

Strategically we are in uncharted territory with a political opponent who seems more interested in watching the world burn than governing.

The age thing aside. It might be time for everyone in the party to be thinking outside of boxes and traditions

[Iggo]

21. That's not what happened.

What happened was, political party held a vote to see who would lead a committee.

Or, if we must use the govt-as-business scenario, they held a vote to see which one would be promoted. Nobody was demoted.

[Sympthsical]

22. Companies usually don't pile projects onto people about to take sick leave

I don't feel like this comparison is apt.

When given a choice between someone who is going to go through the wringer with their health in the near future and someone else, a company's going to pick the person they know will have the energy and be available.

This "Power Forever" ethos is not appropriate for a democratic or Democratic party, IMO.

[Renew Deal]

24. It's not a job. It's politics.

And it is a political mistake to choose a political nobody over one of your stars that is trusted by the swing voters that decided the last election.

[Crunchy Frog]

25. If the company in question was going under,

and was in desperate need of new leadership to take it in a completely new direction, I think most people would feel that the decision made sense under the circumstances.

[Hekate]

26. Were people eager to ditch Jamie Raskin while he was having chemotherapy? But, as to your question...

…places where I worked longest, as a County civil servant and at a public university, had robust regulations in place to protect employees who got sick but could still perform their jobs.

The idea of dumping a serving member of Congress solely because they are being treated for a non-contagious disease, is actually disgusting.

[qazplm135]

28. How would he be dumped?

He's still in Congress either way

[Hekate]

29. You'll have to ask the people who are positing this course of action

Some of them — not necessarily the same ones — also seem to not grasp that Speaker Emerita Pelosi is still a serving member of Congress, newly re-elected by her constituents. Go figure.

[qazplm135]

30. No I'm asking you

Not being made chairperson is not being "dumped."

[Hekate]

31. Read the thread

[qazplm135]

41. I see

Thanks for verifying the need to not engage with you further

[LonePirate]

27. How many millions of people are impacted by the 74 year old at that company?

What if that company was bleeding young and Hispanic customers yet a fresh, young, Hispanic employee could entice those customers back under the premise of being just like them (something the 74 year old cannot offer)?

[Kaleva]

32. Did this company have the workers vote on the matter?

I thought AOC lost because she didn't get more votes.

[Emile]

33. This Ageism directed at younger people needs to stop!

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. Does Connolly get extra pay for being the ranking member?

As far as I can tell, he doesn't. So this is not about sympathy, it's about who will do the job best (he says doing the job won't affect his treatment). Given the toughness of the treatment, no, I don't think we would "roast" a company that said "we think this extra part of the job is too much for you with your treatment and condition - we'll keep you at full pay, of course, and you'll still do the standard part of your job in your contract".

[dsc]

35. I really don't know

if chairs do then probably yes but I admit I haven't any idea.

[bottomofthehill]

57. Not a dime more, not chairmen/woman or ranking members

The only people who make more are the Speaker, the leaders and the whips.

[Autumn]

36. I would say a it's a wise move. A 74 year old man undergoing chemotherapy and immunotherapy

should step down and concentrate on their treatments which can be severe and potentially life threatening. I've watched a young vibrant 30 year old man go though this. It's vicious.

[themaguffin]

38. This is not a company.

[Prairie Gates]

39. I would ask why the 74 year old is still working

The retirement age used to be 65. Even if we advance it to 67 along with Social Security, the 74 year old should be retired.

[onenote]

42. Did you ask that about Joe Biden when he ran in 2020 at age 78? Or Elizabeth Warren when she just ran at age 75?

Do you think that at age 74 everyone should be retired?

Most voters don' t seem to agree.

[Prairie Gates]

43. I don't think people should continue to run for office in their mid to late 70s

Obviously, I supported the Democratic candidates, but I think it's a bad idea. Indeed, here we are.

The OP to which I was responding didn't ask me to align my position with that of "most voters," so that's a completely irrelevant sentence.

[onenote]

44. Here we are: Elizabeth Warren, an expert in banking matters, was reelected.

[Prairie Gates]

46. Here we are

The Dem President was forced out due to perceived age-related issues 100 days before an election, and we've lost Presidency, House, Senate, and probably courts for a generation. So, yeah, two cheers for Warren's tenure.

[onenote]

47. And someone nearly as old as Biden was elected.

We may have lost the House for two years. But not if Democrats adopt age-based purity tests.

[Prairie Gates]

48. Trump shouldn't be President either: he's too old

Among other issues.

I'm not sure what "purity test" you're on about, though it seems to be some talking point du jour to say "purity test" a lot.

[Polybius]

49. Warren was 71

She's 75 now.

[onenote]

50. Warren was born June 22, 1949.

She was elected to her second 6-year term as Senator in November 2018, when she was 69. She was 71 in 2020, when she ran for President but that's not what I was referencing. It was that she "just" -- meaning this year -- ran for a six year senate term when she was already 75.

Apparently, some here think she shouldn't have run or, at very least retired when she hit 74, even if that was during her senate term or if she had been elected in 2020.

[Polybius]

54. I thought you said she was 75 when she ran for President

My apologies.

[Self Esteem]

45. I think we should treat politicians differently than average workers.

It's why I can say I support hiring felons into the workforce but also claim that I don't support a felon for president.

Yes, we should scrutinize politicians a bit more than the average joe, whose personal life and competency might differ.

This just isn't a good comparison.

[sdfernando]

51. Government is NOT a business!

it should never be thought of in business terms…..that’s a big reason we are in the mess we are in right now.

[Pisces]

53. The govt. isn't a company and shouldn't be run that way. These are our representatives and Democrats

Continue to shoot themselves in the foot. All should have a seat at the table.

[Raven123]

55. Wrong question

If two people apply for a job, and one has a serious medical condition that will limit their ability to perform their responsibilities, which one would you hire?

Esophageal cancer is very difficult to treat, the recovery is difficult and the prognosis is often poor. I have personally known 2 people, both of whom died. It is brutal.

The job requires a lot of time and effort. It is very reasonable to believe he is not our best option

[Hassler]

56. We cancelled an 82 year old president, so why not?

[Patton French]

58. Yep

NT

[Nanjeanne]

59. A better analogy than "demoted" is if I had two employees that wanted to lead a big project with

much media coverage and import and the 74 year white male old had serious cancer diagnosis and was undergoing chemo and I also had a young woman of color fully qualified and just as passionate - I’d choose the younger woman to lead that team. And no one would be demoted and both would still be employees, earning same amount of money and benefits.