Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

People of color fill less than 20 percent of senior staff positions in House

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries is one of just three leaders to employ a person of color in a top staff position.

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

While people of color make up a larger share of senior staff positions in the House of Representatives than they did four years ago, the top ranks remain far away from the national demographics.

The latest census data shows people of color make up 40 percent of the U.S. population but, according to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, they comprise just 18 percent of senior House positions. Only 23 of 308 personal offices of white lawmakers have a chief of staff who is also a person of color.


The ranks of senior staffers have become more diverse – up from 13.7 percent when the first edition of the report was published four years ago.

“While Congress has made significant progress since 2018, members of Congress and their leadership must do more to ensure that the diversity of the U.S. House workforce reflects the diversity of the American people,” writes LaShonda Brenson, senior researcher at the Joint Center and author of the report.

The study tallied the number top staffers in three levels of House offices:

  • Chiefs of staff, legislative directors and communications directors in lawmakers’ personal offices as
  • Chiefs of staff, policy directors and communications directors in leadership offices.
  • Staff directors for full committees.

Staff diversity in House offices chart

"While we currently have one of the most diverse Congresses in history, their staff still falls short of reflecting the multiplicity of communities that make up the United States. By increasing the diversity of top Hill staff, especially in senior-level positions, Congress is able to make smarter policies, communicate more effectively, and ensure that everyone's needs are met,” said Kayla Primes, president of the Congressional Black Associates, a bipartisan organization of Black staffers on Capitol Hill. “We acknowledge that 18 percent is an improvement from 13.7 percent, but there is still a long way to go to account for the 40 percent of BIPOC Americans in the U.S. today."

Democrats hired a significantly higher share of people of color for senior positions, accounting for 82 percent, according to the research, and at a higher rate among all the racial groups studied. Republicans’ biggest share is among Native American staffers, but that’s only one of a total of three aides. They also have 26.8 percent of the Lantino staffers in senior positions. Just 5.1 percent of staffers in the offices of white Republicans are people of color.

But even within the Democratic side of the aisle there are differences, with 40 percent of top positions unders members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus filled by people of color. That’s compared to 23.6 percent under members of the moderate Blue Dog Coalition.

Lawmakers of color account for the largest share of senior staffers who are racial minorities. For example, members of the Congressional Black Caucus are responsible for hiring 75 percent of the senior Black staffers across all three office types.

While Asian American/Pacific Islander, biracial, Middle Eastern/North African and Native American staffers do hold senior positions in lawmakers personal offices, none of them serve in a top post in a leadership office or as a committee staff director.

The report also examined which personal offices represent districts that are at least one-third minorities but do not have people of color in senior roles. It found 239 districts that meet the population requirement, and of those nearly half (48.1 percent) do not have a person of color in any of the top positions.

“The lack of top staff diversity is a structural challenge for the entire institution rather than a problem attributable to a single member or political party,” according to Brensen. “The lack of racial diversity impairs House members’ ability to understand their constituencies’ diverse perspectives.”

The study identified 20 senior positions in House leadership (the offices of the speaker, the majority and minority leaders, the majority and minority whips, and the caucus chairs). Of those 20 people, two are Black and one is Latino. The remaining 17 are white. The only leaders with a person of color in a top spot are:

  • Majority Whip Jim Clyburn
  • Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries
  • Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy

Primes noted that her organization is trying to help Congress become more diverse.

“CBA recently re-launched our resume bank as a resource for Members and staff to find that diverse talent because they are here and ready to be of service,” she said.

The Select Committee on Modernization of the Congress, a bipartisan panel that has spent the past four years developing proposals to make the House more effective and transparent, has made suggestions for improving staff diversity.

One such proposal that was implemented turned the Office of Diversity and Inclusion into a permanent element of the House structure. Another directs the ODI and the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer to conduct a compensation and diversity study every two years.


Read More

An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

How has the meaning of military victory changed? Explore Iran, deterrence, nuclear weapons, and why modern wars are fought with limited objectives.

Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

The Last War We Understood

Every modern conflict seems to produce the same debate.

Supporters argue that military action achieved its objectives. Critics ask why the enemy still exists. Iran is only the latest example.

Keep ReadingShow less
United States Capitol building and blurred American flag against blue sky

America’s aging Congress has no maximum age limit. Could a constitutional amendment create age limits for lawmakers and better represent younger voters?

TGI /Tetra Images

Congress Has an Age Floor and No Ceiling. That's Backwards for Gen Z.

Senator Dianne Feinstein's visible decline in her final years in office. Senator Lindsey Graham's sudden death. Senator Mitch McConnell's own recent hospitalization, and his halting explanation of it afterward. Three senators, three separate incidents, no obvious connection between them, except that the saga of these three senators is really one story about the problem of not knowing when to step down. That framing asks the right question of individual leaders. But it assumes the problem is a matter of personal judgment, each senator, in his or her own time, finding the wisdom to recognize the moment has passed. I think that gets the American version of this problem backwards. Congress's age problem is not a string of individual judgment calls. It is a structural feature of the Constitution itself, and it is quietly reshaping who gets represented in American government.

The Constitution sets a floor for federal office and no ceiling. A representative must be at least twenty-five. A senator must be at least thirty. A president must be at least thirty-five. Nothing in the document says how old is too old. Combine that asymmetry with the enormous advantages of incumbency, better name recognition, fundraising networks, committee seniority, and the result is predictable: a Congress that can start young but can never age out. It can only age up. The 119th Congress is now the third oldest in American history, with an average member age of nearly fifty-nine and a Senate averaging in the mid-sixties. This is not a temporary blip. It is the natural output of a system with a gate on one end and no gate on the other.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first
a large white building with a flag on top of it

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the third and final installment of our series on “Article the first.” Previous parts examined the history of the single inverted word that turned an intended floor into a ceiling and its impact on the amendment’s failed ratification. This concluding part outlines the path forward for enlarging the House today.

Part 3 — The Path Forward

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

Painting from 1856 by Junius Brutus Stearns of George Washington at the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the second of a three-part series on the First Amendment proposed by Congress in 1789—often called “Article the first”—which was never ratified. Part 1 explained how a single inverted word in the text created a mathematical absurdity that has been misread for 237 years. This second part explores the untold history of how that defect affected the original ratification process in state legislatures.

Part 2 — The Untold History

Keep ReadingShow less