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

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less
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