After nearly four decades of service, a political era in the nation’s capital has come to a close.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the longtime Democrat nonvoting delegate from the District of Columbia, filed a termination report with the Federal Election Commission on Sunday, officially ending her bid for a 19th term at the age of 88, months after a police report described her as being in the early stages of dementia. First elected in 1990, Norton has been reelected continuously with little opposition, though this time she faced a competitive Democratic primary field, including D.C. Councilman Robert White, 43, and D.C. Councilwoman Brooke Pinto, 33. Her campaign’s final FEC report showed no cash on hand after raising just $7.50 in the first 25 days of 2026 while spending over $4,000.

The issue has sparked debate over age and capability in public office, especially as Norton’s health came under scrutiny following an October 2025 incident where scammers charged her credit card $4,000 for fake cleaning services. A police report from that event noted her as potentially having early-stage dementia, though a spokesperson dismissed this as an unqualified assumption by the reporting officer. The spokesperson declined to confirm or deny the condition to NBC4 Washington.

From 1990 to Now: A Long Legacy

Norton’s journey began in 1990, when she first took office with the support of key figures like Donna Brazile, who served as her campaign manager and later as chief of staff for eight years. Despite her storied tenure, whispers of concern grew louder in 2025 as she repeatedly insisted on staying in the race, only for her staff to downplay those statements.

By September 2025, challenges mounted with Robert White entering the primary race, signaling a shift in D.C. politics. White didn’t mince words, stating, “like most people in D.C., we recognize that she [Norton] can’t do the things that she once did,” as reported by POLITICO. Well, if the District’s own councilman sees a decline, perhaps it’s time to pass the torch before the flame flickers out entirely, the Daily Caller reported.

Even Brazile, a longtime ally, penned an op-ed in The Washington Post that same month, urging Norton to step aside. Her words cut deep: “She is no longer the dynamo she once was, at a time when D.C. needs the kind of energetic representation in Congress she provided for decades.” Ouch—when your former right-hand questions your vigor, it’s not just a critique; it’s a wake-up call.

Financial Struggles and Campaign Woes

Financially, Norton’s campaign was on life support well before the termination filing. In the final three months of 2025, FEC reports obtained by NOTUS show she raised a mere $2,520 while spending nearly $5,000. By Sunday, with no cash left, the math told a grim story of a campaign running on fumes.

The health concerns from the October 2025 scam incident only fueled the narrative of vulnerability. A police report’s description of Norton’s condition, while disputed by her team, cast a shadow over her ability to continue. It’s a sad footnote to a long career—being taken advantage of by fraudsters is a stark reminder of the personal toll public life can take.

Let’s be clear: age alone isn’t the issue, but capability is. With other congressional figures from the 1930s—like 92-year-old Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who’s served since the Eisenhower era—still in the game, the question isn’t just about years but about effectiveness. Grassley, Hal Rogers, and Maxine Waters are pushing forward, but Norton’s exit suggests not everyone can keep pace.

Primary Field Signals New Era

The Democratic primary field Norton leaves behind is notably younger and hungrier. Robert White and Brooke Pinto represent a generational shift, ready to fight for D.C.’s interests with fresh energy. It’s hard to argue against the need for new blood when the old guard struggles to keep up.

White’s critique of Norton’s diminished capacity isn’t just politicking—it’s a reflection of a broader concern. If D.C. has only one voice in Congress, shouldn’t it be a loud, unrelenting one? Norton’s departure might just be the reset the District needs to avoid being sidelined.

Contrast this with the progressive push to ignore age or health concerns in favor of experience. While respecting a legacy is noble, clinging to it at the expense of representation is shortsighted. Norton’s record deserves applause, but the District’s future demands action over nostalgia.

Respecting Service, Questioning Timing

Ultimately, Norton’s decision to step back, whether forced by circumstance or choice, opens a necessary conversation about when to say enough is enough. Her decades of service shaped D.C.’s voice in Congress, even if it was nonvoting. That’s a legacy worth honoring, even as we critique the timing of her exit.

Yet, in an era where mental sharpness and physical stamina are non-negotiable for effective governance, her prolonged candidacy raises eyebrows. Shouldn’t leaders prioritize the public’s needs over personal ambition? It’s a tough but fair question for anyone in power.

Norton’s story isn’t just about one delegate—it’s a mirror to a larger issue in politics today. As the District looks ahead to a competitive primary, the hope is for a representative who can match the city’s energy and urgency. Let’s remember Norton’s contributions, but also welcome the overdue change.