House Democrats are experiencing internal friction over generational change, with some veteran lawmakers resisting calls to retire. This resistance is drawing concern from within the party, as primary challenges against these long-serving members could divert crucial resources needed to regain control of the House. While some retiring Democrats, like Jerry Nadler, have cited fairness to younger leaders, others in their 70s and 80s emphasize the importance of seniority. Representatives like Eleanor Holmes Norton, John Larson, and David Scott are all planning to seek reelection despite primary challengers and health concerns. These older lawmakers argue that fitness for office should be assessed individually, distinguishing themselves from those perceived to be struggling. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries points to leadership changes and the voluntary stepping down of senior members as evidence of generational shifts already occurring. Conversely, activists like David Hogg believe older leaders should yield power to a new generation, with young people prepared to challenge incumbents. The veteran lawmakers are warning potential rivals that their longevity in office stems from proven ability and experience. Some, like Steve Cohen, express confidence in their ability to choose their successors, while others, like Steny Hoyer, question the substance of generational change arguments used by challengers. Ultimately, the debate highlights a generational divide within the Democratic caucus as elections approach.