The U.S. Senate voted unanimously Thursday to raise the maximum retirement age for Capitol Police officers, passing legislation that would allow officers to apply for waivers to extend their service until age 62 — up from the current cap of 60. The House passed its own version of the bill, H.R. 8364, earlier this year, which sets the ceiling at 65. Under current law, officers are forced to retire at 57, or after 20 years of service, whichever comes later, unless the Capitol Police Board grants a waiver. The two chambers will need to reconcile their differing age thresholds before the measure can be sent to the president.
The bills arrive as the Capitol Police force confronts a compounding staffing crisis. Chief Thomas Sullivan told Congress at a March oversight hearing that the department has roughly 1,250 uniformed officers but needs at least 150 more to cover every post without mandatory overtime. The department's budget request this year topped $1 billion for the first time, reflecting both expanded member-protection operations and reimbursements to local law enforcement agencies across the country. Nearly 60 sworn officers are already serving under retirement waivers — a figure that exceeds the combined size of two standard USCP recruiting classes, according to the House Administration Committee.
Threats Against Lawmakers at a Record High
The staffing squeeze is inseparable from a sustained rise in threats. The department investigated nearly 15,000 threats against members of Congress in 2025 — a 58 percent increase over 2024 — and Sullivan told lawmakers that the pace in 2026 is on track to climb further still. The department has overhauled its member-protection protocols since January 6, extending security coverage to lawmakers and their families in home districts and standing up a dedicated center to receive and process threat reports. 'While we focus on those individuals at the beginning of their career, we also need to focus on that experience that's at the end of their career,' Sullivan told the oversight panel. Funding for the department's protective intelligence division — the unit responsible for monitoring and investigating threats — remains, in Sullivan's own description, 'very slim.'
Compounding the problem is attrition. Sullivan said a significant number of officers have left the Capitol Police for other federal law enforcement agencies offering stronger pay and retirement benefits. 'There's nothing keeping folks here,' he told Congress. The protective intelligence division is described as particularly thinly staffed, creating what Sullivan called a dangerous gap between the volume of threats and the personnel available to assess them. 'There's drafts on a consistent basis and it pushes the men and women that we have to the limit,' he said of the overtime burden on the current force.
A Rare Bicameral, Bipartisan Agreement
The Senate bill was co-authored by the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Rules Committee, which has oversight of the Capitol Police. Sen. Alex Padilla of California and Senate Rules Committee Chairman Mitch McConnell of Kentucky introduced the measure jointly, a pairing that reflected the rare unanimity the issue commands. 'We're talking about officers who have served for a long, long time and have a tremendous amount of institutional memory, experience and expertise,' Padilla said on the floor. 'They offer immense value to the department.' He added: 'After bicameral and bipartisan discussions, I hope to see this measure signed into law.'
On the House side, Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil of Wisconsin and Ranking Member Joe Morelle of New York shepherded H.R. 8364 out of committee unanimously. 'No officer should be forced to retire when they can still do the job,' Steil said. Morelle, the panel's top Democrat, echoed the sentiment: 'The Department cannot afford to lose a substantial number of experienced, fully capable officers solely because they reach an arbitrary age threshold.' With both chambers having now passed their respective bills, the next step is a conference to resolve the five-year gap in maximum age — 62 in the Senate version, 65 in the House version — before final passage.
