This week California Sen. Dianne Feinstein pushed back against a report from The San Francisco Chronicle that anonymously quoted four of her Senate colleagues as saying they were concerned that the 88 year old Senator’s memory was in rapid decline, and believed she was no longer mentally fit to hold office.
Speaking anonymously, one California Democrat recalled a recent policy discussion in which they had to reintroduce themselves to the Senator several times over the course of just a few hours. The article goes on to cite multiple examples from Feinstein’s colleagues of her alleged mental decline.
In a statement put out by her office, Feinstein defended her performance saying, “The real question is whether I’m still an effective representative for 40 million Californians, and the record shows that I am.” Though Feinstein did concede that the recent death of her husband had put a strain on her.
So there’s the possibility that the oldest currently serving U.S. Senator is suffering from memory loss, which is yet another reason that I think it’s time we discuss implementing an upper age limit on holding public office.
As it stands, you must be at least 25 to serve in The House, 30 to serve in The Senate, and 35 to serve in The White House. These are all perfectly reasonable requirements as far as I’m concerned. You wouldn’t want someone who lacks a complete worldview or whose brain isn’t fully developed in charge of making crucial decisions that affect the entire country, would you?
Now let’s go to the opposite end of that extreme. Why would we want someone whose worldview is outdated and whose brain is in decline making those exact same decisions. If you were an 88 year old with memory loss, you wouldn’t be able to get a job running the fry machine at McDonald’s. Why should you be allowed to pass laws that’ll affect people long after you’re gone?
Despite the fact that over half of the U.S. population is under the age of 40, the current average age in The U.S. Senate is 64 years old and the average in The House is 58. Americans deserve Representatives that better reflect the demographics of the country.
Lest you think I’m being ageist, a mandatory age limit for public officials is hardly an unprecedented idea. Several states have laws requiring sheriffs and local judges to retire at ages ranging from 65-75. Foreign service officials at The State Department have a mandatory retirement age of 65. Federal law enforcement officers and U.S. Park Rangers have a mandatory retirement age of 57.
We could easily set a mandatory retirement age of 65 or 70 for The POTUS and our legislators, and the country would be much better off.
Picture this: If President Joe Biden runs for a second term he’ll be 81 on election day 2024. Barring an intervention from God or The Southern District of New York, Donald Trump will likely be the GOP nominee in 2024. Which means the 2024 election will be between an 81 year old man and a 78 year old man, neither of whom can form a coherent sentence.
Call me crazy but I’d prefer a president that can actually chew solid foods. Besides, the only competition anyone of that age should be engaged in is a friendly game of backgammon at the old folks home.
Regardless of how you feel about either of them we can all agree that America deserves a much better choice in who we want to be our leader. As comedian John Mulaney once said, “You don’t get to order for the table when you’re about to leave the restaurant.”
About Post Author
