Age Limits for U.S. Politicians
A Brief History
The U.S. Constitution mandates that House representatives be at least 25, senators be at least 30, and presidents be at least 35. While these minimum age requirements are clearly delineated, no maximum is addressed by the Founders. As the Supreme Court clarified in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, the imposition of term limits—and, by extension, age limits—without a prior constitutional amendment, would be unconstitutional.
Still, the question of whether an amendment should be created has captured public interest for decades. As the governing bodies of America continue to skew older, due to, among other things, the incumbency advantage, the country increasingly entertains the idea of age limits in U.S. Politics.
The Contemporary Debate
President Joseph Biden, at 80, is the oldest president elected in the history of America, and he plans to remain in office until age 86. His predecessor, Donald Trump, is now second place, having been elected at 70. The median age of U.S. senators is also at a record peak at age 65, with the House reaching a median of 58. Though aging occurs differently for all individuals, recent concerns regarding the mental acuity of the nation’s older governing officials have come to the attention of the public.
Two recent events—one in which 81-year-old Sen. Mitch McConnell froze for over 30 seconds during a news conference, and another in which 90-year-old Sen. Dianne Feinstein mistakenly began giving a speech in lieu of an “aye” vote during a committee hearing—have brought critiques of American gerontocracy to center-stage. Public opinion prior to these events already favored maximum age restrictions, with a 2022 YouGov poll finding that 58% of the 27,000 Americans polled believed there should be age limits for elected officials.
While proponents of these limits are largely concerned with the declining mental competency of aging politicians, some cite additional concerns about the interests and acumen of their representatives as they age. With issues like climate change and social media becoming common fixtures of Congressional hearings, people worry that older delegates are unable or unwilling to think critically about developments that will have a strong impact on future generations.
Those against limits bring up a variety of caveats, one being that the country is aging as a whole, with the skew in Congressional candidates merely representing that demographic shift. Limits also may block legislators from gaining institutional experience and clout, weakening their power in Congress. Others argue that because aging impacts people differently, a more apt solution lies in mental competency tests. This measure would also require a constitutional amendment, though, if elected Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley plans to act outside of the powers granted to the president by the Constitution to implement it. Finally, a consistent argument against age limits is that the changes they muster could reasonably be brought about by normal democratic voting processes. Pragmatists argue that this solution is both easier and less likely to have unwanted repercussions than an amendment to the Constitution.
Additional Reading Materials
Comments