It's time for age limits for members of Congress

One of the first criticisms of any suggestion about age limits on elected officials is usually discrimination — the idea that you can't discriminate against candidates based on their age. But the Constitution already does so, with age minimums

- Nathan L. Gonzales, Tribune News Service

In a country bitterly divided on virtually everything, from the major to the mundane, there's one issue that could unite Republicans and Democrats: age limits. An uncomfortable conversation about the acuity of aging politicians, from Republicans Strom Thurmond of South Carolina and Thad Cochran of Mississippi to Democrats Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia and Dianne Feinstein of California, has only been magnified by former President Joe Biden's years in office and former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s closing time on Capitol Hill. Then there’s former Texas Rep. Kay Granger, now 82, who was discovered by The Dallas Express staying at an assisted living facility toward the end of her House term as she dealt with what was later reported as “dementia issues.” San Francisco Democrats made news recently over a proposed resolution to call politicians in California to voluntarily retire at an age to be determined later. But the country and Congress should consider something more permanent, specific and restrictive.

One of the first criticisms of any suggestion about age limits on elected officials is usually discrimination—the idea that you can't discriminate against candidates based on their age. But the Constitution already does so, with age minimums. Members of the House have to be 25 years old, (Article I, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution). Members of the Senate have to be 30 years old (Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3). And presidents have to be 35 years old (Article 2, Section I, Clause 5). So the age discrimination argument shouldn't even be a part of the conversation. Considering the general bias toward the perceived wisdom of the Founding Fathers, a critic could say that the framers who included an age minimum would have included age maximums if they had wanted. But life expectancies were considerably different more than 200 years ago.