3 ms·
There are pros & cons to term limits, but I think an age limit would be an easy win. It gets you most of the same benefits with a lot less resistance. Anyone w
by coldpie 1mo ago
There are pros & cons to term limits, but I think an age limit would be an easy win. It gets you most of the same benefits with a lot less resistance. Anyone who will be over 65 when entering a position should be ineligible to be elected or appointed to that position. Judges with lifetime appointments should be forced to retire on their 65th birthday. It's a clean, easy to understand & enforce rule, and provides plenty of time for people to make a succession plan before their brains turn to mush.
- budman1 1mo ago72 ?
- coldpie 1mo agoHuh?
- AnimalMuppet 1mo agoI suspect that they were proposing 72 as the age limit, rather than 65. And I could see it. Airline pilots are age limited at 65 (IIUC), but judges do not make split-second unappealable decisions that can kill hundreds. They could go a bit longer than 65. OTOH, I think after seeing Biden, Trump, and McConnell, it's pretty clear that it should be some distance below 80.
- coldpie 1mo agoEvery year you increase it increases the odds of getting another Feinstein, McConnel, Trump, or Biden. 65 is the standard target retirement age. I don't see any real benefit to deviating from that.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- budman1 1mo agoSo, let's make it 25. Social Security says retirement age is 67. 65 leaves a lot of good years unavailable for service in politics. I am sure a reasonable line could be drawn. And it it less than 80...