Skip Navigation
181 comments
  • I think it should be younger. Maybe 65.

    Members of Congress and SCOTUS should also have term limits

    • I'm onboard with 65 as the maximum age anyone can run for Congress but I don't have a problem with people 65+ finishing their terms provided they're actually competent. I'd like to see mandatory cognitive decline testing for anyone running for Congress, appointed to the SC or appointed to any high position in the executive branch.

      It's absolutely ridiculous that we're allowing people with 5-7y remaining life expectancy to plan our future 20, 40 or 100y out - they just don't have the skin in the game that someone in their 20s or 30s does.

      On top of all of that I'd like to see vigorous corruption testing, SC justices and congresscreatures shouldn't be bought and paid for the way they are now.

      • Yeah that sounds reasonable. You can at most finish your current term once you're past 65. And term-limit everything, Justices, whatever.

    • "After many decades of civil service, it is time for the state to give back to our hard working representatives. Therefore they will be retired in januray of the year following their 65th birthday"

      "January 6th has for the last few years been a reminder of an embarrassing moment in our history, well no longer! January 6th shall henceforth be known as a day of celebration, celebrating not only long and faithfull service but also new talents, skills and hope for the furue! Join us, as we once again rejuvinate our government to keep our nation strong and dependable!"

    • I agree on the legislature, but not the court. The legislature has to plan for the future. Their age should be below the average life expectancy. They need to have a foreseeable future for us to allow them to plan ours.

      I would resolve the instability of the court by eliminating its fixed size. One new justice shall be appointed every other year. In the odd-numbered years, between election cycles.

      This will tend to increase the size of the court over time. The average term length is currently about 16 years, but that is with strategic retirements. I would expect the average term to increase to 24 to 36 years, leaving us with a court of 12 to 18 justices.

    • Honest question, what do we do that we are now living longer, and have better quality of life and medical advancements? With AI progressing exponentially, this will likely increase average lifespans in developed countries. You might be arguing against your own comments here when you hit 65 and realize you still maintain mental acuity and are thriving.

      Personally, I feel like we should be spending our time and focus on fixing a number of other issues. Namely lobbying, special interest groups tied to anti-consumer companies, 'slap on the wrist' fines for billion dollar companies, predatory lending, student loans. I mean the list goes on. These things aren't an age problem, it's a corruption problem.

      • You might be arguing against your own comments here when you hit 65 and realize you still maintain mental acuity and are thriving.

        I’m not running for office nor scotus. But if I were, I’d hope reason would dictate sensible policy, not magical thinking about whatever far-off technological theoretical you might imagine.

  • No; it should be 60.

    • Lifetime appointments to the supreme court are obviously a mistake; the idea there is to make them secure in their jobs so they don't have to politik from the bench. It doesn't account for actually evil people digging in like parasites in the heart of our government. They should serve a single 10 year term, at which point no matter their age they must retire and then serve no further roles ever again. Like, you're not allowed to go be a senator, or a congressman, or a governor, or a Walmart greeter. You can volunteer to speak to law students, you can retire, or you can die. Minimum punishment for a sitting or former supreme court justice for any crime: jay walking, copyright infringement, speeding, embezzling, mass murder: instant death. The guilty/not guilty verdict is read to your firing squad. The members of our highest court should be nothing less than absolute exemplars of citizenship.

      The house and senate should have maximum terms of not ten years each; the senate currently has 6 year terms, that would have to be shortened, possibly to four. Wouldn't hurt my feelings if we eliminated those mid-election years so we could have some time away from being screamed at by our so-called government. You want a full career in politics? You start at the local or state level, then you run for federal office.

      I would make prior office a requirement for President. As far as I'm concerned, you have no business serving as president if you have not already been a senator, congressman, governor, state senator or general assemblyman. I do not believe town council or city mayor should count here because of the low barrier to entry for buying 10 acres of rural land and incorporating it as a town with one resident and electing yourself mayor.

  • I'd support a four-term limit for the Senate, six-term limit for the House, and one term in the Supreme Court for a period of time not to exceed 20 years.

  • Not a retirement age but to run for public office, I think the candidate should have at least 20 years of median actuarial life expectancy remaining. They need to make long-term decisions so they better be around to see how it goes. Right now this is age 60 for men and age 64 for women. In the future it may go as high as 70. If you really wanted to push it I think 18 years would be symmetrical with childhood. First 18 and β€œlast 18” you can’t be in office.

  • People who bought a house and went to college for the same price of college nowadays do not know what the world is like today

  • I support this Pipe Dream.

    Unfortunately, this isn't a Congress that will vote to limit its own power.

  • Yes, because of the risk of elder abuse. And just being absolutely out of touch with the general population.

  • mandatory retirement is never the answer; that's just ageism plus there are a ton of shitty 30 year old politicians.

    term limits especially for unelected positions is a must though

    also national elections for supreme court justices instead of presidential picks.

  • Benjamin Franklin was 70 when he signed the Declaration of Independence, the oldest person to do so.

    If that’s a fact Americans might see as meaningful, the US could cap taking office as President if over 70 on election day (effectively 74 is oldest at end of term), same for the House (oldest 72), Senate (oldest 76), and the Supreme Court… just force retirement at 70 instead of death.

  • No, because democracy. But we shouldn't vote for these old guys

181 comments