Term limits

May 11, 2023 9:36 AM

IceyStars

Views

42108

Likes

1952

Dislikes

48

Dianne Feinstein (Dem)
Age: 89

Chuck Grassley (Rep)
Age: 89

This is a "Blue vs Red" debate as both parties suffer with this. Gerontocracy should not have its place in today's world. There's a risk that key political actors will develop cognitive impairment (a sad fact of old age). There's no easy solution to the problem, but it demands a frank conversation.

My fave is when that woman at deaths doorstep told children to stay in their lane, and mind their own fucking business when it came to deciding environmental policy.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Schumer is a dumbass for putting someone her age on the most important committee. It proves he’s too damn old to be there too if he can’t think strategically

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It's proven that after 60, there is a noticeable cognitive decline. There's also the fact that when you get older and start losing some of your abilities (mobility, strength, mental prowess etc) you start to want to wield power, in the case of congress/representatives, in a way that is self serving as you are losing control of everything else on your life

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

My grandpa is this age and he needs to wear adult diapers and consistently forgets everyone's names. These people should not be at the helm of a country.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 5

My parents are this age and they're both sharp as tacks. I'd take either of them running things, exactly as they are today. I would support cognitive tests for elected officials, since there's so much variability from person to person.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Holy shit, Feinstein looks like shit. She should have stepped down ages ago. Plenty of more ambitious Democrats in California who deserve her spot...

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You should have to be young enough to face the consequences of your decisions.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Nobody over 15 years old gets elected then, because the true disasters are on a much longer time frame.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Can't even fucking walk...half face shuttered...let's bring her back to rule over us! Goddamned fucking sick

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Just fuckin die already you damn Reagan era shitbags!

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I cannot upvote this comment enough

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The high average age of Congress is a side-effect of the fact that Congress rewards seniority (time in office) with better chances at being an effective representative for your district - first dibs on powerful committee roles, more time to network and learn how to get things done, etc. And as an existing rep you have much higher name recognition than most challengers. Also, you can sell your vote to lobbyists so that they finance your next campaign run: more money = more ads for you.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

There is an easy solution: mandatory retirement age for public office positions.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

Right now lets have those people vote on it.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"Weekend at Bernie's - The Next Generation"

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Age and Term Limits sound good but aren't great in practice. Create a policy where if you miss more than say 20 votes/voting days (not married to the number, but something comparative to reasonable yearly sick leave) you are automatically removed from committee assignments. If you miss more time than FMLA leave, a special election is held in your state or district. if your constituents send you back, absences are reset. Performance based is key.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

And there should be regular cognitive function tests, because young people can have bad brains/thinking skills, too. This allows for those that ARE sharp to stay around

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

While I want to agree, this gets tricky. I am VERY hesitant to place restrictions on who can be elected past what already exists, as those type of rules are easy to exploit and set a precedent that we may not want. If a constituency elects someone with dementia, or even just a plain ol' moron, who am I to deny their choice? Do we set a IQ threshold? I'd be shocked if MTG and Bobert didn't qualify as developmentally disabled, can they be barred from office based on that?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Universities pasture out their profs. Ride the sidelines.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The US political system needs replacing with something that actually works in the modern age. The writers of the constitution actually wanted it to be hard to make changes because they didn't envision the massive social and technological upheaval we've seen since it was written. And they didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to consider the constitution an immutable document. The US requires MASSIVE change in order to just serve it's populous. It's a broken country as it currently is.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ive said for years. No presidents over 65, Same for Congress and House. You don't get to run a goddamn McDonald's at 80, you sure as shit shouldn't be running the country. There should also be basic Civics knowledge req'd. Get people like Bobert and MTG out of there with their complete lack of knowledge of how the country was intended to run. No lobbying until 6 years after your last term ends. You're paid the median of the State you represent. Pay your own fing healthcare, no more free ride.

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Just no lobbying, you want to know what bills to write, talk to your constituents not mega corps

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3 Representatives, combined age, older than the country.

3 years ago | Likes 252 Dislikes 5

AOC, Matt Gaetz, and Finestein

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Goddamn. Thats fucking nuts.

3 years ago | Likes 65 Dislikes 0

2 of them are still in their 30s

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

The population of the earth has a combined age older than the universe.

3 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 3

Big bang is BS

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

For some reason my brain went to US population rather than earth population, but even that almost works (13.7 billion years old, divided by 334 million, equals 41 years. Average US age is 38.1 years).

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So far.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Mandatory retirement age. Make it 70. And by extension, you cannot run/hold office if your term outlasts your retirement age. Term limits. 12 years, so two terms for Senators and six for Reps. No switching districts or states. Switching jobs is allowed. Actual residency of five years or more is required. No special retirement fund; SS only. No special healthcare; Medicare only. Wages are maxed at 3% per year...just like the rest of us. If you're going to represent us, then live like us.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

You forgot the president. Even if he is under term limits, there is a problem with having a person that old holding the highest office in the country.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

This aged well

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Term limits are not the solution, unfortunately. I understand the desire, but all that'll do is have inexperience people who have no political power getting rotated in and out quickly. What we need to do is institute ranked choice voting on all levels, get money out of politics and dissolve the parties leaning towards a more direct democracy instead.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Can't serve in a government position if you can't operate the latest piece of popular technology unassisted. Problem solved.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Oh man, no kids today will ever get elected - they don't know shit about how computers work.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

{This is a "Blue vs Red" debate as both parties suffer with this} You mean this is NOT a B vs. R debate, RIGHT?? 'cuz you missed a REALLY IMPORTANT WORD otherwise. Feinstein **should** have retired last cycle, but as the Dems **always** do, they support the dying incumbent. FFS Dems stop propping up the goddamned elderly!! Let the youngs (AOC) take the goddamned torch!!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Ah shoot! Sorry you're right, missed that damn word! haha.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It is 100% *NOT* a "red vs blue". AOC is classic act of something done right. Regardless if you like her or not, you can see she is very articulate with her wording. Watching her debate crypto was amazing. These geriatrics couldn't even tell you how to attach a compressed image to an e-mail

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's a grotesque abuse of power. Gottdamn. Ask those motherfuckers to open a pdf and save it to the desktop. I'll bet dollars to pesos they can't.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

The problem is you need to be a certain age to run, already in politics for the most part and have/raise waaaayyyy too much money.

3 years ago | Likes 361 Dislikes 1

Processes can be changed. Robert's at the SC allowed Citizens United & all the dark $$$.-- It can be UNdone.-- And I'm seeing 20-somethings winning elections lately...which seemed way too young but in action these guys r impressive & knowledgeable!

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Federal government: 35 to be president, 30 to be a senator, 25 to be a US Rep. State laws vary but most are 18 to 25 and a few executive positions that are 30.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You described multiple problems, all being severe problems that can be cured by enacting a severe, younger, limit on age.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

The minimum age for senators and presidents is downright discriminatory, and needs to go.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 10

The person eating fucking tide pods may need to outgrow that before running for POTUS.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Why? Just don't vote for them if they're eating tide pods. I mean clearly the age limit does nothing to prevent us from voting in tide pod eating orange Cheetos anyway...

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

For President, the threshold is 35 years old and born a natural citizen. That's it. That's the *entire* threshold. The politicians have made elections about "age=experience=better" and that's proven to be 99.6% bullshit, with the exception of Bernie Sanders.

3 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 3

Nope. Bernie isn't the exception. The guy has largely been constant since the beginning of his political career. He's always been a die hard for his ideological positions and it's only his rhetoric that's gotten better, but not by much. Dude has been killing it since day one.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

We really really need to start thinking about running for political office as a job interview instead of a popularity contest. Maybe some sort of testing process to show they are qualified for the position?

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

True but the problem is money. I am Almost 35.i could run but I would need millions to even try let alone win. Especially since I haven't been in politics it's a strep road. Even to win local elections it would almost bankrupt me if I didn't get tons of donations

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I wouldn't say Bernie is an exception - he's not better due to age/experience he's better due to personal convictions he's held for decades.

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

I believe this is from '87.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

3 years ago (deleted Apr 17, 2025 4:53 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Can’t be over 50. Done.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 11

I would say have to be out by 65.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yes, 35 for president and a natural born citizen.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Can't be over 75 at the end of your term.

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

If you set term limits, eventually the only experienced law makers you have will be the lobbyists and donors. Get the money out and you’ll get representatives that have to listen to their real constituents.

3 years ago | Likes 52 Dislikes 8

Corrupt politicians need to go before money because you'll never get rid of the money until they are gone. Getting rid of money first (if even possible) just leaves corrupt politicians in place... where they will continue to wreak havoc as they are this country's biggest problem as their corruption affects everything, and they will seek a replacement (most likely maneuvering for more political power and authority) to make up for the lost money.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That argument is BULLSHIT from the get. The "experienced" lawmakers ARE THE GODDAMNED PROBLEM because they keep getting elected on that platform. Agree with you that getting the money out is the key, but that will NEVER HAPPEN as the Congress voted for themselves to get richer this way. "What fool cuts his own purse strings?" Ben Franklin

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 6

I got news for you. This is already a problem. Yes get rid of the lobbyists as the legal bribe system did not keep anyone honest like it was supposed to. We need to drastically increase pay for the reps/senators, make campaigns paid for with tax dollars and up the regulations, No more PACS or Super PACs, eliminate all dark money, make corporations not people again. But since this system keep them in power none but a few would even dare to suggest it.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Lobbyists, people setting laws based on their own stock portfolio, and truth/equal coverage in news are bigger problems than age or term limits. There are young people on their first term in politics that are a bigger clown show than most 89 year olds.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

We have had term limits all along but voters are responsible for making them work by getting informed and finding quality representatives which takes effort most voters are unwilling to put in. If we want better we collectively have to do better.

3 years ago | Likes 114 Dislikes 6

Incumbency is the issue. It’s so much easier to get re-elected because they incumbents have the money and political favor.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I’ve said this over & over & over again. Being an informed voter & then actually voting is the key. Saying “term limits” allows people to pass the buck & be lazy.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

exactly. And if we need term limits on anything it’s for Lobbyists too.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Exactly, the term limit is the primary. Now if you want to talk about mandatory retirement? Yes we can do that but studies show term limits lead to voters electing people just as monstrous as the ones they replace.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

This is just passing the blame down the line. Yes we should do better but putting the blame solely on us is disingenuous. It's like BP passing global warming off as a personal responsibility. Those in power should take responsibility and fix the issues with the system.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

except in a lot of areas new people wont run if the incumbent is running again, so no real other option but to vote in the same person over and over again because they keep running and refuse to retire

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Bingo. Actual term limits do nothing but force people to not have a representative with experience that they like. Institutional knowledge is *good*, as is continuity of government. What we need if you don't want these ancient fossils elected, is for you to show up at your primaries and vote them out.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Not term limits, but there should absolutely be a maximum age to run for office.

3 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 6

Also fucking term limits

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My go-to test if something is a good idea or not. Does the Heritage Foundation like it? It's bad. Really bad. https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/term-limits-the-only-way-clean-congress

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm not sure we're in the same exact political landscape as 1994.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not just run but serve. Hit 65? Guess what you're about to enjoy retirement. Turning 65 in the middle of your term? You don't get to run for that term.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

Why 65? Why not 62? Or 68? Or 71? There needs to be some metric other than an arbitrary age. Some 90-year-olds are more cogent and energetic than some 60-year-olds.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

It sounds shitty, but they don’t understand the world as it is. We are debating AI, they have no clue what it is. Regulations on crypto currency’s, not a clue what it means. How is this supposed to work.

3 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 5

to be fair thats not just on age thoe ^^.... plenty of young people dont understand the world... thire mind corrupted by ooooooold money

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

To not know something is one thing, but it’s more the fact that they are completely uninterested in learning more about this new tech.

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Bingo. Do they give a fuck about climate change? They're not going to be around when that nightmare happens so screw that! They get the bag till they kick the bucket.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You're also describing the average voter too.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

What gets to me is that they dont have to be this way. there are so many people their age, even peers of theirs, who arent this way, who are knowledgeable of the world as it is and get the context of the current age

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

She was missing due to a preventable illness. The vaccine (Shingrix) has been available for a few years. I got the shot 2 years ago

3 years ago | Likes 72 Dislikes 4

The shingles vaccine is not 100% safe. My mother had a reaction to it. Debilitating headaches until the day she died. And she still got shingles, so bad she almost went blind.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

You are insinuating she did not get vaccinated. We do not know this information. She publicly stated that she had previously received the vaccine. Vaccines are not 100% effective and efficacy decreases in the very elderly. This comment is not a support for her decision to cling to power at such advanced age, but please don't spread misinformation.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

There have been reports for years she loses track of where she is and can't get the names right of people who have worked for her for a decade through the past 5 years. This shouldn't be allowed it's fucking crazy. I wouldnt trust her to run an ice cream truck let alone make policy decisions

3 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 0

Everyone on the hill has known her staff has ran her office for the past 5 years or so. This isn't a shock to anyone in the know.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Shingles hurts like a bitch. Everyone that can should get the vaccine. (I caught it at 42.)

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I got my Shingrix vaccine since I saw how it impacted my dad. I don’t want that as much as possible. Nope nope!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

OMG yes! I broke out with shingles a few months after the start of the pandemic, as a 34y/o M, presumably due to all the stress. The blisters started forming on my inner thigh, a little too close to the family jewels for comfort! I caught it early enough that the antiviral I got was effective in stopping the blisters from spreading, but the blisters were nothing compared to the nerve pain! I was on gabapentin for over a year to manage it.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I got a mild case that responded well to anti-virals... but it was in my face and nostril. Imagine breathing through blisters.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That doesn't negate the fact that she's had memory issues for a few years. Airline pilots have a mandatory retirement age due to cognitive decline. Congress, SCOTUS and (in my opinion) even the Presidency should as well. It's not an attack, just the acknowledgment that we all get old and people just ain't as sharp as we were when younger. It's a fact.

3 years ago | Likes 112 Dislikes 3

Honestly, I think it's a bit disgusting that an 89 year old woman is still forced to work. No wonder there's a national conversation about raising the social security age. Retirement as a concept is dying and these people are leading the charge.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That combined with age limits on the lower side really do solidify this a sensible measure with a clear precedent.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Not rich people though. Rich people are perfect flawless and incorruptible and don't even ever actually die, they just voluntarily leave their mortal bodies to ascend to a higher plain of existence where they can become even richer and spend eternity looking down on us poors. /s

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Given that I ain't so sharp *now* what with my ADHD and chronic fatigue, I'm not looking forward to the aging process.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Totally. We will all get old (hopefully) and as we do our bodies and minds aren't the same anymore. To think that we can all remain as fit or as mentally acute forever is just a pipedream.

3 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 2

No point in being defensive about it. Just as people are too young to do a ton of things, old people shouldn't hold certain responsibilities for the same reason. I don't understand why we still think if we get older we somehow get infinitely wiser and better at things. There's obviously a cutoff point. Especially for the USA that loves to age actors and athletes out of their jobs - they should really grasp this concept seeing how a bunch of old barely coherent farts are running the country.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0