The Playbook #3: Term Limits and Age Limits
Playbook 3- Term Limits and Age Limits As Fall approaches, change is in the air. Days are becoming shorter and temperatures are cooling. Leaves are turning and sweaters and sweatshirts are being pulled off the shelf in the closet. Hurricanes have hit our coasts, and the administration of President Trump is proposing an oil deal with the Russian President Vladimir Putin, a live streamed firing squad execution of a convicted military officer, and replacement of President Zelensky as the leader of Ukraine because he is unwilling to cede his country’s sovereign land to its invader. Less than a month from the mid-term elections in the United States, this is the octogenarian voice of the leader of the free world. It seems a timely moment to discuss term limits and age limits for the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. government. Not just for this moment in American history, but for transformative change. Term Limits- Term limits for the President of the United States are limited to two terms by the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution, ratified on February 27, 1951. There are no term limits for other members of the Executive, Legislative or Judicial branches of government, including the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. 16 states have, however, enacted laws imposing term limits on state legislators. There is a myriad of factors that have changed since the framers wrote the Constitution. We live in a very different world. Health care capabilities and life expectancy are both dramatically different than the time of the framers. The Courts today hold more power than the framers ever imagined. The United States is the only nation in the world with a high court with no term or age limits. The three co-equal branches of government today are neither co- nor equal. So, from our human condition to the functional failures of our unequal centers of power, our current system was unthinkable to the framers of our Constitution. These are but a few of the myriads of reasons why rethinking term limits and age limits is needed now. Leadership is about doing the right thing. What is the right thing regarding term limits? I believe the answer lies somewhere in the middle. We are experiencing what no limits has gotten us. What would happen if there were term limits? I believe there would be both intended and unintended consequences. On the unintended side, people with noble hearts may be limited in their years to serve. Agendas may be left unfinished, relationships may not be allowed to continue to develop to serve for the betterment of Americans, expertise and experience may be cast aside. Each of these unintended consequences may be real. So, why seek term limits? Term limits and age limits are not panaceas, but they may be important structural components to a wide range of current problems. Problems unconceived by the framers. Term limits and age limits could contribute to a reduction of corruption, could bring new voices, new vision, new skills, to our everchanging and increasingly turbulent world. Term limits in and of themselves insure change. Government is meant to represent the people. Term limits bring into specific practice a check on representation. Is my representative, my senator, my judge, my President, representing me, representing my values and interests, representing America? Term limits can contribute to addressing these critical issues. So, here is a proposal. Two four-year terms for the Office of President to remain as prescribed by the Constitution. Two 6-year terms for U.S. Senator, for a total of 12 years of service. Six two-year terms for a U.S. Congressman, for a total of 12 years of service. One 12-year term for a U.S. Federal judge, including members of the U.S. Supreme Court. The people most likely to oppose this or similar proposals are congressmen, senators, and judges themselves and the donors, lobbyists, and interest groups that support them They want their person in office. This is another compelling argument for transformative term limit change. Some incredibly capable and well-intended public servants may unintendedly be adversely affected by term limits, but new, capable and well-intended public servants may have the opportunity to bring their fresh perspectives to the betterment of the American people. Age Limits- Getting older is not a disease. Cognitive decline happens to us all. Unfortunately, some more quickly than to others. There is not yet science to predict or inform us when an individual cognitive decline will begin and at what rate that decline will proceed. To be sure, though, cognitive decline and aging are inextricably linked. There is broad bipartisan support for age limits. 76% of Democrats and 82% of Republicans support age limits. Where is the current Congress? In the United States Senate from age 70-79 there are 27 Senators, and for 80 years of age and older there are 6 Senators. That means a body of 100 Senators has 33 members 70 years of age or older. In the United States House of Representatives from age 70-79 there are 71 Congressmen, and for 80 years of age and older there are 13 Congressmen. A body of 435 Congressmen have 84 that are age 70 or older. Looking at the total number of members over age 70 there are 98 in the House and Senate combined and 19 age 80 and older combined. That equals 117 members of either the House or the Senate that are 70 years of age or older. Beyond the real, but unpredictable, cognitive decline of everyone, there exists the reality that setting an age limit could mitigate the effects of cognitive decline. Age limits would further provide opportunities for younger motivated, capable, digitally aware aspirants to public office. Change can be good. In the case of the U.S. Supreme Court there may be additional benefits. Staggering terms could provide the opportunity for each President to appoint justices. It would also mitigate the strategic timing of a justice retiring to provide a politically aligned replacement. In the world of leadership where the prime directive is to do the right thing, timing a justice for retirement for political reasons is certainly not the right thing. So, I offer the following proposal. All members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government should be limited to age 70 to serve. Excellent people may be adversely affected, but just as in the arguments for term limits, the benefits of age limits far outweigh the benefits of maintaining the status quo. The transformative action of applying term limits and age limits would benefit the American people, be reflective of the overwhelming majority of Americans, and be a tangible example of Americans legislating to do the right thing.






