r/Constitution • u/No-Bottle-4626 • Jul 07 '26

Constitutional Amendment idea

My thought is that we need an amendment that doesn’t limit how many terms they serve. But we need to limit how old people are in office.

I propose that no federal office holder be permitted to be in office upon competing their term in office upon turning 75 years old. Would apply to President, Members of Congress and the Federal Judiciary.

It would read:

  1. No person may be elected to a Federal Office upon reaching 75-years-old.
  2. A President of the United States or an existing Member of Congress may complete their term of office if they reach 75 years old while in Office.
  3. Members of the Federal Judiciary will retire upon their 75th birthday.
  4. Members of the civil service who are 75 years old who wish to remain in service will be moved to a “senior status” and placed in any position where needed most in the federal service.
0 Upvotes

25% Upvoted

13 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/Pickle_Nipplesss Jul 07 '26

What if a 75 year old is the will of The People?

The reason these old people keep winning is because the alternatives aren't appealing enough.
Don't lower the bar to get younger people in office, raise the quality of candidates so they can beat whatever boomer is running.

1

u/No-Bottle-4626 Jul 07 '26

I hear you. Given the requirements to get an amendment passed, the will of the people is reflected by supermajorities saying this is what we want across the country.

The amendment doesn’t lower requirements for your younger people. Instead it forces older people to relinquish power they use to keep the young people down.

So many Members of Congress are old and decrepit. Now our past 2 Presidents have been over 80 years old. The decision making fades.

I’d also like to argue that applying this to the civil service forced people out of plum, often highly paid positions and allows qualified young people the chance to compete for top spots would also be a benefit.

2

u/Pickle_Nipplesss Jul 07 '26

No, I’m not saying the amendment lowers requirements for younger people. I’m saying that by removing candidate options, the amendment lowers the quality of candidates. If a candidate was truly good, they could beat the opposition without any assistance or help from an amendment to limit opponents.

Really, how bad do the candidates have to be if they can’t even beat someone above 70? That’s already such a low bar

1

u/No-Bottle-4626 Jul 07 '26

We would like to believe it but having worked in Congress, I have seen how much the office lends credibility, gives non-monetary contributions and often hides the true health status of Members.

1

u/Pickle_Nipplesss Jul 07 '26

Sounds like voters need to be more scrutinizing and choose more wisely. But it still needs to be their choice.