We have long heard the political gripes of the young Americans who hold disdain for the out-of-touch “dinosaurs” that run our country. It seems like this epithet holds some degree of truth considering the current average age of a United State Senator is 65.3 years old. But while young people have dozens of legitimate grievances to express (climate change, insolvent social security, or immigration), the age of our politicians isn’t one of them. 

Criticizing our politicians on the basis of their age is a low-hanging fruit. While it has become a socially accepted outcry for political change in the country, the reality is that it is no better than discriminating against our politicians for their race, sex, or physical appearance. One of the most prominent examples of political ageism is the increasingly bipartisan outcry for Biden’s resignation. Critics claim there is ample evidence of his senility: from stumbling down Air Force One to bizarre ramblings during his rallies. 

The Biden example can prove a point about the mental acuity of the president himself. Yet, other sweeping criticisms of the elderly are harmful because they are entirely based on assumption— judgements of an entire demographic based on just a few individuals. Because the media gains engagement by amplifying the elderly mishaps of prominent politicians such as Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell or President Joe Biden, these stereotypes perpetuate themselves easily. We tend not to see the hundreds of mentally acute representatives in their 60’s and 70’s who are easily capable of fulfilling their roles; this far more common scenario just isn’t sensationalized. 

In truth, many older people who keep themselves active in mentally-demanding roles (such as politicians and judges) tend to remain mentally sharp even into their seventies. From a 70-year old Benjamin Franklin signing the Declaration of Independence to 76-year old Sandra Day O’Connor serving on the Supreme Court, many public servants do their best work in the tail ends of their careers. This is why it is problematic to use Biden’s “brainfarts” as blanket evidence to impeach other older politicians. 

A Pew Research poll conducted in mid-2023 found that the vast majority of Americans from both sides of the political spectrum believed there should be a maximum age limit for Presidents and Supreme Court Justices. Though most said a president should ideally be in their 50’s, survey participants were unwilling to point out a specific number, or hard age limit for either of these positions. The unspoken reality is that many of the age limits being proposed are far too exclusionary; a great candidate just a few years older than the hard number limit could be excluded from serving for a reason as arbitrary as a single number. 

To deny that older politicians don’t have a higher likelihood of being mentally incompetent would be dishonest; while we shouldn’t automatically conflate old age with senility, most people tend to criticize older politicians because they happen to be mentally dull enough of the time. Mental competency tests for politicians of all ages are a well-reasoned compromise: one that acknowledges the underlying truth of a negative stereotype, while also evaluating every individual candidate in a fair and relevant manner. 

We are slated to have the two oldest presidential candidates in history running for re-election in 2024. Instead of hounding Donald Trump and Joe Biden just because they’re too old, the country would stand to benefit far more by focusing on criticisms of their policies. Next election cycle, we should judge our public servants by the content of their character— not the year on their birth certificates.