I am just shy of 83 and this country would be a heck of a lot better off if I were President and in the White House now rather than Trump.
8
Elizabeth Warren has been fighting for the middle and working classes forever. Trump hates her and fears her which is why he calls her names. If Trump ridicules someone, you can pretty much figure they are talented and intelligent. I hope Senator Warren runs. I will definitely vote and campaign for her. She cares about every day people, the environment, and the Country's future. Age is a consideration but certainly is not everything.
9
I certainly don't judge the mental ability of the elderly just because of their age. Personally, I think most of the members of Congress were completely gaga by the age of 40.
My problem with the Democrats in Congress who have been there forever is their firm entrenchment in the corrupt campaign finance system. They are as slavish towards the rich and the big corporations as the Republicans. They don't realize that we regular people even exist anymore.
3
Maxine Waters and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are the two sharpest, coolest people around. Total rock stars. Age doesn't matter one bit.
4
Senator Feinstein may be 85 years old, however I defy any male senator in congress of any age to come back to work the next day as she did after after having heart surgery. We need more women in congress, because these males are too cowardly to do the right thing, as exemplified by Paul Ryan an Mitch McConnell.
7
Nancy Pelosi was a fantastic Speaker of the House. She ran circles around Boehner and Ryan. The GOP hates her for that. So we decide not to have her do a reprise because she’s too effective and the GOP hates her? Because they can appeal to their asinine base voters by using her and her San Francisco values as a foil (you know - tolerance, voting rights, rational tax policy - all the bad things). Get serious.
After she leads the Democrats back into control of the House and gets the Party organized around a shared mission of practical and progressive programs, she should consider stepping aside to support a strong, new, young, widely supported and highly respected leader. And then the entire party should work like crazy to consolidate their gains in 2020 and save the nation from Trump and his lap dog Republicans.
6
There are plenty of young people in the Democratic party who are making their names more prominent. It takes time, people, to build a poplitical career at a national level of visibility. Wait 10 years. The 40-50 people will be 50-60 people and it will be their time. This has always been true. Most leadership of both governments and corporation is held between 45 and 65 years of age. (Still, mostly male.)
Until then, leave the older people alone. If they can't function (like Trump) get rid of them, otherwise, stop complaining. I'll take Bernie, Elizabeth or Joe any day of the week. And Hillary as well.
3
Another reason to elect candidates who have not been sitting in Congress for 30 years is that they have had an excellent, government-funded health plan, a salary that has continued to increase, and many opportunities to expand their wealth (speaking fees, favorable jobs for spouses, etc.) while the rest of us have faced a very different economy. In many industries, we wouldn't be discussing whether 78 is too old -- because 58 is considered too old.
How much urgency can these people be bringing to the table, when they do not in fact share the pain and uncertainty their constituents live with? How well can they understand where the bottom 80% are coming from? If we want to see real help for the middle class, we need to elect members of the middle class. We need people in Congress who know what it's like to worry about a layoff in middle age, who've had to drain savings to pay for an unexpected expense, who've struggled with student loans or inadequate health insurance, who worry about their future.
4
Transitioning out of her role by mentoring those behind her is not a lesser place for Pelosi. She is much less articulate and certainly not advancing effective argumentative frames or messaging . Let her fund raise. Let her mentor, but we are overdue for new leadership in key roles, not only diverse, but intellectually innovative. Schumer needs to tag himself out as well. We need many more gen next leaders gaining experience, and we need to authorize others to participate on a greater scale.
3
The country owes Nancy Pelosi for all the tireless work she has put in to achieve some incredible goals. But the torch has passed to the new Democrats. Nancy Pelosi maybe a fundraising juggernaut but the recent Democrats won without a central bounty. The old has to pave way for the new to stay relevant. I want Nancy Pelosi to step down not because she is old or she is a woman. I want her to step down because the Democrats have been in the minority under her leadership for too long. And the Democratic agenda has been thrown to the winds. One needs to go digital in real time to win real seats and and many seats to be the majority. And I'm sorry but the new generation should be allowed to win with new tools. I wish her well and sincerely hope she retires gracefully.
4
I do think it's time for new leadership, in part because the very compromises long-serving Senate and House members have had to make in order to get things done can be, and are, used against them. I think it was no accident that Barack Obama had only been in the Senate for one term before his successful run for President.
This is why I'm especially enthusiastic about the candidates Democrats are choosing, such as Conor Lamb, who are not only younger but are military veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These are the people who can stand up and demand answers to key questions -- why are we still there, what exactly are our goals, and how do we plan to accomplish them, how do we get out of the Forever War? They can do so because, having served, they can't be painted as unpatriotic. All they have to respond is, "I served there. Did you? Did your children?" to shut down that criticism. They do not have to defend having voted for the wars, the surge, the continued funding.
Anyone who has been in Congress for many years, such as Pelosi, Feinstein, Sanders, etc. is going to have a long voting record that will include some flip-flops, or some very unpopular votes. Perhaps they voted for a compromise bill, or their position on an issue evolved. Republicans are guaranteed to throw those votes in their faces, as they did to John Kerry. New blood is less compromised that way, as well as being less tied to corporate interests. The change we want starts with us.
2
I hope Bernie is listening and does NOT consider running for president again. We elected him US Senator, not Presidential Candidate in Perpetuum.
6
Dear Democratic Congresspeople: PLEASE do not reelect Nancy Pelosi leader, OR Speaker. Same goes for Chuck Schumer, and others like them. Too old, too establishment, too Republican-lite. I'm hoping they will both be defeated in the 2020 election.
4
Perhaps we should present the public with someone like Biden...a calm, experienced politician to try to unite the country and the congress under the banner of President of the USA. He is well thought of and probably the best to help get our attention back to doing the important stuff. BUT, he serves one term, and in that term he mentors and educates one of the young lions (Booker, Harris???) as his VP and that VP runs and wins the WH for 2 terms. Whaddaya think?
2
We need "young blood" is akin "we need a businessperson in the White House." Platitude that means nothing. Who cares how old anyone is? This knee-jerk reaction that age in and of itself makes for progress is ridiculous.
I'm not old. But I sure value a few gray beards in the ranks for their hard won, in-the-trenches deep experience.
5
If there's an advertisement for advanced age being a detriment in politics, one need look no farther than Donald Trump.
Rigid thinking.
Declining stamina.
Frontal lobe deterioration leading to a lack of impulse control.
Anger and/or fear directed at a changing world.
Mental decline doesn't happen to everyone, but elderly politicians in high positions should regularly have their cognitive function tested by a reputable institution.
As my late father used to say, the qualities that define a young person's personality become more so as they age. Does anyone out there think our country can stand "more" of Trump?
4
With Bob Kerry, Republicans gave us the verb "swift boated."
Now with Nancy Pelosi, Republicans are giving us the verb "Hilliaried."
1
John Kerry. Not Bob.
3
In some cases it doesn’t matter how old or how young you are ; if the current occupant of the oval office , who is in his 70s, publicly states that he does not believe that nearly 3000 people died in Puerto Rico from the natural disaster that occurred , he is still an idiot- regardless of his age .
14
Somehow, I'm offended by old reactionary GOP much more than old liberals, I love, Sanders, Warren, etc...
The way old republicans cling to power seems almost despicable, nothing would stop them to nominate a very shady judge to the Supreme Court.
For all we know he also will be investigated.
Here's the latest...
Democrats send 'information' concerning Kavanaugh nomination to FBI.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/13/politics/kavanaugh-feinstein-letter-fbi/i...
2
When someone tried the "age before beauty" line on Dorothy Parker, her response was to say, "pearls before swine".
5
There are stupid and smart, capable and incapable, deft and daft politicians of every age. The important thing is whether they can understand, articulate, inspire and act on the needs and aspirations not just of their base, not just of their party, but of the American public at large. It does not serve us to distract from fundamental imperatives of climate change, health care, racism and poverty by dividing us based on age and generation. I don't care how old you are, your gender, race or sexuality. This country is sick. Will you heal it?
68
LW--"Pay-Go" is stupid. It has always been stupid. It's an old theory like "trickle down." Modern money theory is the right way. She doesn't get that, and that's why se is too old to learn new tricks. It's why Democrats have gotten so used to losing. Also, cutting the military budget, by half, and taxing corporations and wealthy people will stabilize our economy, and pay for the things we need, like Medicare for all. She doesn't care about Medicare for all because she doesn't need it, herself. Pelosi and Schumer are BOTH getting those tax breaks, and don't want to lose them, and they both seem to like war.
1
The headline to this piece makes no sense. Shouldn't it be "Age Before Beauty, especially in politics"?
3
Puhleez.
Those folks kvetching about how the old folks ought to retire and "let" younger people take over strike me as the same kind of folks who expected a participation award when they were little.
Personally, I'd love to see a younger crop of Dems in office (I'm 58), if they aren't running for office, how is that the *fault* of the older Reps and Senators?
"Oh, but the DNC/PACs/blah-blah-blah will only support the older candidates!!!"
Maybe. Then DO IT YOURSELF. Get yourself out there, raise your own money so that you are beholden to no one, and run for office.
STOP WHINGING and start DOING something.
3
As someone who can still remember being young, I'm compelled to admit infallibility had no part in it. Still, i guess I wouldn't turn down a chance for a do-over.
1
Personally I believe that creativity and good ideas are not tied very closely to age and so I am not super concerned with the age of candidates that I vote for...
However, let me point out that there are lower limits on voting age, 18, and age for various offices, i.e. 35 for president. So there is age discrimination in our system - against the young. Older people who decry ageism and don't want an upper age limit should recognize there is some hypocrisy in this position.
The fact that Ms. Pelosi has been Democratic Majority Leader or Speaker for the past 16 years is the problem, not her chronological age. To hold her leadership position for so long certainly takes talent, skills, and energy. Yet, once achieving power—and avoiding horrific errors while your name is not Teflon Trump—holding on to power gets easier. Not easy, but easier because you can grant favors for support and maintain your position because, well, you have the power. But there’s another reason that’s more troubling.
It takes money, gobs of it. We have seen the rise of a substantial industry in political consulting that does not come cheap. Where do the dollars come from to pay consultants, the media buys they make, the logistical management of candidate, supporters, and voters they conduct? In the wake of Citizens United and the rollbacks to McCain-Feingold, it comes from secret contributions from very rich individuals and even richer corporations.
No wonder that progressives are angry at those in power. At best, they represent the people’s interests only part of the time. Ms. Pelosi is a symbol of what’s wrong even if everything she has done is perfectly legal. The notion that each person has an equal voice in electing our leaders is not the reality.
Removing Trump and the GOP from power will require fostering a movement. Those don’t emerge from Super-PACs. It’s time for changing to a fresh set of leaders who can do more than win elections. They can be the change.
6
The two words I'm most anxious to hear on January 3, 2019 are Madam Speaker.
6
Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Shumer, Barack Obama and progressive (a.k.a., socialist-lite) politics and policies were primarily responsible for the election of Donald Trump. Americans became fed up with the statist mantra of tax, regulate and control, which are leitmotifs of progressivism. Even if the Democrats were to regain control of the House and Senate with this year's elections, they won't get much done before 2020, as Republicans apply the resist and stall tactics honed by the Dems in the minority since Trump took office. And their attempts to reimpose over-the-top taxes and regulations may even result--God help us--in Trump's reelection.
The addition of socialists to Congress under the Democrat's banner will only hasten the Party's ultimate demise, as Trump is hastening that of the Republican Party.
2
@Ned Netterville
I would argue that Fox News and talk radio are principally the reason for the election of Donald Trump.
I have neighbors who still believe the Clintons had Vince Foster murdered.
6
Isn't it interesting that the young people want younger people in office and younger people running, however they don't vote. If they were really interested in changing how government works they would read, get involved and then run for office. It is so easy to sit on the sidelines with your finger in your nose complaining how horrible everything is and if we could just get some young people they would improve politics. I heard one young man on Chris Hayes last night say he did not vote last time and he may not vote next time because he wants to be inspired to vote. OMG this is the person complaining about politics and how government does not work. Nancy Pelosi looks pretty good to me when I have to listen to the dribble coming from the younger generation of non-voters.
7
Let me get this straight, the Dems are going to replace Nancy Pelosi because the Republicans don't like her? SHE gives the party a bad image? Have you noticed the GOP's leadership? Give me a break. Give us 435 Nancy Pelosi's and the country would be a much better place to live.
16
A few years ago I was the membership chair for my regional alumni association. My college class was 1969 and I was making a special effort to appeal to young alums. I started with "not your grandfather's alumni club anymore..." but then I thought again and went with "we were the ones who brought you draft resistance, anti-war activism, the civil rights movement, the women's rights movement, the gay rights movement, acid rock and recreational drug use; so if you kids want to have some fun, come hang with us geezers and we'll show you how." The club is mostly under 40 now and too boring for my tastes. Good luck to all.
9
It's very simple. If you want young people to vote, you will need some fresh faces.
I'm not against Pelosi because she's in her late 70s...i'm against her because the same person (with the same techniques) has been leading this body for 17 years and it's time for a change.
4
Well this pushing 70-year-old lifetime Democrat thinks it’s time for our generation to step aside and let the next generation take over. After all, trump was elected on OUR watch. Give it up, fellow and sister baby boomers. It’s their world and we’re running it. We should be living in it.
2
I've long supported the notion of term limits for all political and judicial offices. We already do it for the office of president (though three terms seems a better number than two). Why not for Congress and the Supreme Court? Make the limit 12 years for everyone.
2
It's not about age! Both Pelosi and Schumer are establishment democrats and they have failed the Millennials. Under their watch the democrats lost the House, Senate, Governors, State legislature and the US President's office. Obviously it's Not their ability to raise money it's about their ideas and policies. Their passions. Establishment Democrats have become too far removed from the reality of people's lives. They socialize with their donors more than their constituents.
6
If younger people want younger candidates, then they need to stop having the lowest voting turnouts. They need to step up and run for office and participate as actively as older people. It's finally starting to happen, but there's still a lot of complaining about "the party didn 't give us good candidates.".
Firat, nobody "gives" us candidates -- it's up to us citizens to become them, find them, support them, and vote for them. Second, change comes from all of us, not from waiting for some charismatic leader to do the heavy lifting. Leaders rise and fall; movements continue.The Civil Rights movement continued after MLK was assassinated because its energy came from the people, not just a charismatic leader. The
I find inspiration in art and literature. Politics is about math and good governance, with all our futures at stake.
4
I once heard a career-development consultant say: "Some people have thirty years' experience, and some people have one year's experience thirty times over." Change "thirty" to "fifty", and he could have been talking about today's congress.
1
Older is more experienced but not necessarily more learned. I want flexibility born of new ideas, not old practices. We need a mandatory retirement of the mid sixties for all elected officials.
1
Whatever older generation will do in a near future, the most imperative thing right now is to cultivate the young prominent leaders.
I would suggest that people like Nancy Pelosi with all their amazing expertise should start on a job training seminars/workshops with young and very promising candidates, to share their mastery and experience on how to navigate political circles.
Mentoring people, who would inevitably come to political arena after you is the most important contribution you can make.
I think it's absolutely great to be inspiring and idealistic, but until the sobering reality of today's politics change, democrats need all hands on deck.
Young and brave learn all the ropes!
Politics as it is not for the faint of heart.
3
Pure joy! I love laughing at the Don. Forgetting for a brief moment he's the one running America with no oversight or parental guidance.
Except for the two Obama wins, the Democrats just keep losing and losing. Maybe that's not the leadership's fault, but in any other business, they would have been kicked out long before now. Results matter. If Pelosi et al are so good at their jobs, where are the results?
Sure, they have a chance at the House this year, but that's only because so many people are turning against the worst President in history. Pelosi won't deliver a Democratic victory (if it happens), Trump will.
What good is raising massive amounts of money when you keep losing?
4
The "too old for office" argument is legitimate to make, but the fact that you only hear it in regard to Democrats is very telling.
When I moved away from California 10 years ago I decided I didn't like Pelosi. And I was annoyed with how the Affordable Care Act played out, dropping the "public option" to appease private insurance companies. But now I have come back around to liking Pelosi again. Since trump has been elected I have heard nothing but smart statements from Pelosi. If she can continue to maintain this savviness then she is definitely not too old.
Heck, she might be Speaker of the House when Trump and Pence get impeached for Russian interference in the election ... wouldn't that be sweet.
5
Is see that people keep missing the point: It’s not about age, but about personal amoral, ethically challenged value system.
These people are all yrs of age and have a proven record of amorality: Matt zucker, Theranos’ Elizabeth Holmes, Martín Shkreli‘s EpiPen’s price hike
4
I'm amused how Gail Collins name-drops "Millennials" (albeit a decade later since their arrival on the political scene), but doesn't name-drop "Baby Boomer" despite the majority of office-holders being, you know, Boomers.
Bill Clinton, Gore, Dubya, Trump, Pence, Cuomo, Warren, Hillary, Gillibrand, Condoleeza, etc., ad nauseam, are Boomers. It's a bit like refusing to describe the taxonomy of the particular elephant in the room, isn't it Gail?
The fact that Baby Boomer politicians condescendingly refer to 53-year-old Kamala Harris (b. 1964), 47-year-old Marco Rubio (b. 1971) and 52-year-old Jim Hines (b. 1966) as "young whippersnappers" is sad. Remember when John F. Kennedy became president at age 45?
We are ruled by a nation of old people: A Baby Boomer Gerontocracy. As a single generational cohort, they run this mad-house. Every other generation is "just visiting."
(Cue a response by Boomer NYT commentators who will cherry-pick outliers such as Bernie or Biden and then wrongly assert these outliers refute a general principle.)
4
@Sándor...uh, Bernie and Biden are not Boomers. Besides, outliers are so rare that they are cherry-picked because the cherry tree is so devoid of cherries.
1
Elder states persons have to groom and train the younger politicians to know the ropes of politics within the Congress. Instead of holding on to power for oneself, one should be ready to step aside when the younger one has gained experience and maturity.
Like parenthood, your most important job is to raise your children to function as adults.
Unfortunately, holding on to power seems to be the game.
1
The Greatest Generation.
The Silent Generation.
The Baby Boomers.
Millenials, Generation X, Y, ad nauseum.
These are all nonsensical groupings that do nothing to advance any political cause. Let's stop thinking in terms of so-called generations and think in terms of the electorate overall.
I was glad when Obama was elected. Besides policy and what so many of us thought it meant about America's social progress, I was happy to finally have a president younger than myself.
There is no reason why some of the ancients on the Democratic side of the Congress can't keep getting elected, step aside from their chairpersonships, and allow some relatively new blood develop leadership experience, while still exerting their considerable influence. Aside from ego and perks that is.
1
Pelosi and Shumer would have done a great service to their party and country if they'd both promised to step down from their leadership positions after the midterms. Instead they continue to enjoy their hard won status as the Republicans' go to punching bags.
I actually believe neither cares whether they end up majority or minority leaders as long as they get to stay in the game. And they'll probably continue that way until they're carried out horizontally.
2
@Phillip Usher
Whoever takes the leadership positions will become "punching bags" for the Republicans. Changing leaders won't change that. They purposely target effective Democrats -- tell me why we should let Republicans decide for us.
2
Donald Trump is proof that the only thing that age brings is getting older. No wisdom comes with coloring your hair and fixing your face to look younger.
And beauty is not mind deep. We all live with a use by mortality date. The only thing that we know about Methusalah is how long but not how effective, meaningful and well that he lived.
4
Re age and the 72 year-old Trump:
"You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely." (Ogden Nash)
8
I believe the verb associated with the act of posting on Twitter is "tweeting", not "twittering" (although this is coming from someone whose next "tweet" will be his first one). Nevertheless, I love your column, Gail, because it always sets me atwitter!
2
The New Democratic Coalition under the leadership of Jim Hines is beginning to sound like the Tea Party coalition on the Right. That's just what we need: a small group of ideologues on the Left to do what the Tea Party did, ty up the Congress and prevent any action to be taken. Jim may even get some Republican support for his position. Haven't the likes of Jill Stein and Ralph Nader done enough harm to the country, much less the Progressive Movement? Ralph brought us George Bush and Jill brought us, you guessed it, Mr. Trump, almost as surely as God made little green apples. Now Mr. Hiimes is starting a fight within the Democratic Party before it has gained a majority in the House, acting to endanger that victory by internecine battles. I can't imagine anything as feckless as his posturing at this time. Just shut up, Jim. At least wait until the victory is sure.
5
Oh, good lord. The problem is not that Nancy Pelosi is old; the problem is that she represents the garbage ideas of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party and always will. Look at the hash she and Obama made of the healthcare legislation because they wouldn't take on the insurance companies. Bernie Sanders is old, too, but the younger generations love him and that's where all the energy and fresh thinking is today.
3
@Margarets Dad Oh, for heaven's sake. bernie is still NOT a Democrat, and has an unimpressive record in congress. If he runs, he should do it as the socialist he loudly claims to be or as the independent he is label in congressional records.
4
Well, I think you hit the nail on the head with the line "However, the Republicans have made her the symbol of All That Is Evil In Washington". They are doing the same thing to Nancy Pelosi that they did so effectively to Hillary Clinton over a period of 20 years, viz., vilifying her, without dealing with policy specifics.
8
@gbb
So after the crassness, incompetence, and craziness of this administration in the last 2 years, why does anyone still listen to Republicans?
Millennial democrat here. I don't mind having octogenarian party elders, and I certainly don't think of our intra-party politics as a young vs old struggle.
That said, top party leadership has to start working on exit plans. Pelosi has become a politically toxic brand -- for reasons that are not entirely her fault, but that will prevent us from winning elections. Schumer is far too cozy with his Wall street donors to be leading the people's party. And while I love elders like Biden, Sanders, and Warren's progressive politics, basic biological realities made them risky options for as 2020 presidential candidates (by 2028, they will be 86, 79, and 87 respectively).
All of these elders have made impressive contributions to the party, and as a millennial I want their experience and wisdom in our party. But still, if we intend to build and diversify our bench for future elections, then age diversity needs to be part of the discussion.
4
@Jack
So run for office. The current leaders are the people who did.
1
My mother, who was politically active for years, believed that by the time a person hit 65 it was time to step into a behind-the-scenes advisory role. I will hit that number next year, and I can't say I disagree. Some of it is just my stamina. Also, my interests and concerns aren't the same as they were 25 and 30 years ago. I'd like to claim I'm still focused on what will happen 20 years from now, but I'd be lying. The future should be made by the people who will live there. I'm against setting limits on the upper age at which people can serve, but let's have some common sense.
1
Nanci Pelosi is doing no favors for the Democratic Party by staying, which seems to be more out of ego and a death grip on power for its own sake. I think she needs to gracefully step aside for the good of the party and the country, as Hillary Clinton should have done (as well as the DNC who suspended any pretense of neutrality). Both of them have become so completely toxic politically that centrists and younger voters especially don’t want anything to do with the party, the two demographics that are the most desperately needed for democrats to regain control in Washington and in the states.
It’s not ageist to say “you’ve had your time, now step aside and let the next generation step in”. It is however objectionable to dismiss and refuse to recognize that things have changed, and that what most of the country wants—on both sides—is new leadership and bold ideas. It’s exactly why Trump won, and why Republicans will continue to win if the democratic establishment doesn’t wise up and release their stranglehold on power.
3
@James
Why is it always women who are told they should step aside gracefully to make room for someone more suitable? Almost no one tells men to do this or scolds them for not doing it. And I've noticed Republicans single out the women as their biggest targets though they comprise at most 20% of politicians.
2
There is a good case to be made for a more age-diverse leadership in the Democratic Party. However, I don't think holding onto power is the root problem. Any publicly traded corporation must have a succession plan at multiple leadership levels to ensure it's continued good health. That requires not only identifying and naming the next generation (at least internally), but just as importantly training them in the skills and knowledge required to do the job and mentoring them to improve the chances that they are successful.
This is seriously lacking in the Democratic Party, hence the lack of a demonstrable bench with the requisite record and name recognition to move up.
2
Those who are screaming "ageism" in response to this column should check their intolerance and hair-trigger political correctness. No one is talking about barring seniors from governance. The talk is about balance and fairness and it starts with a simple acknowledgement of evidence:
There is a disproportion of elder (65+) people in the federal govt. It's a simple fact that seniors in govt have been on a steady incline since 1949 and now the middle-aged and younger are underrepresented. All skews in demographics of a group have effects and what is being pointed out by Jim Himes (and others) is that not all these effects are positive.
Only 15% of the country is over 65 but as a demographic they control 50% of the Senate. In terms of issues that affect the younger voter and the far future, what's fair about that to the other 85% of the public?
Lastly, when I think of the way that Mark Zuckerberg utterly stumped his questioners with non-answers during his Congressional testimony, I know I was watching a younger man clearly take advantage of a body of largely older people who hadn't kept up with tech. With companies like Apple and Amazon being the biggest in the country, we cannot afford an aging govt to fail to keep up.
4
Pelosi, Biden, Feinstein, Obama et al are the politicians we look up to and are inspired by to become better versions of ourselves. They are truly smart, eloquent and caring.
But... they are from a bygone age of politics. Like elegant black belt Karate practitioners, they are ill equipped to confront street fighting opponents like Mitch McConnell, whose only rule is: there are no rules. Only results count.
I do not propose liberals sink to the level of modern Republicans, but I do believe we need a new leadership with the audacity to push "unamerican" solutions from the left side too, like mandatory union representation for companies > 50 employees or universal healthcare. A leadership with an aggressive agenda from day 1 of the majority power position which will eventually come (hopefully in Nov.), without worrying about compromise, independent voters, corporate backers, etc.
3
These old Democratic leaders keep being re-elected by the members of their party because they succeed not because they have some authority contrary everyone’s wishes. There is a lot of frustration with how Democrats don’t strut and posture like Trump and Cruz and others who denigrate people and propose policies that weaken democratic institutions. They like to hear inexperienced and outspoken candidates who yell back at them and accuse them of being bad actors like fascists.
But any student of our elections can prove that a strong turnout is anything over 50% percent of the electorate and so 30% of the eligible to vote who do vote are 60% of those who vote. That’s a landslide and it tends to be mostly people with far right and even reactionary preferences. Liberal and moderates expression their frustrations by staying home and blaming Democratic elected officials for letting Republicans have their way.
As for Republicans, they call liberals enemies of freedom and refuse to object to unreasonable behaviors by Republican office holders nor to challenge policies which just have not worked as promised. Tax cuts have not stimulated long term growth but they generate deficits which actual growth cannot offset. Deregulation does not let market find optimal outcomes it lets distortion cause catastrophic outcomes. Trump asserts that plain facts which contradict his declarations fake to show is not weak but make him seem inane, but Republican leaders just let it pass.
4
Unhappy to hear about Ageism in the Democratic party. While it's fantastic to see so many young candidates running for office this year it's dismaying to hear ANY disregard for how vital 'institutional knowledge' is to passing legislation in Congress.
Maybe it's time for primers on how LBJ used the arcane rules of the Senate to get very difficult legislation done. Yes, he used arming twisting, but he, and 'old' Sen. Mitch McConnell, didn't get to the Top by ignorance of the 'old' arcane Senate rules.
4
It should be considered to limit the maximum age of running for president to something like 65. In the end it would be an arbitrary number. The goal should be to balance the experience and relationships developed in a (presumed) career of public service which could culminate in the presidency with the physical energy needed to do the job and the capacity to connect with the youth that is the future of the country.
The Bernies and Nancys of this world are exceptions and not the norm.
There should be a fair way of assuring that people can serve as reasonable decision makers. Trump, Pelosi, and most other aged leaders have no physical mental impairments which make them unable to reason soundly. Trump is just displaying what he has done his whole life. Pelosi and company are slow to change because they know that poorly considered changes bring chaos.
5
@Casual Observer I agree with you on Pelosi.
However, trump has detriorated mentally. The only characteristic that has not changed with age is his ability to con people and create chaos.
If Ms. Pelosi is a good leader, then why is the Democratic Party doing so poorly in elections? Electoral results should be a prime criteria by which we measure leadership, especially someone with long tenure. Based on this criteria, the Democratic Party needs to develop new leadership and replace Ms Pelosi and Mr Shumer.
While I admire Ms Warren I'm skeptical of the potential presidential candidates mentioned in the article.
2
@Brian Nancy Pelosi delivered the ACA. Enough said.
As for losing elections, the blame has to be allocated to President Obama who should have been more actively traveling the country all along during his first and second terms, selling reforms and cementing popular support.
He should have reinstated Glass-Steigall, undone by the Bob Rubin/ Bill Clinton cabal. However, with Tim Geithner as his Treasurt Secretary, how could he? President Obama is heads and shoulders above so many, but he did fail in many instances: he ignored popular pain, hence the Trump effect.
5
Your comment explains why the ACA is commonly referred to as Pelosi-care. Enough said?
Yes, it would have been great if President Obama was more active communicating to the American people. But, you make my point since I don't see Pelosi or Shumer "traveling the country" drawing enthusiastic crowds of supporters for democratic principles.
"Bob Rubin/Bill Clinton cabal"? Sounds like something I'd hear on Fox News. Ad hominems are the refuge of weak arguments. Part of President Clinton's effectiveness was relating to the populous.
We need to measure our leaders objectively. If people are not following, then that is a sign that the leader is failing. Even when the leader is going in the right direction. It is time for new leadership that helps people understand the right direction.
Oh that competence and integrity would only matter more than age, sex, race, etc.!
6
Age is not the issue, never has been. Hide bound, short sighted self interest has always been the issue, and no one generation has a monopoly on these qualities. My 3 year old granddaughter has the same selfish interest as Donald Trump, although she is much, much cuter and I am more amenable to her demands.
Be that as it may, there is one undeniable fact, easily verified by simply stopping and taking a look around: The rat-in-a-snake Baby Boom generation, those denizens of sticking it to the man, changing the world by making love, not war and bucking the establishment has pretty much screwed up everything it's touched. We are not sticking it to the man because we ARE the man, although there's a good argument to be made that we are sticking it to ourselves. Making love is now the trillion $$ a year internet porn industry, and we just set a new U.S. record for the longest war in our history.
It's not surprising we can't find anybody over the age of 65 who looks anything like the people who led us around in the '60's. They all look and act like the people we were trying to be anything but back in them good ol' days.
Time to get out of the way. As long as we refuse to use the political GPS tools at our finger tips, and keep trying to use those old fold up maps, we shouldn't be driving, especially if we're going to do it in the fast lane, 10 miles under the speed limit with the left blinker on, never intending to turn.
3
The old Democratic guard is out of touch with most of America, but their age has nothing to do with it (case in point Bernie Sanders). Their golden days were the Clinton years, during which they chose to ride the economic cycle without properly reversing Reagan's hard right turn legacy, not seeing that as they moved right economically (the 3rd Way), the Republicans pushed even further right instead of meeting in the new middle.
By going 1 step left after 3 steps right when majorities changed, America ended up becoming the bad place for most employees it is today (no pay increases, few holidays, no unions, healthcare as job handcuffs, at will employment, ...).
Pelosi, Schumer, Waters, Feinstein et al meant and mean well, and I'm sure they're pleasant people too, but their priorities are out of whack. Moreover, they are being played by the so called liberal finance, pharma and tech entrepreneurial circles who support and celebrate social causes and justice (gay rights, diversity etc.) but at the same time treat any hint of unionization like a pest outbreak on their work floors.
We need the more aggressive, progressive and non apologetic kind of liberals to take control of the Democratic Party to pull the country back to the left.
1
@Anne
So run.
Nancy Pelosi's garnered significant resources to help candidates. And solidified support to pass considerable important legislation. Has been a power house over the years with significant resources to elect candidates.
All of that is true.
But the bite of the reality sandwich in need of consideration: Democrats need a more youth-oriented emphasis. The election of Pennsyvania's Conor Lamb is a great case study:
He distanced himself without rough and tumble tactics.
What I find is the scarily hostile delight that comes from far too many demeaning/diminishing Mrs. Pelosi-- the most misogynist comments arrive as soon as her name appears.
Ad hominem slurs? These are ad womanem slurs!
2
@One More Realist in the Age of Trump I totally agree. Conor Lamb won because he did not cater to the extreme left. In the time of trump, Mrs. Pelosi is the one with the most experience to guide the new generation of Democrats. Why diminish her because of her age?
1
So, Nancy Pelosi is too old? Many commenters here state that the leaders should step down because they're too old, or they should have a mandatory retirement age? It's time for younger leadership?
OK. But it appears that few commenters are aware that the leadership in each party of Congress are elected positions voted on by their own Congressional caucus members, it's not some rule put in place that can't be abrogated.
Well, members of the proletariat, I recommend you communicate your desires by voting for a younger Congressional candidate, and then let them know you expect them to elect younger leaders.
There, that should fix it.
46
I retain my faith in the ability of youth to be at least as scatter-brained, greedy, short-sighted, and power-grabby as anybody they're bloviating against.
6
Nancy Pelosi was the most effective Speaker in years which is why the right is so critical. I agree that there needs to be more of a proving ground for effectiveness than age, but experience, " know how" is critically important. Paul Ryan is young and a complete failure as Speaker.(And the most disgraceful senator who has broken all traditions and decency to "win" is McConnell an old white man.)
12
You’re not getting older, you’re getting … REMOVED!
2
Don’t trust anybody under 30!
2
Be careful what you wish for....
STOP the infighting, the bickering and the pouting because YOUR pretty pony is left out. THAT is how the Creature “ won “.
Seriously. VOTE in November, then we can resume the usual circular firing squad. Understand ??????
8
The title of this piece should be: the people before ossified corruption with a new brand of politics.
Chronological age is not the problem, but the corrupt value system of individuals in Congress that comes with decades of “public service”, which, long ago morphed into “corporate service”, or “special interest service.”
For example: how can an individual working for decades, first in the House, then in the Senate end up a millionaire like Sen. Chuck Schumer? The latest ignominy is his support for Trump’s move of the US embassy to Jerusalem, thus effectively ending the rights of Palestinians. This move is not in the best interest of the US, the Middle East or the world, so who does Schumer work for?
From Elizabeth Warren to Ocasio Cortez to Beto O’Rourke It’s about bringing back Glass-Steigall to rein in Wall Street & it’s geniuses ; it’s abour regulating the student loan market; it’s about preventing the looting of affordable housing in favor of luxury buildings that serve as money laundering for global crooks, but benefit NYC realtors, who in turn support Chuck Schumer. The Kushners have been in news of late, in this very paper . Manhattan, NY has been effectively “cleansed”of working families leaving the most segregated school system in the country (thank you, Michael Bloomberg)
Let’s not lose sight of what’s at stake here: it’s about ethic and moral values. After all, Facebook’s Matt Zucker is a millennial and as corrupt as the best of them
4
I am 76 and get tired. I limp when my back hurts, Sometimes I need a nap. I think it is time for Nancy Pelosi and statesmen and women over 75 to retire and cede power to a younger generation.
As mentors, they can educate and help a new generation of leadership. Holding on to power until they drop is not a recipe for good leadership.
As a woman, I am proud of Ms. Pelosi and all her achievements. She has served this country well. Thank you for all your hard work and for serving as the first woman Speaker of the House. Well done!
1
@judy75007 Your own deteriorating physical condition should not be the reason for Mrs. Pelosi to retire. She seems to be in good health and, certainly, she doesn't show any mental decline.
Especially during this trump time, we need her wisom and experience. We can't afford to dismiss people who know and do their jobs well just because they are older than 50. That would be absolute stupid.
1
Age, like race, party, or gender, is a poor basis for voting for or against a person. Each individual candidate should be evaluated by each individual voter on the basis of what he or she has done, said, and how much their past actions make their promises believable.
To vote for someone because he or she is young, old, white, black, Asian, gay, straight, or any other personal characteristic is the lazy person's method of choosing, and is just as discriminatory as voting against them for the same reasons.
3
The real Pelosi, Feinstein, Waters, Trump without the creative dying/dolling up would scare the daylights out of the electorate. Trump does it either way.
They are busy upping the retirement in Russia so they can welsh out on payments as a trial run for here. Every one of the "elders" mentioned here is well past that age.
Willing to bet the staff for these folks isn't of an age that requires two hours to get them out the door and tottering to the limo.
Strom wasn't my hero for obvious reasons but he could have run to work. Not these folks. Nor the esteemed justice, PR aside
I do notice a great deal of boomer envy/hate. I didn't choose who or how I was born puppies. Give it a rest and get to work.
I was gladdened to see Cory Booker giving Grassley what for...and then, he had to make that Spartacus crack. Personally, that right there was the end of my ever willingly voting for him as Prez.
Oh, well. I'm still trying to figure out what St. Bernie has ever actually DONE in the Senate. I tend to keep him in the file drawer with Rand Paul.
And is it just me, or does Kamala Harris look at lot like a younger edition of Nancy Pelosi?
1
As we get older, it is important to realize that it is necessary to pass the torch at the right time. It is better to step aside a little early than too late. Earlier this year, Feinstein said Trump had a chance to be a great President. Centrist or not, this statement shows her approach/judgement is out of touch w/ reality. Pelosi needs to groom a replacement NOW. And to allow Waters to be Chair of any committee, based primarily on seniority, is disgraceful. BTW, I am an old angry (liberal) white guy.
1
Why would any of them ever walk away from the trough of money they get?
1
Hi Gail,
Remember us? We're the generation between the Baby Boomers that won't retire and won't move aside and the Millennials who want everything today. You might remember us as Gen X. Believe it or not, we're in our 40s and 50s (plus a few late 30s). We might be as numerous as our neighboring generations, but as Horton heard, "We are here!" We've never skipped a generation before. Why now?
When it comes to people (and managing them), sometimes it's about quality and not quantity.
2
Full disclosure: shortly, the age of this reader, in his eighth decade, will be expressed by the single repetition of one Arabic digit. In the Trumpian view of bias, that certainly puts me with Judge Curiel, who presided over civil lawsuits against Trump University. You be judge of my bias.
Manifestly, the presidencies of Reagan, Eisenhower and Wilson parts of which resulted in the 25th Amendment, remind us that age is not simply a number. Like elections, age has consequences which bear upon the capacity of candidates for public office.
Nevertheless, seems worthy of note, if not critical, that those consequences of aging, with small exception, have their effect relatively quickly, are dealt with and haven't to date seriously impeded the processes of government. Fossilized notions have always come from the mouths of political babes - male and female - and have nothing to do with need/desirability of politicians to have their versions of corporate succession plans.
So what then is the problem? Imo the extent to which the growing injection of generational differences as serious components of political discussion - what there is of it - is more importantly an extension of ageism, simply, increased bias against us "seniors.'
Examples in politics may not abound, but they do in society at large, which seems obvious. The political discussion will go on, as it should. Sight must not be lost, however, of this particular bias component which imo is particularly insidious.
2
If there could be anything good about Trump it would be that he pushed a new group of leaders to step up and lead. We need more young people, women, and minorities to step into the political arena.
6
@Duncan I agree that we need more young people, women and minorities to get into the political arena, but they and their supporters should not expect them to immediately take over leadership positions. Even in politics, there is a learning curve.
1
Gail, you missed commenting on neurobiology, which is in the case of seniority in congress, a VERY important factor. As we age, our brains do not diminish in capacities, but change in their capacities. While an older brain may not immediately find the name, when it does a global search for those metal things we start cars with, it has a greater capacity than a younger brain for integration. It can take multiple inputs and find a common denominator; it can hold a global perspective; it can find a compromise between competing points of view; it can cooperate in the true meaning of the word, much better. It is not so motivated by the urge to make a big name for itself. Also it has more experience and knowledge from which to draw to make decisions. The capacity for care and compassion for the young and the need to give back to society (usually) increases. Simply speaking, it's not so selfish. In ancient human societies, like most mammals, elders brains evolved to be leaders. You don't find a young elephant leading the herd. For strictly neurological reasons, congress is not as well served by members under the age of 50.
11
I think the biggest factor in all of this--just like everywhere in politics in general--is money. It's almost impossible to oust an incumbent without a ton of it, and younger people with fresh ideas likely haven't amassed much of a fortune.
1
@Tim If there are younger people with ideas that appeal to the majority, campaign contributions will follow. I contribute both time and money to Democrats who share my view of what our government should be doing. There are many like me. Try it.
1
I, too, am an elder (early 80s) and strongly believe that Pelosi, Hoyer, Feinstein, et al should leave elective politics. That doesn't mean they should go away. I propose a committee of emeritus elders who can convene every month and share their wisdom with the younger leaders, or be available when the latter have problems and/or questions. They are a valuable resource and musn't be thrown out.
1
@Salye Stein
So you want it both ways—they would no longer hold office or vote, but they would hang around to make sure the young people taking their spot know what's what. Quite honestly, that doesn't really seem like such a great deal. Would you be willing to do that if you were in their shoes?
4
@Mary Rose Kent
No, Mary Rose, don't want it both ways. Want it the best way. Politics has been in the blood of these people for decades and the experiences they've had could very well be useful to the younger new politicos. This consultancy would be far better, I imagine, than being pushed aside.
There is a very simple remedy for getting rid of all these old folks: term limits. Virtually everybody accepts that limiting the presidency to two 4 years terms is a good rule. So, why is that not a good rule for Congress? Let's say ten years for the House and twelve years for the Senate. Why not?
I am 71, and happen to be president of our local golf club. Even that club has a term limit for its board members. You can be on the board for 3 terms of 3 years. It means that you will ensure that younger people with fresh ideas will join the board. And that is fine.
@Ton van Lierop How does running a local golf club compare to running a major country? Not at all the same.
1
@Ton van Lierop...What's to prevent some 71 year old guy who got kicked off the local golf club board from running for the House and/or Senate? Then running for President? Unless you add an age limit, term limits have limits.
Elizabeth Warren may be 69, but she is a political newcomer who has provided a much needed unapologetic progressive voice to the Democratic leadership. As someone with expertise in commercial and bankruptcy law, she has a leg up on many of her colleagues in advocating for consumers and going after those who exploit them. For a newcomer, she has already made her mark with the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau. Her teaching skill, passion, brains and fearlessness, not to mention her ability to get under Trump's skin make her a bright shining star in the political firmament, and for her to be lumped together with Sanders and Biden - men at the end of their political careers simply on the basis of her age infuriates me.
Maybe that is the best you can expect from a 60+ year old columnist. How old are you exactly Gail? Would you like to be reduced to your age?
10
@DebbieR Take a deep breathe. Gail's column is meant to make fun of the ridiculous. She was simply pointing out how we generally view age in terms of mental ability.
1
@DebbieR...Ms. Collins is 72. Plus a few months and days.
There is a lot of heavy lifting to do to get our democracy back in running condition.
Overturning most of the evil that t rump has managed to do by presidential dictate is one thing.
Overturning the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision is probably the most important.
If We the People were financing our elections, instead of the kochs, mercers, adledmans, etc. we would be seeing more diversity in Congress and the White House.
Voting Democratic in this year's election is the start. Democrats can be trained, eventually, to do the right thing.
1
@Bob Laughlin...the buffets, gateses, soroses, steyers, bloombergs, bezos [not to mention a lot of big corporations] and so on are financing Democratic candidates. So how does voting Democratic this fall figure to create more diversity in Congress? Same ol', same ol'
I think that the worst thing the internet has done to politics is to make it impossible for politicians to change their positions on issues as they learn more. More nuanced views are disappearing from our national discussion (if you can call what we're having such a thing). There are fewer and fewer sane people willing to sacrifice themselves and their families for political office.
Both parties are guilty here. We have primaries in New York today. But anyone who is an Independent cannot vote in either one. I don't know why we have primaries but I do know that quite often the selected candidates do not represent what most of us want. We have term limits on the presidency. Maybe we need to enact term limits for senators and representatives. After all, we don't need an old age home in DC. We need elected officials who represent us, not their donors and that seems to be what happens as officials win more and more elections.
1
@hen3ry We have primaries so that the members of a political party have the opportunity to determine who will run to represent that party. If the selected candidates do not represent what you want, join whatever party is closest to your philosophy and work to get candidates who do represent your views nominated.
We have term limits for Congresscritters; they are limited to the number of terms they can please or fool the electorate and the same concept should apply to the presidency.
1
It seems quite likely that part of Trump's awfulness (but only part) is that he is dealing with serious mental decline. If you look at interviews from even 20 years ago, he was able to speak in full sentences and use words of more than 2 syllables.
I understand why people in their 70s don't want to exit the stage. It's a whole lot more fun than anything else they're looking at, but it's not ageist to suggest that there is a time to let the next generation lead and to take on the role of elder states(wo)man.
@Sparky
Robert Mueller is 74 years old and he doesn't seem to be the least impaired mentally. People age at different speeds and are affected in different ways, which is why I think a blanket age rule is not such a great idea.
4
It is not about age as much as it is about being well aged. I am 70 but I like the idea of younger people in positions of authority in government as they can bring a fresh perspective including on how to deal with opponents. And please, more women, men have made a mess of everything.
5
Sorry, Ms. Collins, a healthy percentage of progressive voters over 70 is supporting candidates under 50. Many of us did not trust any one over 30 in our youth, but we learned to appreciate the few outstanding elders of our time such as Justice Ginsburg and Speaker Pelosi. In our personal pursuit of relevance and health, we know all too well the toll that age takes on cognitive and physical health. We don't want the important decisions of our nation to be made solely by those worn out in the service of their country. We don't want representatives serving for 42 years being told by staff what vote to make or skipping town halls. If nursing mothers in wheelchairs can make meeting with constituents a priority, then old men past their prime had better show up or resign with their dignity still intact.
Youth by itself does not ensure good decisions, but it does make possible activities such as visiting all of the counties in one's senate district every year as Senator Amy Klobuchar (D. MN) does. The contrast between the cranky old "gentlemen" of the Senate--Grassley and Hatch--and the energetic Democrats such as Harris and Booker who are their counterparts is clear.
7
Senator Amy is no spring chicken, and has a skeleton or two in the ol' closet.
One of them's named Al Franken.
1
Gail don't you think there is more age-related criticism of women? Why aren't young people inspired by trailblazing women like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi but they go gaga over an old white man like Bernie Sanders? My guess is that Hillary and Nancy remind them of their mothers who nag and lecture them about studying and hygiene and picking their clothes up off the floor. Bernie is the laid-back dad or uncle who shares a joint with you when your Mom goes to lunch with her friends. Youngsters listen up, the reason Hillary and Nancy and Elizabeth are so much older than you is because when they were your age there were no women in the House or Senate or running for President. There were no women governors and very few women lawyers or doctors or heads of universities or CEOs. Gail has written a whole book on this subject, "When Everything Changed," which I highly recommend you read. In the meantime try to cut us older ladies some slack, we had a lot of walls and ceilings that we had to smash. But somebody had to do it.
13
@Dianne Walsh Interesting comment, and perhaps some truth to it, but comparing to Bernie Sanders is like comparing apples with oranges. Bernie has a fiery message, as does Elizabeth Warren - I would risk the age factor for Bernie or Elizabeth and vote for President, perhaps for just 1 term. They both have a progressive message that appeals.
1
Mirror, mirror on the wall...Is it really age? Or what she's accomplished or failed to accomplish? It's unsettling when the lens of discrimination (age-ism) is applied by news organizations and feminists. What does that tell us about how our news is filtered?
1
Some people keep learning and evolve as they age. You will be able to recognize them because you'll notice that what they're saying today is different than what they were saying ten years ago. My observation has been that about 50% stop learning somewhere in their middle ages. They lose interest in new experiences and become static. These latter people are the ones to be on the lookout for, to avoid in electing to public office.
Part of continuing to learn and evolve is recognizing the phases in your own life. For example, at some point you recognize that it is no longer appropriate for you to seek romantic partners of a certain age below yours or you recognize when you need to be a little more thoughtful about how you treat your own body. A big one is recognizing when it is time to hand over the reins to someone else, both because of your own internal changes and also because of the need for someone else's contribution to freshen the result.
I do not admire people who never let go. They are a variant of the person who stops learning and ceases to evolve. Our legislative branch is top-heavy with them now.
6
@Flaminia
I thought you were describing the executive branch, actually.
Regardless of party or political persuasion, America's "me generation" cannot comprehend a world without them.
Nancy Pelosi makes no excuse for her age, then why oh why has she had so much plastic surgery. All that does is make her look OLDER not younger. And why dye your hair if you are so proud of your age. Let it be as it is so we really can see her age. If age equals wisdom, experience, knowledge and ability, let the grey hair and wrinkles show. Part of the reason we have so many problems accepting age in this society is because people dye their hair instead of leaving it show as it is, have plastic surgery that makes us LOOK ridiculous. Look at Nancy Pelosi's eyes, its very clear she has had eye surgery and who knows what else she did to her face. Come on and stop being so phony. AND why cant we retire with grace? What on earth reason would people keep working for when they dont have to or need to or should. I have had enough. Mitch McConnell is 78, Charles Gruff Grassley is 85! Let it go. Also, why didnt John McCain ever retire. He was almost 82 and irascible as can be. It is time to go Nancy.
2
GC wouldn't be guilty of ageism--would she??!!
"Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader, is 78. She’s...of manic capacity and energy, and a truly formidable leader."
Also a role model for how to be 78--a smart, dedicated, public servant--AND a beauty.
7
@Michael Kubara. If she were a role model for how to be 78 she wouldn't color her hair to try to hide it. And she'd have a full panoply of young understudies.
Pelosi is a convenient punching bag and has been even when she was much younger. She is also the best and toughest politician in Washington.
If Hoyer and chairmen are replaced I wonder how the composition of those positions will change.
8
How about term limits for every elected office? This is not hard. VOTE!
When Bill Clinton and Al Gore first ran in 1992, wasn't there much speculation that their ticket might be too YOUNG to win the election?
4
The voters and the candidates care not at all for issues these days. There are rarely discussions about domestic issues or foreign affairs that address reality as it happens to be. Instead it’s about egos and resentments, appearances, and who is likely to convince others to give them what they want or is trying to prevent them. It’s all exactly like “reality” television which is just soap opera without writers.
The leaders of the Democratic Party are portrayed as enemies of freedom, liberals are enemies of freedom. Republicans are afraid of extremists who want the government according to the Constitution of 1789. The vast majority of Republican voters give Trump unconditional loyal support even as he denies obvious realities which he must insist are fake because they contradiction his own stupid ill considered public statements and lame tweets. Democrats elect people who are outspoken but inexperienced while throwing solid performing moderates out because they are frustrated with Republicans in elected positions representing ours.
When I read the news sometimes it resembles Mad magazine in the distant past or the Onion in the recent past.
1
Looks like Gail Collins is one of the dinosaurs, she does not mention a single real issue regarding the Democratic old guard in this column. The older centrist caucus if you will has let the party shrivel up and almost die. What Gail should have pointed out is the win - loss record of the Polosi - Schumer leadership. A dismal failure to put it mildly. Attention Gail! have you not noticed that the GOP has effectively taken over the country in only ten years. I like Gail, I like the New York Times but, both are out of touch with reality. And who cares if Polosi can gather money as if Beto O'Rourk, Bernie Sanders, and other Dems have not proved themselves to be formidable fund raisers. We don't need or want the donor class. One thing is abundently clear, the NYTs is emblamatic of most of what is wrong with the losing Democratic Party — Como? Are they serious, the man is an ineffective corrupt do nothing crook.
1
Bernie ain't a Democrat.
1
There is so much money driving our political system( think, Citizens United) that age, reliability and respect for donors trumps age and acuity.The big donors and PACs do not want to gamble their money on an unknown 40 year old.This is not what our founding fathers envisioned. They favored citizen legislatures with a robust turnover.They did not envision a Senior Citizen legislature with lifetime tenure.Incidentally 85 is not the new 65!I have been both and they are NOT the same!
3
I'm not so worried about some of the old folks in Congress. They can, after all, be sent packing after a few years of screwing things up. I'm more concerned about the misnomered Supreme Court where we remain stuck with the incompetence of its old right-wing members, specifically Allito and Thomas. As for Gorsuch and, sadly, the soon-to-be member Kavanaugh, well they're getting up there in age, too. If ever term limits were called for to keep these old folks at bay, the court would be the first place to start.
I guess being terrible doesn't get measured by age alone, proof of that is Donald J. Trump, an imbecile since the tender age of 'teenager', learning the racist ropes from his father. I guess megalomania doesn't come cheap, as we are finding out by paying in the millions to keep his extravagant and crookish lifestyle free of burdens, hence, 'no need' for his tax returns. What age does confer is, all things being equal, the experience to know what one is talking about...and the dedication to serve the public as best as can...as long as you are not a self-serving politician of the republican variety. But then again, confusion is rampant as to self-identifying, as the Donald remains an opportunist leaning towards the G.O.P. after being rejected from the liberal party. I guess resentment is a powerful force to contend with. Meanwhile, let Pelosi be Pelosi, duly assisted by the Himes/Bookers/Harris of this world, age be damned!
4
And these are the same people who are telling millions of Americans who cannot find jobs that pay a decent wage that there are plenty of jobs out there. Where? There may be a real bias towards seniors in Congress, in the current White House, but not in the job market.
We have the class failure in the White House and the class clowns in Congress. Not one of them understands what it's like to live in a country that caters to the richest corporations and families while neglecting to help the very people who keep the country going.
I'm nearly 60. My friends and I have not experienced a wonderful job market, upward mobility, or a living standard anything like our parents. We have had to worry about keeping our jobs, finding affordable housing, paying for medical care, and getting older and less likely to be employed. We've worked hard. But we've been betrayed by the Nancy Pelosis, the Paul Ryans, the Mitch McConnells, and others who claim to represent us but don't.
We have institutionalized ageism, bigotry, racism, and sexism in America. The only ones who are getting ahead in a meaningful way are the richest and that because they have money and the ear of every elected official. That's not democracy.
6
I wish the press (I'm looking at you, NYT) would give more coverage to the up-and-coming Democrats, so readers could learn about, and get behind some of them. I definitely agree that we need new (younger) blood. If I were going to make a single exception, however, it would be for Nancy Pelosi, simply because she is such an amazing fundraiser, so high-energy, and is so extremely competent at her very difficult job. That's why the Republicans vilify her so much, and of course we fall for it.
6
At 60 and lately retired, I think every oldster hanging onto their jobs should get out of the way. This applies to our political leadership most of all. Bernie, Nancy, and all the rest of you septuagenarians - retire, for heaven's sake! Give up your cars if you have to, move to a smaller, cheaper place, and eat beans and rice. It is your patriotic duty to spend your remaining decades volunteering at the shelter, learning a second language at the community college, and reading the newspaper at the public library. Next election, given the chance, I'm voting for the candidate who is under 50, first-time running for office, and looking to the future.
1
Before age and beauty should come thoughtfulness, competence, and the ability to care enough to perceive and express what people in this country really need and feel.
Yes, Nancy and Chuck are experienced, and Nancy is great at fund-raising & herding the Democratic cats in the House at vote time. But Nancy, Chuck, and McConnell look old, talk old, and think the old inside-the-beltway party politics, which is just what we the people are fed up with on the left or right.
Why? Because same-old politics as usual has served the rich and special interests very well, while our roads and bridges crumble, health care is a mess, our incomes stagnate, and parents don't see much opportunity for their children, while the 1% rake it in & buy their politicians.
And if GOP politicians totally deny climate change, refuse to do anything about it, and then embrace coal, but the Democratic politicians cannot effectively counter this massive falsehood and danger, then what good are they?
Everyday people in the U.S. and in much of Europe are disgusted with politics as usual. Which is why we got crazy Trump and muddled Brexit.
Sorry but the youth vote is the Democrats to have, but youth are not in the habit of voting so they need to be excited and motivated, as they were for Barak Obama.
The older generation's job is to nurture and mentor the younger generation, then step aside. Time to step aside, so a younger generation can clean up the huge mess my generation is leaving.
2
After reading this, I have a vision of Orin Hatch and Diane Feinstein, just two among many others, discussing a piece of legislation and falling asleep in their chairs while talking to each other, with no one around to wake them up as they are all taking a nap.
And we wonder why nothing gets done in Congress. I know, I am 73.
Ageism remains an endemic prejudice in our culture. There are little data that those over 60 are less intelligent or creative than those who are younger. If Pelosi remains the best choice for Democrats so be it, and no age group is spared their share of incompetents. The sense of entitlement that “it’s our turn” as the sole basis for the changing of the guard in politics or business is simply another form of bigotry masquerading as social justice.
6
Democrats should be giving McConnell the same treatment that the GOP gives Pelosi for blocking democracy and refusing a hearing for Merrick Garland.
5
Maybe Pelosi et al should heed the words of Kennedy about letting the torch pass to a new generation.
Its painful to see so many ostensibly "liberal" politicians, activists, and writers promoting age discrimination. Not all hypocrisy resides on the political right.
107
@Michael N. Alexander
Is it really so "painful" to you?
Or just an opportune excuse to shift attention away from the hypocrisies of the 'Right,' such as for instance their hurry to get Kavanaugh seated on the Court before the midterms, when in Garland's case a president — they argued — should not be allowed to nominate a justice "before the people have spoken"?
"Age discrimination"? Crocodile tears.
2
@Michael N. Alexander Well, I'm 69 and it's not about age but how we ended up with a minority party controlling two, soon to be three, branches of the federal government and a majority of governorships and state legislatures, thanks, in good measure, to the "leadership" of people like Pelosi and Shumer.
@Michael N. Alexander Yes, it's perfectly logical for politicians to attain office and stay there until they die, propped up by huge campaign funds that almost all incumbents manage to establish. Once you get elected in America, you stay elected.
I think everyone will agree that our most creative and productive years are/were in the 30s to 50s. Beyond that we just don't have a lot of energy to generate and carry out ideas. We are less aware of new inventions and developments in technology, for example. Also, who in their 60s is tuned in to the powers of social media for voter turnout or in sensing the public response to an idea. What we do develop as we age is knowing some pitfalls of certain pathways. That wisdom can be a guide to the younger leaders, who can use the wisdom to either avoid certain paths or be more aware during the projects they approve and undertake.
1
The reality is in politics there is a point where experience, expertise and age reach their peak. It’s usually middle age or slightly before. Boomer Democrats have not willingly passed the torch and so it will be taken from them.
@AG
Experience, expertise and age reach their peak at middle age or slightly before?
1
President Reagan exhibited memory lapses and disorientation while still in office. Yet there are people in their 80s and 90s who fire on all pistons. And plenty of "seasoned" people in their 40s and 50s who have little to offer. Bottom line: Consider each person individually, based on track record. Otherwise we refuse to consider a member of an entire generation because they're too young or too old. Evaluate the person, not the age.
7
A 12-year-old is raising money to run in 2020 - he's just trapped in the body of a 72 year old.
7
The key is diversity in terms of age.
I have worked on faculties that have been top-heavy with one age group or another and they are simply not as effective.
After teaching for 30 years I see that the faculties that reflect a balance of ages realize the most progress.
One third would be veterans with the wisdom and the expertise that often comes with having done your job for a long time. They hold the institutional memory for the group and they are effective mentors and guides for the youngest and least experienced.
One third are middle-aged. They have the combination of experience and maturity, and can provide a check on the rashness that sometimes comes with the passion of the young and the stodginess that sometimes comes with age. They are a bridge between the old and the new.
One third are the young, who bring energy, idealism and the latest ideas to the mix.
All three should have the emotional energy to innovate and get things done. People such as RBG and Bernie are old in years but have retained this heart. Not all have it. Paul Ryan is relatively young but stingy of spirit. Mitch McConnell has no wisdom despite being long in the tooth.
The integration of the three groups is what results in balance and efficiency and progress.
17
It’s nice to read an old fashioned reasonable observation of the golden mean in human social conduct but unless people are being stimulated into strong emotions it’s not what sells anymore.
4
Isn't age besides the point? I want people who share my ideals and can effectively fight for them. LinkedIn didn't overlook a field for age, its not there for a reason.
1
@Bob
I'm going to guess that LinkedIn doesn't have a field for age because it's illegal for employers to ask a person's age. Why give that information unnecessarily?
I think we can look at our politicians as extensions of ourselves. 60 is the new 40, well not really but don’t a 60yo that. We arrive at retirement age and wait and wait and wait for the right moment to stop working and it just never arrives.
Of course government is not making it any easier for someone to decide to step down from their job. SS age goes up, Medicare costs go up, and fixed income just doesn’t pay the bills. Although not the reason politicians stay around so long, it seems to be the way of our world.
2
At 85 years of age I cannot understand why Diane Feinstein is running for another 6 year term, and why anyone would vote for her, putting her over 90 at the end of her term. As good as old age is, there's no getting around deterioration - in stamina, memory, and more. We elders do not go uphill, it's downhill - great, but downhill nevertheless!
3
@Pat Boice. I agree with this. It's just common sense.
These are extraordinary times. We need a senior technologist of the levers of the House of Representatives to maneuver the rescue our norms after the insult that has been the trump administration. Then, fine. Bring on the fresh blood.
1
I am not as concerned with age, as I am with the effectiveness of the person and the positions they have on certain issues and policies.
I have always said that it was/is better to work within the party and push it (left) towards true Progressive policies. Many people wanted the revolution now, so here we are with a lot of pain.
So... moving forward, I have no problem with Speaker Pelosi (regardless of her age) becoming Speaker once again, and also once again, becoming the most effective and prodigious Speaker the United States has ever seen. (so long as those policies are once again truly Progressive)
So...it will be up to all of you to give her the votes/people to enact those policies with a large majority.
Stop whining, roll up your sleeves and get to work. (vote)
20
@FunkyIrishman
If I were still living in Pelosi's district, I would still be voting for her. She's a dervish for the left.
55
Mary Rose Kent - If I were living in her district in San Francisco, I'd vote for her. The issue is whether she should be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives if the Democrats retain control of the House. Pelosi is a supremely talented politician, but should the Speaker represent someone from a different part of the country? Someone more centrist? Someone younger?
@Selvin Gootar
Maybe because I worked on the Hill in the era of Tip O'Neill, but I don't think of the Speaker as a person who needs to be anything beyond a good marshal for her/his side and the way the Speaker is positioned vis-à-vis her/his district's location, lean, or age is irrelevant. I don't think San Francisco has gained anything other districts haven't because of Pelosi's position.
It’s time for a change in the Democratic leadership. Diane Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi have done some really good things during their many years in office. They should gracefully step aside and ideally they would use their substantial experience to mentor the next generation of their parties leadership.
1
They should get out of the way and let the grandstanding newbies spend all their time exchanging nonsense with Trump and complaining about what’s wrong to keep the news media ratings high.
3
It is all about fundraising. Nancy rules because she raises the most money.
4
I readily confess that I am ageist. I do not want to live in a gerontocracy. The U.S. needs term limits and/or a mandatory retirement age for senators, representatives, and Federal judges, and I am disgusted by octogenarians like Sen. Chuck Grassley and Dianne Feinstein, who refuse to make way for up-and-coming politicians who are in the prime of their lives and careers.
4
@Chris Rasmussen
If the up-and-coming politicians capture the attention and interest of the voters, they will be elected; if not, the elders will stay. It's really that simple.
@Chris Rasmussen
Sorry, but the "up-and-coming-young politicians" have to earn their way up by winning elections, just like everybody else. If they want leadership, they have to show that they are leaders.
1
@Juanita I certainly agree with Juanita and Mary Rose that younger politicians need to win at the ballot box. But I hope they will agree with me that the advantages of incumbency (name recognition, fund-raising, just plain inertia) are so strong that it is difficult for challengers to unseat an incumbent. As a result, incumbents sit in Congress for 30 years or more. This is no way to run a country. Senators Leahy, Grassley, and Hatch were downright embarrassing at last week's Kavanaugh hearing. These men should be home playing with their great-grandchildren.
"Donald Trump is 72, but he was already terrible when he was 50. "
There was a three-week period when Trump was 6 that he wasn't terrible. Other than those weeks, he's been terrible his whole life.
16
I'm just 71. When I grow up I want to be Larry Eisenberg.
12
“Honestly, if you didn’t have to be 35 to run, there would be 12-year-olds raising money this very minute.”
I don’t often laugh out loud when reading Ms. Collins’s op-eds, but (as someone who’s about to turn 63) I did at this line — maybe because I actually believe it.
2
It would be nice to have a Democratic House leader capable of forming sentences containing complexity, well-formed ideas rather than talking points linked by a random conjunction or two. Master Legislator or not, Ms. Pelosi is rapidly becoming her own worst enemy.
2
Anyone who wants evidence of the age problem for dems should check out the hearings
compare the two senators from CA
one is this old grandma sitting there looking slightly exhausted not saying a word
the other is out there hitting hard, fighting, going down swinging--- full of energy and life
when i read that DF was the only one over 80 I had to go google PL - to find out he's only 78!
he sounds like he's 108 -
they are both too old - couple them with grassley and the whole front row looked like the day out at the olds folks home
two words
TERM LIMITS
PL has been in there since 1974 - it's gross and selfish
there are plenty of young, smart, hard working vermont dems who want a shot at that seat - but he is in there for maybe another 10 years = awful.
2
Perspective is all- and there is something to be said for experience and an agenda that includes the lives of grandchildren. Still, I'm disappointed that there seem to be few apprentices or proteges to these titans of politics. I do think the short supply has much to do with nobody wanting the job- bright young people have generally refused to subject themselves to the admission requirements : lots of money, public humiliation and lack of privacy.- leaving public service in part to the idealists, who may finally be getting a second look.
3
It is reckless and irresponsible for Pelosi, 78, to have as her deputies a man her age and another a year older. No one is saying she has to go quietly go away. They're saying the responsible thing to do would be to groom a younger leader (and deputies), continue her prolific fundraising efforts on behalf of the party and be every bit the player she is now without the title. The part that isn't mentioned here is that she also was leader when Dems lost control of the House.
She actually said, "I'm worth the trouble."
No she isn't. No one is.
PS: I'm 63.
3
Lost me on the first sentence.
You got the last part wrong, Gail. Donald Trump is a 72 year old man with the vocabulary level of an 8 year old and the maturity level of a 2 year old...
5
Ugh. Baby Boomers.
When will they age out and leave us alone?
The Selfish Generation.
@El Jamon. I suggest you read the comments. You'll discover that a LOT of the people favoring the retirement of these older legislators ARE themselves Boomers. Including me. I'll be 62 in a couple months.
1
@El Jamon
When young people care enough to vote. The only reason we have trump and the same old tired politicians is that the baby boomers vote at a much higher rate than young people.
With apologies to Pogo. You have met the enemy and he is you.
4
Gail
You wrote, “However, the Republicans have made her the symbol of All That Is Evil In Washington...” You seem like a fun loving type. Want to have some real fun? Do what I have done and ask your republican friends exactly why they hate Pelosi. Ask them what she has done exactly to garner that hatred. The answers would be funny, if they weren’t so instructive. You see republicans hate pelosi, Biden, Holder, Obama etc. not because of specific policies or acts but because Fox, Brietbart and Rush have to.
Kobach earned my disdain with his phony war on voters. Trump earned mine with hundreds of lies, Ryan preached fiscal responsibility while a democrat was president only to blow a hole in the deficit as soon as a Republican won. Don’t get me started on the specifics of Republicans denying climate change and a woman’s right to choose.
Pelosi passed the ACA which was ok until republicans found out it was Obamacare. Their hatred of her is all labels and non specific. No matter who or how old the democrat leader was the result would have been the same. Hatred without reason.
8
Cory Booker proved himself to be a blustering buffoon at the Kavanaugh hearings. We need younger leaders, but hopefully we can do better than this egotistical clown.
3
The photo caption says that Pelosi is open about her age--but she and Feinstein, eg, do their best to look younger than they are. How about some gray/white hair?
2
@Julia
GLAD YOU THINK THEY LOOK YOUNGER THAN THEIR AGE. WHAT ABOUT THE MEN? TRUMP?
1
Donald Trump was already terrible when he was 50 seconds out of the womb. Scuttlebutt from the 1940s in Queens has it that he poked out an eye of the nurse who cut his umbilical cord with her own scissors. He has only gotten worse since.
9
Oh Gail, c'mon..."Nancy Pelosi....is a fund-raiser of manic capacity and energy, and a truly formidable leader".??
Nancy Pelosi is the worst Speaker. With that fluttering, stuttering, girlish cadence, I grind my teeth listening to her ramblings.
I can't wait for her to be replaced.
And yet: Kamala Harris and Cory Booker's grandstanding for the roles of Spartacus/Wonder Woman at the hearings make me gag or laugh.
Great choices,
2
Stop using the left-right labels. (And liberal-conservative labels.) Those give a false appearance on equivalent respectability. That undermines everything good in NYT political news and opinion.
The reality is that we are in a death struggle between Americans and Mobsters. Use these truthful labels. And command the rest of the NYT to do the same.
10
This gerontocracy reminds me of the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
The average age was 1919: 39, 1982: 70. (see Wikipedia)
We all know when and how that ended.
1
Term Limits !! no exceptions only allow 2 terms for any office period.
Years of watching our government be it Democrats or Republican continue stupid policies year after year is insane.
America need New blood and New Ideas in our government and the current system is failing us and must be changed.
1
@Rjnick
You really think having half of the House of Representatives be newcomers every other year is a good plan? I sure don't...
What this clearly shows is that age is a poor indicator of being smart or mellow. I submit the following cases as evidence:
Strom Thrurmond, the poster child for racism and racists, was one himself in his youth. He did not change his attitude or beliefs, at least not significantly, as he aged.
Donald Trump was a liar and a cheater right from his school days. He too did not change his style as he aged.
Wisdom does not automatically come with age. If you are a smart young person, you grow to be a wise old person. But if you are a liar, cheater, and a racist, there is a very good chance you grow up with an even stronger views in that regard.
3
It is extremely stupid to feel ashamed of one's age, even in the US society that adulates youth, sexually attractive looks, and promotes the wet-behind-the-ears to positions beyond their capabilities. The leftist radical Democrats' drive to power must be checked before this militantly vegan and cannabis smoking crowd gains an upper hand and converts the nation to spineless, cannabis-poisoned lotus eaters, blindly following the dictates of the extreme left.
Every one of these Methusalems should be replaced now.
That whole “wisdom comes with aging” theory I have found, is a bunch of baloney. The people I knew that were idiots when we were 45, are pretty much the same idiots at 75. As you stated Gail, Mr. Trump is acting like the same fool he was in his 40’s - why is anyone surprised by that?
211
@Mary c. Schuhl: Many people can and do learn from experience. You yourself say, "I have found" and cite your long-term experience with idiots. Trump may be an idiot, but he also has had no experience in governing or even in practicing self-control. He's a poor example of the invalid point you're trying to make.
@Mary c. Schuhl It’s probably more correct to say that age comes with wisdom. That is, all things being equal, those who are prudent (wise) will have a better chance of living longer than those who are foolish. Not only will they have better chances for an increase in the number of years they live, but the quality of those years will also tend to be better.
@Mary c. Schuhl - Thoreau smashed this age reverence in Walden. Of course, no one reads Walden who even knows Thoreau. SAD!
So, Booker comparing himself to Spartacus – and Zuckerberg taking his measure vs Augustus Caesar...
*ttps://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/09/17/can-mark-zuckerberg-fix-facebook-before-it-breaks-democracy
Liked them better when they were trying to fix the Newark school system together, instead of the whole world...
*ttps://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/education/23newark.html
Until they’re ready, a seasoned – even wizened – one who’s seen and done it all in California, would be my first pick...
To that end, engaged a respected former British thespian to rummage through MI7’s secret dossier database – turns out, he still has his fake security clearance – and procured two birth certificates for your scrutiny and edification, attesting that...
1. Jerry Brown was born on April 7, in the year 1983
2. Arnold Schwarzenegger was born in Palm District, California
Wikipedia does not reflect these truths – but it often updates real-time...
Give it till Saturday...Early next week, for complete footnoting...
At that point, WaPo’s going to run with it, Gail – but you’ll have had first shot...
Well I'm for purging all Democrats from the Party who should have been moderates in the Republican Party - regardless of their age. Democracy does require an adequate opposition. "Traitors! Morons! Fiends! Thank you for your service - now go away fast!"
Only the fate of the US, the West, Modernity and Humanity has been at stake. What, me worry?
What do Pelosi, Schumer, and Hoyer have in common? It's not craftiness, wonkiness or a grand vision; it's the ability to suck up massive amounts of corporate cash in exchange for doing as little possible to promote a progressive agenda. If this was boxing, it would be called taking a dive. BTW, this would have also been Hillary's mission, had she been elected, under the quaint sobriquet of "incrementalism".
2
at the age of 81 I feel just as energetic and mentally fit as Ms Pelosi and Ms Feinstein. But we all must recognize that the amount of travel, late night work required in the Senate and the House may begin to take its toll on them, as it would on anyone over 80, and perhaps they should step back just a bit to give the merely middle-aged a chance. Please note this does not apply to the Supreme Court.
1
I’m 66 ... just retired ... lifetime D.
I learned an awful lot about younger people prior to retirement. They honestly think we’ve screwed things up (healthcare, social security, meaningless wars, deficits, etc.) and don’t trust us. Hard to argue.
Time for Pelosi et. al. to go. Think Beto O’Rourke.
122
@Dave Klebbak
I agree! It's not about age it's about trust. Under Pelosi the GOP took over and pushed thru bills and policies that have hurt the millennials
@Dave Klebba
I don't know what you mean by "we."
@Dave Klebba I think we should keep Pelosi and elect Beto O'Rourke. Pelosi is too much of a known fighter for the Dems to be tossed for who knows what.
But Gail, you made the argument because there already is a growing group of "younger" office-seekers coming along. Together they will present a spectrum of ages, ideas and perspectives. Sports analogy time: In (men's) Professional Golf you have three tours Champions (seniors), the regular PGA Tour, and Web.com Tour for younger players. We have an upper house, lower house and states. Making things work in government is all about collaboration of interests. Unfortunately today, one party advocates diversity and the other demands loyalty. The voters must decide.
1
If the population is previously brainwashed, it’s completely irrelevant whether the turnout is going to be 20% or 100%.
How to recognize the manipulated and fooled voters?
For decades they keep voting for two political parties that work for 1% of the population.
Whomever you vote for under those conditions, the outcome will be the same.
The same patrons donate to both political parties because both organizations work for them.
A handful of dollars for the campaign donations provides an impression of the choice and working democracy.
Brilliant, isn’t it?!
Dorothy Parker and Clare Boothe Luce arrived simultaneously at the entrance to Sardi's restaurant.
Luce (magnanimously): "Age before beauty."
Parker (going in): "Pearls before swine."
Now why can't we have that kind of comity in Congress?
4
Trump is Archie Bunker. Pelosi is Eleanor Roosevelt. And you ask why there are no new ideas?
60
@michjas What is/was not to like about Eleanor?
I want to see her face on the $20 in place of Jackson's.
1
@michjas I'd love it if all politicians were Eleanor Roosevelt.
@michjas What is/not to like about Eleanor?
I would like to see her face replacing that of Jackson on the $20 bill.
Goodness, Gail....most of the septuagenerians you mentioned have been about our political business for much of their lives. When one wonders why so long, it becomes apparent that the bennies and the liberal love is terrific. That explains the Dems. For the Repubs, it must be the bennies only. Hey, that's enough!
As to age and less beauty, recall Pelosi's response right before passing the ACA legislation, "We will find out what it means after we pass it!" As Charley Brown would say, "Good grief."
More grief we've all gotten from all the old politicians on both sides. Biden, a good man, is moved to tears so often he often can't see straight. Warren wails so loudly one thinks she has not taken her calming meds. Feinstein deserves no comment, nor does Maxine Waters.
The Republican hangers-on are too many to mention, and have accomplished so little to deserve any.
The answer we seek to this Methuseleh mess is term limits folks. Serving the public iin Congress is no different from jury duty, excepting we can seek Congress duty. Like all trials, it should come to a quicker end and the brief thanks that goes with it.
For those who worry about access to Congressional wisdom, let those who served us well for 8 years voluntarily serve on a Retired Congressional Wisdom Committee. Like jury duty ,it would be at no cost to the public, except for meals, a soft co. It would differ in having a sensible deadline.
2
The young don't vote.
7
No comments here about Joseph Kennedy III?
The Democratic Party should be grooming him even as we speak. If you follow him at all you know what a great candidate he would make. If elected in 2020, he would be almost the same age his Great Uncle was when he was elected President.
3
I’m guessing you weren’t around in 1963 — or 1968.
1
The Who sang about this back when they were young men, in "The Young Man Blues."
The reason the young men were blue is because the "Old Man has all the money." As long as the old have all the wealth and power they will always be targets of the young.
The question isn't who is old or who is young, the question for politicians is "what are you doing for us with your wealth and power? Nancy used her wealth and power to try to get Affordable Healthcare. Trump used his to pay off porn stars and playmates.
5
Gail, you had me at "the head of the New Democratic Coalition is 52".
Elizabeth Warren is 69? Nice.
6
72 going on 5.
3
I don't care, and you shouldn't either!
Democrats regularly get into internecine struggles over minutae like this, and that creates an opening for the Trumps and McConnells of the world to wreck everything we all, collectively, care about.
If you're honest, competent, not corrupt, and rational, then I can get behind you, whether you're 24 or 104. Let's keep our eyes on the big picture.
7
I'm all for easing out the Democrats' current Politburo-like drowsy slate of leaders. We've unfortunately lost a cohort of D's behind them that has departed in frustration with the Geritol ceiling.
But I'm impressed with few of the younger faces touted for the presidency in 2020. Harris? Booker? Gillibrand? Really? Too hectoringly immature. And unelectable, btw, if that sort of thing matters to you.
John Delaney, Jeff Merkley: Who he?! Inslee, deBlasio, Garcetti, O'Malley, Murphy, Tim Kaine: Nah...
Sanders, Biden, Warren, Jerry Brown: too old, too much baggage.
Others mentioned are only remarkable for their laughability quotient: Oprah, Avenatti, Holder, Cuomo, Zuckerberg... C'mon, Democrats, you can do better than this. I hope. (Clintons' pet Terry McAuliffe: geddouttahere...)
Amy Klobuchar and Sherrod Brown are the only two so far noted who have the necessary combination of smarts, heart, stability, sobermindedness, and comity that we need so desperately in our leadership.
Bullock and Hickenlooper are possibilities...
4
Harris-Booker in '20.
3
Term limits.
1
I prefer the stupidity of youth to the wisdom of old people. Youthful expression always has more hormones attached to thinking and old people just have memories. Old people will evacuate in NC, whereas young people will face the storm head-on. They knew all along that the Major category was a lie and Florence would come ashore as "just a hurricane". In Washington, keeping the Ship of State afloat is in the hands of old people and we're sinking.
1
Even with Benghazi, deleted emails and a cheating spouse in his past, Michael Avanati would have made a much better candidate than Hillary. Why? Age. Sorry, but its a physiological fact, that age trumps experience when it comes to being agile and sharp. Pelosi does O.K. for her age, but it's her age that's the problem.
1
oh go home Nancy, we’ve all had enough. Your recycled ideas are for a time long gone, that’s one reason you party can’t win elections.
Have the dignity and self awareness to step aside and let the younger generation with fresh ideas help move us ahead.
How long will you persist in the face of failure?
1
"Nancy Pelsoi makes no apologies for her age," reads the caption underneath the photo that accompanies this piece. Why in the heck should she apologize for her age? Did she make a mistake in the year she was born? Has she sinned against someone for living the number of years she's lived? What, exactly, should she apologize for? Must she apologize for her continued existence?
11
I'm 66 & have had limited energy most days for a long time even though I am in good health. I now collect Social Security (1/2 my income) & work about 20 hrs a week, with plenty of energy.
I suspect that the only way these leaders can do their job is that they actually work the same hours as I do, or less. & yes that includes RBG!
How or why age should matter is beyond me. (I’m 43.) First of all, experience counts for something, and generally, older politicians tend to have more experience than younger ones. Second, the firebrand in the last election was Bernie Sanders — the oldest candidate! Being young doesn’t automatically make you a firebrand anymore than being old doesn’t. These stereotypes are just dumb.
5
Ought to be a law—disqualified if over 70 at time of election followed by mandatory retirement at 76.
Have these old politicians nothing better to do? I'm 74 at the moment, and rather enjoying retirement.
2
I am not a fan of Orrin Hatch but his decision to retire at 76 despite being urged by President Trump to run for re-election is admirable. I wish more aging Democrats would do the same. Start with Dianne Feinstein running for re-election at 85. She holds a safe Democratic seat and her retirement would present an opportunity for a younger Democrat to gain experience. Despite the fact even the party did not endorse her in the primary, she will be elected again. Why? Is it ego driven? Does she think the world will fall apart if she is not the Senator from California?
The Democrats lack bench strength. The best way to develop that bench strength is to have a mix of older and younger members of Congress holding leadership positions so the older members can mentor potential successors. If you look at the private sector, many CEOs step aside in their late 60s and early 70s after developing a successor to provide a seamless transition for their organization. Many comments on this column refer to the benefit of experience older members have. But older members must make a strong effort to pass this knowledge on to younger members.
The prospect that Biden, Sanders, and Warren are the leading candidates for the Presidential nomination in 2020 scares me. I am hoping an Obama-like figure emerges from the pack.
4
I remember when we smirked at the old, often vodka-impaired men of the Soviet Politburo. For the record, that was Brezhnev (75), Andropov (69) and Chernenko (73). The Russians are smirking now.
62
Yesterday I watched a town hall Chris Hayes did in Michigan. Apparently, in Michigan, there were thousands of ballots where votes were cast for every office but President in 2016. It sounds like a lot of Democrats showed up but couldn't force themselves to vote for Hillary. Then Chris interviewed some younger folks. They just weren't "inspired" to vote for Hillary. Excuse me, but in my voting life I have not just thought about myself when voting. The greater good, and all that. Today Susan Sarandon is òut there advocating for the revolution again. She's apparently not too concerned about people being thrown off their health insurance. I agree that the Democrats need to bring in younger people in the leadership structure. But there's something to be said for experience and common sense.
3
The way I see it is there are people like Pelosi and Schumer who, apparently, are very good at behind the scenes politicking, but who are not very effective in communicating a sense of strength and clarity to us, the voters. Sadly, one needs to be aged to become powerful as power isn't granted overnight. Paul Ryan's rocket ascent and descent proves one can't be a baked cake without enough time in the oven.
9
I'm reading a lot of comments that project the commenter's difficulties with aging onto other people. Your experience is not everyone's experience. If you really think that way, you may have unwittingly become Republican.
1
Although I agree that Nancy Pelosi needs to step down because of the importance of the upcoming election, I am saddened that this woman who has done so much has been successfully made a scapegoat. Were it not such an important election, I would not ask her to make this sacrifice. One wonders whether the Republican campaign to discredit her (and Hilary) would not have been successful were they not women.
2
@Zoned
So are you saying women politicians should "step down" if the election is "important", but it's OK for them to stay if it's not?
Women are always being asked to make a "sacrifice"
aren't they?
Absolutely the purpose of the Republicans' campaigns against Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi is to discredit them, because they are powerful and effective Democrats. The campaigns will continue to be successful if they can get Democrats to turn against their own. Don't be a part of that.
Diversity of opinion, experience and point of view are necessary, especially in Washington. Diversity includes generational diversity. Too bad our system consolidates power in those who are entrenched, thereby discouraging diversity. Some good folks are going to fall by the wayside are we struggle for change. As we narrow the voting gap, there will be change consistent with our changing demographics. At least on the Democratic side.
These politicians all have chair jobs. I don't have a problem with older politicians,however, for those of us who have had to work 12 hr shifts with our bodies for many years such as nurses( myself for 44 years), do not threaten our Medicare and social security. I will not be able to this job beyond 65 and I have friends who have left the grueling hospital floors at 60 yrs.
5
While Nancy is a scapegoat, she has been in the House leadership position all the while the country has shifted far right. She is part of the silent Dems leaders who have stood by as our institutions are being savaged, waiting patiently to be reelected NOT because she deserves to be. Quite the contrary, because the other sides performance has been so bad. Where oh where has the Dem's leadership been?? They do not deserve the gift the Republicans are bestowing on them. No matter what happens to our country going forward, they will be remembered as those responsible for allowing the greatest democracy in history to be severely diminished for generations to come, if not forever. You wish to cut them a break?
2
Well, Trump may be old in years spent on earth, but any twelve year old eclipses him as far as maturity by at least 8 to 10 years any day of the week.
4
As with most things American, it's persistance if a white male does it....(Strom....Biden...) but it's questionable when women and minorities tackle it (Waters).
As for me, give me the clarity of Feinstein's questioning of Kavanaugh any day over the others. Ginsberg can stick around as long as she'd like for my money...she is the original standard bearer of a woman's rights under the constitution.
And as for Nancy Pelosi...her record speaks for itself. I remain proud that she represents me in Congress. My voice is being heard...so i don't need a twitter account...us civics 101.
11
At 98, I do resent
You're checking age 'fore you consent
To offer your vote
To a youth of no note
That strikes me as being low rent.
428
Larry you are a treasure
I would vote for you if you ran!
1
@Larry Eisenberg
Amen to that.
If youth is such an asset, what should we make of (thank goodness he's not running for office) odious Trump adviser Stephen Miller? Better to evaluate people on the quality of their ideas.
DP
Slyly cute Larry. but no cigar (they're bad for you anyway). 98? Happy Birthday!
The problem that I see with the Democratic Party leadership is not so much their age, it's their complacency in the face of an unstable and untruthful president who is ripping to shreds everything that rank and file voters believe in and their unwillingness to try anything different even when anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear can tell that what they've been doing hasn't been working.
It's not just age when the guy who fired up the internal opposition movement and inspired millions of young people to get involved in politics is pushing 80.
My guess is that the Democratic establishment will unite behind a candidate who's essentially, Obama light. Someone who can appeal to one or more of the identity groups that make up the Democratic Party without scaring the cash out of the big money donors. Either that or they'll try to resurrect Hillary from the political graveyard--a potential disaster but one that appeals to many who took her loss very personally.
I'd like to see them nominate someone, preferably someone with executive experience, from a state that's not on the east coast or California. Of course I have no idea who that could possibly be. Having sort of given up on supporting local candidates and ceding statehouses to the Republicans in the 2000's the Party does not have a large base of talent.
Until someone like that emerges I'll remain a supporter of the 79 years young hero of the youth, Senator Sanders.
1
Dear Gail, Ruth and Nancy are Atlas's who have not shrugged, shirked, or shied in their positions of responsibility. So glad you are there too. Your work is so light, artful, and leavened flowing from the pen of a major feminist historian, topping off a significant remarkable journalistic career and American life,the tendency is to undervalue what you do. As usual today you attracted my attention; You made me think; And you left me laughing noting that someone was "already terrible when he was 50". Thank you, Joe M. 72.
7
The Republicans are aiming at Pelosi because she guilty of being a female. Ask Hillary about the Republican base and females.
8
The Democratic Party needs to embrace FDR's Party,and his Second Bill of Rights.
8
The Silent Generation and the Boomers (I am one of them) has had their chances, and they gave us Trump.'
We need new leaders, who are not fixated on refighting the battles of 1968.
91
@John Graybeard
Wether we want to or not, we ARE going to be refighting the battles of 1968 (and 1965, and 1972, and even back into the 1940s) because the republicans currently in power, led by the monstrosity in the W/House, are busy overturning ALL the gains that were made in those years.
Voting rights are being gutted; public schools are being destroyed through under-funding; health care is being stripped away--again; the republicans are determined to kill off Medicare and Social Security; and, for the SECOND time in my lifetime, American women are going to have to fight for the right to control our own bodies.
I'm appalled that we have to fight these battles again; but I absolutely want leaders who are fixated on fighting them.
34
@John Graubard It was those - of any age - who did not vote, and those - of any age - who did not care enough to vote thoughtfully, (along with Republican manipulation of voting districts) that gave us this nightmare. One age group is not to blame.
17
@John Graubard Such a clever (and empty) reference to 1968. Care to be specific about what events or politics of that year you see reflected in 1968?
I am all for the younger generation engaging in our politics, as after all it's their future at stake. But it strikes me that many of the millennial generation are too busy seeking to create the next big tech thing, or score millions on Wall Street, and have not until recently been paying adequate attention to what's been happening for years. And disruption, while appropriate in certain circumstances, cannot and should not be our primary approach, especially in government. We've seen far too much disruption already, and it's led to global chaos. Maturity and experience are valuable, and vital. Always have been, and always will be.
6
Look at history:
The key to Democratic victory is more younger people voting. For many, issues matter less than a leader they feel is like them. Fresh faces without baggage do better - JFK, Bill, Barack.
Elders should put country before ego and support new leaders
1
This really is a Tale of Two Cities moment. Nancy Pelosi really is a great politician. But she is not a great leader. Bernie is a great leader but he is too old. Booker is a fiery leader but compromised with the FIRE crowd in NY City. Honestly, Harris might be the one. Young in political terms, and not tainted by years of Congressional sellouts and compromises. Diane Feinsten, give it up? Too old, too stale, too conservative, too many dead husbands willing her money and status and too compromised. And then there are the Republicans. Oye vey I don't have enough time, space. Plus nausea is setting in just thinking about that bunch. It is a far, far better thing that I stop writing.
4
Gail, I see your points. But for once, I must disagree. The fact that Pelosi is used as the Wicked Witch Of San Francisco for GOP fundraising is the exemplar of rabid misogyny. It has less to do with ageism, than the fact that a mere Women could be so incredibly successful. Let’s put HER intellect, stamina, common sense and leadership up against that of the creature occupying the Oval Office. I’ll gladly place cash wagers against that outcome, to ALL takers. Notice : NOT intended as an offer or inducement to engage in illegal gambling.
As Democrats and sensible and/or fed up Independents, we MUST Win the Midterms, to contain this ongoing disaster. THEN, we can bicker and moan about age, retirements, and new blood.
Seriously.
6
Well I guess ”elder statesman” (add /woman) is a term for a reason. Age alone should not be a disqualifier. Donald Trump would have been unfit for the office from age 35 on . Nancy Pelosi has proven a capable leader the entire time, that is why she is such a lightening rod.
A coalition that includes older people, a large voting bloc ,makes sense.
I would vote for the nonagenarian poet who graces the NYT comments section before any current serving Republican. His clever way with words and keen awareness of current events puts him light years ahead of them, especially the shameful CIC.
4
I'm not concerned about any, presumed, generation gap within the Democratic party, my only concern is with a voting gap. If you vote, I respect your generation, your maturity level and your intelligence. You, already, know more about civic virtue, democratic values and government of the people than the leader of the Republican party and his supporters. So welcome to adulthood, responsibility and political involvement. May you grow old enough to have this period in our politics become a funny, fading memory and may the Republican party remain in decline for the rest of your days.
181
"Democrats should have higher standards for ourselves (how about for the swing voters) than Trump and Co..."
Democrats should win, that's what they should do. The Democratic Party isn't about "ourselves," the touchy-feely liberals, it's about America, which is going down the plug-hole while Bernie and Gillum sell socialism to people - ordinary, middle-class, maybe independent-voter-type people - who run for the hills when they hear "socialism."
Bernie - and I guess, now Gillum - are true to "their" values. And Bernie lost the election for Hillary Clinton and for America, with all of his Democratic independence and self-righteousness. Result: Trump.
Meanwhile back at the Okefenokee Swamp, Bill Nelson - who looks like a geriatric Cabbage Patch doll - is running against "I took the 5th 75 times in the biggest Medicare fraud civil case in US history" - "septic-tank" Rick Scott: 60-ish, tanned, with his Navy baseball hat, blaming Nelson for blocking federal funds - Nelson just got 1M from the CDC to fight algal blooms - to fight algae while he (Scott) stands in front of his Naples McMansion with a beach covered in dead fish as a backdrop.
And Scott will probably win because Nelson looks like he was just wheeled out of the waxworks. In Florida, they're right on the surface - which is covered with dead fish - of everything.
The thing is, the vast majority of the democratic elders were in place when Obama won the presidency, and almost had control of both houses for a short period of time (Kennedy was ill and Franken was not confirmed for six months).
They had the ball, and republicans with their usual bag of ruthlessness and dirty tricks stole it in the following mid-terms. They blocked everything Obama tried to achieve (kudos to Pelosi for the ACA), and look at the damage they've done since.
I'm all for experience, wisdom and congeniality but seems every time we manage to get control, these same people fumble - over and over again.
If democrats manage the blue wave into reality, with the likes of what now passes for a republican party that has zero compunction about adhering to rules and other niceties, I worry that history will repeat.
I'm really tired of seeing Schumer in front of a camera, looking over his glasses telling us all once again how furious and shocked he is about the latest outrage with all the urgency and passion of a person upset over spilled coffee.
11
@Deb, agree, Schumer was a terrible choice for leader. He lacks the "it" factor and is boring and ineffective. Why aren't more charismatic democrats given the "mike" and camera to make points?
2
The problem is folks like Pelosi, Feinstein, McCain, etc all paid their dues and became very good at their craft. The ones snipping at their heels are the ones who have not yet learned how to play the legislative game. I often have wondered why more good people don't enter the arena. We have no great leaders who have the intelligence, eloquence, and have broad appeal to get things done. The reason, I think, is anyone with half a brain does not want their every breath to be seen by the public and scrutinized and they don't want their family to be exposed to the ruthlessness of politics. So that reduces the pool of candidates to select from. In addition. If you are from the post Nixon years and you view politicians as lying, cheating, corrupt, and ruthless, why would you want to join that club? Look at the present make up.....Trump, Collins, Hunter, Menendez, Cuomo, etc. The arrogance and hubris leaves you speechless. And the public views the rest of the politicians as just not having been caught yet. One can find many other places to serve the public good than swimming in the swamp. And Trump may have "drained" it ....but he quickly filled it back up with equally, if not more sordid water.
1
As the son of an immigrant I was born a Democrat in the 1940s. It's in the DNA, you can't ignore it or hide it. My heritage includes FDR, Eleanor Roosevelt,Truman, JFK, RFK, LBJ, Sam Rayburn, Adlai Stevenson, MLK, and Obama. There are more of course.
The older Democrats like the Clintons, Pelosi, Feinstein. Schumer, Biden, and Warren have the same blood flowing in their veins. But so too do people like Beto O'Rourke, Kamala Harris, Booker and other young Democrats. I would ask Democrats of my age to be their mentors, not their opponents.
2
I just returned from Malaysia, where the newly elected Prime Minister, Mahathir bin Mohammad, is 92. After a corruption scandal (in which Trump cronies were involved) he is being hailed as a national savior. His election was not anticipated, and young people are head over heels delighted that he won.
You’re never to old to make a difference!
10
Making generalizations about people is bigotry, and age is one of the last demographics where such bigotry is socially acceptable. If you want term limits on leadership, that's one thing -- whether the leader is 40 or 60 or 80. But to imply that older people are as a rule stuffed shirts, or entrenched in old politics, or too timid, or not inclined toward technology or social media -- and that younger people are none of those things -- is just ageism. Collins's closing example of Trump is actually case in point. Do Republicans look at President Twitter and sigh, "Gee, he's just too old to connect with his base?" I hate to say it, but hearing so many people on the left fret over the ages of leaders seems like yet another case of the infamous self-defeating Democratic angst. Worse, it legitimizes ageism and encourages its spread among otherwise non-bigoted people.
1
Please note that aged and aging Democrats have all served their time in office with great admiration, civility, skill and spunk. Why trade all that and their experience, too, for some 50 yr old's ambition to jump to the top. Without any serious testing, I might add. And obviously, Kamala is still learning how.
1
Senior Democrats are acting like helicopter parents who would rather chauffeur their charges than teach them to drive. What they should be doing is mentoring the younger electees and candidates, helping them raise funds and learn the ropes of getting things done expeditiously, and thwarting jerk-arounds like Mitch McConnell. The Tea Party group who swept into office in 2010 were obstructionists but not effective because they never learned to function effectively as legislators and have since left now that they are eligible for federal pensions. Pathetic. Voters are looking for representation without chips on shoulders and long-term grudges. With Trump, the country is now running backwards.
Bob Dylan recognized this problem in the sixties:
Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’
3
It is difficult for a statesman who still has a political future to reveal everything that he knows: and in a profession in which one is a baby at fifty and middle-aged at seventy-five, it is natural that anyone who has not actually been disgraced should feel that he still has a future.--George Orwell, review of Churchill's _Their Finest Hour_,1949
1
Well some Democratic voters may be facing the dilemma of “Age Before Beauty” in the upcoming elections, as Gail points out, but spare a thought for Republican voters.
The GOP leaders keep casting (fake) “pearls before swine,” i.e. candidates like Duncan Hunter, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Ron DeSantis et al, and their electorate keep gobbling them up. Let’s hope a blue wave in November changes that.
1
Pelosi isn't a disaster because she's 78. She's a disaster because she's so status-quo. Beholden to big money and corporate interests.
4
Clearly the smart money in DC must abandon pharmaceuticals for adult diaper start ups, where corporate mission statements are not to drain the swamp but contain it.
Carrying discretely wrapped sample wares, the lobbyists must find unexcelled access to longstanding congressional members, especially during days of protracted hearings, who may urgently wish to make their own "donations".
On the plus side, brand recognition accrues with time. Just ask Ronald Reagan and Colonel Sanders.
I believe Nancy Pelosi is widely regarded as one of the best and most effective Speakers of the House in the last 100 years.
Were she a man they'd be carrying her around on a divan and bathing her feet in rose water.
4
@mj,
Note that Nancy's highly effective reign as speaker only lasted four years for your encomium! She's always impressed me with her savvy while even when she was the "minority" leader. More Democrats consistently vote than Republicans.
Teaching of Civics has been diminished as it was part of the Social Studies curriculum while I was in school. I mainly blame the apathetic mom-voters and the Republican voters, who have allowed the influence of Fox Entertainment and the Republicans' unAmerican and misogynistic tactics to reject Nancy's power during Clinton's and Obama's midterm elections. For several decades, they also voted for the backwards policies of Nixon, Reagan, both Bushes, and the wannabe tyrnt, Trump.
Gail there was a big discussion at the Times a few days ago cautioning us comment writers against beginning with an "As an x..." sentence, a caution I support but cast to the winds here.
As an 86 year old dual citizen US SE and strong supporter of Bernie Sanders (see my logo, his motto), I want to see more much younger people in the Congress. We just had an election - and what an election - and the party leaders who impressed most or got the most attention were all quite young.
I have been impressed by the new, younger, and diverse backgrounded people who are turning up and want to add the name of one who for some reason or other is being systematically omitted from Times stories on these young people. The name is Ilhan Omar with roots in Somalia and from what I have seen so far a real dynamo who can get ut and talk to the people, all kinds. By strange coincidence I have a Facebook Friend in Minnesota - but really an intellectually lively friend to put FB in perspective - who also has Somali roots who has known Ilhan Omar for a long time. I tell my friend that I think she will be running for office soon.
Younger and with diverse backgrounds, that is what I want to see. And has anyone ever proposed term limits? Not only for the Congress but for the Supreme Court. We have a limit on the President, who maybe will soon be gone Insha' Allah, why not on the others?
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
4
"Donald Trump is 72, but he was already terrible when he was 50."
The most astute and concise summing up of Trump in an Op-Ed to date.
5
One does question why a party would continue to put up candidates like Pelosi, over the age of 80, obviously going senile, and make them their leader.
The nation's best.
God help us.
1
Sorry Gail, Boomer politicians are killing this country. Obama was a late enough boomer to be culturally literate in post-boomer reality.
Democrats can run just about anyone under 60, and win the Presidency in a landslide. And the geriatric Democratic Power Structure knows it. But they are so utterly enamored of their own images, they cannot bring themselves to admit it is time to get out of public life.
4
Just as money's something that only seems to exist once one's totally without it, wisdom's something already too-little/too-late the second it's earned.
I strongly suspect that were it not for Republican control of the three branches of government, more Democrats would have retired and if control shifts it will make it safe for them to do so. In the meantime, and for that matter anytime, judge them for their merit not their age. Judge them by their accomplishments and effectiveness in achieving the goals of the party. To do otherwise is folly.
3
Time for all of us Boomers to step away and clear the path for the young(er) to clean up our mess...which is formidable.
1
Gail Collins, a terrific Op-Ed, thank you.
1
No need to put to the side Pelosi or Waters if they’re doing a good job, which I believe they are. It’s when we get doddering folks (Trump comes to mind) that we have to pull them offstage.
4
@ZijaPulp
Neither one is capable of a thought! Until Democrats put some thought into office we will easily elect people like Donald Trump! He's Much more appealing.
I'm a boomer, BUT....
it's time for a new generation to take the lead.
Biden? Sanders? Warren? Peolsi? No way.
Enough!
4
Therein lies a major problem the Democratic party refuses to recognize: "a fund-raiser of manic capacity and energy." Over time the party went from using fundraising to achieve a goal to fundraising *as* the goal. The result is a party that is out of touch with its members and picks policy positions that make Ronald Reagan look like a left-winger!
That's sad, but that's not the real problem. More importantly, Trump has demonstrated that a large block of the public was so thoroughly fed up with "business as usual" that they were willing to put a populist into the office. Luckily for all of us that he's an incompetent populist. Meanwhile, the public is still angry and the Democratic party still thinks that if they can just re-instate "business as usual" everyone will be happy. That isn't a good plan; that's a recipe for a disaster. What if the next populist is actually good at it? Many countries have been wrecked by clever, capable, populist leaders elected by a frustrated public. We're no different when it comes to a risk like that.
We need a change from "business as usual" and we need it soon!
1
@AB
The current pResident was never a populist.
When I hear of calls for "new blood" in the Democratic party, I'm reminded of what Bob Dole said about Newt Gingrich: "Newt's in favor of new ideas. He doesn't have any; he's just in favor of them".
In the same way, if you don't have individuals in mind, calling for new blood for its own sake is shallow and pointless.
6
I found GOOD NEWS in your piece, Ms. Collins.
I did not realize that Senator Warren was only sixty nine. I thought she was older.
Sixty nine? HA!
Why. . . . .I'M sixty nine.
Senator Warren, right now, is one of my favorite human beings. She is
(1) very smart
(2) very hard-working
(3) very committed.
And yet. . . .and yet. . . .
. . .you have a point. These people--some of them--really ARE. . . .
. ..elderly. And yes--I know! the Trumpster is no spring chicken. (Though he sure SQUAWKS like one.) But it's not quite the same thing.
Two last things:
(1) The Democrats have such trouble getting their message out. I look at videos of Ms. Warrren interrogating some beefy protege of big money. . . .I want to scream to Mr. Trump's wild-eyed groupies--"But she's fighting for YOU!"
No. They don't see that.
(2) Sensitive stuff coming up. Ms. Pelosi (I just read this) has been called a "San Francisco Democrat." Well--I've known for years, there is indeed that "San Francisco" connection.
And in many ways--millions upon millions of Americans. . . ..
. .. are not thrilled with San Francisco.
Americans like me. Some of us are just a bit more conservative, more hidebound than . ...
. ..well, THEY are. Enough said!
ALL these Democrats, though--
--they're fighting the good fight. More power to them!
I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.
Hope that'll be true of millions of my fellow citizens. . .
. . .come November.
6
I care about these peoples' ages a lot less than I care about how they vote. If the Democrats do take the House, I want to see them vote like Democrats and at least slow the Trump contagion.
4
While Democrats tend not to fully appreciate what they have in Nancy Pelosi, Republicans can forget what a fierce advocate she's always been for the most vulnerable, or how she's proved over and over she cannot be bought and corrupted by monied interests. Pelosi, like a fish bone they can't cough up, sticks in their collective Republican craw. This reader cannot wait to see her resume her rightful role as Speaker of the House.
5
The words “old”-“age” are horrifying to all Americans.
Our culture despises the elderly.
5
You know you're getting up there when you miss the good old days.
1
Talk all you want about the ages of our candidates and current representatives but first and foremost, lets make sure we end up with more Democrats that Republicans.
8
Mental sharpness declines with age. I am old and certainly don't have the mental capacity to do what I did when I was younger. You wander into a room and wonder why you went there. You can't recall the names of people you have known for years.The Democrats need to be grooming a new and younger class of politicians.
3
A cheap shot to write that Senator Strom Thurmond is "mainly remembered for being a horrible racist."
The following is from the Times' obituary https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/27/us/strom-thurmond-foe-of-integration-...
A month after he took office in 1947, a mob in Greenville lynched a black man accused of robbing and killing a white taxi driver. As governor, Mr. Thurmond brought in a tough prosecutor, but a jury acquitted all 28 white defendants. Mr. Thurmond was widely praised for his efforts, and he said he believed the prosecution would deter lynchings in the future. South Carolina has never had another lynching.
In many areas, Mr. Thurmond was a progressive governor, pressing to improve black schools, promoting equal pay for women and fighting for better working conditions at textile mills. He even called for rent control. And when a federal judge, J. Waties Waring, ordered the state Democratic Party to allow blacks to vote in the primaries, Governor Thurmond kept silent, neither denouncing nor praising the decision.
Not in our 70's yet, Gail. mid 60's yes . Got a few years to go .
Can't think of a better reason to live in Texas than to be able to vote for Beto O' Rourke .... I think he really could make America great again. We need more like him!
2
Baby boomers...
we think 80 is the
new 35 in politics.
60
I love Pelosi, and appreciate all she’s done. She is formidable. But but but, it is time for the old guard to step aside and help the new guard. Why can’t Pelosi be mentor to the new? Why must it be that we are forced to continue with what’s always been? Change is afoot, it would be great to see Pelosi step back. Not to disappear, but to aid the next generation.
2
I'm in my 40s. I look at Democratic leadership and I see a generation that can't let go. The country can be on the verge of neo-fascism, suddenly on a world stage full of enemies, but they will hold onto their power and blame it on someone else, whimpering all the way to the bank from Trump's tax breaks.
The very fact that this generation would try and scream age discrimination betrays how drunk on their own power they've been for so many decades -- in fact, during their tenure, the middle class essentially disappeared.
This country has no real leadership right now; while Trump should be a gift for Dems, there is instead, a vacuum, filled up by the rantings from MSNBC. It shows the kind of chokehold the Clintons and the money game instigated by Citizens United have on the party. There is no set of exciting, charismatic, moderate Democrats, even white male Dems, who can inspire the swing and Independent voters. Why is that?
Because the donor level of the Dems don't nurture younger talent. They should all step down, and use their considerable experience to act as elder states people mentoring the young. Some times I wish the DNC would declare bankruptcy and fold so that some new organization filled with actual liberal thought with fewer corporate ties could emerge. That won't happen with Pelosi around. She IS Ms. corporate politics, which is everything voters rejected in 2016.
96
@SydBlack, if you honestly believe that there is a vacuum in leadership, that there is little inspiration and excitement capable of inspiring voters other than stolid Democrats, you haven't been paying attention. Show me an instance of Nancy Pelosi's "whimpering," please.
And maybe watch something besides MSNBC,
1
@SydBlack Totally agree and I am a baby boomer--of the older kind.
If someone can do the job well, and be inspirational and project confidence, then that person should stay, whatever their age.
That said, the senior core group should be mentoring the younger members.
And when they do finally step aside, they will be invaluable to the next generation by continuing to contribute their advice and wisdom.
2
If there is a Blue Wave and the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives, does Representative Pelosi get any credit for that win and if so how much? Experience, political savvy and the ability to raise enormous amounts of money that she brings probably has as much to do with such a victory as does the incompetence of Donald Trump. Age is not necessarily a deficit in politics and governance.
137
Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Maxine Waters, Dianne Feinstein. All great people. All great at their jobs. All need to go. Why Accountability. The ancient, glacial pace of change and corresponding out-of-touchness of the Democratic leadership is partly responsible for the epic failure to elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump. If I performed that poorly at my job, I'd be toast. They all need to go.
The real issue is vanity, aka hubris. Bernie and Joe Biden are stuffed with it, so is Nancy Pelosi, who should have retired as Minority Leader after 2016 and her third go-round of being unable to flip the House. If it happens this year, it will be because people went around her and the ossified DNC leadership.
Diane Feinstein should have retired, but then California would lose seniority in the Senate, as Kamala Harris was only seated last year (and she rightly has Presidential ambitions). And Diane and Nancy are SF pols. As to Elizabeth Warren, she does not appear to suffer from hubris, but it remains to be seen if she can mount a credible campaign.
Pelosi is incredibly effective, energetic, and accomplished. Her ability to get things done is without equal. Replacing her with a younger leader just because the new person is younger is insanity. Fighting off the regulatory changes alone will require a person with deep knowledge and skills. It would be nice if Dems avoided self-sabotage, especially now when so much damage is being inflicted by this reckless know-nothing administration.
211
@Megan She can use her skills in an advisory role. she is too old and is a great selling point to Republicans. She needs to let go. And now let me say the vulgar two words: term limits
@Megan
To pretend that Pelosi is uniquely qualified and would be replaced by someone who is unqualified is presenting a false choice. Pelosi is a fantastic fundraiser in part because of her personality and drive, but let's not forget she's from a relatively wealthy district in a wealthy part of the country AND she's been majority leader or Speaker forever. Easier to raise money (even in your sleep) when you wield that sort of influence. I trust that the Dems could find someone in their 50s or early 60s that could do as well.
There is little grace in being a leader without a succession plan and it's apparent that she's not been in the business of transitioning skills and power to the next generation.
@Megan.
More or less agreed. But Pelosi and Schumer don't have to be the Democrats' *spokespeople*. They're ineffective and boring.
Perhaps Democrats should retain Pelosi and Schumer as their leaders, but tap effective speakers as their primary spokespeople.
"Nobody’s better proof that age doesn’t matter than our current president. Donald Trump is 72...."Donald Trump is the poster boy for why age does matter. He did not mellow with age like a fine wine, that is for certain, nor did he grow wiser. The worst of his attributes became magnified with age. His rages are louder, his Tweets are meaner, and his ability to concentrate is fleeting. According to Woodward's book, he can't retain information, nor analyze it.
I am 73, and while I like to think my brain is still functioning well, I know I lack the stamina to function as I did when I was in my 60's. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is an exception to the rule, as are Feinstein and Pelosi. Personally, I think it is time for younger, fresher voices to be heard in the Democratic Party, and time for the elders to lend support and wisdom. Corey Booker and Kamala Harris at 49 and 53 respectively are at an age where they are seasoned, and have the vitality necessary to take on the Republicans full force without apology (which both are doing).
President Obama was 47 when he was first elected President. He energized the Democratic Party's base, because he was not an entrenched politician whose time had come and gone. People who are in their late 40's and early 50's seem to me to be in top form to run this country, both mentally and physically. They could serve as mentors to younger elected politicians.
We need some sort of mandatory retirement age for those in office. 75 seems about right.
100
@Diana
Obama lost both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court along with a majority of state executive mansions and legislatures.
Obama failed to deter and defeat Russian hacking and meddling in the Presidential campaign and election of 2016.
MAGA!
@Diana...yeah, 75 does seem about right. So, aloha, Ruth, Diane and Nancy.
I'm retired and an old guy. Also true -- agism is another "ism" to fret over, but there is a reason why people have their driver licenses taken away when they get into their 70s and 80s. It was sobering to watch the hearings on TV and to see people dither and dodder and even fall asleep. I'm sorry but a more youthful and practical set of voices need to be heard.
On another note, the Dem's biggest problem is lack of focus. While the GOP marches lock step, we have got to back people who will win and not fringe people out of the Green Party (for example) who do nothing but dilute the vote.
What's the point of getting old if when you do arrive there, everybody begins to think you're "over the hill," "out of touch," and any number of other quotes. What is the point of being a grandmother or a grandfather if you have to set aside all that experience raising your own. It never ceases to amaze me that one can work 40 or 50 years, retire and go sit on a beach or play golf 5 times a week. There's nothing wrong with that and they certainly deserve to be there, but why not instead make use of all that experience and share it with the younger generations. People over the next 3 to 4 generations will have figured out that retiring and not making use of that experience you have accumulated will begin developing far different views of what retirement should be.
As far as the political scene, the Republican Party seems to always build its case on denigrating their opponent. This time it's not the presidential election but the midterms and they are counting on that ridiculous marketing ploy of creating fear among their own base and dissension among the democrats by casting Pelosi as the demon. The reason they do that is because they know that if the Dems do take over the house, "Pelosi will eat their lunch," The Republicans know the real Pelosi. Maybe the Democrats should get to know her too!
3
Paul McCartney is 76. I'd rather listen to him than anyone I can think of under 30.
It's what we do, not how long we've ben doing it. Most cultures in the world understand that. America doesn't.
3
I'm 73. Physically, I wouldn't want to tackle a hugely demanding job, but for those elders who can handle it, let's stop assuming that younger is better.
I look back at myself in my 50s and say, "Wow. I was kind of off-base." I needed to do better at understanding where other people were coming from. I needed to value their point of view at the same time as I tried to get my own (wonderful) ideas across. Nobody is going to listen to you if you're not listening to them.
Let's give the elders the respect they have earned. If a person doesn't exchange ideas with younger people and revise their own ideas then that person should go, but to assume that an elderly person should go away simply because they are old is, frankly, appalling.
133
Young people consider the GOP to be horrible, by a large margin. It is crucial to get young people out to vote, and not having all dinosaurs on the ballot will help. And I am a dinosaur.
To those Democrats who think Nancy Pelosi is “too old,” and would vote her out for the sake of “new ideas” or “new blood”: Why do you think the Republicans, including the so-called President Trump, have been demonizing her for years? Why do you think they spend all that energy to discredit her?
Maybe think for yourself, rather than being persuaded by REPUBLICANS who want you to vote out one of the most effective Democratic House Speakers in generations.
Maybe evaluate Ms. Pelosi by her TRACK RECORD (which is stellar) and not by her AGE.
7
The track record of the Democratic party while Pelosi has been among the top leadership is abysmal. During and shortly after Reagan's presidency, the Republicans developed a list of strategic goals and began to play the long game. Over the past 30 years, they have systematically and successfully executed large parts of that plan. The plan has been pretty obvious and the results show a great success.
The last 10 years of that plan have occurred under the noses of Pelosi and several other feckless democrats in leadership. Results matter and the scorecard of election and judicial results over the past 10 years says that, for the most part, the D's have been routed by the R's. Time to change coaches.
43
@JS.
The track record of Democratic party voters has been abysmal for the last 10 years or more. And not voting or voting third party because they're not getting what they want doesn't absolve them. As President Obama said many times, making change happen depends on all of us, not just party leaders.
1
@JS:
Okay ... but who among the "younger" generation of Democratic politicians possesses the requisite depth and shrewdness. In my opinion, none of the highly-touted "younger" politicians, except perhaps Mark Warner, has exhibited those qualities.
We hear a lot about "energy", but being energetic is far from all that's required for effective leadership.
1
@JS I agree that the Dems have been outplayed by the Repubs, but that is hardly Nancy Pelosi's fault.
Where the Republicans are winning is in the courts, and at the state level, allowing them to gerrymander at will. In what way (or how) could Pelosi have stopped that?
If the Dems have had any congressional success at all, it is largely due to her leadership. See: ObamaCare. It should be named PelosiCare.
1
We are seeing daily the limited influence of the supposed 'adults in the room' to control the Toddler-in-Chief. What we need is a Congress to be a responsible counterweight to the Trump White House. Vote for Democratic legislators, whatever their age, to again have mature leadership.
1
I'm so far left of Pelosi, Schumer et al. that we're not even on the same page. That is my objection to them. Their ages have nothing to do with it and Bernie shines bright as the proof.
I sure hope I don't detect a whiff of ageism, so ubiquitous in our American culture, emanating from this article.
2
Why aren't these Democratic political leaders over 70 stepping aside to raise up new, younger ones? I'm 72, and I think Pelosi, Feinstein, Biden, and others look ridiculous clinging to power, regardless of their skills and connections. They would all be formidable forces without having to be elected again. Can't they work behind the scenes and support Merkley, Harris, Booker, and a host of other talents?
Don't they need naps the way most of us over 70 do? It could just be they can't do without their retinue of aides and assistants to take over when they're napping.
If realized, the upcoming Blue Wave should also be generational.
The Democrats are touting "40 under 40" in their 2018 house general election pool of candidates.
Time will out.
1
Any senator who's made Chair of an important committee has probably served on the committee for at least 6 years. Nobody should need another six years to learn the Chair's job. As someone closer to 80 than 70, I say that anyone eligible for Social Security should be ineligible for House or Senate leadership. Throw the rascals out.
How old do you have to be to be mature? That's the more important question. And the more important answer is rarely as
definitive as that of chronological age. For example, our current Manchild In Chief arguably possesses a maturity level far lower than the amount of time he's spent on the planet, while his most recent predecessor arguably possesses a maturity level beyond his years.
Therefore, what remains truly confounding is why voters often (too often) choose age over wisdom!
There appears to be ageism going on at every level of our lives.
In business, women in particular are acutely aware of the need to
look young. Had lunch with a woman once my business assistant,
now at the time in her life when she is considered "passe". She and
many like her get botox, become blond and hide their years as best
they can. It's criminal to deny the experience and talent so many of
these people have, but our culture continues to worship at the altar
of youth, most of whom have no sense of history, and surely lack the wisdom that comes with experience. Business also doesn't want to pay for the more experienced worker. In contrast however,
we have Trump, who knows little , won't learn anything and is 72.
Go figure....
4
In the age of identity politics I hope age doesn't become yet another identity issue we all start fighting about and lose elections over. It is true we live longer (especially those in Congress who have really good insurance) and therefore we have older and older people in political leadership positions including the president. It is also true that it's all relative, one older person is wiser for age while another is just plain old, no wisdom.
Same can be said of younger folks.
Youth really is wasted on youth, and the older I get the truer that truism seems.
I just really REALLY hope in November Democrats put aside all their squabbley peeves and vote for the Dem most likely to win whether they are old or young, sexy and charsimatic or not so much. Just vote Dem is all you have to know. That is this older lady's wisdom for the day.
1
Term limits. We need new blood with new contemporary ideas. Let the "oldsters" be the mentors and campaign for money while the younger do the actual work. If we don't get new blood, the next generation is just going to give up.
Vote folks. Our lives and democracy depend on it. Vote Democrat.
1
This isn't maccurate, Pelosi, Feinstein, Biden are unpopular with progressives because they're CONSERVATIVE Democrats who support the status quo, that's the elephant in the room here with our politics. Warren and Bernie are very popular with young people because they are progressive democrats. There's a glut of conservative democrats in their golden years to be sure, but the young profgressives aren't discriminating against experience as long as it comes with an ethical point of view beyond Seniority, Fund Raising and Donors the only things that make Pelosi and Biden tick. You're comparing old apples and old oranges. Old politicians don't share a point of view in the Democratic party, but they cetainly do in the Republican party. Obama was young and pretty and promised change, then foverned like Clinton and Reagan. I think most voters aren't really ready to be fooled like that again. Youth's value is limited in a team enterprise requiring experience yo get things done.
1
Pelosi is a formidable leader? In what sense, Gail? Her fund-raising, yes, it’s manic, for sure.
Anything for a Buck Pelosi.
But that’s really not a look that the kids are into anymore. And even those approaching decrepitude ourselves find the Democratic Party’s demonstrated willingness to pair up with any shore leave sailor/CEO with two bits (or, preferably a few million) to be tawdry, to say the least.
The outcome of all that manic fundraising suggests that I’m not alone in my revulsion at pay for play... a lost House, 1000 lost legislative seats nationwide, numerous governorships lost, Trump as president...
Hey, I hear the guy who led the charge of the light brigade was a fundraiser of manic capacity too!
So when we talk about age, it’s really about a generational outlook.
The Democratic Party of the past 30 years has viewed corporate fundraising as a virtue. The Democrats coming up now don’t. And young people do appreciate that some Democrats, such as Warren and Sanders, have a more “youthful” outlook on political fundraising, thus their popularity with the youngsters and the young at heart, such as myself.
Pelosi and Schumer and the rest of the Democrats are lucky they’ve got Trump in the White House. Otherwise they would be in for an embarrassing shellacking in November.
As it is, they have an even chance in the Senate and a 75% chance in the House.
With Trump in the White House.
Truly formidable leadership... really?
1
There a jobs where there is a mandatory retirement age, part 121 pilots and air traffic controllers come to mind. If the government thinks that at 65 you’re too old to fly passengers around why do they think someone that age is routinely allowed to make life and death decisions that affect millions of people?
The very first thing I do when reading about_any_politician or public figure is to ascertain their general 'Net Financial Worth'. In Ms. Pelosi's case that figure is about $130 million dollars plus the house and vineyard in the Napa Valley etc. If one looks past that, and it's not easy, Washington needs a younger group of people, sans mega millions and the corruption, wealthy donors, lobbyists and perks that arrive with such stature and spare change in the hands of so many.
Until and unless this machinery of politics and money at all levels is fully redrawn, and it will not be easy, nothing will change. It's akin to professional sports and steroids. Too much money involved.
Now something very powerful. I remember attempting to call and leave a message for Nancy Pelosi on her Washington DC phone line on three different occasions. In each case I received a message telling me that her voice mailbox was full and was unable to take my call or message. With her stature, income and connections, such a system would be an easy correction.
This is just before I had my name formally removed from the voter registration list locally by written request and will never be involved in any selection process as it's far too deep corrupted by dark money and political backroom deals. I'm also aware of something John Dean once said after the Nixon White House crashed and burned. He simply said "Stay away from Washington.." and I have never forgotten those honest words words.
Reasonable term limits would help solve the problem. We've done it for the presidency, why can't it be done for Congress and (please!) the Supreme Court?
1
Growing old means one becomes more of whatever they were when they were younger. Voila! Strom Thurmond.
Age has little do do with one's wisdom, or thoughtfulness, or good character, or fairness, or kindness, or effective competence.
Yes experience/learning does effect competence. Thus older gents theoretically should have an intrinsic edge over younger gents.
But here is the rub - we are the people we are.
I could have years of experience and learning as a composer but I'd never be on par with the child Mozart. My wife - no mental slouch for sure - with tons of training would never be a leading NASCAR mechanic.
Some young whipper snapper may be the computer genius of the Century - but will such be a financial hacker? or an inventor of life saving/enhancing cybernetics?
You see experience and learning can only shape so far.
And even there gained expertise and competence can promote/facilitate good or evil.
And Wisdom, Kindness, etc. sometimes never come from vast experience and learning.
Or they act against Wisdom, Kindness, etc. as trickery, selfishness, evil, and prejudices are also honed in the naturally receptive.
My point is this - there are MANY bright competent people that will technically help technically lesser Leaders do good or do evil.
When it comes to our leaders - especially now - CHARACTER counts.
What are their natural inclinations? to what model of life do they operate? how positively committed to humankind and modernity are they?
We are in an existential battle - vote EXISTENTIALLY not technically! Choices: Plutocracy or Egalitarianism?
1
Someone explained about the British House of Commons, it is the best elderly day care facility!
Perhaps kinda true of America’s lawmakers as well, they keep getting elected re elected even as their grandchildren have children. Meanwhile the youth in the country continue to he ignored dismissed ridiculed as left leaning left of left leaning and so on, when all these youth care about it their own future and that of the planet. The elderly day care facility does not care about the future of this nation, they just want to hold on to the power cuz they know, god forbid if they retire, they will be in a Real Elderly care facility receiving pension and health care they themselves passed as legislation.
1
Age and dementia (or strokes, heart attacks, cancer, puzzlement at the ignorance of youth, etc.) are not unrelated phenomena. Being put out to pasture is not necessarily a bad thing; just ask a few recent Kentucky Derby or Preakness winners. Not saying that those involuntarily (or by choice, for that matter) retired are gonna get a lot of action as a reward, but, who knows?, might be worth a shot. Of course, there are some, like a certain Donald-what'shisname who put himself "out to pasture" whenever the mood struck him. But he could afford the $130k-$150k, uh, fee, although in the horse world, it's the stud who collects the green.
Everyone says they want to quit while they're ahead, but few are they who really do. "Retirement may be looked upon either as a prolonged holiday or as a rejection, a being thrown on to the scrap-heap." – Simone De Beauvoir
"Nobody’s better proof that age doesn’t matter than our current president. Donald Trump is 72, but he was already terrible when he was 50. "
Yes, I suppose that's true. Actually, he was terrible even younger than that.
I am part of that "never trust anyone over 30" generation, although I never actually yelled that myself (thanks for the reminder of those days, Gail). While I respect Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, etc., I do think it's time for those of us in that generation (not to mention the people over 30 we were yelling at!) to move aside and let a younger generation take over. Nobody likes to be shoved, but maybe people like Rep. Himes can gently nudge my generation aside.
It's not simply age. It's much deeper. It's about a strategy that Democratic leaders have been using for decades that has failed again and again and again. People talk about Pelosi as a fund-raising machine. Well, yes, but only from big, rich donors, not from ordinary Democrats. Corporations contribute to both parties to ensure access. Corporations don't vote, and billionaires only have one vote each.
But the ordinary Jane and Joe who give $10 or $25 dollars to a candidate are going to register, and then get out and vote for that candidate--they are MORE invested in the candidate, and now they have skin in the game. This is how Barack Obama blew past the institutionalist, Hillary Clinton. This is how the Tea Party got so many people to vote, even in primaries.
The leadership of the Dems, especially Mrs. Pelosi, refuse to recognize this and FORCE their DCCC-selected candidates to pledge 4 hours a day to calling BIG donor to solicit funds.
I keep pointing out that Dems have been losing races to control the House EVERY 2 years since 1994, winning only in 2006, and on Obama's coattails in 2008. That's 2 out of 12 House elections won--and the last was 10 years ago!
That, in MY opinion, is why SO many voters are saying it's time for Pelosi, Hoyer and the other ossified leaders to step aside. If Democrats win back the House in 8 weeks, it will be DESPITE Pelosi, Schumer, the DNC and the DCCC.
My youngest is 13. Last time Dems had the House he was 3!
2
It would be a great idea if the Democrat strategy was to let the Republicans (and their PAC's) spend umpteen millions linking all the Dem candidates with Pelosi. Then a few days before the election she announces stepping down from the speakership position regardless of the election outcome. Then candidates can say they'll have to see who's running before casting a vote. It will be wide open for a new generation.
In western PA all the commercials against Connor Lamb were of the Pelosi-related kind to an absurd level of boogeyman-ism it was hard to even understand. And he isn't even really even a Democrat! He was so pro-gun/pro-religion Trump announced victory even when his preferred candidate lost.
Pelosi has definitely been treated unfairly in her time and had extremely sexist and degrading remarks lobbed at her over the years. Now, regardless of how hard she's worked and legislative achievements she's garnered the right-wing has successfully used her as a cudgel against Democrat candidates in every district. Why not let them until the end then pull the rug out? Plus it would definitely invigorate any new group of legislators which would enter Congress especially if one of the first jobs is to be elect a new majority leader. At the same time Pelosi's contribution could be celebrated properly as she steps aside from leadership while still representing her district and helping incumbents behind the scenes. It would be a selfless choice. Hopefully one she makes.
1
I am 67 and know I don’t have the energy I had in my 50s. But 80? Feinstein and Pelosi are putting ego ahead of country. Don’t we have enough of that in the White House?
When I watched the Kavenaugh hearing on television, I was so frustrated by the ineffectiveness of Senators Leahy and Feinstein- they sounded confused, weak and at times barely intelligible. At a time when so many Democrats and Independents in the country feel angry and frustrated by Trump and the Republicans, and opposed Kavenaugh’s nomination, viewing these Senators’ inability to express their opposition in a clear, focused manner seemed pathetic. Pelosi, Feinstein and the rest of that generation deserve our gratitude for their years of service, I suppose, but they need to gracefully accept that their time has passed, move on and support younger candidates who can actually communicate about and understand today’s issues.
2
Just beat her by being a great candidate. Ageism is just a cover for sexism. Feinstein's opponent is not impressive at all. However she continues to impress with her performance on the job and her commitment to issues like common sense gun control. Why does nobody complain about Bernie's age?
Pelosi also was able to get elected speaker and didn't even come close to losing the position when a younger male ran against her - he had no ability to corall or count votes. Pelosi's predecessor Gephardt sent fundraising mailers saying we should donate to his party because he stood by and supported President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. Huh?
What we need is to blend the generations better. I'd like to see more joint appearances or a bigger variety of who appears on the Sunday morning shows (is McCain still a weekly guest? I stopped watching a few years ago.)
Brian Schatz from Hawaii is impressive and he's younger. Just win by being a good candidate.
3
It’s s not their age, it is their expiration date. Elizabeth Warren hasn’t been around in politics long enough to have reached hers, but HRC had, and Pelosi may have.
1
The effectiveness of House and Senate Democrats would be a better measure than whether they are now or soon to become members of that august body called octogenarians. If younger hyper-ambitious lawmakers have energy combined with intellect and creative substance, then they should assert themselves and display their talents. Heaven knows America needs fresh faces and thoughtful voices.
The most revered figure during the Watergate hearings was Senator Sam Irvin, an old man, a Southerner, folksy and brilliant who suffered no fools. He handled Nixon's perjurers in a manner that won America's heart.
There is a lesson for us today.
More than a leader of a particular age, what voters clearly want is change. That’s why Obama beat Hillary Clinton in the primaries and why he beat McCain and Romney - not because he was younger than his opponents, but because he represented change. Trump won (but not the popular vote) in 2016 because he was the change candidate even though he is older than Clinton. 45% of the country voted for the most unfit President in our history because he promised (lied, which is like breathing for Trump) to blow up the status quo. It was like saying we weren’t happy with the way our driver was driving, so we found a drunk with a brain injury passed out by the side of the street and said why don’t we let him drive us instead. Nonetheless, Trump was the change candidate, Clinton was not. Warren is old, Sanders is really old and is a life long socialist, but they represent change and therefore have a chance of winning the next election. Booker is younger, but was embarrassing during Kavanaugh hearings, Harris is younger and was impressive during those hearings. For Pelosi, Schumer, Biden, Kerry, Clinton - it’s well past time to thank them and have them exit center stage.
Finally, Ginsburg, a Justice who has an extraordinary record establishing and defending women’s rights, human rights, our democracy, should have retired in 2014 under Obama and a Democratic Senate. Instead she is now branded as the ridiculous Notorious RBG. Even the very best should know when their time is up.
1
As a septuagenarian with something still left on the old mental fast ball, I initially recoiled at the thought of pushing us oldsters out to pasture. But then events, both global and personal, made me reflect some 10 years ago to present day events.
Commercial airline pilots retire at 65. As a former corporate officer of a large multinational company, they had a policy of mandatory retirement at 65. Then there is the health aspect; as one ages stuff happens. John McCain, and before him Ted Kennedy, sadly developed the same deadly malady. In McCain's case, Arizona essentially had one Senator for a year. There are more such examples, plus I am sure there are plenty of counter energizer bunny arguments to put me in my place.
However, what I personally know now and appreciate, there is more to life on planet Earth than one's chosen work/career; there are always people in the wings to take ones place, sometimes for the better; with new found time, volunteering can be an enjoyable and rewarding option; and grand kids are one of the joys that make aging palatable.
Gail, wait, wait. 12 year olds are probably up-to-date on what's going on as they are in middle school learning all about civics, history and elections. Most 12 year olds have heard of the Constitution and ethics. Hmmm....
Do Pelosi and her co leaders think that they are immortal? Or that they are irreplaceable? I am a bit older then all three of them and in medicine we do our best to train those younger than us to replace us when we retire, grow old or die. For there has to be physicians trained to do the jobs that we did.
Pelosi has done none of that. And that is her fault, not being a woman and not being old but not training her successors. For no matter how much money she raises or how skilled she is she will die or become weary or senescent.
It is time for new blood.
1
I find it amazing that here at the Times people commenting are so eager to get rid of Pelosi. I find it akin to whether you would choose an experienced surgeon to perform heart surgery on you or someone just out of med school.
Please Representative Pelosi, do not leave your job. My preference is for all this push back to result in Pelosi bringing younger people up the chain faster as they become more experienced. I do not go along with the current trend in American politics to distrust experience. I actually find it to be the most important characteristic for voting for someone.
Now you might feel that entrenchment of the establishment is a problem. Perhaps but not with Pelosi. She is simply fantastic.
Maybe we should put together a contest: Choose any young dynamic politico you like and have them filibuster the full House for 8 hours while spouting eloquence about Dreamers and never take a bathroom break, all the while standing and in high heels, all the while holding her caucus together under the most stressful circumstances, all the while as she dominates fund raising. Let's see how well those youngsters do.
3
"...six years does not seem like quite enough time to become super-skilled at the job" referring to how long Republicans stay in charge of a committee versus Democrats in committees for life. With regard to Republicans short term as committee leaders, it doesn't take much experience, or brains, to only be interested in tax cuts for the rich so you can eliminate the entire American social contract (i.e. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.), so you then can give more tax cuts to the rich..
4
You can say it's time for these octogenarians to go and you'd be right. They have stayed far too long on the stage, grown far too used to the sound of their own voice while living in their bubble of privilege, and seem unable to grasp the concept of knowing when to gracefully retire stage right and leave the drama for the next generation to pick it up and go from there. In this they are particularly representative of their (Boomer) generation.
And the longer they remain so ensconced in their power position the less representative of the general American population they become. Yet they refuse to give way. They don't even seem to be grooming the next generation for their role, so it seems they think they'll live forever? Indeed it seems you're going to have to pry the job position from their cold, dead and mummified, hands.
But they aren't hereditary dynasties are they? They'll elected by the people aren't they? If people have truly grown tired of them the answer to this problem is simple. Stop whining about what they do and vote them OUT. If they won't leave the stage gracefully there's always the (voting) hook, isn't there? So have at it America. You want change, then you have the mechanism to do it.
John~
American Net'Zen
37
@John The oldest baby boomers are 72 now, so they are hardly octogenarians. Septuagenarians is more like it.
@John...not that it matters, but Nancy and Diane are not Boomers.
Actually we were right about not trusting those over 30. We simply weren't good about following through on that wonderful bit of truth when we turned 31.
6
I"m 66, and I know that with age comes a certain amount of deterioration, physically and mentally. It may not be politic to say, but the truth is, at 70+ you just aren't as sharp as you once were (if you ever were). The age of some candidates bothers me. I do not believe, and experience has not shown me, that with age comes wisdom. Many people 10 or 20 years younger than me have impressive intellect, ability to reason and analyze, and a grasp of issues. And, frankly, I'm tired of the old folks running everything and not doing such a great job of it. I'd happily vote for younger candidates, if they've convinced me they are prepared. A 2020 campaign between Trump, Biden, Sanders and Warren would be a campaign of the dinosaurs. I hope to see Kamala Harris or Cory Booker take on Trump instead.
3
With age comes wisdom. Also forgetfulness, self-righteousness and intolerance. Not to mention increasing if unhealthy attention to one's financial security. The only thing that tempts the long-term politician to retire is the prospect of a high-paying sinecure as a lobbyist or corporate director. We no longer speak of term limits. Age is the enemy of social progress -- and we seem helpless to fight it.
4
George Washington was president for eight years, and then he said farewell. I'm sure thereafter he was consulted a lot, but he didn't feel he had to be the ring master forever.
5
Shouldn’t being good at the the job actually be the most important factor? Fox will always pick a scapegoat. This way they have chosen someone who can weather the storm. Democrats should not let that determine who they pick for leadership. Republicans would not target Pelosi if they were not scared of her.
14
I'm really tired of the agism, and sexism dressed up as agism, lurking in the suggestions that Nancy Pelosi should step down. Why? It's someone else's "turn?" Wasn't that one of the smears thrown at Hillary Clinton by these self-same self-appointed progressives, that she was too entitled in thinking that it was her "turn?" But now it's OK to state that it's someone else's "turn?"
Nancy Pelosi is smart, effective, strategic, and gutsy. And the Rs hate her. For those reasons, I am very happy for her to remain as the D house leader, and hopefully to preside as Speaker in a few months.
26
Ms. Pelosi could always round them up! The "been there, done that" school of experience should count for something. Saying that, I think politics could be so tedious with the same old stories of greed, hubris, hunger for power etc. I mean after 30 years or more, the faces may change, but the sins...correction....the stories are the same. Maybe we should start touting "trust no one over 60". Or maybe there is that idea that has been floating around for a long time. Term limits. Bad idea say the older politicians....bad idea....Huh.
3
I have no problem with Representative Pelosi not being the Speaker. This seniority system is archaic. I do have a problem if the fallout causes Democrats to lose her vote. She deserves to be reelected, then to endorse someone else fort Speaker.
1
The problem, in my opinion, is the number of middle, working class voters needed to make the Democrats more competitive are turned off by the professional class "establishment" Democrats or the Third Way/New Democrats, i.e the Clinton/Obama crowd. I suppose it started with Carter but became a philosophy under Bill Clinton (plus Hillary and later Obama, Schumer et al.)
Bill put away a huge number of young black people with the crack cocaine/vs powder three strikes sentencing disaster, cut back on welfare and came close to attacking SS and Medicare. Thanks to the Lewinsky scandal the country escaped this horror. To add to the downward slide they helped kill off unions, enacted NAFTA without accounting for the now unemployed workers. This continues to this day.
Folks before you attack, read up, I did.
The patience of the working class and now the middle class is legendary. Politicians from the egregious Tea Party, New Democrats, the GOP and Trump have betrayed them.
If a new group of, shall we say, FDR model Democrats perform for them, every other politican will be washed away. Meanwhile the establishment Democrats, young and the Septuagenarian/Octogenarian "cabal" are actively trying to kneecap politicians who want to represent the great unwashed. The oldsters should retire and become mentors.
November/ 2020 will be interesting. Authoritarianism or change for the better. Sorry, can't do twitter length inanity.
6
I guess it comes as no surprise to me that nothing gets done in Congress. How does one coordinate the nap schedules of 535 people?
Tenure is a necessary but insufficient criterion for leadership. Talent and tenacity should also be considered.
3
Age, gender, income should not matter in elected officials even though in reality it does.
The proof that is should not matter is history at least with income and social status.
Washington and Lincoln are generally considered to be our two greatest presidents.
One was born into wealth, married into one of the richest families in our country and the other was dirt poor and born on the frontier.
One created our country and got it going, the other saved it and ended the original sin of slavery.
1
As much as I dislike the democrats, if forced to choose who will do the best for the country, I will take the competent Feinstein and Pelosi and her teammates over the inexperienced, preening lightweights, Booker and Harris.
6
Why not term limits for the Supreme Court (say 12-15 years even)?
8
Donald Trump "was already terrible when he was 50." Really, Gail? It would be more on point to note that Donald Trump was already terrible 50 years ago when, at 22 years of chronological age, he was no more past his terrible twos than he is today. This isn't the first time he's been publicly labeled an emotional two-year-old.
12
Nothing is wrong with old, just as long as their competent marbles are still there. We don't need "fiery" leadership, we need smart leadership. What's missing are enough younger leaders with impressive marbles.
11
So is Ruth Bader Ginsburg a heroine for not retiring and enabling DJT to appt. another henchman to the Supreme Court?
Should she have retired when Obama was nearing the end of his 8 year term, when he still had the capacity to make a new long lasting appt. to the court?
Are Ego and Politics separable?
35
@Texan
Yes, because Obama was absolutely allowed by the Senate to appoint new Supreme Court Justices at the end of his term.
4
@Texan. Almost everyone, probably including you, thought Clinton would win. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, a perfectly sensible campaign slogan might have been “I’m better at picking Supreme Court judges than Trump.”
Ah, hindsight. Those words from the poet resonate: “what might have been.”
2
@rjon
True, hindsight is 20/20, but she is no spring chicken!
Fascinating piece on the old age of elected legislators in the New Now of America, Gail. Old people vote, young people are too busy to vote. Can it be that the "manic capacity and energy" of oldsters in our government -- Pelosi,78, Waters, 80, Feinstein 85, RBG, 85, etc. is due to "the dying of the light", to women (and men -- Grassley and Hatch, 84, "Statler and Waldorf") politicians not going gently? Our president is 72, tittivated up with glimmering orange make-up, thin wisps of hair at attention dyed platinum, a fine example of aged mutton (and not too intelligent) dressed as lamb.
Your words, "age before beauty" remind me of middle-school taunts -- dirt before the broom. As both Leon Trotsky and James Thurber said, "old age is the most unexpected of all the things that can happen to a man". Then again, this day, "Hurricane Florence lands in the Carolinas" may well live in climate-warming denial history. May well be Donald Trump's Waterloo.
5
I've been trying to figure this out, too. It seems like age discrimination is a problem everywhere except the highest levels of government and politics, where the more fossilized you are the better. How come I'm in my fifties and worried I couldn't get another job, if I were to lose my job … and these guys don't seem to be expected to EVER retire? Some simply refuse, they'll die first.
4
I was just starting college when Mayor Moscone was assassinated and Diane Feinstein became the mayor of San Francisco. I think it would be lovely if she had decided to retire in 2018. But she certainly has the right to run and I shall vote for her in November. The other guy is . . . ?
I do have to wonder if Gail would make the same arguments regarding job discrimination based on age. Having decided to change jobs in my 60s, all I can say is, "Ouch!"
66
@Michael H.
I totally agree with you. Meanwhile, the headline was about Nancy Pelost's age, and Gail does, t mention once.
Being a Senator or Representative should not be a lifetime position. I respect the fact that many of the older members of leadership are mentally alert and able, but frankly would prefer the next generation step up take a turn. If voters want a more youthful government they better get out and VOTE for it.
5
Sooner or later we all have to step back and hope that we have given the next generation enough ammo to take over the hunt. Needs, perceptions and desires change with each successive generation. I think the most that the senior generation can hope for is that we have provided the next with the tools decency and sense of responsibility to move on in a positive and productive manner with the fate of all our futures in mind. The grifter Trump and his cabal of fellow con people are certainly not an example to be followed.
1
Nancy Pelosi has been an extremely effective legislator, far more capable than her male successors as speaker. She has even dealt successfully with Trump, to the extent possible. According to a recent Time profile, she spends hours learning about members of her caucus to figure out how to persuade them to support legislation.
What is most disturbing about younger Democrats' declining to support her is that this rejection seems to be driven by Republicans' demonization of her. Democrats should not be allowing Republicans to choose their leaders for them. Additionally, whom candidates might support as party leader if they are elected does not need to be a campaign issue. Republican candidates are not asked about this.
That said, the Democratic establishment seems smug and complacent, and too unwilling to identify and groom future leaders. Nancy Pelosi should be transmitting her wisdom to younger members, not just fifty somethings like Joseph Crowley, but also to those in their thirties and forties.
20
Nancy Pelosi has been a mentor to younger representatives. Why does no one give her credit for that? Credit is due.
I agree with the rest of what you said. Let's not fall into the trap of believing Republican smears against good and effective Democrats.
Nancy Pelosi was an excellent Speaker and will be again, but Republicans have made her toxic with some voters with no proof. They have made the word Liberal toxic so that we now say we're progressive. The Republican practice of using the fascist art of repeating a lie enough times it becomes believable.
They made the name Clinton synonymous with crime for Republicans, again with no proof.
With Trump now the head of the party that has no honor, their plan for elections is Bumper sticker phrases, and political skuldugery, such as closing polls early or entirely in Dem districts, voter suppression of voter rolls, Voter I. D laws that amount to Poll taxes.
What has become of one of our political parties that they do not believe in the majority rule of Democracy?
18
Age matters. I know because I am old. Some people learn with years of experience, but others just repeat what they learned years ago. It seems that as people age, they have trouble learning new things. Change happens and change matters. Change may be the only universal constant. The jokes about 5-year-olds helping Grandpa use his cell phone are funny because they are true. One of 72-year-old Trump’s biggest problems is his utter disdain for learning. He worsens it by using his ignorance as a weapon. We need smart, knowledgeable leaders who are willing to learn continually and to be flexible with their opinions as facts and circumstances change. I’m not per se opposed to Pelosi or any other older leaders, but I am not interested in leaders incapable of innovation or of adapting to change.
11
@M.i. Estner
I’m also old! If 65 is old! How about we expand what we need to the rest of the population? “ smart knowledable PEOPLE who are willing to learn continually and be flexible with their opinions as facts and circumstances change.” Well said, thank you. Now let’s go and spread that message!
1
I'm not a Republican supporter, but their system of term limits on committee chairmen is eminently sensible. The House in particular should be bursting with new ideas for better government, not a retirement home for those intellectually past their prime. I've seen people close to me go through their 70s and 80s. Don't try to tell me there isn't a decline.
.
I do not want more baby boomer leaders in Washington. Boomers campaign mostly on nostalgia (We'll finish the job we started in 1968!), and govern bereft of new ideas, resigned to interminable siege warfare with battle lines that have not shifted in 50 years. If you can remember what you were doing in 1968, particularly if you participated, I don't want you to be my political leader any more. This definitely affects my vote when I enter the voting booth. I'm not voting for some Democrat repeating Ted Kennedy's 1980 campaign speech. Especially you, Bernie.
3
@Tom Just as in the 3 bears story. something can be just right. Too young lacks the knowledge that comes with experience, too old lacks the energy to overcome objections. But you can't put a number on it. Our founders put a number on the presidency low side at 36. It probably should be 46 as we now live longer. They didn't put a high number because nature took care of it at that time. We should at 82. Funny but that's my present age.
The core of the Congressional morass is less the age of the people than the fealty to the Party, both sides. Pelosi's greatest skill, herding the Democrat cats, is also the failure of the Republic which was designed to have the Senators and Representatives, in their collective wisdom, decide the course of our one nation with liberty and justice for all. Instead we have politicos deciding the course of the two Parties, under guys with caucus and finance for all.
3
The question is two fold. Is experience useful in Congress? The second question is why does the public continue to reelect incumbents at an 85% pace if they want change in Washington?
2
@tom I believe the phrase is: “better the devil you know....”
First, I believe Ms. Pelosi has been an effective leader of the congressional democrats and deserves much credit for passing legislation to help the forgotten in our society in a toxic environment created by the GOP. Having said that, the democratic party suffers from, to put it in Trump's words, low energy ---e.g. Hillary Clinton's entire campaign. What the primaries are showcasing are a group of candidates that are energizing---I feel Ms. Pelosi needs to take a hard look at that dynamic, and perhaps, make personal and official moves that capitalize on that dynamic.
8
The Times editorial reset has changed the structure of writing and commenting, so it is increasingly hard to find the broad cross-section of innovative thinking and experiences this paper (its digital form) is noted for! Its proud discussion forums--these comments--draw global responses and has proven the best way for an enlightened English-writing community to share and build a democratic voice. Rather than broading, we see the Times narrowing. Absent now are the information to guide readers; bylines, comment numbers. It is harder to read, not easier.
Not only the stories, the page display must feature and provide context, which the Times seems to have forgotten.
16
@Walter Rhett
Thankfully, Gail's column is always a safe place for the sensible, slight whimsy needed to deal with the brutal blows of a Party gone mad, which through lethal non-violence (legislation/regulation/stripped safety nets) is trying to kill us--every study cites rising numbers of deaths from their policy changes in healthcare and air and water regulation, in fire and disaster management, in raising premium costs for healthcare and mortgage costs for housing. Justice has become a partisan tool on voting, immigration, gun control, abortion, and civil rights protections.
In such times, the Times should widen its voice and lessen the walls of separation between media institutions and communities. Too many op-ed pieces are now appearing without a sense of their public fit, of which comments have always been a direct, powerful, insightful and reliable gauge. These voices have been a unique feature--and presence--in the Times!
3
@Walter Rhett
The fringe gets lots of press! Other traditions/ideasar e ignored!
This, from the tradition of writing as talismanic energy, in this case the work of the writer to speak to the spirits in divine symbols about human concerns.
Evil dances where fertile sun grows its virtues,
The bokors applauding the hallelujah shouts
This is the work of political Ebola.
How to handle the dead. The dying
Absent from the count, the children
Released to die, capital rising
Capital Rising
(Not Capricorn or Cancer or Copernicus)
Not Confucius
capital rising
(All voices be silent or sing.)
Capital rising.
There's something typically Democratic (and democratic) about arguing over the Speakership before the party's taken control of the House. My favorite player at this game so far is Conor Lamb, who who was criticizing Pelosi during his special-election success, even through he still has to win the same seat in November. I hope he does win. I hope all the Democrats win, including the young ones -- but they seem to be getting ahead of themselves a little bit. And it worries me to see so many younger Democrats embracing and echoing Republican talking points about their party's leader.
26
@Maggie Mae, Wonderful points. Let's say what we mean with some courage, It's why Beto O'Rouke is refreshing. He speaks without taking a poll.
2
Composition of U.S. voters according to an analysis of U.S. census data from the Pew Research Center:
Millenials (18-35 years old): 31%
Generation X (36-51): 25%
Baby Boomers (52-70): 31%
Silent/Greatest Generation (71+): 12%
According to Pew, voter turnout in 2016:
Millenials: 49%
Gen X: 63%
Boomers: 69%
Greatest Gen: 70%
If we want more young voters to participate in elections, why not have more young candidates for local and state offices as well as for the U.S. House?
How hard is that?
14
@Blue Moon. Interesting factoid, no President has ever come from the Silent Generation. We kind of skipped over them when we went from GHWB to Clinton (Greatest to Boomer). Last four Presidents have all been Boomers. But, as Gail points out we may not be done with the Silents (Biden, Bloomberg, Pelosi, Hoyer, et al) just yet.
@Blue Moon Maybe the world belongs to those who show up. That would be the older people, apparently
1
Millennials, that is
How to get things done. That is the advantage a Pelosi brings to the table: Invaluable skills developed over the years. A younger person will not have that skill set and it is very much needed in our government.
If the democrats succeed in taking congress then more progress and problem solving will be possible. But, a 29 year old, regardless of the energy, intelligence, and morality, will be just starting a career.
Experience, especially given the challenges Trump and the GOP will have left us, will save the day when combined with the energy the younger bring to the task.
I favor Biden as prez with a Kamala Harris VP. I see Biden running and enjoying himself these days. Biden has been there. There is no replacing his level of experience. Bernie Sanders, an arm waving, sputtering 60's radical, has never really accomplished anything in his years in congress.
Let's get real.
31
@Harold I agree, but today's "liberals" are extremely ageist. Notice how they talk incessantly about raising the minimum wage to 15$ an hour, but never mention that seniors are being told to survive on about 2$ an hour, which is what millions of SS benefits amount to a month.
3
At one point, I thought my now 38-year-old son would be the next wave in Congress. When he was a child, that was his goal. He could always schmooze a room, even when he was eight years old. His knowledge of politics is next to none. He went to law school (and, by the way, cannot get a job as an attorney that will pay a living wage, so he's working at something else so that he can feed his family). But then, reality set in. We are not wealthy. He could not afford to run for office, even at the local level. Some rich candidate who could buy TV and print ads, as well as slick brochures, would find something he did when he was 19 and plaster it all over the media, and voila! My son would suddenly become a pariah. How many other young, enthusiastic candidates like him are out there, with young families, who, because of Citizens United and the money factor, cannot run for office?
As for Pelosi--I think Republicans just like the way her name sounds, so that they can use inflection to make it pejorative. They rarely say WHY they dislike her; it's always things such as, "You don't want NANCY PELOSI and her ilk to tell YOU what to do!"
I am 70 years old, and sometimes I wish I had run for office. I worked in government, and, toward the end of my career, when I saw how elected officials couldn't go anywhere without being bombarded by one person or another, I realized I made the right decision. When the election ends, the fundraising for the next one begins again. And so on.
35
Why does no one ever point out that there is a huge difference between running for President when you are in your seventies and running for Speaker. If a Speaker dies it is in no way a crisis the way a President dying in office is. Age is a very legitimate concern when electing a President but not for members of Congress who are mentally competent and capable of getting things done.
The psychologist Howard Gardner wrote the book “Frames of Mind” which described his study of highly intelligent people from different fields. As he made clear, there are some fields - math and science, for example - where the greatest achievements tend to be made by the young but others, like politics, for which age and experience can be a big asset because, As the saying goes, with age comes wisdom for many, at least those who are intelligent and sane to begin with.
I am appalled that many younger Democrats on the left have turned on Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, for supposedly being too moderate and too old. A lot of them are big supporters of Bernie who is close to her in age. Hines may be 52 but he is a moderate which should matter a lot more for those on the left than his age.
Pelosi is one of the most effective House leaders of all time which is why the right is trying to destroy her. Sadly many pundits also have a bias against age, at least when it comes to women. As a result a lot of left wing Democrats, especially younger ones, have been bamboozled by the attacks on Pelosi.
53
i agree. The attacks on Hillary worked. seems like they are working on Pelosi
1
As others have mentioned, competency is more important then age. However, as Einstein said man years ago - problems facing mankind today, cannot be solved at the level of thinking that created the problem(s) in the first place. Whoever the democrats promote to senior leadership positions, I would like to see the thinking elevated to better consider the current needs of the public. To me, this has gone missing. Age can create some stodginess in thinking and that's my concern with continuing to rely on the money raising old guard to lead the congress.
8
If I were 25, I could relate more to a candidate like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (28), than to Nancy Pelosi (78). Voters need to relate to a candidate and feel that a candidate understands them. Someone of their generation has a better chance of being that candidate. Also, a young fresh face represents change vs. the same leaders who are associated with Washington's sclerotic politics.
Obviously age is not the most important criteria, but it is a factor.
7
It takes a lot of time and money to run for office. Most young people don't have either, they are too busy working. Politics lends itself to people who are done with the first part of their life.
12
I couldn't agree more with this column. I personally can't stand either party at the moment and I'm a youngster of 60. We desperately need term limits, NO ONE should hold an office for more that 8 years max. And while we are at it, let's publicly fund all election campaigns to end what is legal bribery by monied interests. What we have isn't democracy. Like everything in America, the days of honest competition went out with the Edsel. Open your eyes people.
24
@Tony
Why the arbitrary eight years that you propose? It's a number out of the air.
When I did volunteer work for a member of the Colorado House a decade ago, I got to see the value of institutional memory that senior members had. And this WAS with term limits. In Congress, without limits, such memories are even more important. Some people are just hitting their effectiveness stride after 8 or 12 years.
FYI, congressional term limits were tried in some states back in the 70's. Struck down by the supreme court, as was appropriate, because it is a constitutional matter.
7
"Being old does not necessarily make you mellow."
Great line! I'm all for new blood but if Dems are going to win anything for more than two years, you have to have some more seasoned pols in the mix. The ideal, of course, would be to take the house, and in the speaker vote, have someone younger take the gavel.
Speaking of blood: watching those Kavanaugh hearings was a form of torture. You have Grassley and Hatch who sound positively senile up against the passion of relative Senate teens, Harris and Booker.
All I can say, is, if age brings wisdom (which I'm not too sure about), it's hard to see it among aging Senate Republicans. Even among some Dems--liberal Lahey sounded almost incomprehensible at times, despite the astonishing accusations he was leveling at the nominee.
It's hard to determine what needs changing in Congress aside from political control. The term "term limits" was coined for a reason. I don't think the founders envisioned government service in Congress to be lifetime affairs.
No, even originalists would admit, that at some point, elected members of Congress need to get back home on their farms instead of gumming up the works of progress and freshness of thought.
Don't have a farm? Not to worry. Join a think tank as long as you keep your research to yourself.
25
I like Jim Himes, but he sounds a little bratty about having to wait his turn. That he's unable to convince those in power that he's worthy of holding a higher position means he's not a very good salesman. I've tired of lesser known Democrats (particularly men) criticizing Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, both of whom raise millions of dollars annually to keep the party functioning. Jim ain't got that cachet.
26
The more pressing age-and-longevity issue is the Supreme Court. The US is the only country IN THE WORLD that has lifetime appointments for its highest court -- and the politicization of that, and its consequences, are all too obvious with Republican efforts to stack the Court with 50-somethings who will last for decades.
Along with the end of the Electoral College, Supreme Court justices should be subject to revolving 18-year term limits. This will decrease politicization of the Court -- since election cycles will subject the party that abuses the system of nomination to payback -- and increase the quality of rulings.
39
@Doug Keller: Too late for term limits, unless you apply them also to the current judges and soon to be judge, which i doubt is possible. Otherwise the term limits will start with the judges proposed by a Democratic president, while the current younger conservative judges stay on until they die.
10
@Anna
I don't see any reason why the term limits would not be applied across the board, with the logic that the judge with the greatest seniority is first up -- and the rotation ensures that every president henceforth has the opportunity to install one judge (at least).
I doubt that judges in their 80s will object.
The alternative is to throw up our hands and be stuck with a system that produces the kind of cynical travesty just served up to us by the Republicans?
Every Ship of State has some barnacles encrusted on it’s hull. In Congress, those barnacles have a decades long life span not seen in the natural world. They create their own self-centered ecosystems of power and patronage. Shorn of earmarks, the patronage manifests itself in other ways.
Look only to K street to see the plumbs of being part of those storied barnacle appendages. Unlike the natural world, Congressional barnacles can also detach and reattach themselves. Note Jon Kyl who recently returned after a short “time for family” hiatus mentioned on these pages.
Congressional barnacles after decades of growth can be considered to big to fail. That is, until some red tide of phytoplankton known as term limits washes in or a barnacle buster movement scraps e’m off the hull. Once cleaned, it’s performance improves and the ship sails off to chart new waters.
Unfortunately, in Congress the barnacles are superglued and marine epoxied on for durability.
9
In an era when age discrimination is illegal, and where progressives can be expected to oppose it in a workplace, it is a tad rich for them to discriminate based on age alone. Experience and knowledge are not things to be tossed out lightly.
That said, it is understandable, notwithstanding the experience of Pelosi and her lieutenants as they approach eighty years of age, that more youthful Members of Congress yearn for their own leadership opportunities.
Perhaps their opposition to the likes of Pelosi is driven by selfish reasons, such as wanting an opportunity themselves to occupy those roles. Perhaps it is because they realize that the current leadership has become a lightning rod for galvanizing voters against Democratic candidates. Perhaps it is because they believe that a historically gridlocked Congress would benefit from a new perspective that fresh, younger leadership could bring.
Whatever the reasons, we should all remember that elections produce winners and losers. Incumbents historically have had electoral advantages. But in politics, challenges are fair game, whatever the reasons. The deck is stacked against them, but perhaps it shouldn't be.
Leaving age out of it, there are good reasons to want and have fresh Congressional leadership. Leadership contests certainly aren't beauty pageants. Thank God for that small favor, but it is the big favors doled out by incumbents that need to be stopped. Those, alone, are sufficient reason for a change at the top.
6
Career politicians fall out of touch with the body politic. It seems that the Democratic leadership is more interested in keeping their jobs then serving the interests of the party.
6
The rot is on both sides of the aisle, both simply serve different corporate masters.
@Gary Cohen: Pelosi manoevered the ACA though a minefield and is a formidable fundraiser. How is that not serving the interests of the party, and progressive Americans with it, for that matter? Of course the Republicans are afraid of her but can do nothing but smear her to the point Democrats buy into it or roll over meekly for the smears. Ooooh, the Republicans could get mean to us if we back Pelosi.... That's exactly WHY you should back Pelosi, publicly and proudly, and leave the question of her succession for internal discussions. And please don't have these discussions behind her back. She is a pragmatic and rational person after all.
1
The population these people swore to serve are growing up in a technological age which is and, continues to foster a far more educated, savvy, aware and, in touch generation at home and abroad.
The function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not followers. It takes the wisdom of experience to earnestly look at oneself and ask if it is time to pass the torch to a new generation of leadership, to transition from leader to the role of teacher and mentor.
"With age comes wisdom, but sometimes age comes alone
Oscar Wilde
It is time to pass the torch for most refuse to acknowledge;
"the whole is greater than the sum of its parts"
7
We need to get one thing straight: Chronological age is merely a number; intellectual acumen and talent in an endeavor are demonstrative variables. In my experience, some people are effectively finished at eighteen or twenty-one. They take to the couch in front of mindless TV, and we never again hear from or about them. The exception is the 70-year-old child in the White House.
23
@Faction Of One: Your tag reminds me of 0rwell's inventive term," minority of one!"It's true there are old fogies, and, as pol. sci. professor at NYU remarked to me once, young fogies as well."Taking to the couch in front of mindless t.v.,"s puts it all into focus. But saying that age is just a chronological number is true except when it's not, when 1 seeks at a position at a university or in the media. You are judged on your looks, age and, to a lesser extent, on your erudition, knowledge of a particular subject matter. Hence, RL's crack about "info babes!" De Gaulle saved his country from the tragedy of perpetuating a hopeless colonial war in Algeria when he was well into his seventies, but he was the exception that does not prove the rule. However, his advanced age did not stop him from dismissing 4 generals who staged a putsch in 1961 against him from calling them a "quarteron de generaux en retraite!" Trump is the ONLY magnetic personality on the political stage and jobs of thousands of "journos" depend on his remaining in the WH.W/o him, "ratings would "afficher une baisse," and layoffs would follow!A 70 year old child does not take the plunge, enter primaries, beat 16 pro's and "invincible" HRC machine, plus chalk up all the achievements he can take credit for if 1 is emotionally, intellectually child like.Do not allow your biases to overcome your ability to be objective!
When it comes to pragmatism and just plain old common sense, the female half of the world's population takes my vote every time.
Let us hope that the Year of the Woman plays its part at long long last.
No more wars that cannot be won. No more broken bodies coming home. No more children growing up with nothing but a photograph of their mother or their father.
Peace, it is beautiful !!
29
It's a self-flattering sense that only they, the elders, have seen life, experienced it, know it.
They are sure that only they can save the Republic and rather than retire to enjoy their good health, their families, the next stage in their lives--they hold on, grasping onto power and onto the sureness they have that only people like them can solve the problems of our benighted world.
Sen. Feinstein cannot be wedged from her Senate chair for a lack of imagination. She, quite literally, refused to see that California Ds had turned the lights out at her party, shut down the music and locked the doors--they did whatever they could to signal to her that it was time to go home but yet she stayed because hubris assured her that Kevin Leon was a whippersnapper who couldn't do the job to her satisfaction. No, Senator, you needed to have the decency, the self-knowledge and the tact to recognize that though you have had a long and distinguished career there was no one but you demanding you stay. Everyone else was demanding that you step aside and let the next generation lead before the next generation died from heart disease and arthritis.
Time for Feinstein, Pelosi, Hoyer and the rest of them to go, just go and not force us 63 year old radical revolutionaries to show you the door--thank you for your service but go, your time is over now, we got this.
13
Sometimes I wonder whether this is the best time for a generational change in leadership. Whoever succeeds Trump will have one huge job on their hands governing and healing the country. Foreign policy will be important as we repair damaged relationships. A strongly partisan Presidency may be the last thing we need. Perhaps an older leader might be more suited for that moment than someone young, ideological and vigorous as they will tend to have more years of life experience and more years of practical experience in government and a deeper understanding of the whys and hows of we got to this point in history.
This is not to say that someone younger might not have the capacity to rise to the occasion and I'm certainly not saying that with age automatically comes wisdom (Trump is 72). But I think of Joe Biden, elected to the Senate in 1972 and as knowledgeable about foreign policy as anyone and think that experience might be exactly what we need right now. He seems to be a pretty vigorous for a man who will be 78 in 2020. I might be willing to give him a single term to clean up some of the Trump mess.
21
The solution to this problem is simple, but not easy: term limits. It's time to cap the number of terms that these characters are allowed to serve. It is disgraceful that these people somehow manage to become multi-millionaires while working in jobs that pay $175,000 per year. In addition, perhaps our politics would become more civil if we did not have such entrenched Washington creatures throwing sharp elbows instead of finding common ground. It is no coincidence that nearly every one of these old-timers is also a polarizing figure.
12
Actually, it's even simpler than that. It's called voting. From the statistics, however, it seems only older people have found this an easy solution. Go figure.
20
@David Ricardo
We already have term limits. They're called elections. If you have a problem with who other people in other districts and states choose as their representative, well so do I brother, but it has nothing to do with age. I doubt term limits would change that, but it would insure that we would be governed by rookies. And who said the advanced age of representatives was a "problem" per se anyway?
25
@RJM
If the campaign laws were equal your argument might be solid, but election laws favor the incumbents and that is the reason for term limits.
I am 75. Yesterday I went for a routine check-up by my internist here in Warsaw. He is no spring chicken either, I would guess late 60s. He pronounced me fit as the proverbial fiddle and said that, "I think people born during the war have grown up more adept at staying healthy than younger generations." Whatever the reason, as Ms Collins points out, we do seem to have a surfeit of sturdy pre-Baby Boomers in positions of power.in the House and Senate I do not think that this is a bad thing, per se, but I do think that at some point it becomes appropriate to assume the role of elder statesperson (i.e holding on to one's seat in the House or Senate) and allow younger people to have a crack at leadership. I do not think any nation can succeed when it permits too great a generational gap between those whose hands are on the levers of power and those whose hands must do the work and fight the wars.
23
Why not be truly honest? The problem with representation in the US Congress is not age based, it is the "donors" to the parties. The Democrats drink at the same well as the Republicans. Mr. Sanders proved that small donations from voters works and that their voices are heard. As a SFO resident from 1977 to 1996, I don't think Pelosi & Feinstein can say that they truly represent middle America...not when so many schools have closed (the city is too expensive to raise a family), rents have skyrocketed to the point where the diversity I knew in the city is long gone, the median home price is $1.62 million, etc etc. I expect the fight for Speaker, should the Democrats prevail in November, to be quite nasty. I'd rather see Pelosi pass the gavel to the younger generation rather than repeat the fiasco of 2016 where Hillary Clinton insisted that it was "her turn". As for Feinstein - she doesn't have the endorsement of the CA Democratic party, as the 5th richest US senator, her financial disclosure statement is the size of a phone book (SF Chronicle) and at 85 with a pacemaker, shouldn't she be spending her twilight years doting on her family in Pacific Heights?
32
For twenty of the last twenty-four years, Republicans controlled the House and two god-awful Republicans ascended to the presidency without winning the popular vote.
If the Democrats wish to dominate for the next twenty-five years, something has to change.
Compared to Gingrich, Hastert, Boehner & Ryan, Pelosi was a genius legislator but that only lasted four years.
We need some new leadership and in the Senate, as well.
If there's a wave, Democrats need to reshape the party to meet the needs of the people who vote them into office. Just being able to say Democrats are better to voters than Republicans are is not enough.
It wouldn't hurt if Democratic senators and house members looked a lot more like the people who vote for them, too.
27
@Mary Scott Unfortunately voters of today seem to prefer older representatives. Could it be a higher percentage of oldsters vote?
21
@W. Fulp Or could it be as the excitable young man discovered, the older he got the more intelligent his father's ideas seemed to be?
This is less about age and more about how difficult it is to wrest power from entrenched government figures. We need less incumbency at all levels.
24
@Nick
Term limits. Sorry, folks, but it's imperative. Enough of this garbage about needing the special know-how of long-term incumbents. Hogwash. People can learn how to legislate, can immerse themselves in legislative history, in a couple of years.
The current generation of 70-80 y.o. Is living longer than amy of their predecessors. And they greedily and selfishly hold on to everything they got, creating a huge back-up. I’m not talking about the poor seniors forced to pack groceries to make ends meet. Talking about politicians, lawyers, professors, bankers, captains of industry, doctors.
We need an enforced retirement age, at least in politics and in law and medicine.
Mandate that a candidate is only eligible, when at the last day of the term s/he is running for, the candidate is not yet 70 y.o. Simple. Clean. Better than term limits.
8
I find "CitizenTM" to have a peculiar attitude toward older people. There is a complete lack of recognition that experience can bring wisdom, and that at an older age one has more knowledge and more experience. With age, people's desire to give back to the whole community can increase. I would never accuse people of being greedy or selfish because they don't wish to be forced out of the community and denied the opportunity to contribute. There is a level of hostility here toward older people that probably has a psychological explanation related to CitizenTM's personal history, and which I find indefensible bigotry. People are not their age, they are individuals with individual gifts and deficits. Judge them on the merits of their individual characteristics.
1
@CitizenTM
Discriminating against older Americans is a prejudice and illegal.
Also, the poor would always end up hearing the brunt of any mandatory retirement ages.
1
@CitizenTM
I have to guess you're nowhere close to 70 and expect to have a good enough retirement package that you don't need to work to supplement it when you retire. This is not the reality of many many retirees. If you mandate retirement at a certain age, be sure to mandate a retirement plan that allows people to afford to live on it.
1
The Constitutional minimal age of 35 should be understood as an a fraction of the life expectancy at the time, which, let's say, for 50. If life expectancy age today is 80, then the minimum age should be 56. That is the way to interpret a living Constitution for almost dying candidates (half kidding).
8
I think Pelosi has done an extraordinary job as the House leader. It is also time to pass the torch for the good of the party. Trump has given the Democrats new life when the party was all but moribund. Now is the time to move new Democratic leaders forward.
Please step aside Speaker Pelosi.
21
@goofnoff
Ms. Pelosi won't stand down until a new standard bearer comes forward. She is wise and strong. I trust her judgement and believe she'll step aside when the time comes.
Never underestimate Nancy Pelosi. She is a fighter.
76
@goofnoff
Which leaders would you suggest? Is it time for Bernie Sanders to step aside for new independent leaders? Funny thing about Republicans, no matter their chronological age, their attitudes are always senescent. Bret Kavanagh would fit right in with the 18th century Tories.
@S.E. G.
Entrenched
I am old now, older than I ever quite imagined I would ever be, back when I was “young.” I do not like being old like this, but the alternative is worse.
Ecclesiastes was right: there is nothing new under the sun, all us vapor and has been seen before.
So set your heart and mind on good and small and achievable and wise things. Moment to moment, day by day. Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly as another Prophet said.
In this, the world is redeemed daily and people are made better.
Thank you.
93
Just because the old guard is good, does not mean a changing of the guard would not be better. Two of the front runners for the Dem nomination in 2020 (Sanders and Biden) are too old for membership in the Baby Boomer generation. In other words, they are older than Bill Clinton, and he was elected president 26 years ago.
If I were a Gen X-er or a Millennial, I'd be spearheading a (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) movement for a constitutional amendment to add an upper age limit to be elected president. How about 70? It's exactly twice the minimum age for election. I'm confident that there's talent to spare within that 35 year age span. If I'm wrong, the Bidens and Sanderses (and the AARP) of the future can use their talents to lobby for the amendment's repeal.
7
@Bob Hanle
No. Everyone should be represented. I greatly value the wisdom of my elders. I'm inspired by the passion of the young folk. If we could get the money out of politics, something I bet the vast majority of Americans would agree with, we could have good governance. I'll keep dreamin'.
27
@S.E. G.
And I'm inspired by the passion of older people.
@S.E. G. As an elder, I'm on board with getting money out of politics. But, having worked with legislators as a policy wonk for my entire professional career, I've known too many who hang on out of ego or because being an elected official is all they know how to do. Trust me, there's plenty of talent and wisdom in the younger generation of 50 to 70 year-olds. I'm sure they would be as up-to-the-task in 2021 as an 80 year-old Bernie Sanders.
The bottom line is not age, or the related focus on old, established and establishment networks and funding.
It's the ancient Machine Politics these represent: Power for power's sake, building and using political and financial power mainly just to have the power to maintain that same power.
It's time to rediscover the Principle and principles which that Power was supposedly built to serve.
Machine Politics, power without principle, or principle in the service of power, is what lost the last general election, in various ways, and put the most unprincipled man ever in the White House, the greatest centre of power in the world.
For your own sakes, but more for the sake of your fellow citizens and country - and for the sake of the world, the planet even: stick to your democratic and Democratic principles, and Break the Machine.
23
@Martin
Breaking the Machine is exactly what the trumpistas want to do, and they'll burn down the house to do it.
I want good governance. Smart people, elders with wisdom and experience, young folks with passion and smarts. Why is this so hard? Good governance in a democratic republic requires the best of us to stand up. I don't care if you are twenty or eighty. What I care about is a dedication to serve the people. And that's us, all of us. E Pluribus Unum.
129
@S.E. G.
The problem is there is a huge divide in America on what constitutes "good governance".
1
@S.E. G.
Thank you, this was exceptionally well said.
1
Diane Feinstein has been our Senator for 26 years through 5 elections so far, and she's likely to get 6 more years. In all that time has she always been the best person for the job? If so, its truly amazing how one person can be the best among 39+ million people year after year after year . . .
Or is it just that she's good at raising money from corporate donors and ultra-wealthy individuals and good at managing the arcane world of the DNC? I suspect the latter.
24
There are two fundamental reasons for the age gap, which is really about willingness/interest in public service over the past few decades:
GOP and right-wing media since Reagan have been railing about how govt is the problem, not the solution... now to the extreme point where the illegitimately elected guy sitting in the Oval is actually attacking the American govt on a near daily basis.
24/7 news cycle, social media etc that has given us all a case of ADHD and no restraints on opining/judging all and everything. This makes it brutal to go into public service. You have to have some streak of narcissism to put up with the shaming, and enough ambition to forego your best impulses for what will work to get votes.
If we all had a good civics class in middle/high school and actually had some idea of how difficult it is to govern we'd at least be a bit less clueless, and hopefully a bit more forgiving.
35
How long they live isn't the issue... it's how long they're allowed to be in office that is.
We need term limits, among other things, to try and get away from career politicians and back to public service.
27
@J,
Since the Constitution does not mention term limits, a Constitutional Amendment with 75% of the States' support is needed.
Regardless of age or party I find myself wondering why the talent pool has become a desert. So many of our choices are one dimensional and parochial. Fortunately there are professional staffers that keep things turning. For now.
8
@JimmyMac
Perhaps the demands of running for office ( time constraints, raising money ,raising money, raising money) does not correlate with the qualities needed for elective office so many who would otherwise qualify are deterred from running.
4
Normally I'm a big believer in the value of age and experience, especially as I stare into my imminent seventh decade. However with the tectonic shift that new technologies have caused in our social interactions and the way we access information, I begin to question the relative value of that experience in this milieu. While I can tread water in this new digital ocean, I don't swim as effortlessly and instinctively as I see in the younger students. Our governmental leaders will need to engage with these voters reflexively and naturally in a heretofore unthinkable instantaneous and personal level, and not merely through staffs. The experience and skills of a legislative maestro like Representative Pelosi are irreplaceable, priceless and essential to Democratic success - but perhaps from the second seat.
27
@Diz Moore
I work in the digital world, and I'm sorry to say that I'm not greatly inspired by the thinking of our digital gurus. Too often they're looking for quick fixes to challenges that really require long-term attention and significant hands-on management. However wired the world is today, the people in it are still people, with complex needs and desires that can't be reduced to algorithms or simple solutions packaged in email and IM. As you say, the skills and experience that define a leader like Pelosi are irreplaceable. Younger Democrats need to learn from her before they decide she's no longer able for the job.
1
OK. I am 72 and I want to write a comment but I don't want to offend anybody so I'll just say this.
I couldn't care less about a politicians age as long as they are putting forward a progressive platform that is not tied to dark, secret, hidden, ill-gotten, or negative financial sources.
If that's too idealistic then there's this.
The Republicans have allowed themselves to make a deal with the devil to get a few political advantages over the hopes and dreams of half the country.
The Democrats need to lay out and fight for a political position that speaks to helping all of the people in the country...healthcare, good jobs, education, the environment. Issues that effect the United States in the present and guarantee a future for our children in the future.
If these positions are expressed by someone 20 years old or 80 years old...they will have my vote.
585
@Lalo Amen. People all over the country pretty much want the same things: affordable health care (not insurance, CARE), good infrastructure, affordable housing and college or technical training for themselves or kids, jobs that pay well enough to provide the basics and maybe a little more. Democrats need to forget the divisive social issues of abortion and same-sex marriage until after the election and concentrate on kitchen table issues that will bring independent voters back to the side of sanity!
1
@Lalo I'm almost 72 and I am tired of all these oldies clinging to power for too long.I agree with the kids and want to see more of them in positions of responsibility.
As for Pelosi choosing to protest by standing in high heels for hours on end is not brave, just vain and stupid.
@Lalo
I don’t care how much they “speak out”, we cannot get those things without strong majorities. Pelosi made the ACA happen, and those who benefit from it owe her their thanks. If you want more or better (as do I), you need to start with putting a wrench in the propaganda machine the GOP has put in motion for the last 30-40 years. It won’t really matter who is President when the court is tilted firmly right.
2
What is meant by “there’s a generational gap”? That Bernie, like Bill Clinton twenty years ago, doesn’t have a computer because he doesn’t know how to use one? That Pelosi still thinks a “three-way” is a low-bore conference call? That Liz Warren thinks the mob is running all those casinos on her family’s land?
Pshaw.
Only in the New York Times or Harvard can Dianne Feinstein be referred to as a “centrist”. And I take umbrage at the notion that Republicans believe Nancy Pelosi to be “the symbol of All That Is Evil In Washington” – she was merely half of that symbol before Harry Reid retired to Nevada to hide from Sheldon Adelson; but these days she seems rather put out by being paired with Chuck Schumer, since she doesn’t understand Teiglach and thinks that Matzoh Balls are too doughy even for an Italian.
But should the House be flipped this November, an outcome so fervently hoped for by the unchained, potted liberati, you can bet that Nancy will hold the Speaker’s gavel. For all the time she’s been a force to reckon with in the House, it’s amazing how many pictures of aging congresspersons cavorting with goats in Dionysian abandon can be collected in three decades of representing San Francisco and California’s wine country and eastern deserts. The kids of thirty, or even of fifty, haven’t a prayer.
Go Nancy! If not for her, Republicans might actually find a way to compromise with Democrats in the House. And we certainly can’t have that.
Nice pearls, though.
3
@Richard Luettgen --- well, there are only two Republicans left in the Senate: Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
All the rest have retired or surrendered to Trumpismo.
And the sad thing is that America would probably be run very well and very decently by those two and Pelosi, and they'd see things a whole lot more similarly than you think.
105
@Richard Luettgen
Your pseudo-intellectual and highly contrived wit doesn't pass for intelligent commentary. What do Matzoh Balls or Italians have to do with anything in this discussion, other than allowing you to admire your own substance-free writing style?
You think the kids of thirty, or even of fifty, haven't a prayer? Just watch them on November 6. Regardless of your opinion of Ms. Pelosi and other Dems in her generational cohort, the kids will be swelling Democratic ranks.
You're right though; if the Dems young, old and in-between become the majority, Nancy will no doubt hold the Speaker’s gavel - for a while. Then there will be an orderly transition to someone of the next generation, who will act as Speaker of the House, not of the Party - thus giving the GOP a fair shake in opposition that they have done nothing to deserve, thanks to the likes of Gingrich and Hastert.
127
@Richard Luettgen Another Luettgen example of verbal amour-propre. As always his unintelligible stream of consciousness leads up a cul-de-sac.
50
While Republicans advocate trickle down, Pelosi advocates flow down. She has never yet seen a redistribution of income that she could resist. But Pelosi is not a progressive. Pelosi preaches that if you've got the dollars you need to share them. Progressives, on the other hand, advocate all kinds of far-reaching government benefits, and when asked how they are going to fund them, they answer either that "we're working on that" or, more frequently, everything pays for itself.
2
@michjas Nobody does "redistribution" and large government benefits like the Republicans; they just completed one this year, where they distributed $1.5 trillion to the 1% and to large corporations. That's on top of continuous government handouts to the oil and gas industry (because it won't be capitalism if we don't bribe the oil industry to do what they are supposed to do), fifty years of subsidies to the sugar producers (got to destroy Cuban economy) and others too numerous to mention, and known to all. Progressives are rank amateurs at handouts; Republicans are the real professionals.
65
@michjas. I guess Social Security, The TVA, the GI-bill, Medicare, and the ACA were not "far reaching" enough to be progressive. So Pelosi just "preaches", while progressives "advocate." Do tax cuts for the top 1% not also represent a redistribution of income, and how will they "pay for themselves"? Trump is always saying "we're working on that" and "we'll see what happens." When is the next "infrastructure week"?
32
@michjas
And just what are "conservatives" trying to conserve? Their own wealth, status and privilege? Hope you are one of them or will benefit from "trickle down."
I’m hoping the nation and the Trump cabinet will soon decide that Trump is no longer fit for office. Once that happens, perhaps Congress will decide to test the physical fitness and mental acuity of our legislators.
I hope that such tests won’t require legislation or a constitutional amendment, but they may. We’ve already seen the need for legislation to require financial disclosure for presidential candidates, since tradition wasn't enough to compel Trump to open up.
Time to establish real standards for national office!
27
True, Strom Thurmond was a notorious racist, but he was the consummate politician; back in South Carolina, he couldn't lose, because he seemed to know everybody. Even my grandmother (a Democrat who called him an "old goat") was impressed when she met him and he told her he'd had a great respect for her first husband (who had been mayor and a newspaper editor, and who died in 1932). His office helped my sister's in-laws when they appealed to him about a problem with social security. I didn't know anyone who actually liked him, but everyone voted for him. I wish some Democrats would learn that skill.
20
@carrobin
A "problem about social security"?. A horrible law instituted by that notorious socialist FDR. If Kavanagh and a few others on the Supreme Court decide to repeal it as unconstitutional (never mind precedent), there won't be any further "problem"
Voting districts, tax cuts/stock buybacks, immigration, the courts: exclusion.
And the Democrats cover everything else: inclusion.
The republicans stick to exclusion because it is easier than solving problems, plus they have their piety and guns.
The democrats are worn down, trying to save the world is hard work.
35
I'm an old Californian who thinks the government is much too old. The future should be decided by people who are actually going to live in the future. It's time for Feinstein, Pelosi, Brown, Waters and the whole group of them to yield to younger leaders, say people in their 50s and 60s.
15
@Campbell Well said. This fellow oldie totally agrees.
It's not their age but none of them would be a good president.
As for Dianne Feinstein, I'm surprised that she apologized to a nominee who didn't even deserve a hearing under the circumstances. Whether she liked it or I liked it, she went too far, imo, apologizing for protesters. That said, I hope she wins. She's ethical and gutsy.
Pelosi is a real fan of plastic surgery for someone who isn't concerned about her age. She's a limousine liberal who has failed to set an agenda that supported working people other than the ACA effort. How about a real push to provide affordable childcare for the tens of millions of women who are trying to work or go to school and raise their kids. Dems had 2 of 3 of the WH and Congress from '09 to '11. Surely she could have spent some time, money and energy to increase Dem turnout in the midterm. The only positive thing she's done that I can recall is hold a press conference for Sandra Fluke when the GOP shut her out. She needs to retire or allow someone else to become speaker. If she cares about the party, she should spend her extra time raising money.
Maxine Watters should pass as chair of the Financial Committee due to her husband's involvement in banking and what that has entailed.
Booker is only good at self-promotion but Kamala Harris would be an excellent candidate.
See, none of it has to do with anyone's age.
10
One of the things that I have noticed about the 'yung-uns' who are calling for Pelosi to retire is their nearly total lack of knowledge about the complexity of the political process. Little credit is given to the very difficult charge of mastering how to keep hundreds of congressional Democrats who are beholden to their constituents, most of whom have divergent interests. Moreover, the Democrats have been a minority party that has had little influence, which should be obvious from the votes for the $1.5 trillion that has gone to the donors and 1%ers and Nunes and others in the Republican Party. Policy and political savvy are needed; I'm not sure that I've yet heard much from the new generation and their recognition about how complex the policy process is. Nonetheless, I salute them and look forward to their standing for office, getting out the vote, and voting, in numbers to overturn the horror that has been policy decisions by the Republic Party.
111
@AR
I believe the yung-uns' chief complaint is that Pelosi and other congressional septuagenarians have had decades to groom and mentor younger politicians to share the task, enliven it with new ideas, and connect with younger voters.
1
"Really miss those good old days." My goal is to retire to the 1970s. Yes there was much evil, but there was less despondency. And real estate prices were a whole lot lower.
25
@gnowell Anything pre-Reagan Restoration would be better.
1
@gnowell But, but.....disco! And those platform shoes!
The age and race of Congress looks less and less like America. While I do appreciate the need for earned experience and age shouldn’t be a disqualification, I want leadership that is REPRESENTATIVE, not white and stuck in old-think modalities. The leadership are luddites. Comfort and fluency with technology is becoming critical in all aspects of life and Congress members (not just their staff) needs to grok that.
15
As the median age of the US population has continued to rise, it is possible that those over 60 are more aware through experience and education than those under 35 about US history, its government and economics . One wonders what percent of millennials have studied the role of the Federal Reserve in their high schools as compared to 50 years ago? How many young people who voted for Bernie Sanders knew that he had done a film documentary about Eugene V. Debs and who that was? Many of those who grew up in the 1960s continue to work for nuclear disarmament, environmental legislation, preserving social security and Medicare.. Pelosi is a Democrat like Obama, means that she is central, liberal, and progressive. To malign her is to play into Republicans fear mongering to keep the House in hands.
161
That may be true. But does the opposite than solve the problem. It kicks it down the road til someone kicks the bucket.
@Alan J. Shaw
Eugene V. Debs: a well-known socialist, a supporter of workers' unions. I believe I would enjoy that documentary very much.
Pelosi: Central? Yes. Liberal? Yes. Progressive? No. I do know what she stands for, and I don't want her.
As at least one writer has noted, I’m more interested in political position than age. I’m fine with Pelosi, actually. She’s a firebrand who’s done a good job, which is why the Republicans want her out. DiFi has always been on the conservative side. The pressure from the left has pushed her to the left and to stand up to Republicans. Good. That said, I don’t think 50-ish is all that young, which is the age of many of the new pols. If they are shaking up positions on gun control, etc., that’s the main thing. I think we need to offer a real choice.
78
Joe Biden may be in his mid-seventies but he's still physically spry and more mentally alert than Republicans half his age.
BTW:
Not all of Spartacus' followers were crucified. Tony Curtis got stabbed to death- by Spartacus.
47
@stu freeman, i agree about joe. Most important, he alone can win, succeed, and step down after one term if that makes sense. The rest? Meh.
8
@stu freeman
Although Roman law permitted the execution of slaves, I guess the women who followed Spartacus in Howard Fast's novel were not crucified, and at least one woman Varinia, portrayed in the film by Jean Simmons, escaped with her and Spartacus' child.
1
I love how Biden never holds back. Whether he's being feisty or whether he's weeping for a lost friend, what you see is what you get with Joe Biden. He's a likable example of someone who tells it like it is.
3
"This is for every single kid who fears for their life," said Alfonso Calderon, a Stoneman Douglas student. "This is something serious. It is about human lives."
Why are these students not being heard at all by the Democratic campaigns around the country? For the Democratic geriatrics to dismiss a whole generation of highly motivated articulate and focused young people is akin to a death wish. These great great grandchildern should be speaking at every rally advocating for a cause Pelosi's generation is completely oblivious to. If they are not heard and taken seriously, we lose an important demographic of the population when they don't show up on election day. They need their cause to be recognized and taken seriously.
62
@h-from-missouri
You are right that the Stoneman Douglas students and other young March For Our Lives deserve more visibility in Democratic campaigns.
But I'm struck by your quotation from Alfonso Calderon: "It is about human lives."
As Paul Krugman argued a few weeks ago, Pelosi was the greatest Speaker in modern times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/opinion/nancy-pelosi-midterms-democra...
I would add that her skill at the Speaker's specific and difficult and unglamorous job of shaping legislation and counting votes got the Affordable Care Act enacted. And by providing coverage for millions of people who weren't covered before, the ACA has saved the lives of tens of thousands of Americans.
50
@h-from-missouri
Actually, millennials are so unmotivated and self-absorbed that only 1 in 5 of them voted in 2016. You would think they would have the brains to know that elections have consequences and that elections will have a huge effect on their lives, but apparently the young cannot look up from their smart phones and video screens long enough to bother voting.
1
@h-from-missouri
Are they being heard by Republicans? No they are being totally dissed as paid actors. I think most of us who consider ourselves Democrats are hearing them.
1
Lots of comments here about the old war horses needing to step aside.
Well, we have elections. In the House, those elections occur every two years. It seems Ms. Pelosi's constituents aren't that anxious for her to spend more time with her grandchildren. I was one of those constituents. I voted for her starting with Pelosi's first run in '76 until I left SF 15 yrs ago. I think its time for a change, but I also am aware that a more accurate nickname for ACA would be Pelosicare, because it was Nancy Pelosi who got that law passed in the House.
The Constitution specifies minimum ages for elected offices; no mention of maximum ages. If people believe there should be an upper limit, let them initiate the constitutional amendment process. First task; get it passed by the old war horses in Congress. Good luck with that.
64
We have an agenda benefitting old people with capital. Most senators are millionaires, many house members are. And even when they were public servants all their life.
1
Sorry, but age does matter.
Nobody is the same at 70 as he or she was at 50.
The body and mind slow up, whether one likes it or not or whether one is willing or not to admit it.
Knowing when to call it quits gracefully is perhaps the greatest act of one's career, as prominent as one might be.
For every exception to the rule there are the many who cling to their positions and end in "second childishness and mere oblivion".
31
@Joshua Schwartz
Nice that you quote Shakespeare, but try Browning's "Grow old along with me, the best is yet to be." 80 year old Maxine Waters is the most courageous, outspoken and articulate critic of Trump in Congress and anywhere on the public scene.
2
@Joshua Schwartz
Tell that to Trump.
When ever I get discouraged and recently that happens a lot, I remember that Cher is my age so I soldier on.
143
With eight decades behind me, I still have the mental capacity to protest! Despite her caveats towards the end of her op-ed, this was as ageist as it gets. (No excuse that it comes from the keyboard of a septuagenarian). My representative in Congress was the excellent Louise Slaughter, who recently died aged 88. She was as alert, enthusiastic and mentally young in her last term as when she was first elected to the House in 32 years ago, and I would have cheerfully voted for her again this November.
My complaint is not at the Democratic leaders’ ages but that many of them haven’t kept up with young Democratic values – or, to be more accurate, old ones that seem to have been forgotten and are now being rediscovered. Don’t worry, Gail. For the first time in years I sense that the Democratic Party is renewing itself from the grass roots up – and not in small part thanks to the inspiration of an old codger called Bernie Sanders.
As an aside, I believe that one the most recommended contributors to these comments is well into his 90s.
229
@mancuroc
Can the Democrats in Congress really move affairs as long as seniority rules apply? I raise the question, but I don’t have an answer.
1
"Critics from the left howled when Feinstein — the top-ranking Democrat — apologized to Brett Kavanaugh when the hearing on his Supreme Court nomination was disrupted by protesters. Feinstein is a centrist from the old school, which generally means more politeness and less twittering."
Feinstein wasn't just being old-fashioned here, she was being smart. Kavanaugh should have faced grilling by Senators and then his lame responses, not yelling demonstrators, would have been the story. Moreover, we watch a coarsening of our culture with every day of the Bigmouth-in-Chief; Democrats should have higher standards for ourselves than Trump & Co. have for themselves.
There is no end of objections to raise about Kavanaugh. The right way to voice them would be by calling or writing your Senators and expressing why he doesn't belong on the Supreme Court.
156
@NM How is polite being smart when the other side is willing to break all norms to win?
@NM
I do write to my senator. Last week I received a response from Cardin to a letter I wrote to him last year. Get him out. Replace him with a real progressive.
1
Assume that the appropriate qualities for leadership are: a vision; an ability to articulate and communicate that vision; an ability to convince masses of people that the vision is beneficial to the country without being terribly disadvantageous to themselves; an ability to convince other politicians/leaders to implement the vision; and an ability to marshall and manage the resources necessary to implement the vision. Now run that through a political process that is overwhelmingly focused on sloganeering, money-raising and taking campaigns to the lowest common denominator.
Ronald Reagan pulled it off. Bill Clinton sort of did. Barack Obama almost did, although he was hampered by having to deal with a terrible economic situation (significantly worse than Reagan). They were all basically Washington outsiders. This piece is all about the Washington insiders - wrong focus.
8
It’s great that these pols in Congress can keep chugging along past 65 years of age until they or God decide it’s time for them to quit. Unfortunately, we constituents in the private sector are eliminated, sometimes before 65, from the workforce because who needs expensive baby boomers when you can get millennials and Gen-Xers for less. When the workforce participation ratio in such a strong economy is not rising, you know baby boomers are being sent into force retirement. I’m surprised more baby boomers are not making their first run for Congress – you get elected and you’re literally set for life!
34
Cory Booker is not going to be President. I wish these people would do the jobs they were elected to do instead of jockeying for a spot on the 2020 ticket.
64
@BrianJ: You're right. He's probably going to be Vice President as of January 2021.
25
@BrianJ so who SHOULD be running then?
Very few politicians can get away with being forward thinkers, or even thinkers. Especially after Citizens United, they are paid to protect the status quo. That’s where all the money is. Or, they’re paid to ignore big business and not ask too many questions. Think Facebook or Google. Of course, most Congressmen and Senators are so old and hidebound they don’t even care to try to understand the social and political implications. They leave that to the young interns.
The status quo kills progress. Citizens for the most part want to stay in their own small world. Very few people outside of the scientific community or the arts truly challenge themselves. Teachers might say they do, but if they really did, education would be a lot better. Journalists certainly did not challenge themselves during the Bush campaigns.
Youth should be about challenges and envisioning the future. The society and attendant educational system in place during all the years Pelosi and Feinstein, etc. have been in power has not lived up to that. Raising money is great, but they didn’t even bother to question why they had to.
I’m old and I would like to see better. I think young people can do it.
24
I'm getting older myself, but if the Democratic party wants to excite younger voters, there have to be some young-ish leaders and candidates (early 50's and lower counts). Do you old guys remember how extremely ancient people in their 70's (or heaven forbid, 80's) seemed when you were young? Yes you've got a lot left to give, but it doesn't need to be as the marquee leader. I love Nancy Pelosi for all the good she has done (she's actually my congressperson), but after all these years people are just tired of her. (It happened to Churchill; it happens to everybody.) If, as she appears to think, there is nobody who can do what she does, she needs to bring the young-uns up to speed. Fast would be good.
347
@Bob G. +1. Bang on. How can the enthusiastic youth get excited by their grandparents generation? Love you all (especially Joe) and thank-you for your service but please move aside Dianne, Nancy, Bernie, Joe, Elizabeth, Steny and so on, just bow out and mentor your successors.
There is only one exception to this oldies-must-go rule, and he has the smarts to step aside anyway and pursue better things—our soon-to-be-lamented governor Jerry Brown, a wise old man if ever there was one.
1
@Bob G.
I'm not tired of her.
1
At a certain point, older* Dems in leadership need to step aside, and allow younger leaders to step up, for the simple reason of image - image attracts votes, and attracting votes are what the party is all about.
However, stepping aside from leadership rolls need not mean resigning from Congress, or not being available to help those younger leaders stepping up, nevertheless the party has a face/image to project, and that should be a face/image of energetic vitality and relevance.
Perception is very often reality, and this is no way denigrates what Dem leaders did in the Obama years (and since) especially Nancy Pelosi rounding up the Dems to unilaterally save the banking system 10 years ago.
Of course, whichever Dems step up will soon become targets of the right wing media smear machine, but the depth of the Dem bench is more apparent if the older leaders want to still stick around (with their obvious experience) AND the able, younger leaders step up to show their stuff.
This is not a problem with an 'either' 'or' answer - the answer is 'both'.
* = author is 60+, so this opinion is not an ageist slur
96
@R. Law Their is nothing wrong with finding a younger vice-chair for the committee assignments, matching newly elected with old hand sponsors/mentors, significant interest/constituency representation, and just the simple areas of political civility, voter appeal, and proper language and speaking.
3
@R. Law: Pushing 70 (and feeling it) I couldn't agree with you more. Another commenter laid it out as well, the dems are doing nothing to groom the future, they've no plan for longevity. Pelosi, Feinstein, et. al. should have the grace to accept their lifetime achievement awards and become ambassadors, mentors and architects of the future.
4
All fair points. Many I've argued myself. The one point where I may offer a polite refutation is regarding millennials. They are not coming. Millennials are already here. With all due respect, I'd just as soon skip over the Gen-X Democrats with their Reagan propensities and go straight to the new generation.
I mean this with all the ageist subtext the words imply: Gen-X politicians are place holders on the way to something better. I like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris just fine. However, they both lack genuineness in the same way that is signature of the Gen-X political sphere in general. They reek of ambition. Allow me to suggest this: Ambition does not play well among millennials.
To be fair, I'm not sure why Ms. Collins mentions Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden for 2020. Either one could have won in 2016. However, both candidates have aged-out now. Their messages will live on, Sanders in particular. However, Elizabeth Warren is the only person in the age bracket with even a running chance at the nomination. Her job would be a lot easier if the Feinsteins and the Pelosis would just retire already. Who would replace them anyway though? More Gen-X politicians.
Like I said, we need to skip a generation in politics. The good news is time is currently on the millennials' side.
24
I’m Gen X and so is Obama, who is almost exactly my age. What’s your point? Some of us just got voted down, and down, and down. It’s not because we didn’t try.
@Andy
Too bad millennials do not vote. Had they voted in the same proportions as other demographics in 2016 we might not have ended up with T-Rump.
Only 1 in 5 eligible millennials voted in 2016. Maybe they just do not get that elections have consequences.
4
Expecting politicians to set a good example is laughable. But on this issue, voters are not covering themselves in glory either.
The generic concerns I hear about older politicians are the same I've heard expressed in corporate America for decades ... need new ideas, low energy, health concerns. At least in recent years, most corporations at least try to hide their ageism (more so in firing than hiring in my experience).
This isn't a legal question of course. You can't stop someone from voting against someone due to age (or race, or gender, or religion, ...). But it's a question worth considering.
So what's it going to be? Is ageism OK or not? Reasonable standards or pick and choose depending on the results you want today subject to change tomorrow?
18
The lack of term limits and the manner selection of committee chairs by seniority in Congress prevents change and entrenches the eldest. Incumbency is favored in elections as well. The permanence of appointments to the Supreme Court, with no retirement age, compounds the effects. The people who wrote the rules based the system on the shorter lifetimes of their era.
14
@Harpo: Nah; they based them on the fact that they, too, didn't want to surrender power voluntarily.
13
Mold is cool for now. The older the Dems are now, the better for the future of the country. Not necessarily politicizing nursing homes in the near future, but making room for immigrants to quickly assimilate into leadership roles of the Democratic party, after the current batch retires. Revitalizing the promotion of education will increase the likelihood of recent immigrants as registered Democrats, supporting more powerful recent immigrants heading the Democratic party will increase prosperity and increase rapid advancement that hard working people strive for. A forward thinking Democratic party with powerful leadership to reform immigration, education, and healthcare concerns will strengthen the economy long term.
6
My question about Nancy Pelosi is whether she is grooming her successors. Being willing to step aside from leadership and be a mentor to the next generation of leadership would be a marvelous thing for the long-term future of the Democratic Party, of which she will not be a part.
223
@macduff15 Exactly -- this is what is missing from govt - any org would do this, and it is the main reason I fault Pelosi -- she needs to step up and show a diverse (in all ways, including age) slate of successors for major committees. Representation aligned with the US demographics today should be a major focus of this succession planning, if they truly claim to be 'for the people'
12
@macduff15. I agree! I’Ve been wondering about that for a long time: is Nancy’s Pelosi grooming younger successors? It would be the best thing she could do for the Democratic Party.
She has been an excellent speaker and leader, but it’s time to step down with the gratitude of many.
2
It's always been frustrating being at the tail end of the boomer generation. Sure, we got great music, and the whole world bent to the wishes of our generational cohort. But by the time us tail-enders came along, everything had been taken. All the good jobs were gone, Nixon had plunged us into the beginning of a series of Republican recessions, and we always struggled to be accepted by the leaders of our generation.
That's what happened to the Democratic party as well. The leading edge boomers crowded out all of the next levels down, so now, as the time has come for them to be replaced, a generation of potential leaders gets skipped.
The leading edge boomers have about reached their sell-by date. If my trailing edge cohort never gets its chance to lead, I think we're comfortable with the next generations, particularly the millennials.
80
Nov 1958 here. Thank you for nailing the plight—and the forward-looking—of tail-end Boomers.
I would add to your list of cohort disadvantages the raising of the full retirement age. May SS still offer yearly increments until 70, when I can finally (perhaps) afford to retire
14
@Justin, Nancy Pelosi et al are not boomers. Trump is a "leading edge boomer" at age 72; anyone older than 72 is not a boomer.
Btw, it was never so easy for boomers at all points in the age range - but those for us born in the middle, it meant competing with millions of our peers for college admission and jobs.
The first recession I experienced was in the '70s, when my career was just beginning. I weathered several more over the last few decades - then since age 50, ageism kicked in.
I would like to see a Congress that represents a wide range of ages, from 20s on up. But I've been hearing for at least 15 years that everyone over 50 should just step aside and disappear, and I'm sick of it.
And I can't help but notice that the ageism is most sharply targeted at women.
75
Excellent. Obama is a tail end boomer, though.
I just turned 60, and as an old white man, I'm still much younger than all of the democrats mentioned in this article. No offense to all of these elders, but it's time for new and younger blood. We need new ideas from people who aren't constrained in their thinking by multiple decades of bureaucracy and seniority. I want all the best parts of democratic socialism - medicare for all; campaign finance reform; paid family leave; reasonable costs for college students, etc. I want to be hopeful about our country again, and I'm willing to pay more in taxes for it. I am no longer willing to settle for old white people telling me why none of these things can be achieved. It's been happening for years in better countries than ours all over the world. Let's make it so here.
682
@markymark: Most of the people who have been telling you it can't be achieved are in the Republican Party, which is the party that actually controls the government. The elders of the Democratic Party are not the biggest obstacle to the realization of your goals. Maybe not even the third or fourth biggest obstacle.
1
@markymark
What you say would be true if not for people like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. These are exactly the people who have been saying all along that the best parts of democratic socialism CAN be achieved.
1
@markymark I'm a 67 year old white woman. I hate that TIME photoshopped Pelosi's image on last weeks cover so she looked like she was 50. Pictured here, she looks good for 78...I'm ready for some younger ideas in Congress.
I was there when the "Don't trust anyone over 30" movement began. It was at Berkeley, all these almost educated students were of the opinion that the rest of the population was out of time and did not understand the current scene. In many ways they were right, their elders listened to different money and voted for fossils that thought and acted like they did.
I can remember thinking my elders were not keeping up also. We old people get more conservative, much of it has to do with experience, and education. We can see the past, we have lived through times we would not wish on the new generation. Ask them about Fascism, they get that blank look. When California instituted term limits, I could see the loss of what os called corporate memory, and we ended up with legislature controlled by lobbyists who know the way to get their laws done. The old sly politicians were gone, the lobbyists became deal makers.
Yes we need new blood in congress, but we need the Pelosies to show them how to get things done, she is their fund raiser, she is effective, the GOP sure does want her out.
Yu want to get rid of old white men, better look and see what you are replacing them with. people who think they can just go in and change everything. Well the more things change, the more they stay the same. Learn from experience, not from demagoguery, the have fought those battles and the rookies have not.
249
@David Underwood The question for me isn't whether Pelosi should run or get re-elected. It's whether she should continue in the role in which she has been so succesful. It's time for her to make way for a new speaker.
6
@S North
Nothing stopping a Dem House from electing a new speaker next year.
It's really not that complicated. For much of the population, it's really difficult to get excited about electing an 80 year old. Let's face it, politics is as much about popularity as policy. Trump is all popularity and zero policy. That is if you want to call white nationalism, economic isolationism, xenophobia and racism "policy". Fortunately, without any coherent and functioning policies, except chaos and constant lies, his popularity is finally fading.
People got excited about Barack Obama. His vigor, his smile, his attitude, his eloquence. He has that fire that gets people motivated. Joe Biden, a great American, has lost that fire he once had. He's pushing up against 80. We all slow down as we age. It's natural. You become the wise old sage. Let those younger warriors swing the sword. The sage should tell them when to swing it.
Elizabeth Warren still has lot's of fire, but I must say, she appears to be getting rather thin and frail. Being president is the hardest job in the world. Her diminishing physicality is a sign of future decline. If I noticed it, others will too and certainly her opponents will make big deal out of it. Why not elect a younger woman who is more robust? Warren's ideal time was 2016, but she demurred to the one whose time was preordained.
Let's invest in a new generation of politicians. Let's play long ball. The experienced people can still participate as their wisdom is priceless. But we need some sword swingers.
407
@Bruce Rozenblit Wisely said. I noted my energy diminishing considerably at age 65 and it continues to diminish at age 69. I have canvassed and phoned for Democratic candidates for the past 20 years. This year in particular the canvassing is particularly exhausting. I asked the campaign of a local candidate last weekend where all the 40-year-olds, 50-year-olds, and 60-year-olds are, as well as Millenials (who are often paid interns but not volunteers). Are we Boomer elders going to be canvassing in wheelchairs and walkers because noone else participates or cares? Even as a volunteer I'm happy to hand over the torch to younger generations. Would think that public servants in my age group upward would feel the same way, while remaining as advisors in the background. Let go!
14
@Bruce Rozenblit
BRAVO!!
76 year old white woman
1
@Bruce Rozenblit The sad truth that Democrats must face is that in today's America competence is not the most important quality to have in a candidate. The proof is that many young people decided not to vote in the last presidential election because Hillary didn't inspire them. So they were willing to risk handing over the most powerful nation in the world, a country that is holding together that world, to an unqualified con artist. That tells you all you need to know about the danger of running candidates who don't inspire. Trump was a non politician, one who vowed to focus only on American (mostly economic) interests. He was also entertaining, funny.
I am utterly convinced that if Hillary had been young and beautiful she would have won. Many young people just didn't want to be lectured to by an old woman. The tragic fact is that people vote for the wrong reasons. Our education of civics has failed miserably. Many proporitize appearance and speaking ability over managerial expertise. So if we put up a tall, handsome, young person who can make inspirational speeches, his/her qualifications would be basically irrelevant. Until the Democrats wake up to this fact they will not get back control of government.
I'd like to see a dual presidency. One being the young, handsome inspirational leader who interacts with the public. An actor, basically. The real president making policy and decisions would be an unattractive but very smart and qualified manager who runs things.
The last election offered two 70 and over options for President. Granted, a few younger Republicans ran in their primaries but none had a national presence before the primaries.
I agree that it’s time for a younger generation to move into leadership roles. Until this year I haven’t seen many taking the steps to do so; they seem very complacent to let their seniors continue to lead.
23
All the members of Congress need a voice, not just the leadership. There are many new ideas running around in the heads of our elected representatives, of all ages, and seniority doesn't automatically bestow wisdom. Let the youngsters have significant roles; they may surprise you.
39
It is not age. The dividing line is around these two things, considered to be virtues in this column, "a caucus of moderate party members" and "a fund-raiser of manic capacity and energy."
Many voters, like me, don't consider those things to be virtues. They are the problem.
Some of the oldest know that, like Bernie and Warren. Many of the youngest know it.
It does not matter how old might be, he's already left behind, when she would write of him, "Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut. Himes, 52, is the New Democrat Coalition, a caucus of moderate party members."
27
So much of the criticism of Pelosi (just like with Clinton) often relates to her gender. Pelosi worked to pass financial reforms (which Trump and the Republicans are committed to undo) and the Affordable Care Act. The era could be called the Pelosi years just as easily as it is referred to the Obama era. Those two accomplishments alone show how successful she has been.
617
@Mal Stone
Success is highly relative. What's happened to the party and its legislative seat losses has to be factored in. Once it is, it drags quite a bit on that success.
Enduring policy ideas are what matters. Healthcare for all endures. Pelosi is opposed. Free college is a must going forward. She opposed it. The military-industrial and surveillance complexes have thrived at our collective expense. She's supported them.
Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, and the new young incoming progressives will lead the way going forward. We need change if we are to survive what comes next.
11
@Mal Stone
I absolutely agree. Without Nancy Pelosi, there would not be an Affordable Care Act. SHE made it happen.
1
@Mal Stone
That is the reason republicans have savaged her.
She is great at her job and instead of defending her the democrats cower at any criticism and go on defense.
They should knock it off and appreciate anyone who is effective.
9
Age is one issue. The top leadership of the Democratic party, in both houses of Congress, is dominated by whites older than age 72. The Silent Generation has done more than enough. The generations after it are old enough and mature enough to take over.
Centrism is the other issue. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Patty Murray, Steny Hoyer and a slew of other top Democrats have quietly worked against the interests of their own voters, favoring corporate donors over the rest of us. They've also work hard to keep progressives from sharing power. The latest from Pelosi is that she will "handcuff the Democratic agenda" if Democrats retake the House.
Pay as you go isn't the right way to go, not when tens of millions of Americans are barely keeping head above water.
Then, there is the voter anger over the quiet way Democrats have handled Trump. Voters want to hear about impeachment. Nancy talks about e pluribus unum and finding common ground.
Most of us find nothing in common with mafias and oligarchs. Trump needs to be in jail, with the rest of his retinue of white supremacist thugs. Today's news about 12,300 children being held captive by Trump's white supremacist government doesn't add to an already sour mood.
Go home, Nancy. Thanks for your service.
===
https://www.rimaregas.com/?s=nancy+pelosi
The Millennials are coming and it can't be soon enough.
251
@Rima Regas
"Voters want to hear about impeachment."
What voters? The 27% of the electorate who are registered Democrats? I'm not a Dem, but i would love to see Trump impeached if warranted. But if that's what a Dem is running on, then i'm figuring they have nothing else on offer. Say Trump does get impeached, what's he going to be replaced by? The same politicians and policies that got us here in the first place?
Want this Independent's vote, don't talk impeachment. Talk about what you'll fight for. Single payer healthcare? Jobs, wages, housing? I'll consider it. Focus on impeachment, and you can look elsewhere for a vote.
24
@Rima Regas
The fact that Nancy Pelosi wants candidates to talk about Trump’s corruption instead of his impeachment is evidence of what, exactly? That she’s cozying up to the administration? Nonsense. She wants to win as many Democratic House seats as possible, and believes that beating the drum over impeachment ahead of the midtermswould be over-playing a strong hand.
103
@rtj
7 out of 10 Democrats want to hear about impeachment. I wasn't calling for a singular focus on impeachment. Pelosi, when speaking publicly about it, called for e pluribus unum. Those are her words. Just looking at the behavior of this GOP and its leader, speaking for myself, I am not interested in cooperation. I am interested in a thorough de-infestation job. I am also interested in a Democratic leadership that is keeping count of all the things Trump and his bandits have been undoing, and that includes shifting funds from programs Congress funded, to their white supremacy immigrant imprisonment operation.
Establishment Democrats still don't have a message, except when commenting on progressive issues, they're derisive.
It's been two years since Election 2016 and the Democrats don't have a message and are still rejecting a left flank that is resonating.
---
Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking' https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2ZW