Constitutional Amendment 28 (Proposed)

 

Before sending this to my respective U.S. Representative and Senator, I invite the Ricochet community to read, reflect and comment on the following proposed Amendment XXVIII to the U.S. Constitution:

As pertains to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5; and Amendment XXII, Section 1:

“No person shall be eligible to the office of President who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time of inauguration to the first term of service.”

It’s simple, direct, and addresses a multitude of problems. No candidate, no matter how seemingly hale and hearty, would be eligible if they have exceeded by two years the age of mandatory Social Security (seventy). The high physical and psychological demands of the presidency are indisputable; hoping that the normal and expected consequences of aging will not affect an individual’s capacity to perform the duties of President is wishful thinking at best.

If passed by Congress and ratified by the states prior to 31 December 2023, it would apply to the 2024 General Election. Both political parties would have sufficient time to adjust to the new requirement. Both sides of the “Blue-Red” divide would have the means to “save face” by turning aside from superannuated “senior leaders” whose “best days” are behind them.

Thoughts? 

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 70 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Yes!  Actually, I would suggest the age of 70.

    • #1
  2. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    I’d sign on for that

    • #2
  3. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    But aren’t there several senators over age 72 who think they should be president?

    • #3
  4. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    So a two-termer could get close to 80?

    • #4
  5. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    I would take out “to the first term of service.” Otherwise, someone who is 71 at the time of inauguration to his/her first term, if re-elected, would be 75 when inaugurated for the second term, and 79 when the second term ends. If 72 is too old, it’s too old regardless of whether the person has already served a term.

    So we would have:

    No person shall be eligible to the office of President who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time of inauguration.

    Done and done.

    • #5
  6. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But aren’t there several senators over age 72 who think they should be president?

    Yup. Might have to go to the Article V Amendment Convention for this.

    • #6
  7. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    On further reflection, I don’t think we should limit this to the office of President. So

    No person shall be eligible to Federal elected office who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time the oath of office is administered.

    I used the “oath of office” as a trigger point to cover all Federal elected posts.

    • #7
  8. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    On further reflection, I don’t think we should limit this to the office of President. So

    No person shall be eligible to Federal elected office who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time the oath of office is administered.

    I used the “oath of office” as a trigger point to cover all Federal elected posts.

    I wouldn’t make it “oath of office” since they might make it so no oath is given, to bypass the restriction.

    And you might want to specify “Earth years” while you’re at it.   Better yet, make it “time period for this planet to make one rotation about the Sun.”  Don’t even call it Earth, in case they pass legislation to change the name of the planet to “McConnellWorld.”

    And specify that 72 is in Base 10/Decimal.

    Because you can’t be too careful with those people.

    And 72 in Hex is 114.

    • #8
  9. Lawst N. Thawt Coolidge
    Lawst N. Thawt
    @LawstNThawt

    I think one question is do we think we can rely on the VP and the majority of the cabinet to declare that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.  If so, we probably don’t need another rule that would disqualify someone we might all agree would be the best one for the job.  There are some pretty sharp old people.  Of course, most of them are smart enough to not be in this question, so maybe we do need a retirement age. 

    • #9
  10. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    No. The people should decide. Technology will change what is ‘too old’.

    • #10
  11. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Hang On (View Comment):

    No. The people should decide. Technology will change what is ‘too old’.

    Then why can’t the people decide to elect someone younger than 35?

    • #11
  12. Chris Williamson Member
    Chris Williamson
    @ChrisWilliamson

    You’ve got company on the Democratic side.

    I don’t agree. No sense gumming it up with one more requirement.

    • #12
  13. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Forgive my curiosity, but does “inaugurated” encompass a possible “acting” presidency that starts out as an appointment with Congress’ confirmation to fill a vacant VP slot, and then that unelected VP merely succeeds to the office of Acting President when the incumbent has resigned, died, or has been ousted, per the 25th Amendment?

    Or are inaugurations strictly limited to winners of presidential elections?

    • #13
  14. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Hang On (View Comment):

    No. The people should decide. Technology will change what is ‘too old’.

    Then why can’t the people decide to elect someone younger than 35?

    Good point. They should be able to. 

    • #14
  15. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Hang On (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Hang On (View Comment):

    No. The people should decide. Technology will change what is ‘too old’.

    Then why can’t the people decide to elect someone younger than 35?

    Good point. They should be able to.

    Does your flexibility extend to people voting at whatever age they like?

    If not, why not?

    And if not, why not apply the same logic to ages of office-holders?

    • #15
  16. Ole Summers Member
    Ole Summers
    @OleSummers

    This would get some support because we are watching a human wreck waste away before our eyes. Truthfully, I feel there are a lot of other matters should be taken care of and are more pressing. There is no real order of importance here but term limits for both elected personnel and federal agencies, “sunset” rules requiring fed agencies to come up for review after a certain term, several that attack budget issues, the ability of the Congress and/or state legislatures to reverse a Supreme Court decision within five years of the decision with super majority ….. the list goes on. I believe any of these has a higher piority than this.

    But the point is made that the power of fed has to limited by the people most of it returning to the states. The politicos in Congress would be against all that woould helpful. Article Five Convention is probably the only route to get any of it done to save the republic

     

     

     

    • #16
  17. MoFarmer Coolidge
    MoFarmer
    @GaryBlake

    Could we get term limits added in there somehow?

    • #17
  18. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    On further reflection, I don’t think we should limit this to the office of President. So

    No person shall be eligible to Federal elected office who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time the oath of office is administered.

    I used the “oath of office” as a trigger point to cover all Federal elected posts.

    One small step in cleaning house.

    • #18
  19. Mark Alexander Coolidge
    Mark Alexander
    @MarkAlexander

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But aren’t there several senators over age 72 who think they should be president?

    I would add, “No one who has served in Congress as a senator shall be allowed to serve as President of the United States.”

    • #19
  20. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    There would definitely be bipartisan votes in Congress for it. 

    • #20
  21. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    I don’t want anything that keeps Trump from office.

    • #21
  22. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Does your flexibility extend to people voting at whatever age they like?

    If not, why not?

    And if not, why not apply the same logic to ages of office-holders

    3-year olds should not be voting. Live 80-year-olds should be voting.

    This is so obviously aimed at Trump while claiming to be aimed at Biden.

    • #22
  23. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    There would definitely be bipartisan votes in Congress for it.

    I’m not so sure.  Most House members could dream of one day being Senators, and Senators probably dream of being President.

    • #23
  24. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    No.  I prefer the voters to determine who is the best person for the job and sometimes someone over 70 is just fine.  The problem is that this time the man who is in office wasn’t elected, the ballot boxes were stuffed.

    • #24
  25. ToryWarWriter Thatcher
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    Meh.

     

    I think the USA would be better served by barring anyone from being President who hasnt done a single term as governor of a state.  

    It would solve so many problems, and provide a record of accomplishments and failures for any candidate.  

    • #25
  26. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    Meh.

    I think the USA would be better served by barring anyone from being President who hasnt done a single term as governor of a state.

    It would solve so many problems, and provide a record of accomplishments and failures for any candidate.

    And would have blocked Trump, but then again if we hadn’t had Obama and so many other non-governors, Trump might not have been necessary.

    There have been plenty of whacko governors, though, who became president.  Carter, Clinton…

    • #26
  27. Lawst N. Thawt Coolidge
    Lawst N. Thawt
    @LawstNThawt

    • #27
  28. Rightfromthestart Coolidge
    Rightfromthestart
    @Rightfromthestart

    I would have thought 75 but 72 or 70 would be ok.

    We also need an amendment fixing the number of Supreme Court Justices at nine since one party keeps threatening to change the rules whenever they lose.

    • #28
  29. ToryWarWriter Thatcher
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    kedavis (View Comment):

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    Meh.

    I think the USA would be better served by barring anyone from being President who hasnt done a single term as governor of a state.

    It would solve so many problems, and provide a record of accomplishments and failures for any candidate.

    And would have blocked Trump, but then again if we hadn’t had Obama and so many other non-governors, Trump might not have been necessary.

    There have been plenty of whacko governors, though, who became president. Carter, Clinton…

    I am well aware it blocks Ike as well.  But I think overall it would have worked out better.  

    • #29
  30. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    On further reflection, I don’t think we should limit this to the office of President. So

    No person shall be eligible to Federal elected office who shall have exceeded the age of seventy-two years by the time the oath of office is administered.

    I used the “oath of office” as a trigger point to cover all Federal elected posts.

    I wouldn’t make it “oath of office” since they might make it so no oath is given, to bypass the restriction.

    And you might want to specify “Earth years” while you’re at it. Better yet, make it “time period for this planet to make one rotation about the Sun.” Don’t even call it Earth, in case they pass legislation to change the name of the planet to “McConnellWorld.”

    And specify that 72 is in Base 10/Decimal.

    Because you can’t be too careful with those people.

    And 72 in Hex is 114.

    Brilliant. As Hicks said in Aliens, it’s the only way to be sure.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.