The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Michael Cianchette is a Navy reservist who served in Afghanistan. He is in-house counsel to a number of businesses in southern Maine and was a chief counsel to former Gov. Paul LePage.
Age is just a number. Until it isn’t.
I’ve got one of those milestone birthdays this weekend, one where I enter a new decade. It is a little surreal.
I don’t feel any older than years past. Hopefully I’m a little wiser. I cringe looking back at some of the thoughts or ideas I had in my teens and 20s. That’s part of growing up. Done correctly, it is a process that never ends.
But sometimes the number means something.
Entering a new decade triggers a bunch of health metrics to rise on your radar. Maybe the additional year doesn’t change things by itself, but statistics work for a reason. Age and health are correlated.
It applies to politics, too.
The knock on President Joe Biden over the past month has focused on his age. After a disastrous showing in the June presidential debate, his ability to competently serve for another four years was in serious doubt. At 81 years old, it was a legitimate question.
Now that he has stepped aside, similar arrows are pointed at Donald Trump. The former president appeared more coherent and energetic at age 78 when contrasted with Biden. Whether that still holds true moving forward opposite the 59-year-old Kamala Harris is yet to be seen.
In many ways, we are in the midst of a generational change in leadership. The late California Sen. Dianne Feinstein held onto her office past her 90th birthday despite clear health failings.
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, revered by the American left, died in office at age 87. Some of her admirers rue her decision to not step aside during the Obama administration.
In contrast, Utah Sen. Mitt Romney made the decision to step aside at 77 years old. The former GOP presidential nominee acknowledged that some people remain strong and vigorous into their 90s, like Nebraska Sen. Chuck Grassley. But you never know.
Age may just be a number, but numbers mean things.
Having hard conversations about age and competence is one of the most uncomfortable things we can do. That is doubly-true when dealing with public office, for a variety of reasons.
One reason is because every individual is unique; population statistics writ large do not tell any particular story. There are some Maine leaders in their 80s who are strong, savvy, witty, and wise. They can do a great job. Others are more akin to President Biden.
Another reason, more cynical, is that older people vote at a higher clip than younger folks. Questioning a candidate’s ability to perform due to their age is likely offensive to a large voting bloc. Not a recipe for electoral success.
But President Biden’s decision to step aside — however voluntary or coerced it was — hopefully allows us to have those conversations more freely. We can question whether people born before the start of the Korean War are the best equipped to deal with some of the challenges in front of us, whether the rise of artificial intelligence or malicious actors utilizing social media to sow hate and discontent.
It may be uncomfortable, but it is a question that we should ask about Sen. Angus King. He has spent his entire tenure in Washington aligned with Democrats. Yet, as his political allies begin attacking Trump’s age, we should remember that King is two years older than Trump.
Age was a legitimate question for Biden. It is a legitimate question for Trump and King as well.
Regardless of the question, voters are almost certainly going to send King back to Washington for another six years. He will be 86 years old should he serve the entire term.
Age is just a number. But voters should ask whether that number has any meaning in deciding who we should send to serve in the U.S. Senate.
