• drdalek@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t cheer death, but this shouldn’t be allowed. At least we can move things forward from the headache her (really those around her, lets be real) refusal to resign.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It shouldn’t be allowed, by having term limits for all members of Congress and possibly an age cap. I would be OK with an age cap of 75 for anyone running for election, with exceptions for those who are already in office and surpass that age. After their term ends past age 75 they must retire. Term limits… maybe 2 or 3 terms, not sure

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Make it more scientifically oriented, peg it to the average age of noticeable mental decline caused by aging, at present that’s still mid to late 60s but it’ll feel less “arbitrary”

          • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately, anything that isn’t a hard number is just going to turn into a political cluster fuck.

            “What does ‘noticable’ mean? Let’s argue this for 30 years and never come to a decision.”

            The best way to “future” proof it would be to make the age get lower every decade until another constitutional amendment is passed.

            • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well with mental decline there’s actual diagnostic standards that can be applied to determine the statistical average.

              Like I said, we already have a general range, and a more precise number which can flex as statistics change wouldn’t be that much harder to achieve.

              I believe putting it under standards of medical and mental diagnosis protects it once it’s set in as a norm, a number is just a number, but a calculated number based on medical statistics exposes anyone challenging it to accusations of trying to weaken the government by opening the door for people in mental decline to cling on to power.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well with mental decline there’s actual diagnostic standards that can be applied to determine the statistical average.

                Agree. There are actual cognitive tests that exists today and that’s used by medical personnel.

                They could be purpose to test those in office as they get older, the same way that pilots have to get tested medically to maintain their license.

            • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well with mental decline there’s actual diagnostic standards that can be applied to determine the statistical average.

              Like I said, we already have a general range, and a more precise number which can flex as statistics change wouldn’t be that much harder to achieve.

              I believe putting it under standards of medical and mental diagnosis protects it once it’s set in as a norm, a number is just a number, but a calculated number based on medical statistics exposes anyone challenging it to accusations of trying to weaken the government by opening the door for people in mental decline to cling on to power.

      • bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        IMO we cap those running to where you cant run if your term would end if your age would be over 70. Ex: presidents can run at age 66, but not 67 because their age would put them at 71 at the end of their term

    • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      When the life in question is holding back an entire country out of sheer stubbornness, and in the absence of functional policy to deal with that situation, death is literally the only thing we can hope for.

      Cheer away. You didn’t put us in this situation, she did.

      • Liz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem was that replacing her on the judiciary committee will and would have taken 60 votes, meaning the Republicans will simply refuse to seat anyone and no more judicial appointments until the next election cycle. That’s why she couldn’t retire when it became necessary. She literally clung on in order to avoid Republicans further fucking up the country.

        • Xbeam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          She should have retired 15 years ago at 75. She helped create this problem.

    • Algaroth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just imagine the headache of having to replace her now. She should have retired like 30 years ago.