Commentary: Age should not be a factor for service of judges

We all know as we age we encounter common age-related physical changes. Our hearing and vision may get worse and there is the increasing probability of arthritis, hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis.

Cognitively, there may also be changes — both negative (the speed in which information is processed may decrease, and we may become more distracted) and positive (wisdom and creativity often continue and grow throughout our adult years).

But most importantly, we all age differently. As Elizabeth L. Glisky, University of Arizona professor at the Evelyn F. McKnight Brain Institute, states, “Although there are clear generalities and common principles that can be demonstrated in cognitive aging, what is perhaps most compelling about age-related cognitive change is its variability. Cognitive decline is not inevitable. Some older adults retain excellent cognitive function well into their 70s and 80s and perform as well or better than younger adults.”

Ballot Measure 94 acknowledges this variability— and the research regarding age and cognitive functioning that has ocurred since 1960 when Oregon voters passed the constitutional amendment requiring mandatory retirement for judges.

Age should not be a consideration for employment, whether you are old or young. It should be about competence and ability.

Adults older than 75 can still be mentally sharp and can still contribute. And the wisdom and perspective of older adults is needed now more than ever.

Lisa Gambee, Wasco County Clerk, and her Chief Deputy, David McGaughey, spoke at the Mid-Columbia Senior Center last Tuesday offering a fascinating look inside our local election process. But next Tuesday all the shouting will be over, thankfully!

To make sure your mail-in ballot arrives at the courthouse by 8 p.m. Tuesday, Lisa suggested you consider mailing it before Thursday since election day postmarks don’t count.