I read David Von Drehle’s Nov. 28 op-ed piece “It’s Time to Give It a Rest, Baby Boomers” with mixed feelings. Certainly he raises a valid point that we need not rely on septuagenarians to fill the White House in 2020 (Democrats, are you listening?). In fact, while we’re at it, maybe Bernie Sanders and Pat Leahy ought to give some thought to stepping aside for younger, fresher input.
Whether we like it or not, baby boomers have been in positions of power in finance, government, entertainment and industry, and it’s difficult for them to gracefully relinquish it. I suggest the ideal role for baby boomers is not in positions of power but of influence. Numerous retired executives capably assist small business owners through SCORE, and have lent their experience and expertise to solving financial problems in various levels of government.
Von Drehle may have a point in claiming older adults “tend to be slower in conceptualizing and less ready to change strategies when circumstances shift” and “tend to rely more on prior knowledge about the problem domain and less on new information,” but he’s off base in stating “the brain reaches its peak processing power by age 20.” Studies show that frontal lobe development, especially in males, is not finalized until age 26 (a strong argument against legalizing marijuana). Recently I ran into a former Hartford selectman, whom I’d guess to be in his late 70s. His seasoned wisdom tempered with humility was extremely refreshing. Contrast him, if you will, with a 22-year-old college graduate who wanted the citizens of Hartford to defer to her “expertise” and “experience” on racial matters. Expertise? Remains to be seen. Experience? Not so much. Hubris? Over the top. It’s noteworthy that the early Christian church set 60 as the minimum age for “elders” or “presbyters” (literally, “old men”). There’s something to be said for seasoning and allowing the wisdom of years to be the “check” Von Drehle mentions. As an insurance commercial says, “We know a lot because we’ve seen a lot” — not really a bad thing, on balance.
William A. Wittik
Hartford
I would like to add a tip of the hat to Scott Labun, whose letter (“RIP, Grand Old Party,” Dec. 7) cited the death of the old, and once great, Republican party. It has become a party of sinister, greedy connivers.
Speaking of sinister, greedy connivers, I would add Sen. Mitch McConnell to Mr. Labun’s list. This devious snake of a politician, who is in a position of immense power, does not, in my humble opinion, have the best interests of the country at heart, but rather (a) the survival — nay, the dominance — of the Republican Party, and (b) the enhancement of his and his colleagues’ political futures. His refusal even to allow hearings for Judge Merrick Garland was outrageous and unconscionable, and it seems likely that such behavior will, some fine day, come back to bite him or his Republican heirs.
I suspect that a few years ago people like Karl Rove and the backroom boys of the GOP — clever folks, to be sure — saw the handwriting on the wall, noted the changing demographics of the country and the influx of immigrants and heard the ever-louder voices of younger (often liberal) voters, and decided they had better do everything possible to prevail — not only prevail, but to impose their narrow, ungenerous ideology on the country, and to thwart the Democrats at every turn. Under their new marching orders, the GOP will now do everything it can, legal or otherwise, to gerrymander congressional districts, suppress voting rights and tell bald-faced lies. The recent slapped-together tax bill is but one example. I cannot believe that many GOP congressmen and senators do not secretly acknowledge that their hastily cooked bill is anything but a bone tossed to their wealthy donors.
Whatever happened to the usual Republican outrage about the national debt? And, of course, they will welcome a repainted, made-over Roy Moore into their ranks.
The GOP is no longer, as Mr. Labun says, the Grand Old Party. The party of Lincoln, Ike and Reagan is dead.
A.E. Norton
Woodstock