Opinion polling shows age limitations on elected officials are popular. It’s one of the few things members of both political parties (and the political middle) can agree upon. Inconveniently, many of those who are supportive of such limitations are guilty of electing those same aged politicians to office.

Allow me to take the unpopular stance and state we should not seriously consider imposing an age limitation on members of Congress (or any office, for that matter).

Mitch McConnell is 81 years old. Nancy Pelosi was 82 years old when she gave up her Speaker’s gavel. California’s Dianne Feinstein is the oldest U.S. senator at 90 years old. The leading candidates for President of the United States are 80 (Biden) and 77 (Trump). As my counterpart mentions, 25% of Congress is over the age of 70.

Congress would be better with age limit | POINT

I get it, those are high numbers.

But, what these politicians have in common is they were duly elected at some point in time by a majority of voters. I have no doubt the majority of voters in Nancy Pelosi’s district would tell you they support age limitations or term limits on members of Congress, but as she was elected with an incredible 71.7% of the vote in her last primary election, clearly the desire for a new perspective isn’t that strong in California’s 11th Congressional District. I use Pelosi only as an example, but you could easily say the same thing for almost any member of Congress that meets this criteria.

The primary motivation for such age restrictions is laziness at worst and apathy at best. In a democratic republic, we can self-impose term limits and age limits as individuals if we so choose. If you believe it is critical we put younger folks in office, you can enforce that rule upon your own ballot. Nobody is stopping you.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Imposing such a limitation universally rules out the possibility somebody over a certain age is capable of great things. Ageism! I’ve met many over the age of 70 I would trust a great deal more than somebody from my own generation. I should maintain the freedom to vote for that person if I believe they are fit to hold office. Effectively, what such a limitation says is that we don’t trust you, the voter, with that decision. Society has taken the liberty to decide for you.

Dare I say that sounds… antidemocratic?

Instead of arbitrary limitations on the numbers of years a person has been alive, or served in office, perhaps we could focus on educating a population of folks that cannot even name their own Congressperson.

Though most people reading my column online will undoubtedly disagree with my stance, I am blessed to know this will also appear in print, where my geriatric readers will hopefully be more appreciative.

Sage Naumann is a conservative commentator and strategist. He operates Anthem Communications and was previously the spokesman for the Colorado Senate Republicans. Follow him on Twitter @SageNaumann.