Doogan should disavow ageist remark about Wayne Anthony Ross

Then Doogan wrote, "Add to that the fact that he's reached an age where most men are retiring rather than taking a new job, and you had a recipe for disaster." You don't have to be a professional writer to appreciate the irony in his statement: it's OK to use discrimination based on age to fight discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender.

Thinking that perhaps end-of-session pressure was clouding his thinking, I asked Doogan via email to clarify his remarks. His non-answer was, in its entirety: "So you're saying that, at 66, most men AREN'T thinking more about retirement than taking a new job?"

Doogan's arrogance is stunning, not least because he assumes Ross is lying about wanting the job. Would he reject a female job candidate of child-bearing age on his assumption she's thinking about getting pregnant? The commonality is ignoring the relevant merits of the candidate in favor of baseless stereotypes.

Doogan implies that a 66-year-old lacks the staying power for the job, but the only thing lacking is Doogan's logic. We've had twenty attorneys general since statehood. The average tenure is only 2.5 years. Longevity? Please. It's just insulting to the Alaskans we all know who continue to make great contributions well past that age.

What if your father applied for a job and was turned down by an employer that said he was too old? It's not just stupid and shameful, it's also illegal courtesy of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and Alaska Human Rights Law, both of which prohibit age-based discrimination in hiring, firing, promoting and compensating workers. His own party platform condemns age discrimination.

Political appointees have been covered by the ADEA since 1991. These individuals may seek the assistance of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission if they feel they are the victim of age discrimination. In other words, what Doogan did may be a crime. Doogan can waffle as much as he wants: he clearly stated and re-stated that age was a factor in his vote.

Is age discrimination really a problem? Absolutely. Age discrimination complaints nationwide hit a record number last year: more than 24,000, an increase of 30 percent over 2007 and the most dramatic increase in any category of employment discrimination. Although workers age 45 and older have a lower unemployment rate than younger workers, they are a larger proportion of the long-term unemployed. Compared to younger workers, they are out of work much longer, and when they do find a job it replaces much less of their former income.

OK, so if it's a problem, how big is it? More than half of the 97,000 AARP members age fifty and over in Alaska - 3,000 in Doogan's district alone - are still working. Sixteen percent of the workforce nationwide is 65 or older, the highest percentage since the 1970s. Sixty percent of workers over age 60 said they are delaying retirement. That's a pretty big problem, and it's the reason the R in AARP no longer stands for retired.

One thing that's puzzling about Doogan's refusal to admit he's wrong is that he himself turned 60 years old last year. At least three of his Democratic colleagues in the House are older. Will Doogan campaign for their opponents in 2010? He should have the time, since by his own reasoning he should be "thinking more about retirement" and not running for reelection.

My son Sam will be four this summer. As he ages I don't want him discriminated against based on his number of years on the planet, his possession of a Y chromosome, or anything else not based on merit. Unfortunately that's not a vision for the future of Alaska that either Mr. Ross or Mr. Doogan appears to share.

Ken Osterkamp, Ph.D., is the state director for AARP, Alaska's largest membership organization, representing more than 97,000 Alaskans. He is 42 years old.