This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

On January 3, 1977, I was starting my first-ever semester of college at Northwood Institute (now University). I was 19 years old. It was the same day that Apple Computer incorporated. The number one song on the Billboard Hot 100 was "You Don't Have to Be a Star" by Marilyn McCoo and Billy Davis, Jr. The number one movie was Clint Eastwood's "The Enforcer." Gerald Ford was still president of the United States, although President-elect Jimmy Carter was named Time Magazine's "Man of the Year" on January 3. Among the new members of the 95th Congress sworn in that day, almost 40 years ago, was Utah's Orrin Hatch.

Utah's senior senator in 1977, Jake Garn, just one and a half years older than Hatch, retired from his Senate seat one year shy of a quarter century ago, or four Senate terms ago. There are older senators than Hatch currently serving (two), but none longer. Only eight senators in the history of Congress have served longer than Hatch and, if he were to serve and complete a seventh term, only three senators would have served longer – Robert Byrd, D-West Va.; Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii; and Strom Thurmond, R-South Carolina.

Political legacies are funny things. Despite decades of senatorial service, Byrd and Thurmond are mostly remembered for racist beginnings and pandering endings. Inouye's greatest legacy pre-dated his election to the Senate. Time served is not a legacy. Doing the right thing at the right time is the hallmark of a legacy.

Conservatives value the experience that often attends age. But Hatch didn't begin his Senate career as an old man. He was 43 years old when he defeated 18-year incumbent Frank Moss, not much older than Utah's junior Sen. Mike Lee when he defeated 18-year incumbent Robert Bennett. In fact, candidate Hatch famously asked his old opponent, "What do you call a senator who's been in office for more than two terms? You call him home."

Four years ago, when facing what he perceived to be a tough convention fight in the 2012 Republican primary, Hatch promised delegates that if they elected him, he would not seek to serve a seventh term. Of course, between then and now a lot has changed in Utah politics. The state Legislature's compromise on the Count My Vote initiative, SB 54, saved the caucus and convention system in Utah but cleared the way for Hatch to avoid another grueling and contentious convention. Rather than having to stare down his right-wing opponents, he can avoid repeating that embarrassing and costly experience by simply gathering signatures from the broader GOP — a no-brainer for a clever candidate as long in the tooth as Hatch.

But questions still remain for conservative voters. Chief among them involves the last two years of Hatch's current term. The historically disruptive election of Donald Trump makes the next two years the most important in a long time. A lot of politics and policy will occur before the 2018 mid-term congressional election. Would Hatch serve Utah voters better by focusing on his official duties over the next two years or by spending most of that time running for re-election?

And, no, he cannot do both effectively. Every minute he spends on his re-election is a minute not spent on official duties, and vice versa. Of course, that is the way it is every election, but this time it is different in scope and magnitude. Every minute Hatch spends on a seventh re-election bid is the equivalent of hours and days spent away from official duties in the era of Trump. Hatch will not be able to mail-in political influence.

In fact, in the era of Trump, the board is wiped clean on all previous or imagined influence. If there is any real message to come out of the 2016 presidential election it is the old, crony, establishment way of doing business is over. As they showed in the 2010 mid-term election, voters might believe that a 40-year incumbent is no longer the right sort of person to engage the volatility of the Trump era.

The key to Hatch's success will be the immediacy of his impact, not the prospect of his impact. He has two years to make a difference. Nobody cares what he has done for 38 years or what he promises to do until he is 90 years old. His past will be as politically meaningless as his future if and substantive action is not forthcoming from him between now and the 2018 mid-term election.

In other words, the key to Hatch's legacy will occur over the next 730 days, not the past 38 years, and there will be no legacy for him if he spends that time running for re-election.

Paul T. Mero is manager of ptmstrategies LLC.