When the Going Gets Tough, Seniors Must Get Voting

With Social Security and Medicare facing harsh threats from various politicians, retirees must keep a close eye on the 2012 elections.

The recently-deadlocked super committee was the latest in a line of blue-ribbon panels -- preceded by Domenici-Rivlin and Simpson-Bowles -- that have debated, and in two instances recommended, drastic cuts in Social Security and Medicare, landmark programs that have helped generations of seniors stay healthy and out of poverty.

These threats to retirement security will continue unless two pillars of our fiscal debates change: 1) the false but widely-held belief that Social Security increases our deficit, and 2) our fundamentally-flawed tax and spending policies that drain federal coffers to benefit corporations and those in the top one percent of incomes.

The current field of GOP presidential candidates offers little solace to seniors who are worried that their Medicare and Social Security, or that of their kids and grandchildren, will be sacrificed to pay for even more tax breaks for those least in need.

For example, Mitt Romney has called for a higher Social Security retirement age, which would hurt blue collar workers far more than venture capitalists. He wants to move toward a privatized "voucher" system for Medicare that would have seniors buying coverage from insurance companies. This would be a taxpayer-subsidized gift for corporations that already enjoy exorbitant profits. Moreover, under Romney's Medicare, seniors would face great risk and anxiety, as its funding levels would face annual votes in Congress.

Newt Gingrich would privatize Social Security, allowing Wall Street to profit handsomely by managing individual accounts tied to the roller coaster of the stock market. After what we have seen in the past decade, do we really want Bear Stearns, AIG or Bernie Madoff getting their hands on our Social Security? Gingrich -- who once said he hoped Medicare would "wither on the vine" -- also supports a voucher program through private health insurance providers. The last time these companies got a piece of Medicare, courtesy of George W. Bush in 2003, it resulted in what the New York Times called, "a financial windfall larger than even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts had predicted."

America is getting older. The 2010 Census showed that the over 65 population grew by 15.1 percent, versus 9.7 percent for all ages. The 2012 elections will be the first in American history in which the majority of the voting age population is over 45. These demographic changes not only make Social Security and Medicare more important than ever, but they also give older workers and retirees more political clout.

But this increased political voice makes retirees a tempting target for election-year lies and scare tactics. We have already seen benign-sounding groups, such as RetireSafe and 60 Plus Association, that echo industry talking points in high-dollar advertising campaigns that mislead seniors.

The 2010 Affordable Care Act has been a particular target, despite the fact that it has helped over 2.65 million retirees save an average of $569 per year on their prescription drugs. These shameful efforts to scare seniors carry on the legacy started by Sarah Palin's baseless warnings about "death panels."

So what should seniors do between now and November? The most important thing will be to start separating fact from fiction in election year rhetoric. Retirees must reach out to their neighbors to help them better understand the issues and where the candidates stand. It's also important that they educate their children and grandchildren. It's truly time to bring people of all ages together to help save the American dream of a safe and secure retirement when our working days are done.

Social Security and Medicare are two great American success stories. Before, too many people worked until the day they died or lived out their final years in pain and poverty. Our nation has come a long way, and in the 2012 elections we cannot turn back.

Barbara J. Easterling is president of the Alliance for Retired Americans. She was previously the secretary-treasurer of the Communications Workers of America. For more information, visit www.retiredamericans.org or call 1-800-333-7212.

 

Follow Barbara J. Easterling on Twitter: www.twitter.com/activeretirees

Comments

[Royce09]

06:44 AM on 12/24/2011

Simple formula get rid oft social security and medicare for over 50 million baby boomers and balance the budget and get rid of the deficit. That is exactly what the GOP/Tea Party is dying to do. This protects the rich from a returning to a tax burden plus as ryan said, when can take the money we save on cutting these welfare programs ans give the rich additional tax cuts.

I think the message is clear, the gop/tea party wants to KILL off the baby boomers who have become a nusiance to them by being the largest welfare group in America now, ignoring the fact all of them have paid into these programs their entire lifes. The gop/tea party is pushing for the FINAL SOLUTION of the baby boomer problem - just give all of us baby boomers a pill please that will let us go into a peaceful sleep and have nice dreams and NOT WAKE UP, at least be humane about it and dont degrade us any more or put us on the streets to die in shame of being a burden on a country alot of us fought for and who are veterans, they spit on us coming back from Vietnam and now the GOP/Tea party is spitting on us again.

[freedomfries25]

08:05 PM on 12/21/2011

How convenient- she forgot to mention Obama's desire to cut ssi as well.

[A level Head]

05:44 PM on 12/21/2011

One of the biggest threats to the long term health of the Security system is the payroll tax reduction -- PAYROLL TAX is an euphemism for Social Security Tax -- So before ya'all pontificate on the Repubs trying to destroy SS it might be wise to ponder yet another "Progressive" idea that will come back to haunt the future.

[kat4show]

11:46 AM on 12/21/2011

Well for sure all those senior tea partiers will continue to vote against their own well being and then wonder "where their medicare went."
And all the younger TP people will wonder what happened when they find out they now have to pay their parents medical bills because , A)name me one senior or anyone else who will NOT have one pre-existing condition by age 65 and therefore be denied any insurance. (Just seeing a Dr. these days qualifies as a pre-existing condition.) and B) if by chance they do get some kind of "insurance" it will cover nothing and the voucher will be so limited so as to not begin to cover necessities. That's a guarantee.
So you all go ahead and put these nuts back in the white house and congress.

[hipocampelofantocame]

08:20 PM on 12/20/2011

Seniors have to realize that our present two party government is self-serving, and does not
have seniors' interests at heart. The two parties consist of (1) the entrenched incumbents,
and (2) the lesser others trying to become entrenched; bipartisanship does not apply here.
Almost all politicians running for federal office have long since been influenced by lobbyists,
and are in no way free and independent legislators. Nothing they say or promise in political
campaigns has any basis in fact. One must choose their candidates very carefully.

[beckjr2000]

01:46 PM on 12/20/2011

From Wikipedia "The Alliance for Retired Americans is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization of retired trade union members affiliated with the AFL-CIO". Interesting that only ideas being brought forth by Republicans are noted isn't it?

No where does she remark on the Obama Administration's Treasury and Labor departments asking for public comment on "the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams." The idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years! I'm from the Government and I'm here to Help (Myself)!

[beckjr2000]

01:46 PM on 12/20/2011

Yes, let's remember the "Death Panels". In reality this is the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a 15-member board, appointed by the president, scheduled to convene in 2014. The board would cap the total amount of money Medicare recipients could receive for care. Interestingly it's not only Republicans who are against it. Barney Frank along with 11 other Democrats have co-sponsored a bill to have the IPAB repealed. Under this panel 1. it is going to examine the medical evidence on how effective a certain treatment is likely to be in a certain population of patients. 2. will “let the doctors know” whether that treatment ought to be used in those patients. (“Letting the doctor know” is a euphemism for “guidelines,” which itself is a euphemism for legally-binding and ruthlessly enforced directives) 3. “Subjective” measures ought not to influence these treatment recommendations. Non-objective parameters – such as the doctor’s medical experience, intuition, or personal knowledge of the patient; or the patient’s “spirit,” or will to live, or likelihood of tolerating and complying with the proposed proposed treatment 4. since our government is a compassionate and caring one, and wishes to reduce unnecessary suffering, palliative care will be made available in the form of pain control, even while withholding potentially curative care!

[DennisByron]

12:33 PM on 12/20/2011

Seniors, to begin separating fact from fiction, as this left wing zealot requests above, begin by ignoring this article. This article is full of incorrect and misleading information about Medicare.

She says "... a privatized "voucher" system for Medicare... would have seniors buying coverage from insurance companies. This would be a taxpayer-subsidized gift for corporations that already enjoy exorbitant profits."

Seniors already are dependent on coverage from insurance companies because Medicare is such bad insurance.
-- 50% or so of seniors buy insurance (a few actually still get it "free") from their former employer through insurance companies.
-- 25% or so of seniors buy their insurance from insurance companies through Part C Medicare.
-- 15% or so of seniors get their healthcare insurance through insurers offering MediGAP policies highly regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
-- Even the few (under 10%) seniors that depend only on Parts A and B Medicare probably get drug coverage from insurers through Medicare Part D.
-- And their Parts A and B policies are administered by insurance companies such as Wellpoint and Blue Cross, not by some CMS paper pushers.

In addition, at least in Massachusetts where I live, very few insurance policies come from for-profit insurance companies

How can someone so ignorant of how Medicare works be allowed to speak for seniors? I would guess some one who understands Social Security as well as I understand Medicare would also find many errors in the author's above Social Security scare

[capitaldysfunction]

02:07 PM on 12/20/2011

"How can someone so ignorant of how Medicare works be allowed to speak for seniors?"

When it comes to people being ignorant of how Medicare works, Dennis, you take the cake. And since when did supporters of traditional Medicare become left wing zealots? You can take your Paul Ryan Republican privatization voucher plan for Medicare and gift it to private for profit health insurance companies, but no thanks, we'll keep traditional Medicare.