SENIOR CITIZENS' ISSUES

AGE WARS

The Social Security crisis of the early 1980s brought into focus the concept of intergenerational conflict, frequently referred to in the media as "age wars" or "the war between the generations." The 1960s had popularized the idea of a "generation gap," referring to the difference in values between the parents and children of that era. The 1980s took the seed of this idea and cultivated it into something markedly different. The idea gained increasing currency that the relationship between the older and the younger generations was being transformed by economic and demographic trends, trends that would continue to impact with rising urgency for at least the next fifty years. Specifically, older Americans in the 1980s were charged with claiming an unduly large share of federal resources through the Social Security system. Not only were Baby Boomers paying high taxes to support benefits for the elderly, but they were doing it at a time when they should be saving for their own retirements. Projections showed that when the 75 million-strong Baby Boom generation entered retirement in the early decades of the twenty-first century, the generation behind it, being much smaller—and saddled with paying interest on the huge deficits run up in the 1980s—would be unable to fund the tremendous costs of the baby boomers' Social Security and Medicare benefits. The idea of generational conflict, therefore, referred first to the conflict between adult baby boomers and their elders, the notion being that the elderly should forgo some of their excessive benefits in the interest of "generational equity." The idea of generational conflict also referred to the future, when elderly baby boomers would be competing with their children's generation for diminishing resources. In 1982, according to polls taken by many organizations, from Gallup to NBC News, the idea that there was a marked conflict between the generations was not supported. Skeptics claimed that the concept of "age wars" was a creation of the media. In 1985, however, Americans for Generational Equity (AGE) was organized "to promote greater public understanding of the problems arising from the aging of the U.S. population and to foster public support for policies that will serve the economic interests of next century's elderly." Formed by two U.S. senators, AGE became a principal catalyst for keeping public attention focused on what it believed was the growing risk of a serious clash between the generations.

Sources:

Jerry Gerber, Janet Wolff, Walter Klores, and Gene Brown, Lifetrends: The Future of Baby Boomers and Other Aging Americani (New York: Macmillan, 1989);

Philip Longman, "Age Wars: The Coming Battle between Young and Old," Futurist, 20 (January February 1986): 8-11.

The Graying of America

In 1980 26 million Americans were sixty-five or older; by the end of the decade their number had reached 31 million. Because of medical advances and a relatively high standard of living, Americans were living longer than previous generations. Indeed, by 1985 the average life expectancy had increased nearly twenty-five years beyond what it had been in 1900, giving older Americans, in effect, a quarter century more than their grandparents had in which to be elderly. Being predominantly middle-class and generally more affluent than previous elderly populations, retired Americans in the 1980s contradicted many stereotypes about the later stages of life, living more dynamically than might have been predicted. While well-appointed retirement communities began to flourish across the country, senior citizens traveled the superhighways in recreational vehicles (RVs), ran in marathons, took ocean cruises, formed and joined new organizations, and continued to educate themselves by participating in programs such as Elderhostel and the Shepherd's Center, which provided formal and informal instruction on subjects from computers to international politics. Americans, who had been famously preoccupied with youth for at least twenty years, began to focus on "the graying of America." In the media, as well as among politicians, social scientists, and economists, attempts were made to describe and understand the phenomenon of increasing—and increasingly visible—aging Americans. While businesses began to court the dollars of retirees, even teen-fixated Hollywood began to notice their older audience. On Golden Pond (1981), starring the elderly Henry Fonda and Katharine Hepburn as a couple facing their last years, was a surprise box-office hit and won several Academy Awards. After long absences from the screen other older actors, including Jessica Tandy, Hume Cronyn, and Don Ameche, began appearing in major films, and The Golden Girls, a comedy about three middle-aged women—and the mother of one of them—living together, became a hit television series.

Another Dimension

Of course, not all senior citizens were on golf courses or cruises. During the decade special problems of the elderly, such as Alzheimer's disease, received increasing attention, generating their own array of books, articles, and television movies and documentaries. Nursing homes multiplied to accommodate the multiple and complex needs of older Americans, many of the most elderly of whom suffered from chronic, incurable illnesses. Advances in medical technology that enabled some older Americans to enjoy healthier lives also provided the means to keep severely ill elderly persons alive indefinitely on "life support" systems. "Living wills," specifying in advance an individual's wishes regarding medical treatment should he or she become incapacitated, became more and more common. Medical schools began to offer increased education in geriatric medicine, a previously neglected specialty. At the same time, lawyers became aware that the problems of the elderly required new legal specialists. All in all, whether focusing on the brighter side of "the golden years" or the darker side of old age (loneliness, depression, bereavement, fears of impoverishment by catastrophic illness), people discussed the themes of aging and later life more frequently and openly than they had in previous decades, as if a taboo had been lifted. (It should be added that the "graying of America" most often referred to the increase in, and increased visibility of, the currently retired population. In some discussions, however, it referred to the Baby Boom generation of 1945 to 1965, especially regarding questions of what their retirement circumstances would be in the early decades of the next century.)

Gray Power

Correctly or incorrectly, senior citizens were increasingly perceived as a distinct segment of American society, a cohesive group with its own special perspectives and agenda. The Gray Panthers, formed in the 1970s, signaled the beginning of a remarkable growth in the number of organizations dedicated to seniors' concerns. In the 1980s the Gray Panthers were over shadowed by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), which, with 20 million members, became one of the largest mass-membership organizations in the United States—second only to the Catholic Church. From its headquarters in Washington, D.C., the AARP was a forceful lobbyist and advocate for older Americans. Because of its influence and that of other groups such as the National Council on the Aging and the National Council of Senior Citizens, the perception grew that senior Americans were a new single-interest group capable of exerting tremendous power on the electoral process and influencing government policies. Phrases such as gray power and the gray lobby became popular; politicians referred to the senior lobby as "the eight-hundred-pound gorilla" (who can sit wherever he wants). As statistics showed older Americans were among the most active voters, officials and candidates for public office increasingly showed up at retirement communities and even at nursing homes. Some observers, arguing that the political clout of older Americans was exaggerated, pointed out that older citizens, like every other segment of the population, were a diverse group with diverse values and interests. Nevertheless, it was commonly recognized that certain issues, such as Social Security, united most senior citizens. Indeed, those citizens were extremely visible when this highly charged issue came into sharp focus in 1981.

Social Security Crisis

For several years in the early 1980s an intense debate focused on Social Security, a debate stirred by the highly publicized claim and growing perception that the Social Security system was facing a crisis. This hugely important program, the foundation of federal social insurance since the Great Depression, paid all senior citizens monthly cash benefits from a trust fund financed by payroll taxes on workers and their employers. Social Security also provided health insurance to senior citizens through its Medicare component. Suddenly, after it had been widely accepted that the fiscal problems of Social Security had been resolved in the 1970s by huge tax increases, officials in the newly elected Reagan administration charged that Old Age, Survivors, Disability, and Health Insurance, the part of Social Security that paid retirement benefits, was threatened with imminent bankruptcy. Reagan officials claimed further that even if this problem were resolved, the system faced serious deficits for the remainder of the decade; moreover, the long-term solvency of Social Security was also in jeopardy. In twenty to thirty years, they argued, when the baby boomers would be eligible for benefits, deficits would be so huge that the system would collapse. There simply would not be enough workers in the labor force to finance the benefits.

Reactions

Such reports alarmed both senior citizens and younger Americans concerned about their own retirement years. Their fears were exacerbated by the economic troubles of the early 1980s—inflation, recession, high unemployment, federal budget deficits—and by the budget-cutting zeal of the Reagan administration. Many senior citizens feared that financing for Social Security, which one congressman called "the lifeblood of millions," would be slashed. When the Reagan administration confirmed these fears in 1981 by proposing significant cuts in the program, Democrats charged that the president was trying "to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly." Around the country senior citizens demonstrated with signs warning, "Hands Off Social Security." The administration proposal met such a storm of protest that the Senate rejected it by a vote of 96-0, and the issue was quickly dropped. Nevertheless, there was a deficit in the retirement trust fund, forcing Congress to make unprecedented provisions to borrow from other funds in the system. By this means the short-term crisis was averted: monthly checks continued to be mailed to beneficiaries. But, for the first time since the program began in 1935, public confidence in Social Security had been severely shaken; and the apocalyptic projections about the program's future remained. In 1982 a Washington Post—ABC News poll found that 66 percent of Americans younger than forty-five believed Social Security would not exist by the time they retired.

NURSING HOMES

As Americans lived longer in the 1980s, increasingly reaching ages into the eighties and beyond, the problem of caring for the gravely ill or incapacitated elderly grew into a critical issue for many senior citizens and their families. Many Americans, faced with the loss of spouses or parents to devastating and incurable illnesses like Alzheimer's disease, learned to their dismay that neither Medicare, the government health-insurance for the elderly, nor private medical insurance covered the costs of long-term, catastrophic illness. In fact, neither Medicare nor private insurance benefits covered any nursing-home care beyond several months. After this period, the costs of a nursing home had to be paid by the individual who required it. Unfortunately, the average cost of nursing home care was $2,000 per month, and it was estimated that most people who entered nursing homes for long-term stays would exhaust their entire lifetime incomes in two to three years. When assets were fully exhausted, the individual was then qualified to receive government assistance in the form of Medicaid. In the 1980s the number of nursing homes increased dramatically in the United States, but not dramatically enough to meet the demand. Shortages of nursing-home beds was a serious problem in most states, and, despite the high costs of their services, most nursing homes found themselves with long waiting lists for people needing care. In 1989 it was estimated that 7 million seniors were in need of long-term care, and that number was increasing steadily. Studies showed that 47 percent of families had experienced a long-term care problem within the family. As the decade progressed, the problem of long-term care was increasingly seen as one of the most severe social problems of American society. In response insurance companies began to offer some nursing-home policies, but most of these policies were judged to be seriously inadequate. Congress finally tried to address the problem of catastrophic illness in 1988 by extending Medicare benefits to cover such an emergency. The bill it passed, how-ever, was repealed in 1989.

Sources:

David L. Bender and Bruno Leone, eds., The Elderly: Opposing Viewpoints (San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1990);

Elizabeth Vierck, Fact Book on Aging (Santa Barbara, Cal.: ABC-Clio, 1990).

Social Security "Saved."

Under the pressure of public concern about a program Americans had long taken for granted, President Reagan appointed the bipartisan National Commission on Social Security Reform. The commission included important Republicans such as Sen. Robert Dole of Kansas, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and influential Democrats such as Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York and Rep. Claude Pepper of Florida—the eighty-year-old Pepper was known as "Mr. Senior Citizen" and "the Champion of the Elderly" because of his passionate advocacy on behalf of older Americans. In the highly charged political atmosphere, the mandate of the commission was to propose reforms that would ensure both the short-term and long-term financial health of Social Security. Generally, Democrats believed there was a short-term problem in funding but that the Social Security system was basically sound. They claimed Reagan officials were exaggerating both short- and long-term problems so that the administration could justify cutting this widely supported domestic spending program. Republicans generally favored cutting benefits, which would allow them to cut payroll taxes, thus helping President Reagan fulfill his pledge to cut taxes and reduce the size of government. After deliberating for a year, the National Commission on Social Security Reform nearly ended in failure. A dramatic eleventh-hour compromise, however, produced a complex plan that was offered to the president.

The Final Plan

This "rescue" plan attacked the trust-fund deficits by proposing to raise $165 billion in new revenues by 1990 from a combination of accelerated increases in payroll taxes and deferred cost-of-living allowances (COLAs) for beneficiaries. Also, while benefit levels would be maintained, for the first time since Social Security began, a portion of those benefits would be taxed. In addition, the age at which people were eligible for benefits would gradually rise from sixty-five to sixty-seven. To increase the financial base of Social Security, newly hired federal employees—previously excluded—would be added to the system. Finally, cost controls were added to the Medicare part of the system. The package was designed to keep Social Security solvent twenty to thirty years into the next century. Although there had been predictions of intense partisan bickering, Congress quickly approved the plan with only minor amendments. Critics charged that the bill was a "quick fix" that did not sufficiently address long-term structural problems; nevertheless, the bill President Reagan signed in the spring of 1983 was the most serious reform of the Social Security system since its beginning.

Sources:

Andrew Achenbaum, Social Security: Visions and Revisions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986);

Merton C. Bernstein and Joan Brodshaug Bernstein, Social Security: The System That Works (New York: Basic Books, 1988);

Erdman B. Patmore, Handbook on the Aged in the United States (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1994).