Older Vote Carries Clout

Experts Say It Could Sway Elections, Set Future Course for Critical Issues

By Patricia Barry and Walt Duka

AARP, October 2002

When older Americans go to the polls on Nov. 5, their votes could decide not only the elections' outcome but the future of Social Security and Medicare—including prescription drug coverage.

"This could be the most significant election in decades for programs that affect people age 65 and over," says Robert D. Reischauer, president of the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank.

The current balance in Congress—with Democrats narrowly controlling the Senate and Republicans the House of Representatives—has resulted in sharp ideological differences, and a legislative stalemate, on changing those programs.

Most Republicans favor private retirement accounts in Social Security, while most Democrats oppose them. Democrats mainly want prescription drugs to be provided in much the same way as other Medicare benefits, while the GOP favors a drug program run primarily through private plans.

So the Nov. 5 stakes are high, because if either party wins a big enough majority in both chambers of Congress, that party will control the agenda. The GOP needs to gain only one seat to take back the Senate; Democrats need a net gain of six seats to take the House.

On the other hand, if the balance in Congress stays much the same, that won't necessarily force members to compromise. They may continue to spin out the issues until the 2004 elections.

"People worry that if the party balance remains close, there's an incentive for lawmakers just to keep on throwing Molotov cocktails at each other," says Chris Hansen, AARP's director of advocacy.

"What would really grab Congress' attention," he adds, "is a new election dynamic—for example, if some incumbents are not re-elected because, it turns out, older Americans were upset about lawmakers playing politics instead of governing."

Older Americans traditionally play a key role in mid-term elections. Two in three usually vote—a much higher percentage than any other age group—and over the past three decades they have steadily gained clout in overall voting patterns. [See chart: Older Voters' Political Power Is Steadily Growing.]

"They're probably the single most important swing vote out there that's up for grabs," says Lawrence Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota. "The party that can lock up the senior vote will have a real advantage."

A recent Gallup poll asked voters of all ages which issues will matter most to them on Nov. 5. Overall, Americans rated the economy and terrorism as their top priorities. In contrast, people over 65 chose Social Security and a Medicare drug benefit—and in fact most voters over 50 scored those issues highly. [See chart: What Matters Most to Voters of Different Ages.]

But this could be misleading. Older Americans could certainly "drive a change in Congress if they just focused on seniors' issues," says Robert Blendon of the Harvard University School of Public Health. "But with everything else going on, they may vote on other things."

Those other things include the economy, stock market, corporate scandals and—if the United States goes to war with Iraq or suffers more terrorism before Nov. 5—patriotism. Older voters are a highly patriotic group, Blendon points out. The upshot, he says, is an election season that is "extraordinarily volatile."

Here's how three issues important to older Americans are shaping up as the AARP Bulletin goes to press, according to analysts across the political spectrum:

SOCIAL SECURITY
Clear differences separate the parties on how to ensure a sound future for Social Security. Most Republicans, including President Bush, favor letting workers divert part of their payroll taxes into personal investment accounts.

Most Democrats call this "privatization," a term Republicans vehemently reject, and heated debates over the word—and what it represents—have broken out in a number of campaigns.

The president and his supporters say retirees or near-retirees would remain in the current system, with no reduction in benefits. But opponents claim that the huge diversion of tax revenue into personal accounts would lead to benefit cuts for everyone, current workers and retirees alike.