Tag Archives for AARP

Senate Finance Panel Begins Discussion on Fixing Social Security

Published in RINewsToday on August 17, 2026

Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI) is projected to reach insolvency by late 2032, triggering an automatic 22% across-the-board benefit cut if Congress fails to act, according to the 2026 Social Security Trustees Report released June 9. The clock is ticking — fewer than 2,300 days remain.

What would that mean for older Americans? Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), put a dollar figure on the potential impact in his August 5 testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. Acomparable benefit reduction imposed today, he said, would mean an average loss of about $500 a month for beneficiaries.

For a typical newly retired couple, that could translate into an annual loss of roughly $12,000 in Social Security income — a substantial hit for households that depend on the program to pay for housing, food, utilities, health care and other basic expenses. Goldwein’s testimony underscores what the Trustees’ numbers mean beyond the percentages: a future across-the-board cut could have a very real impact on retirees’ daily lives.

Senate Finance Panel Takes Up Social Security’s Future

Just nine days before Social Security’s 91st birthday on Aug. 15, the Senate Committee on Finance held an Aug. 5 hearing, “Exploring Process Approaches for Addressing Social Security Solvency,” to spotlight the program’s looming financial challenges and explore possible legislative approaches. The hearing brought together policy experts and advocacy organizations to discuss how Congress might move toward a solution.

The more than two-hour hearing examined the merits of using a commission versus the regular legislative process. Senators and witnesses also discussed increasing revenue from higher earners, raising or eliminating the payroll tax cap, adjusting benefits, and changing the retirement age.

Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) opened the hearing by warning that Social Security’s OASI Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted in late 2032. If Congress fails to act, incoming program revenues would be sufficient to pay only about 78% of scheduled benefits, he said.

The last comprehensive congressional effort to address Social Security’s solvency took place more than 40 years ago, culminating in the Social Security Amendments of 1983. Signed by President Ronald Reagan, the bipartisan legislation gradually raised the full retirement age, subjected some higher-income Social Security benefits to federal income taxation and increased payroll taxes to strengthen the program’s finances.

Crapo pointed to the 1983 reforms as an example of how an outside commission might help break legislative gridlock. He also cited his participation in a later bipartisan fiscal commission, commonly known as the Greenspan Commission, whose recommendations ultimately failed to win the support needed to move forward.

Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) challenged the idea of creating another commission, arguing that Congress should take responsibility for solving the problem rather than sending it to an outside panel.

“Instead of ‘talking about talking,’ this body should get to work on finding a resolution to the Social Security solvency challenge and having that debate in public view,” Wyden said.

Crapo responded that the hearing was not intended to promote a specific proposal but to examine a broad range of ideas.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) pushed back against Democratic criticism that Republicans were seeking to cut benefits, saying Congress needs to be willing to consider different approaches to the problem.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) took a much harsher view of the program, calling Social Security a “Ponzi scheme” and arguing that money collected from taxpayers has already been spent.

Rhode Island’s Whitehouse Calls for Answers

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse pressed Republicans for a specific plan to address Social Security’s finances.

“Where’s the Republican proposal? Where is it? It doesn’t exist,”

Whitehouse charged, arguing that Republicans were unwilling to publicly embrace proposals that could result in benefit reductions.

Whitehouse said Democrats have legislation that would make Social Security solvent “for as far as the actuarial eye can see” without cutting benefits.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) focused on raising more revenue from higher-income Americans by increasing the amount of earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax.

Warren noted that the payroll tax currently applies only up to a certain level of earnings, meaning high-income workers pay Social Security taxes on a smaller percentage of their total income than most middle-income workers.

Sanders framed the issue in simpler terms, asking whether wealthy Americans should pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as firefighters and nurses.

But not every senator framed the debate in partisan terms.

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) observed that conversations about Social Security often “immediately” become fear-mongering, with the discussion centered on taking benefits away.

“We’re actually trying to be able to get to a point where no one loses benefits,” Lankford said, noting that the goal should be long-term stabilization.

Lankford acknowledged that having a “grown-up conversation” about stabilizing Social Security’s finances and resolving the problem remains a real challenge.

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) also called for bipartisan action.  “We’ve got to fix this and that means working together. There’s a lot of great ideas out there. If we would just make this a focus and a priority, we can get something done,” she said.

Their comments underscored a central question facing Congress: Can lawmakers move beyond the political rhetoric surrounding Social Security and find enough common ground to actually fix the program?

AARP: Keep Social Security at the Table

Nancy A. LeaMond, AARP’s executive vice president and chief advocacy and engagement officer, questioned whether another special commission is the best way forward.

“The history of special commissions is littered with very good intentions and failed results,” LeaMond told the committee. She argued that Social Security’s future should be addressed directly by Congress, which has jurisdiction over the program and a long history of tackling difficult Social Security issues.

LeaMond reminded senators that Social Security remains the foundation of retirement security for millions of Americans. She noted that it provides more than half of household income for 43% of older American households and provides at least 90% of income for nearly 12 million Americans age 65 and older.

Social Security’s impact also extends beyond individual beneficiaries, LeaMond said. “Every dollar paid in Social Security benefits generates two dollars of economic activity, supporting 12.2 million jobs and $2 trillion in economic output each year,” she said.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) acknowledged AARP’s efforts to protect Social Security, including its television advertising campaign warning against benefit cuts. But Grassley urged AARP and other organizations to do more to educate the public about the looming automatic reductions.

“We’ve got to wake this entire nation up to the fact that there’s going to be 22% cuts if we don’t do something right now,” Grassley said.

Goldwein told the committee that Social Security’s financial problems can be addressed if Congress begins the process rather than continuing to delay action.

In his testimony, Goldwein described CRFB’s Trust Fund Solutions initiative, which offers potential approaches for restoring Social Security’s solvency. Among the ideas discussed are changes to the taxation of benefits, expanding the payroll tax base, limiting benefits for some high earners, and encouraging longer workforce participation.

The dollar figure Goldwein cited — an average reduction of about $500 a month under a comparable benefit cut — puts the Trustees’ warning into perspective. For retirees already struggling to keep pace with rising housing, food and health care costs, losing another $500 a month would not be an abstract budget number. It could mean difficult choices between paying bills, buying groceries or filling a prescription.

Charles Blahous of the Mercatus Center also called for Congress to move quickly, arguing that the most important part of Social Security reform may simply be getting the process started before continued delays make the problem harder and more expensive to solve.

Rebecca D. Vallas, CEO of the National Academy of Social Insurance, told the committee that the decisions Congress makes about Social Security will rank among the most important work lawmakers undertake in generations.

Vallas cited a survey of more than 2,200 Americans conducted by NASI in partnership with AARP, the National Institute on Retirement Security and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The survey found that 85% of respondents favored preventing benefit reductions or increasing benefits, even if that would require raising taxes on some or all Americans. Only 15% preferred benefit reductions to tax increases.

Support for raising revenue rather than cutting benefits crossed party, income, education, and generational lines, Vallas said.

A Final Note…

“Social Security is too important to millions of Americans for Congress to take shortcuts or empower fast-track commissions to do their job. This is an opportunity to show that Washington can work, that it can deliver the results that the American people are demanding, and that it can achieve this goal without waiting until the very last minute to act,” says submitted testimony by Max Richtman, President & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

The message from the hearing was clear: Social Security’s financial problems are real, the clock is ticking, and Congress has no shortage of policy ideas.

What remains uncertain is whether Democrats and Republicans can put aside their philosophical differences long enough to agree on a bipartisan solution.

After 43 years and 4 months since the enactment of Social Security reforms in 1983, the stakes are simply too high for millions of older Americans to wait much longer.  Lawmakers must roll up their sleeves and get the work done.

Unpaid Caregiving Takes a Toll on Retirement Security

Published in RINewsToday on August 10, 2026

Unpaid family caregiving is often viewed as a labor of love. But a new national study shows that caring for a loved one can also come with a significant financial price — one that may well follow caregivers right into their retirement years.

On July 22, the Washington, D.C.-based Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization that studies employee benefits, released its 42-page report, “Caregivers and Retirement: Findings From the 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey.” The report examines how unpaid caregiving affects financial security, employment, health and retirement planning.

Not surprisingly, the findings paint a very troubling picture. Caregivers are more likely than non-caregivers to report lower financial assets, debt problems, poorer health and less confidence about having enough money to live comfortably throughout retirement.

The report is part of a broader caregiving project being developed by EBRI and Greenwald Research. The goal is to provide employers with educational resources and strategies to help employee caregivers better prepare for retirement while managing the all-consuming demands of caring for a family member.

A Growing Retirement Security Issue

The 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey, now in its 36th year, found that nearly three in 10 Americans age 25 and older are unpaid caregivers.

For purposes of the study, caregivers were defined as people who provided unpaid care for an adult or child during the previous 12 months in a non-institutional setting and helped the care recipient with at least one activity of daily living or instrumental activity of daily living.

The findings were discussed during a July 22 EBRI and Greenwald Research webinar featuring Craig Copeland, EBRI’s director of wealth benefits research; Lisa Greenwald, CEO of Greenwald Research; Kerry Sette of Voya Financial; and Cynthia Hutchins of Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Throughout the discussion, the message was quite clear: caregiving is not simply a family or health issue. It must also be viewed as a retirement security issue.

“Caregiving is often discussed as a family, health or workplace issue, but this research shows it is also an important retirement security issue,” Copeland and Greenwald said in announcing the report.

“Caregivers are doing many of the same planning activities as non-caregivers, but they are more likely to face debt, lower assets, mental health strain and lower confidence about their long-term financial future,” they noted.

The 2026 report builds on an earlier 2023 EBRI/Greenwald Research study that also examined caregivers. Comparing the two surveys, Copeland said caregivers continue to fall behind their non-caregiving counterparts.

Taking a Look at the Key Findings

Caregiving can take a toll on health. Only 36% of caregivers said their health was excellent or very good, compared with 45% of non-caregivers. Caregivers were also less likely to have household incomes of $75,000 or more — 53%, compared with 62% of non-caregivers. Women represented 61% of caregivers, compared with 47% of non-caregivers. 

Caregivers have fewer financial resources to build wealth. Thirty-four percent of caregivers reported having less than $10,000 in savings and investments, compared with 25% of non-caregivers. Debt was also more likely to be a problem: 69% of caregivers said debt was a problem, compared with 57% of non-caregivers.

Caregiving can hit the family wallet. Thirty-four percent of caregiving workers and 20% of caregiving retirees said they provide financial support to the person they care for. In addition, 20% of caregiving workers and 15% of caregiving retirees said they had taken on new or additional debt as a result of caregiving.

The emotional toll is substantial. Sixty-four percent of working caregivers and 52% of caregiving retirees said caregiving had negatively affected their mental health. Among working caregivers, the financial tasks most affected were saving for emergencies (56%) and working the hours they wanted or needed to work (54%).

The financial pressures of caregiving can make it harder for people to prepare for their own futures. Caregivers in both the lower- and upper-income groups were more likely than non-caregivers with similar incomes to lack confidence that they would have enough money to live comfortably throughout retirement.

Among households earning less than $35,000, 75% of caregivers said they were not confident they would have enough money for retirement, compared with 55% of non-caregivers. Among households earning $75,000 or more, 32% of caregivers lacked confidence, compared with 23% of non-caregivers.

Caregivers were also more likely to worry about the impact of an economic recession, rising housing costs, and having to provide care for a loved one with a health condition or disability.

When Caregiving Changes Retirement Plans

For some caregivers, the demands of providing care can even change when they leave the workforce.

The survey found that caregiving retirees were more likely than non-caregiving retirees to have retired earlier than planned. Among those who retired earlier than expected, caregivers were more likely to say they did so because they had to care for a spouse or another family member.

Caregiving retirees were also more likely to describe their current retirement lifestyle as fair rather than excellent. They were more likely to say their retirement lifestyle was not what they had envisioned and that several retirement expenses were higher than expected.

Higher-income caregivers also lagged behind non-caregivers with similar incomes in completing several important retirement-planning tasks, including calculating how much they needed to save, saving for retirement, planning for emergency expenses and estimating future health care costs.

The report points to a number of ways employers can help working caregivers, including flexible scheduling, remote-work opportunities, caregiver resources, education and benefits designed to reduce some of the financial pressures associated with caregiving.

Lisa Greenwald, CEO of Greenwald Research, says caregiving creates financial, health and social-emotional pressures at different stages of life — while people are working, preparing for retirement and after they retire.

For employers, she says, recognizing these challenges can help them provide the flexibility and support caregivers need to remain productive at work while continuing to save for retirement.

Having Their Say…

Washington insider Dan Adcock, director of government relations and policy for the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, agrees with the report’s findings about the financial and personal pressures facing caregivers.

Unless unpaid family caregivers receive greater support through respite care or paid Home- and Community-Based Services, Adcock says, caregiving responsibilities can take a toll on their physical and emotional health.

He also points to another concern not fully captured by the EBRI survey: working-age caregivers who leave the workforce to care for a loved one can end up with lower Social Security benefits because the program’s benefit formula is based in part on a worker’s earnings history.

That is one reason Adcock supports a Social Security caregiver credit.

He urges Congress to pass the Social Security Caregiver Credit Act of 2026 (S. 4396/H.R. 8490). The legislation was introduced by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in the Senate, with Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) introducing the House companion measure.

The legislation would allow qualifying unpaid caregivers to receive up to five years of deemed wages for purposes of calculating Social Security benefits. To qualify, a caregiver would generally have to provide at least 80 hours of care per month to a dependent child under age 12 or a chronically dependent relative.

The bills remain in committee. S. 4396 was referred to the Senate Finance Committee, while H.R. 8490 was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.

The issue is particularly important here in Rhode Island, where thousands of family members provide unpaid care that helps loved ones remain in their homes.

Maureen Maigret, policy advisor with the Senior Agenda Coalition of Rhode Island (SACRI), says the EBRI findings confirm what advocates have been seeing for years.

“Caregiving takes a significant physical, emotional, and financial toll on our unpaid caregivers,” she says.

Maigret notes that Rhode Island caregivers provide thousands of hours of unpaid care that can allow people to remain at home longer, potentially delaying or avoiding more costly nursing facility care.

SACRI is pushing for policies to strengthen support for caregivers, including expanding the state’s Temporary Caregiver Insurance program, adequately funding respite services, and creating a state caregiver tax credit.

Rhode Island has already taken steps to support working family caregivers through its Temporary Caregiver Insurance program. Aging advocates, however, continue to push for expanded eligibility and additional weeks of paid leave.

Taking a Close Look at AARP’s Caregiver Study

After a media briefing last year, AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving (NAC) published a report, Caregiving in the U.S. 2025, that warns of a looming crisis that will impact America’s 63 million caregivers, an increase of 45% over the past decade. The report, released June 24, 2025, noted that caregivers are at a “crisis point.” Nearly half reported major financial problems, one in five reported fair or poor health, and more troubling, nearly a quarter felt completely alone.

One in five caregivers report poor health; a quarter are taking on debt due to caregiving. Half report negative financial impact due to caregiving, and one in five cannot afford basic needs like food.

EBRI’s new survey adds an important retirement-focused perspective to an ongoing national conversation about unpaid caregiving.  The research shows how caregiving can affect not only today’s household decisions but a person’s long-term financial security.

And that may well be the most important takeaway from the new EBRI report.

Millions of Americans step up to the plate when a parent, spouse, child or other loved one needs help. They do it because it is what families do. But caregiving should not mean that the person providing that care has to sacrifice his or her own financial future.

Like AARP’s 2025 caregiver study, EBRI’s report examines how caregiving responsibilities are associated with retirement confidence, debt, savings, financial stress, workplace needs and long-term retirement preparation among workers and retirees.

The EBRI research, complementing AARP’s definitive caregiving research, makes it clear that unpaid caregiving carries consequences that can extend far beyond the time spent providing care. For many Americans, the price may be paid not only today, but again when they reach retirement.

A Final Note…

EBRI’s Copeland points out: “The survey results clearly show caregiving has significant impacts on both workers and retirees, not only now but in the future as well. While you may not be a caregiver currently, if you have parents or children, you are likely to be one in the future. Thus, preparing for this need, or better handling current caregiving needs, can make a huge difference in retirement preparations and current expenses. Caregiving can take a toll on all aspects of life, so anything individuals can do to plan for it or better educate themselves can foster a caregiver’s well-being, both financially and emotionally.”
.

The 2026 Retirement Confidence Survey was conducted online from January 2 through January 28, 2026, among 2,544 Americans age 25 and older. It included a general population sample of 2,052 people — 1,007 workers and 1,045 retirees — plus an oversample of 492 caregivers. The final analysis included 701 caregiving workers and 305 caregiving retirees.

The 2026 survey was supported by the American College of Financial Services, American Funds/Capital Group, Bank of America, Bright Horizons, CareScout, Edward Jones, Empower, Fidelity Investments, FINRA Foundation, Jackson National, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Mercer, Nationwide, Principal Financial Group, Protective, Prudential/PGIM, T. Rowe Price and Voya Financial.

To watch the EBRI Webinar and for a copy of the slides, go to https://www.ebri.org/publications/webinars/past-webinars

To read AARP’s 2025 Caregiver Study, go to Caregiving in the U.S. 2025 – AARP Research Report

Georgia poll once again shows tightest races rest on Voters Over 50 

Published in RINewsToday on July 27, 2026

With just over three months until the 2026 midterm elections on Tuesday, Nov. 3, control of both the U.S. House and Senate chambers could hinge on the gray vote—Americans age 50 and older—one of the nation’s most reliable voting blocs.

That was the key takeaway message delivered during AARP’s July 23 virtual media briefing, where the Washington, D.C.-based organization released the findings of its latest bipartisan battleground-state survey examining Georgia’s closely watched and contested governor’s and U.S. Senate races.

According to AARP, Georgia is the second state in its 2026 battleground polling series, following Ohio, whose survey was released on June 25. Additional surveys are scheduled for Alaska, Arizona, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Texas to be released before the upcoming midterm elections.  The bipartisan polling team of Fabrizio Ward (R) and Impact Research (D) was commissioned to conduct these surveys.

The Georgia poll findings suggest that voters age 50 and older are once again poised to play a very decisive role in determining the state’s election outcomes in one of the nation’s premier battleground states.

In Georgia’s May 19 primary election, voters age 50 and older cast 68% of all ballots. The survey also found that 88% of voters age 50 and older rated themselves a “10” on a 10-point motivation-to-vote scale, compared with 62% of voters under age 50. These findings reinforce a long-established demographic trend: older Americans remain among the nation’s most dependable and motivated voters and are likely to have a significant impact on the November election.

The Power of the Gray Vote

“Voters age 50 and older will decide this November’s Georgia races,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy Officer, in announcing the poll’s release. “Candidates who speak directly to the issues these voters care about most—including rising prices, protecting Social Security and Medicare, and lowering health care costs—will have the greatest opportunity to earn their support,” she explained.

During the nearly 30-minute morning briefing, AARP Georgia State Director Vanessa Payne joined Republican pollster Bob Ward of Fabrizio Ward and Democratic pollster Matt Hogan of Impact Research to discuss the poll’s findings and what they reveal about the priorities of older Georgia voters. Jen Jones, AARP’s Vice President of Government Affairs, participated during the Q&A to address questions, particularly around Social Security and retirement security, drawing on broader AARP research beyond the Georgia polls.  Ilse Zuniga, AARP’s Director of External Relations, moderated this briefing.

According to the new AARP poll, Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms leads Republican Rick Jackson, 48% to 46%, in the governor’s race, within the poll’s margin of error. Age remains one of the race’s defining dividing lines. Jackson leads by 13 percentage points among voters age 50 and older, driven by strong support from voters age 65 and older, while Bottoms holds a 23-point advantage among voters under age 50.

The survey also examined Georgia’s competitive U.S. Senate race, one which could prove critical in determining which party controls the Senate. Incumbent Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff leads Republican Rep. Mike Collins, 52% to 43%. Ossoff enjoys a 30-point advantage among voters under age 50 and a narrow lead among voters ages 50 to 64, while Collins holds a 24-point advantage among voters age 65 and older. The poll’s findings found that age 50 and older remain a key swing constituency, while Ossoff leads among swing voters age 50 and older by 23 percentage points.

Opening the media briefing, Payne emphasized that AARP’s mission is not to predict election winners or tell voters how to cast their ballots.

“Our mission isn’t to tell people how to vote or who will win,” Payne said. “It’s to ensure that the priorities of Georgia’s voters age 50 and older, the largest and most reliable voting bloc in our state, are part of the conversation throughout the election season.”

Payne remarked that Georgia has become one of the nation’s most competitive battleground states, where narrow margins often decide statewide elections.

“One in eight voters over 50 are swing voters, making them one of the most influential voting blocs in this election,” she observed. “Georgians are focused on key issues affecting their daily lives—from protecting Social Security and Medicare to managing the rising cost of living. Candidates who understand those priorities will be best positioned to earn their votes,” she added.

Although older voters represent every political persuasion, Payne noted that they share many of the same concerns.

“What unites them isn’t party affiliation,” she said. “It’s a shared focus on protecting their financial security, maintaining their health and being able to live as independently as possible as they age.”

Democratic strategist Matt Hogan agreed with Payne that voters age 50 and older are likely to determine the outcome of Georgia’s upcoming midterm elections.

“Voters 50-plus will be the deciders in the Georgia election,” Hogan predicted. “The share who say they are extremely motivated to vote is 26 percentage points higher among voters 50-plus than among voters under 50,” he said.

Hogan also pointed to a significant shift in voter sentiment on the generic congressional ballot.

“Democrats now lead by a seven-point margin, with that shift especially pronounced among independents, who now favor Democrats by an 18-point margin on the generic ballot,” he said, noting “That’s a 26-point swing from 2024.”

“It’s Social Security & Medicare, Stupid”

 Turning to the issues driving older voters, Republican strategist Bob Ward stressed that financial security remains at the center of their concerns. “Seniors, those voters 65 and older, are equally concerned about immigration and protecting Social Security and Medicare, which are very much economic issues for older voters,” Ward explained.

“More than two-thirds of seniors tell us that Social Security makes up a major part of their income. It’s a big deal,” he added. “The importance of Social Security continues to rise to the top and will be just as influential on older voters this fall as rising prices,” he says.

Ward also noted broad bipartisan support for lowering prescription drug costs through Medicare.

“Fighting to lower prescription drug prices by expanding Medicare’s drug price negotiations is a winner on both sides of the political aisle,” Ward said, noting that 87 % of voters say they would be more likely to support a candidate who expands Medicare drug negotiations.

The poll found that among voters age 50 and older, 48% said Social Security is or will become a major source of household income. An overwhelming 92% said they would be more likely to support a candidate who will ensure they receive the Social Security benefits they earned through a lifetime of work.

Reflecting national polling trends, the survey findings indicated that grocery prices remain the affordability issue weighing most heavily on older Georgians.

“Voters in Georgia worry about the price of groceries more than any other issue, and that concern cuts across every political and demographic subgroup,” Ward said.

AARP’s poll also found respondents expressed a growing concern about the impact of expanding artificial intelligence data centers on household utility bills. Seventy-five percent expressed concern that new AI data centers could increase residential electric rates, while 85% said policymakers should ensure those costs are not passed on to residential utility customers.

A Final Note…

AARP’s Georgia battleground poll sends a clear message to candidates running for the U.S. Senate and Congress: older voters remain one of the nation’s most reliable and influential voting blocs. They vote consistently, they are highly motivated, and they are focused on issues that directly affect their financial security and quality of life.

AARP notes that in every election since 2002—the first year voting data by age became available—Americans age 65 and older have voted at higher rates than younger age groups.

Protecting Social Security and Medicare, lowering prescription drug costs, keeping groceries affordable, and controlling rising utility bills are not simply campaign talking points. For many older American voters, they are everyday concerns that will influence how they will cast their ballots in November.

Political observers have long referred to Social Security as the “third rail” of American politics. The phrase comes from the electrified third rail that powers many rail systems—touch it, and the consequences can be fatal. In politics, this metaphor suggests that proposals perceived as threatening Social Security can carry equally serious political consequences.  While people usually attribute the phrase to U.S. Sen.Tip O’Neill, William Safire documented in The New York Times that O’Neill’s chief counsel, Kirk O’Donnell, actually coined it.

As voters in Georgia, Ohio, and the other battleground states head to the polls this November, the 2026 midterm elections may once again test whether Social Security remains America’s political third rail. When the dust settles, we’ll see whether older voters reward candidates who they believe will protect Social Security and Medicare—or reject those they believe will weaken these programs.

AARP’s Georgia battleground poll,  conducted by the bipartisan team of Fabrizio Ward (R) and Impact Research (D), surveyed 1,060 likely Georgia voters between July 13 and July 16, 2026, using live telephone interviews and SMS-to-web methodology. According to the pollsters, the survey has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

For more information, contact Kate Bridges at kbridges@aarp.org.

Additional information about AARP’s 2026 battleground polling series is available at  https://www.aarp.org/pri/topics/voter-research/politics/2026-midterm-election-polls/?msockid=31611274a2d760231f7a0578a3f86192.

___