Gray Power Can Turn a Campaign Sour

Published in Senior Digest on October 2004

After 24 years on Smith Hill that included a 10-year stint as House speaker, John Harwood’s career came to a surprising end recently when 33-year-old former prosecutor J. Patrick O’Neill’s grass-roots campaign brought home the votes. The lopsided victory, 758 votes for O’Neill to 352 for Harwood, propelled the political novice into the district 59 House seat.

Two years ago, Harwood barely kept his long-held House seat after a vigorous political campaign by write-in independent candidate Bruce Bayuk. According to Joseph Fleming, of Fleming & Associates, a Cumberland-based polling and political consultant, seniors casting votes for Harwood at the polling place in Kennedy Manor on Broad Street, played a key role in his victory in that election cycle.

Fleming, who also serves as a political analyst for Channel 12 News said that senior voter support for Harwood was almost nonexistent in the recent Democratic primary. Senior voters joined with anti-Harwood voters throughout the legislative district to give the former House speaker the boot.

“Harwood lost better than 2-to-1 at the polling place in Kennedy Manor,” Fleming said. “Seniors decided it was a time for a change.”

Over the years, political candidates have made pre-election day pilgrimages to Pawtucket’s senior high-rises. In District 59, both Harwood and O’Neill courted voters in high-rises, providing food during meet and greet events.

“It’s a myth that a good meal at a senior high-rise will ultimately equate to a vote,” quips Fleming. “Seniors may go down to eat the food, but it doesn’t mean that you’ll get their vote. Everyone feeds them, but they can’t vote for both sides.” Moreover, he said, the majority of older voters don’t reside in senior high rises.

“Seniors read campaign materials look at the campaign issues and vote for people who reflect their views on these issues,” Fleming says.

Darrell West, a Brown University professor and political pollster, notes that seniors are the biggest voting block in Rhode Island. “Not only are they a sizeable group in numbers, they also are more likely to exercise their franchise to vote,” he says.

Ken McGill, registrar for the City of Pawtucket, agrees with West’s assessment. McGill says that in any election, political candidates can count on senior voters to turn out in high numbers.

“Seniors were brought up respecting the right to vote and how important it is. They know what is at stake and pay careful attention to the issues that not only affect them, but issues impacting on members of their family, McGill says.

“Compared to young people, seniors are 30 to 40 percentage points more likely to vote, West said. “Seniors vote because they are invested in their community and come from a generation where it was considered any honor to vote,” says West. He added that young people tend to be very cynical about politics and more likely to feel their vote does not matter.

West said that seniors voter as a bloc only when they see their issues directly at stake in an election. “If an election centers on Social Security or Medicare, they are more likely to overcome differences by gender, income and ethnicity and cast a ‘senior’ vote,” he says.

Adds Kathleen S. Connell, director of AARP-RI, “There are many reasons why candidates look to the senior citizens for votes. One of them being, the issues that affect the concerned seniors are the same issues that will also affect the candidates and their families now or in the future.” Also, candidates know that seniors are the most reliable and informed voters, she says.

One of the questions surrounding the upcoming election is whether seniors will support the Rhode Island GOP in its efforts to increase the numbers in the General Assembly?

“Seniors lean Democratic because the elderly typically has seen democrats speak out most forcefully about the need to take care of seniors and protect Medicare and Social Security,” says West. However, Republicans have made in-roads with moral or ethical issues, he says.

Aging groups are gearing up for the upcoming November elections to send educated voting seniors to the polls, Connell says.

“This year, some of our volunteers are participating in presidential debate watches with Rhode Island College, and we are distributing voter guides for them to track the candidate responses to issues of importance to AARP members. They can use these guides to further study the issues before going to the polls.”

Richard Bidwell, executive director of the Rhode Island Gray Panthers, also sees the value of getting educated senior voters to the polls. With the backdrop of the upcoming elections, the Senior Agenda Consortium (SAC), founded by the Gray Panthers and now comprised of 20 aging groups, is working to improve seniors’ knowledge of issues and develop strategies to pressure candidates to support SAC’s legislative agenda.

As it did two years ago, SAC, which is funded by the Rhode Island Foundation, will organize three regional forums, to prod the candidates to support its legislation positions on issues ranging from ensuring access to low-cost prescription drugs, better funding for community long-term care services and protecting RIPTA bus routes. The results will be released to the media.

Bush’s “just guns, no butter” policy hurts senior programs

Published in the Pawtucket Times on March 31, 2003

President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Guns and Butter” policy is not in fashion today.

In a recent Washington Aging Report, radio commentator Bill Benson predicted future federal funding of program and services for seniors will take a back seat to President Bush’s worldwide fight against tourism, the high-tech war against Iraq and tax breaks for the upper income Americans.

In his Marh 24 commentary, Benson, a former assistant secretary with the U.S. Administration on Aging and now a principal at Health Benefits ABC – sees tough times ahead for the federal funding of programs and services, especially the creation of a meaningful Medicare pharmaceutical assistance program.

“Guns and Butter” was coined nearly 40 years ago, describing President Lyndon B. Johnson’s two-front war. Back then, a large infusion of federal dollars allowed the Democratic president to fight a war abroad – in Vietnam – along with a war on the domestic front, against poverty and social ills, especially those facing the elderly.

“By the end of 1965, with Vietnam escalating, we had the Medicare program and the Older Americans Act,” noted Benson, adding Medicaid was also created at this time to help millions of low-income older people afford the cost of nursing home care.

Benson’s radio commentary charged the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress are fully committed to funding the “guns” but not “butter” policy initiatives.

“It would be one thing if the commitment to guns over butter was for the president while we topple Saddam and occupy Iraq, and combat terrorism everywhere. “Instead, it looks like the Bush administration is committed to making butter a scarcer commodity for years to come,” said Benson.

According to Benson’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year suggests it won’t be both “guns and butter,” especially in light of the president’s efforts to pursue large tax cuts for upper-income Americans.

What about the spending for guns?

According to the Washington Post, Bush’s proposal for the fiscal year begins on Oct. 1, calls for defense spending that is 16 percent more than the combined total of all other discretionary spending excluding what he would spend on homeland security.

And that figure does not take into account the cost of the war in Iraq, nor expenditures to combat terrorism, Benson says.

Meanwhile, Benson said the Washington Post noted secretary of defense Donald Rumford has proposed a $20 billion increase for defense for each of the next six years, would follow what have been six straight years of real increases in defense spending. The result by 2010 would be annual spending for defense of more than half a trillion dollars.

Combine increased defense with the cost of the Iraq war.

Benson noted the White House estimated the cost for Iraq and related matters will be nearly $75 billion over the next six months.

Benson said that by 2011, the first baby boomer s will turn age 65, and will begin placing huge demands up on Medicare, Social Security and other services for the elderly.

“President Bush’s FY 2004 budget calls for $ 400 billion spread over 10 years for a prescription drug plan for senior,” said Benson.

On the other hand, the Congressional Budget Office estimates Medicare beneficiaries will in fact spend more than $1.8 trillion over the same 10 years for prescription drugs.

That means, said Benson, the president’s plan would cover only a bit more than 20 percent of wat seniors will actually spend. And that is if the $ 400 billion actually goes for drug coverage when there will be many other demands for additional Medicare dollars.

Bush also purposes to cut funding for the Older Americans Act – a federal program that supports such services as Meals on Wheels, transportation for the elderly and ombudsmen to investigate problems in nursing homes -by $24 billion, Benson said.

With a worldwide war on terrorism combined with the ongoing war in Iraq, the debate regarding “guns and butter” spending must begin in earnest.

Hard choices must be made in times of war, but seniors must continue to press both the Bush administration and Congress for adequate federal funding to create a meaningful Medicare pharmaceutical assistance program, and to shore up the ailing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security programs.

In this new era of huge defense spending, the Bush administration and Congress will have to make very painful choices in allocating its limited discretionary funds to support a wide variety of domestic policy initiatives.

Only an intense lobby of aging advocates and seniors will keep programs and services benefiting the nation’s elderly on the radar screens of federal officials and lawmakers.

Seniors Must Educate Themselves to Push for Political Policy Reforms

Published in the Pawtucket Times on July 22, 2002

Did you go to the Bristol 4^th of July parade?

Or perhaps were you one of hundreds of people who gathered at Slater Mill Historic Site to hear U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy’s announce his bid for re-election.

If you attended one of these events or one of the hundreds of others scattered throughout the Ocean State, you probably ended up meeting gubernatorial, legislative, statewide or congressional candidates who were seeking high visibility with voters and potential votes from old friends and new acquaintances.

The clock is ticking.

With about seven weeks before the Sept. 10 primary, Rhode Island political candidates are scrambling to fill up their calendars with the dates of hundreds of “must-attend” events.

Political wisdom tells us that these candidates are more responsive to attending coffees, festivals and events that will attract older voters. This is because seniors as a group tend to get to the polls more often than other younger demographic groups. Years of research on voting trends bear this out.

According to the Bureau of the Census, in the 1996 presidential election, voter turnout among Americans 65 and older was 67 percent, only 10 percent lower than their registration rate of 77 percent. In that presidential election cycle, voter registration and turnout for Americans 50 and over was about the same as for Americans over age 65 (64.4 percent). Yet only 31 percent of voters between the ages of 18 and 20 cast a vote in the presidential election of 1996.

Can this trend take hold for the 2002 Rhode Island elections? You bet.

The question is – are federal and state policy makers prepared to confront the changes that will occur with an aging America?

In the next Congress, both Republican and Democratic leadership must work closely together to develop sound aging policy initiatives.

Federal lawmakers must quickly come to grips with how to assist seniors to pay for costly long-term care while ensuring quality services are provided. They must continue their efforts to hammer out a bipartisan law to make pharmaceutical drugs more affordable and to keep both Medicare and Socially Security financially solvent.

At the state level, the Gray Panthers of Rhode Island working in collaboration with the Rhode Island Forum on Aging and the Rhode Island Minority Elder Task Force, move to educate senior voters about state and federal aging issues. Funded by the Rhode Island Foundation, the Senior Agenda/Election 2002 project will identify priority state and federal aging issues, solicit candidate positions through a questionnaire and hold four regional forums to further discuss positions.

Become an educated voter. Learn more about the aging issues of important to you by carefully reading the political candidate’s positions in the written materials to be made available to you by the Senior Agenda/Election 2002 project.

At coffees, festivals and political events that you attend before the September primary and up to the November election, tell any gubernatorial, statewide or legislative candidates you meet to make further reforms net year to the state’s pharmaceutical program (RIPAE). Tell them about the need for assisted living facilities for moderate and low-income seniors and affordable housing options for frail and low-income seniors.

With the backdrop of the November election, Rhode Island lawmakers and Congress must continue their efforts to develop and implement programs and services especially geared to an aging society.

Aging as a policy and political issue will ultimately have an impact on every generation from today’s seniors, their aging baby boomers children, and finally to their young grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Being an educated voter, especially one who consistently votes, is likely to gain points with a political candidate and with those who ultimately are elected to office.