Tag Archives for third rail

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.

___

Social Security is in Crisis: We Must Resist Efforts to Change It

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on August 19, 2025

Security will mark its 90th anniversary. On that date in 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the landmark program into law as a safeguard against the “hazards and vicissitudes” of life.

“For a federal program to endure for 90 years and maintain an extremely high level of popularity among the American people is truly extraordinary,” says the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). “It is an achievement that should be celebrated far and wide.”

Yet this milestone comes amid growing political controversy that could shape the program’s future.

Privatization Concerns Emerge

Just 15 days before the anniversary, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made remarks that sent shockwaves through the aging advocacy community. Speaking at a Breitbart News–sponsored event, Bessent described President Trump’s newly enacted “Trump accounts” (also referred to as “Child Savings Accounts” or “Child IRAs”) as potentially serving as a “backdoor for privatizing Social Security.” His comments, made during a Breitbart policy panel on the evening of July 30, were quickly picked up by national media outlets.

Bessent elaborated: “If these accounts grow and you have in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for your retirement, that’s a game-changer too.” He suggested that the success and expansion of these individual retirement accounts—created under President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act—could eventually reduce Americans’ reliance on traditional Social Security benefits.

The law, signed by Trump on July 4, creates a new tax-deferred investment account for children under the age of 18, born in the U.S. between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028. These accounts are seeded with $1,000 in federal funds and allow additional contributions of up to $5,000 annually from parents, family members, or employers. Structured similarly to IRAs, the funds must be invested in low-cost mutual funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that track a U.S. stock index.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM President and CEO, quickly issued a public response, calling on Trump to denounce Bessent’s suggestion of a “backdoor” to privatization. “President George W. Bush tried it after his re-election in 2004—and failed miserably. The American people didn’t buy it then, and they won’t buy it now,” Richtman said.

He urged the former president to issue a clear and unequivocal statement: “Make a clear, unequivocal statement (as only you can) that your administration will not try to privatize Social Security.”

John Hishta, Senior Vice President of Campaigns at AARP, also issued a statement and condemned Bessent’s comments. “We have fought any and all efforts to privatize Social Security, and we will continue to,” he said. “President Trump has emphasized many times that Social Security ‘won’t be touched,’ and that he is ‘not going to touch Social Security.’ This must include any and all forms of privatization.”

“Privatization is a terrible idea”, says Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works in a statement, noting that unlike private savings, Social Security is a guaranteed earned benefit that you can’t outlive. “It has stood strong through wars, recessions, and pandemics. The American people have a message for Trump and Bessent: Keep Wall Street’s hands off our Social Security!,” she says.

Following the backlash, Bessent attempted to clarify his remarks in a post on X (formerly Twitter) the next day: “Trump Baby Accounts are an additive benefit for future generations, which will supplement the sanctity of Social Security’s guaranteed payments. This is not an either-or question. Our administration is committed to protecting Social Security and making sure seniors have more money.”

During her Thursday press briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized that President Trump remains “wholeheartedly committed” to protecting Social Security—even as Bessent’s earlier comments appeared to contradict that position. “What the Secretary of the Treasury was saying—and what this administration believes—is that these Trump newborn accounts, which are an incredibly creative and positive provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill, are meant to help supplement, not substitute, Social Security,” Leavitt told reporters.

Democrats and Advocacy Groups Push Back

Last Thursday, amid hundreds of events scheduled this month throughout the nation to celebrate SSA’s 90th anniversary, the Washington, D.C.–based Social Security Works hosted a press conference to warn against what they called Trump administration efforts to undermine and dismantle Social Security.

Moderator Nancy Altman, President of SSW, opened the Town Hall by emphasizing the importance of celebrating Social Security’s milestone anniversary and the need to protect and defend the program. Throughout the event, Altman introduced each speaker, describing them as champions dedicated to safeguarding Social Security.

Speakers cited administrative actions such as firing 7,000 employees, closing field offices, and creating a customer service crisis. During the 37-minute press event, prominent Democrats and leaders of progressive advocacy groups argued these steps were part of a deliberate strategy to erode public confidence and justify future benefit cuts or privatization.

They contrasted these actions with proposals to expand benefits and extend the program’s solvency by lifting the cap on taxable income. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont), described as a leading champion of earned benefits and author of the Social Security Expansion Act, called Social Security “the most successful federal government program of all time.” This was said to counter claims by critics, like Elon Musk, who have called it a “Ponzi scheme.” Sanders added: “This is a huge fight. We have the American people behind us. Let’s win it.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee and a key figure in the Senate’s “Social Security War Room,” said: “Trump’s so-called promise to protect Social Security, in my view, is about as real as his promise to protect Medicaid—no substance.”

Rep. John Larson (D-Connecticut), Ranking Member of the Social Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, urged Congress to expand benefits. He noted that the last major expansion was under President Nixon and that millions of seniors still live in or near poverty.

Former Social Security Commissioner under President Biden, Martin O’Malley, charged, “They’re trying to wreck its customer service so they can turn enough Americans against it—and ultimately get away with robbing it.” He described this as the strategic motivation behind what he called the Trump administration’s dismantling of the SSA’s operational capacity.

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan), who helped organize the Expand Social Security Caucus and has deep family ties to the creation of both Social Security and Medicare, declared: “I’ll be damned if anybody’s going to take us back to those days,” recalling the poverty and desperation seniors faced before the program’s enactment.

Judith Brown, a Social Security beneficiary, gave personal testimony underscoring the critical role her monthly check plays in her financial survival.

Keisha Bras, Director of Opportunity, Race, and Justice for the NAACP; Molly Weston Williamson, a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund and an expert on paid leave; and Sarah Francis of Unrig Our Economy rounded out the panel.

A Legacy Under Threat

NCPSSM President Max Richtman warns that while the anniversary is cause for celebration, “we must always defend the program from those who would privatize or outright eliminate it. These forces have been at work ever since Social Security was enacted.”

To educate the public and counter misinformation, NCPSSM has produced a new documentary, Social Security: 90 Years Strong, with funding from AARP. The film tells the story of the program’s creation during the Great Depression and its enduring role for seniors, people with disabilities, and their families.

The documentary features interviews with Senators Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley, Nancy Altman (Social Security Works), Bill Arnone (formerly of the National Academy of Social Insurance), FDR’s grandson Jim Roosevelt, Tracey Gronniger (Justice in Aging), Kathryn Edwards (Labor Economist), and Giovanna Gray Lockhart (former Director, Frances Perkins Center).

Social Security is often called the “third rail” of American politics—a metaphor drawn from the high-voltage rail powering some trains, where contact can be fatal. In politics, “stepping on the third rail” can mean political death.

“More than 69 million Americans rely on Social Security today and as America ages, we expect at least 13 million more people to rely on it by 2035.” said Myechia Minter-Jordan, Chief Executive Officer at AARP in s July 21 statement announcing the results of a new SSA survey. “For 90 years, Social Security has never missed a payment, and Americans should have confidence that it never will,” she said. 

The survey findings indicate that nearly two in three (65%) retired Americans say they rely substantially on Social Security, while another 21 percent say they rely on it somewhat. In 2020, 63% of retired Americans said they relied substantially on Social Security, jumping from 58% in both 2015 and 2010.

Social Security has strong bipartisan support, too.  The survey found that that more than two-thirds of Americans (67%) believe Social Security is more important to retirees today than it was five years ago. Overall, 96% consider the program important, with broad bipartisan agreement: 98% of Democrats, 95% of Republicans, and 93% of Independents.

The Social Security Trustees’ 2025 annual report, released in June, projects the program’s trust funds will run short of money by 2034. Without action, beneficiaries could face an estimated 19% cut in monthly payments.

Whether lawmakers who support privatization —while keeping their voter base—if they “step on the third rail” by raising the full retirement age or refusing to raise taxes remains to be seen.

We’ll see.

Countdown to 2024 elections heating up about what to do about Social Security

Published in RINewsToday on November 27, 2023

The political clock is ticking. It’s 340 days before the upcoming presidential elections and control of Congress and the White House are up for grabs.  As education, abortion, foreign policy, immigration, crime are emerging as upcoming campaign issues, fixing Social Security and Medicare are also on the voter’s radar screens, too.  

As the Democrats call for expanding and shoring up the existing Social Security Program (by introducing H.R. 4583, Social Security 2100 Act and S. 393, Social Security Expansion Act and other legislative proposals), Republicans are calling for changes in the program including looking at raising the eligibility age for full-time retirement, possible means-testing, and adjusting benefits for higher income earners.

The Nov. 9th Republican debate was not reassuring for younger taxpayers who are counting on collecting the Social Security benefits they earn with every paycheck, says Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare. Two of the GOP presidential hopefuls promised, in effect, to cut Social Security for future beneficiaries,” he said. 

However, former President Donald J. Trump, who didn’t participate in this debate, has warned the other candidates not to make cuts in Social Security and Medicare benefits. While he opposes raising payroll taxes to ensure the fiscal solvency of these programs, he doesn’t provide specific proposals as how to do this. 

Presidential GOP candidates call for fixes to an unsustainable Social Security system 

According to Richtman, Nikki Haley claimed that Social Security is going “bankrupt,” and she would raise the retirement age for workers who are now in their 20s, and also means-test benefits. Chris Christie also said he would raise the retirement age and eliminate benefits for higher earners, essentially converting Social Security into a safety net program, instead of an earned benefit. 

“Governor Christie and Ambassador Haley fail to recognize that future generations of retirees will rely on their Social Security benefits even more than today’s seniors do — and that means testing would cut deep into the heart of the American middle class,” says Richtman.  “Ron DeSantis — to his credit — promised not to cut Social Security, but demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the program’s finances by perpetuating the myth that the government is ‘stealing’ from the trust fund,” he added.

On Oct. 25, the newly sworn in Republican House Speaker, Mike Johnson (R-LA) sent a message to his caucus calling for Social Security and Medicare reforms to be made by a debt commission to tackle changes being targeted for these programs. Richtman warns that this approach is “designed to give Congress political cover for cutting Americans’ earned benefits.”  In response, the Biden Administration described such a commission as a “death panel” for Social Security.

Over six years ago, Congressman Johnson (now newly elected House Speaker) called for cuts to Social Security. According to Independent News Network, Meidas Touch Network, in a 2018 speech before the American Enterprise Institute, as incoming chair of the Republican Study Committee, he called for cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  He viewed these programs as “essential threats” to the American way of life, even suggesting that the government might cease to exist if they continued to be fully funded the way they are now. 

Slashing SSA benefits through a Debt Reform Commission

“That is why these commissions have been rightly described as ‘death panels’ for Social Security and Medicare. It is unfortunate and disappointing that one of the Speaker’s first priorities is creating a mechanism intended to slash programs that American workers pay for in every paycheck, fully expecting the benefits to be there when they need them,” says Richtman, charging that the House Speaker “clearly wishes to break this compact with the American people.”

“Congress should address Social Security in the sunlight, through regular order, as it always has,” said Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works, and former top assistant to Alan Greenspan on the 1983 commission. “The only reason to create a fast-track, closed door commission is to overthrow the will of the American people by cutting their hard-earned benefits. Anyone who supports this commission is supporting benefit cuts.”

In a Nov. 13 correspondence to Congress, Jo Ann C. Jenkins of the Washington, DC-based AARP, also opposes the creation of s debt commission.  She strongly disputes the GOP’s claim that Social Security is a driver of the annual deficits or national debt, stressing that the program is self-financed.

According to Jenkins, 90% of the retirement program is financed through payroll contributions from workers and their employers.  Around 4% of its funding comes from federal income taxes on some Social Security benefits and 5.4% comes from interest earned on U.S. Treasury bonds held by the Social Security Trust Funds.

“Any argument that claims that Social Security is a driver of the national debt – simply because it receives interest from the U.S. Treasury bonds- is disingenuous,” says Jenkins, noting that U.S. Treasury bonds are of the world’s safest investments.

Alex Lawson, Executive Director of the Washington, DC-based Social Security Works, agrees with Richtman’s assessment of House Speaker Johnson’s ongoing approach to Social Security and Medicare. “The Louisiana Congressman recently joined the vast majority of his caucus to vote for a commission designed to fast-track cuts to Social Security and Medicare behind closed doors”, notes Lawson. 

“As Chair of the Republican Study Committee from 2019-2021, Johnson released budgets that included $2 trillion in cuts to Medicare and $750 billion in cuts to Social Security,” says Lawson. This includes raising the retirement age, decimating middle class benefits, making annual cost-of-living increases smaller and ultimately moving towards privation of Social Security and Medicare,” he notes.  

With Johnson pushing for the creation of a debt commission, over 100 organizations have become co-signers on Nov. 8 correspondence to Congress opposing the legislative proposal.   

Aging groups begin to mobilize

While the Social Security Trust Fund Report, released in April 2023, warned that Social Security funds will become depleted in 2033, making the program totally insolvent in 2034 when beneficiaries could only receive about 80 percent of their scheduled benefits, the cosigners say the program’s projected short falls are “manageable by size and still a decade away, are fully understood.” 

“In this Congress alone, several legislative proposals that do just that have been introduced with numerous cosponsors. The only reason to make changes to Social Security via a closed-door commission is to cut already modest earned benefits — something the American people overwhelmingly oppose  — while avoiding political accountability, say the co-signers. 

“Congress already has a process to confront the federal debt. That process is known as reconciliation. Revealingly, Social Security cuts are excluded from the reconciliation procedure, because, as previously stated, the program is totally self-funded, cannot pay benefits or associated costs without the revenue to cover the costs, has no borrowing authority, and, therefore, does not add a penny to the deficit. Consequently, if a debt commission with jurisdiction over Social Security were to be formed, its purpose would be clear: to cut its modest benefits, while avoiding political accountability,” warn the cosponsors.

But the shortfall is real

In an article in Money magazine, the writer notes, “Taxpayer funds cover the bulk of Social Security payments, but if the program’s reserves run dry, beneficiaries would face immediate 20% cuts to their checks come 2034. Any decrease to Social Security payments would likely be extremely unpopular, considering they’re a major source of retirement income for tens of millions of people.” According to a new report from the ​​American Academy of Actuaries, the longer the issue is put off, the harder it will be to address the looming shortfall.

The Third Rail of national politics 

According to AARP research, “85% of older Americans, regardless of party, strongly oppose targeting Social Security and Medicare to reduce federal budget deficits. Specifically, the survey found that 88 percent of Republicans, 79 percent of Independents, and 87 percent of Democrats strongly oppose cutting Social Security. Similarly, 86 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of independents, and 88 percent of Democrats said they strongly oppose cutting Medicare.”

Washington insiders consider Social Security to be the “third rail of a nation’s politics”, a metaphor coming from the high-voltage third rail in some electric railway systems. Stepping on it usually results in electrocution and the use of the term in the political arena refers to “political death”.

Next November, can the GOP politically survive stepping on the third rail by targeting the nation’s most popular social welfare programs (Social Security and Medicare) for adjustments to reduce the federal budget deficit? When the dust settles after November, 2024 elections, we’ll see if younger voters, who have the most to economically lose, view Social Security and Medicare as a key issue influencing their vote and “untouchable.”

We’ll see.