Obama and Democrats' Senior Citizen Problem
Senior citizens are more opposed to Obama's healthcare plans than any other age group
One of President Obama's biggest challenges this fall will be persuading seniors to accept his healthcare proposals. Many elderly voters are deeply worried about "Obama-care" because they fear that his plans will reduce their coverage and increase their costs. Seniors, in fact, are more opposed to Obama's healthcare ideas than any other age group.
This is ironic because those over 65 rely on the government in so many ways, such as through Medicare and Social Security. But they have developed a deep skepticism toward Obama's agenda of expanding the reach and power of Washington. They basically agree with the conservative attack that he is a liberal zealot who wants to inject the government into every nook and cranny of American life—including everyday decisions about the choice of doctors and medical plans, pollsters say. Some seniors specifically fear that the healthcare overhaul will take money away from their cherished Medicare program, and they don't want to take that risk.
Only 35 percent of people 65 and older approve of Obama's handling of healthcare, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll in August, substantially lower than the 44 percent who approve of his handling of the issue among people 30 to 64 and the 57 percent among those 18 to 29. And only 8 percent of seniors say Obama's plans would improve their own healthcare, while 42 percent believe that Obama's plans would make it worse.
Seniors have other serious concerns about Obama. They are scared about the vast debt his administration is running up, and they don't like some of his "bailouts" of the car industry, big financial institutions, and people who took out risky mortgage loans, pollsters say.
And during the campaign, while Obama impressed many Americans with his youth and energy, he never quite reassured white seniors that he was one of them. As a result, he lost the over-65 white vote to Republican nominee John McCain by 45 to 53 percent. Many of these voters felt he was too young, too inexperienced, too liberal, and too wedded to change at any cost—and they weren't sure that, as an African-American, he would fairly represent white voters' interests.
All this could result in serious damage to Obama's agenda. Seniors vote in higher proportions than other voters, especially in off-year elections, so members of Congress carefully keep track of their political temperature. Many seniors also have the free time and motivation to pack political forums and multiply the decibel level of their voices. Look at the angry protesters at the town hall meetings of Democratic legislators this summer. TV coverage showed that the most furious and vocal demonstrators were often white seniors.
Obama strategists are well aware that seniors are frequently culturally conservative and that they represent the only major age group Obama lost in the last election, but the strategists haven't figured out a way to stop the hemorrhaging.
Meanwhile, the Republicans are trying to take full advantage. Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, addressed the issue last week when he said, "We need to protect Medicare and not cut it in the name of 'health insurance reform.' " A new RNC ad on TV urges "no cuts in Medicare to pay for a new program" as part of a "seniors' bill of rights."
The fury of the Democrats in response shows how dangerous they think this issue is for them. Not only did the Democratic National Committee attack the GOP effort as a "seniors' bill of lies," but DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse also said, "Republicans have substituted scare tactics for substance and lies for truth." Attempting to resurrect old stereotypes among the elderly about the GOP, Woodhouse added in a news release: "Now, the very Republicans who opposed the creation of Social Security and tried to dismantle it less that four years ago—and the same Republicans who have worked against Medicare since its inception—are now standing up for seniors? With all due respect to Michael Steele, that dog just won't hunt." Democrats say Steele was being hypocritical for attacking Obama's "public option," a government alternative to private insurance, while at the same time Steele was defending the big-government program of Medicare.
But Steele was reflecting the concerns of seniors and seemed to be playing smart politics. The more the GOP drives a wedge between Obama and the elderly, the less effective Obama will be and the more trouble the president and his fellow Democrats will face.
- See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.
- See photos of anger at town hall meetings.
- See a gallery of political cartoons.
Reader Comments
Obama
Bush got us unto a terrible mess, now Obama is trying to get us out. It is not an easy task, it will take some time to turn the Economy around. Stop and think before you make rash statments. The press is probably the worse affender.
Government
Their first mistake was giving all of the jobs away! The next was letting anyone come here from anywhere, including the Mexicans. They took the few jobs left because they would start out at cheaper pay. Then they yell more money.We cross borders illegally and go to jail,they cross ours and they get welfare,medicad,get to drive(even if they can't read the road signs).They get free child care,and most drive new cars,wear a lot of real gold jewelry,brand new clothes,and have new houses. I also think that the people in Washington should get paid like we do,have the same health care,and have to use Social Security. They would work to find a way for everyone to have a decent living then.I think anyone coming here from another country illegally should be jailed, until they can be sent back and then jailed there.All caught with drugs punished severly. All the ailiens have the best of everything,and the Americans have lost the American dream !!!! Obama should also have to show the whole country his birth records,with someone who has nothing to gain and can't be bought to verify it!!!!!!!!
Healthcare dynamics
Health problems and substantial medical debt are primary factors in personal bankruptcies in the USA, along with job loss and family problems, which are also frequently related to health. Over 40 percent of all bankruptcies in 1999 were associated with a medical condition or debt. Half of those in bankruptcy had health insurance, indicated that coverage is frequently inadequate. Nearly half of the bankruptcies among those aged 65 and over were due to a medical reason. A market economy, as promoted in the US, tends to view medical expenses as just another form of personal consumption and to disapprove of collective or government action to reduce insecurity. Although many countries encounter problems in providing high-quality, well coordinated healthcare services, the US is unique in the anxiety its citizens experience over healthcare costs. In a survey in the USA, physicians believed that unfair treatment is mostly based on whether patients have health insurance, followed by how well they speak English, their level of education, and their financial status [Kaiser Family Foundation, National Survey of Physicians, Part i: Doctors on Disparities in Medical Care, Highlights and Chartpack (Menlo Park, CA, Kaiser Family Foundation, 2002)]. Healthcare rationing in the US is mainly effect by lack of insurance coverage. As a result, we have not explicit or widely accepted way to curb expenditures, and the fragmented system hinders us from doing so. The competitive marketplace is not intended or designed to further the public good. Insurance companies reduce payments to doctors and hospitals, “carve out” benefits – like pregnancy and delivery or mental health – or add high copayments and deductibles to shift costs to patients. Pockets of self-interest compete for profit and shift burdens back and forth without achieving any improvement in quality of value of care. The Medicare Advantage (also called Medicare+Choice program (M+C) different than but closely related to the managed care option (MCO)) was an effort to both improve quality and control costs. MCOs take financial responsibility for Medicare enrollees and have an incentive to improve health and reduce expensive treatments. Unfortunately, the ideal is not working as well as intended. Under MCO costs have risen and quality has not improved. M+C enrollment peaked at about 17 percent in 1999 and declined steadily to about 10 percent of the eligible Medicare population in 2004. During the program’s first five years, MCOs have continually reduced benefits and canceled policies, creating a sense of uncertainty that threatens to reduce participation rates even further. Too often MCOs control costs simply by restricting care; this is not care management. MCOs that are more concerned with their bottom lines than with the quality of their patients’ lives have added to the mistrust many Americans feel towards managed care. (Acknowledgement: The language of Christine K. Cassel , MD has been used in this respons
advertisement
