'Active grannies' the new soccer moms By: Mark J. Penn July 29, 2008 07:49 AM EST
Despite all the talk about this election being driven by the youth vote, America as a nation has never been older and the power of the senior vote has never been greater.
In the relentless quest to find the soccer moms of this election, perhaps the answer will be found in the “active granny” vote — empty- nesters who have found a new freedom in their lives after the kids have left and who look at the world very differently than do their kids graduating college. The seniors of today may not be the so-called Greatest Generation, but they sure are the biggest generation — and their voting power has been compounded by the dramatic expansion in average life expectancy that’s occurred since they were born.
In 1976, voters older than 60 accounted for just 15 percent of the electorate. In 2004, they were 24 percent — a nearly 70-point jump in their voting strength. And the under-30 vote in 1976 was nearly 30 percent, so young people actually had a 2-1 edge. That has disappeared in recent years as the senior vote has surpassed the youth vote in sheer numbers. History also shows some similar, if less dramatic, changes: In 1960, when John F. Kennedy was elected president, most Americans were below the age of 45. Today that has been reversed in the census figures, with oldsters having a 4-point edge over those under 45.
And what has been the key vote in the two states — Florida and Ohio — that have been central to the outcome of the last few elections? The senior vote. Pennsylvania is possibly in play only because its voting population is the second-oldest in the Union. The industrial heartland tilts older for a simple reason — older voters have been left behind as their sons and daughters seek better jobs in other parts of the country.
Importantly, it turns out that, rather than being averse to change, seniors have often been the leaders of change, serving as key bellwethers. In fact, they have picked the popular vote winner in every single election since 1952, with one exception: choosing Richard Nixon over Kennedy in 1960.
Long regarded as core Democratic voters thankful for Social Security and Medicare, seniors’ voting outlook is no longer defined by Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt or Lyndon B. Johnson. Instead, they cast two votes that define them: They overwhelmingly supported Ronald Reagan’s candidacy in 1980 and also were the strongest supporters of Bill Clinton in 1992. In fact, despite all the talk of his popularity with youth, Clinton won the senior vote in 1992 by a wider margin (12 points) than he did the under-30 vote (10 points).
The lifestyles of these seniors have been undergoing some changes over the last few years. Rather than retire, about half of American seniors now expect to keep working — half of them because they need the money, and the other half because they now see work as part of an “active retirement.”
Today’s seniors are hardly monolithic in their outlook. Men have gotten increasingly grumpy — they believe that the country has had a fundamental break in values from the past, and they’re upset with what they see as a youth that does not have to work as hard as they did to succeed. But they are a group that can be very attracted to one of Barack Obama’s primary election proposals: eliminating all income taxes for the first $50,000 of income for everyone over age 65. The Obama camp hit a bull’s-eye with this proposal, which has little economic justification but is great politics.
Senior women, on the other hand, tend to be more concerned with what they consider essential — Social Security and health care — two subjects that have been largely missing from campaign rhetoric in the past month.
Both Obama and John McCain have work to do with seniors. In the Democratic column, while there were unprecedented numbers of young voters in the Iowa caucuses, the biggest increase in the primary states was among older voters: 9 million new voters over 45. Though there were dust-ups on Social Security, health care and taxes, ultimately most seniors voted on the basis of experience — and they voted for Hillary Rodham Clinton by wide margins.
On the Republican side, despite what you might expect, McCain took time to win over seniors: He came in third with them in Iowa, second in his big New Hampshire win and split older voters with Mitt Romney in Michigan. Not until South Carolina did he win them decisively — and then in Florida he won by only 5 points. McCain may be of the older generation, but that has not translated directly into votes.
In the last New York Times survey, seniors were effectively tied, favoring McCain by 2 points. Eighteen percent of seniors surveyed in that poll were undecided. In fact, the undecided voters we are seeing across the polls are largely white and senior. They will be the biggest viewers of the conventions and the debates, and the 4 to 5 percent of senior undecided voters is enough to tip the election one way or the other.
Obama will certainly do very well with younger voters, and he has appealed to them with his message of change and new generational appeal. But the growth of the senior vote in the past 48 years will make this a closer election than it appears to be. With Obama having just returned from his foreign tour, perhaps we need to look at seniors in upcoming polls to see if the trip has helped allay their concerns about his experience.
In the coming months, the big viewers of cable television, the conventions and the debates will be the active grannies — and they will be torn between wanting to vote for the kind of change they voted for in 1992 and wondering whether Obama has cleared the experience hurdle they are concerned about. And they are not going to vote for an older candidate just because of his age — if anything, they may vote for a candidate who reminds them of their children rather than themselves. There are new issues in their lives: making income after the age of 65, growing issues with age discrimination, getting plugged into technology, having access to the latest medical treatments and good doctors through Medicare, and seeing their families torn apart by career-driven migration.
If I had to handicap the race now, Obama has a huge opportunity with this group. Seniors are unhappy with President Bush and the direction of the country, and Obama does represent the kind of break with a Bush administration that Bill Clinton represented in 1992. And McCain is simply no Reagan when it comes to convincing people he represents the right blend of change and experience they are looking for.
With 18 percent of seniors undecided and polls very close in the battleground states, my advice would be to take a serious look at these new active senior voters, whose voices just may turn out to decide this election. After all, they have been picking winners since 1964.
Mark J. Penn served as chief adviser to President Bill Clinton in the 1996 presidential election and to Hillary Rodham Clinton through her Senate and presidential races. He is author of the best-selling book “Microtrends: The Small Forces Behind Tomorrow’s Big Changes” (Twelve, 2007).