The authors document the higher poverty rate of older women, especially women of color, compared with older men—a pattern created and maintained by the intersection of the structural factors of age, race, and marital status. They then review how the U.S. Social Security program generally benefits older women and reduces their late-life economic vulnerability. A persistent gender inequity, however, is that women are more likely to disrupt their paid employment to meet family care responsibilities, which may increase the number of zero-earnings years and reduce the amount paid into Social Security. Current proposals to privatize the Social Security system are critiqued in terms of their gender inequities. Three relatively revenue-neutral proposals that could increase Social Security's protection against poverty and differentially affect low-income women are briefly discussed.
American Association of Retired Persons. (2005, February 12). AARP and Social Security: A background briefing. Retrieved May 20, 2005, www.aarp.org/socialsecurity.
3.
AnzickM. A., & WeaverD. A. (2001). Reducing poverty among elderly women. ORES Working Paper Series Number 87.Washington DC: Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation and Statistics.
4.
BinstockR. (2002). The politics of enacting reform. In AltmanS. H. & SchatmanD. I. (Eds.), Policies for an aging society (pp. 346–377). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
5.
Board of Trustees, Old Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance. (2004). Annual report of the Board of Trustees of the federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance trust funds.Washington, DC: Author.
6.
BurkhauserR. V., & SmeedingT. M. (1994). Social Security reform: A budget neutral approach to reducing older women's disproportionate risk of poverty.Syracuse, NY: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs/Center for Policy Research.
7.
CallahanD. (1999). Still with us: Elderly poverty in America. The American Prospect. 10(45), 74-77.
8.
CavanaughF. X. (2002). Feasibility of Social Security individual accounts.Washington, DC: Public Policy Institute, AARP.
9.
Congressional Budget Office. (2004). The outlook for Social Security.Washington, DC: Author.
10.
DiamondP. A. (1998). The economics of Social Security reform. In ArnoldR. D., GraetzM. J., & MunnellA. H. (Eds.), Framing the Social Security debate: Values, politics, and economics (pp. 38–64). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
11.
DiamondP. A., & OrszagP. R. (2003). Understanding the legacy debt in Social Security.Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
12.
FavreaultM. M., & SammartinoF. J. (2002). Impact of Social Security reform on low-income and older women.Washington, DC: Public Policy Institute, AARP.
13.
Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics. (2002). Older Americans 2000: Key indicators of well-being.Hyattsville, MD: Author.
14.
FitzPatrickC.S., & EntmacherJ. (2000). Increasing economic security for elderly women by improving Social Security survivor benefits. Retrieved October 1, 2005, http://www.nwlc.org/pdf/NASIwidows2.pdf.
15.
FlippenC., & TiendaM (2000). Pathways to retirement: Patterns of labor force participation and labor market exist among the preretirement populations by race, Hispanic origin, and sex. Journal of Gerontology: Psychology and Social Sciences, 55, S14-S27.
16.
Harrington MeyerM. (1996). Making claims as workers or wives: The distribution of Social Security benefits. American Sociological Review, 61, 449–465.
17.
HerdP. (2002). Care credits: Race, gender, class and Social Security reform. Public Policy and Aging Report, 12, 13–18.
18.
HudsonK. (2000). No shortage of “nonstandard” jobs.Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
LeeS., & ShawL (2003). Gender and economic security in retirement.Washington, DC: Institute for Women's Policy Research.
21.
MoodyH. R. (2002). What is the future of Social Security? In MoodyH. R. (Ed.), Aging: Concepts and controversies (4th ed., pp. 215–250). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
MunnellA. (1999). Reforming Social Security: The case against individual accounts.Boston: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.
National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. (2005, January). Social Security's real ‘crisis’ is one of morals. Retrieved February 01, 2005, http://www.ncpssm.org/news/archive/nathansonoped.
25.
National Women's Law Center. (2002, May 10). Women and Social Security reform: What's at stake?Washington, DC: Author.
26.
National Women's Law Center. (2003, January). Women of color and Social Security.Washington, DC: Author.
27.
Older Women's League. (2002). Social Security privatization: A false promise for women. Washington, DC: Author.
28.
Older Women's League. (2003). Women and retirement income. Washington, DC: Author.
29.
QuadagnoJ. (1999). Creating a capital investment welfare state: The new American exceptionalism. American Sociological Review, 64, 1–11.
30.
RappaportF. S. (2004, May 21). Women and Social Security: Important issues for financial security of older Americans. Report presented to Mercer Human Resource Consulting, New York.
31.
RoseS. J., & HartmannH. I. (2004). Still a man's labor market: The longterm earnings gap.Washington, DC: Institute for Women's Policy Research.
32.
ShawL., & HillC (2001). The gender gap in pension coverage: What does the future hold? Retrieved October 1, 2005, http//www.iwpr.org/pdf/e507.pdf.
33.
SmallhoutJ. H. (2002). Benefit design choices for personal Social Security accounts. Benefits Quarterly, 18, 44–64.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004b, August). Median earning of workers 15 years old and over by work experience and sex. Retrieved October 10, 2005, http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p60-203.pdf.
38.
WeirD. R., WillisR. J., & SevakP. A. (2002). The economic consequences of widowhood. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
39.
WilliamsonJ. B. (2002). What's next for Social Security: Partial privatization?Generations, 26, 34–39.
40.
WuK. B. (2003). Poverty experience of older persons: A poverty study from a long-term perspective.Washington, DC: AARP.
