Over the past several decades, significant progress has been made in reducing poverty among the elderly as a group. However, statistics show that it is primarily older men who have escaped poverty, while the number of older women living in or near poverty has actually increased. Older women are now twice as likely as elderly men to be poor. Although many Americans of both genders still find it difficult to attain economic security during their later years, advances for older women have been especially impeded by gender discrimination in traditional patterns of retirement financial strategies, including Social Security, private pensions, and personal investment. As the elderly population in Colorado continues to rise, the economic security of our state’s older residents becomes increasingly important.

• Women over 65 had an average income of $14,320 in 1997, while men over 65 had an average income of $25,669. That means that the retirement wage gap is fifty-six cents; or women of retirement age earn only 44 cents for every dollar a man of the same age receives. (Employee Benefit Research Institute and March 1997 Current Population Survey)

The social and economic patterns that hamper women’s economic security during their working years –the wage gap, lack of value placed on work done inside the home, and a general gender bias in many public programs, to name a few-- are magnified during retirement. Few women receive employer-sponsored pensions, and even fewer are able to live on their pension payments. Private investments are also problematic for older women, who frequently lack both the resources and the knowledge to begin investing for themselves. Social Security, which is often the only dependable, permanent source of income for retired women, also has a number of internal biases against women’s life patterns and needs. To compound these problems, since women on average live longer than men, their resources need to last longer and are more likely to be eroded by inflation.

• According to the University of California Institute for Health and Aging, older women’s income from all sources at retirement is 30% of men’s.

• Between 1990 and 1998, Colorado’s elderly population grew by 21.4% to a total of 401,784 persons, constituting 10.1% of the state’s population. (Population Reference Bureau, October 1999 Population Today)
• In 1999, there were 407,773 people over the age of 65 living in Colorado. 57.3% of them were women. 70% of Coloradans over the age of 85 were women. (US Census Bureau, Population Division)
• By 2020, the US Census Bureau projects that Colorado’s elderly population will increase 108% from 1993, to 743,000. (www.census.gov/Press-Release/cb96-80.html)

• Women lose or reduce the opportunity to amass benefits and pensions for retirement when they take time off from working outside the home to raise a family.
• The Business and Professional Women’s Foundation reports that only 39% of all working women were covered by a pension plan in 1997. Less than 1/3 of currently retired women receive a pension, compared to 55% of male retirees.
• Among new private sector pension annuity recipients in 1993-94, only 30% of women over 65 received a pension, compared to 48% of men. Additionally, women’s pensions are worth only half as much as men’s: the median annual benefit for women was $4800, compared to $9600 for men. ("Women and Retirement Security"National Economic Council Interagency Working Group on Social Security)

Most retired women have little money to invest, and consequently tend to gravitate towards low-risk investments that do not result in much gain. The pay gap, compounded with the added expenses for health, children, and elder care that women pay over their lives, means that women have a hard time saving enough to provide comfortable retirement. Additionally, women who have never invested before and/or can not afford to hire a professional financial consultant are at risk of losing what little money they have managed to save. Women are also less likely to have invested independently over the course of their lives, and have little or no experience from which to build. Employer- or state-sponsored educational efforts, beginning when women enter the work force and continuing into retirement, could dramatically help future retirees make the most of their private investments.

• Overall, elderly women depend on Social Security for 51% of their total income. (Social Security Administration)
• According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 75% of unmarried elderly women depend on Social Security for the majority of their income; 40% of older women living alone depend in it for at least 90% of their income; and 25% of all elderly women rely on Social Security for their financial support. ("Social Security and Poverty Among the Elderly")
• The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities also reports that without Social Security, more than 52% of elderly women would be living in poverty. Even with Social Security, 13% of older women are poor, making them nearly twice as likely as older men to live below the poverty line. ("Social Security and Poverty Among the Elderly.")
• Social Security benefits are based on an individual’s earnings over 35 years. However, women who take time off for caregiving and family responsibilities, the median woman retiring in 1997 had only worked 27 years, compared to 39 years for the median man. Consequently, women’s Social Security benefits are automatically reduced. (Social Security Administration, Office of Chief Actuary, October 1998)

In addition to gender biases in traditional means of subsistence for retired persons, women’s economic problems in later life are substantially compounded by their longer lifespans.

• While few elderly married couples are poor, more than 22% of divorced women, 18% of widows, and 20% of never-married women over 65 lived below the poverty line in 1997. Overall, nearly 60% of all elderly women are unmarried.
• In 1993, elderly women were more than three times as likely as elderly men to be widowed (48 percent versus 14 percent).
• As women grow older, they are more likely than men to live alone on reduced incomes and to depend on assistance from friends and relatives. Eighty percent of elderly living alone nationwide in 1993 were women.
• Among both sexes, the likelihood of living alone increased with age. For women, it rose from 32 percent for 65- to 74-year-olds to 57 percent for those aged 85 years or more; for men, the corresponding proportions were 13 percent and 29 percent.

(Source: US Census Bureau, May 1995 Statistical Brief Sixty-five plus in the United States)

1. The protections in the current Social Security system that especially benefit women must be preserved, including: Guaranteed lifetime benefits and a full cost-of-living adjustment that ensure that women do not outlive their assets, or see their income reduced by inflation, no matter how long they live. A progressive benefit formula that helps lower-income earners, who are disproportionately women. Benefits for children and the parent who takes care of them, when a working parent becomes disabled or dies prematurely. Spousal and survivor benefits for married women, divorced women, and widows.
2. Since Social Security provides almost all retirement income for most women, Social Security benefits should be changed to reflect the pattern of women's work. Social Security should offer benefits for time taken to raise a family, as well as time spent in the workforce.
3. Provide incentives for employers to offer educational programs on the need for women in particular to plan for their own retirement, and to encourage employees to take advantage of additional savings programs (pursuant to the rise of 401(k) plans).
4. Create a state-sponsored public education program to provide information and assistance to women of near or retirement age who have been denied benefits.
5. Increase survivor benefits offered to widows and widowers. This would substantially mitigate poverty for many elderly widows, who are the poorest part of the population.
6. Oppose efforts to privatize Social Security, which would unfairly disadvantage those retired Americans (overwhelmingly women and low-income individuals) who lacked previous investment experience and/or could not afford professional financial advisors.