When I was growing
up in the 1950s, there was a pervasive assumption that most of
the nation's wealth was owned by women. Women lived longer than
men and inherited the money their husbands made, so it was said.
Ipso facto, widows were rich.
Anyone even slightly
familiar with the voluminous statistics collected by the government
knew this was a myth, but not until the new feminist movement
arose in the late 1960s was it publicly questioned.
It took organized women
at least a decade to convince the public that women, especially
older women, really were poorer than men. It took longer to convince
the government that particular attention ought to be paid to the
economic problems of older women; very few became rich widows.
The struggle is not
over. Although the poverty rate among the elderly is less than
a third what it was forty years ago, the "gender gap" remains.
As the Twentieth Century ended, almost twice as many women as
men over age 65 (13 % to 7%) had incomes below the poverty line.
This gap is larger for those who are older.
At the sixth conference
of the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) held in Washington
D.C. last June, the problems of older women were high on the agenda.
Numerous papers emphasized that the economic reality for retired
women is collectively worse than that for retired men. The "three-legged
stool" on which retirement traditionally rests -- savings, pensions
and social security -- has shorter legs for women.
As succinctly put by
Lois Shaw and Catherine Hill, "older women enter retirement with
fewer economic resources than men." Their lifetime earnings are
lower; they are less likely to have pensions, and those too are
lower; they are less likely to be married, and those that are
married are more likely to be caring for their spouse rather than
being cared for.
A look at the "legs"
shows how much shorter they are.
Earnings
While the gender gap
in annual income is going down, it has not gone away. Women still
earn less than men, whether they work in similar jobs or in lower
paying "women's jobs." They are more likely to work part time
and are employed fewer years during their lifetimes. Younger women
are doing better than we did, but their success does not translate
into a lower gender gap for those women now entering retirement
-- the ones who were raised on the rich widow myth. On the contrary,
because husbands usually retire before wives, older men are more
likely to have an employed spouse than older women.
Pensions
Half of American workers
don't have pension plans. Of those now receiving pensions, women
still get less. The fact that women work full-time for fewer years
than men means lower pensions when they retire. As of 1995, women's
pensions were worth only 58 percent of men's, and only 26 percent
of women over age 65 had pension income, compared to 46 percent
of men. Survivor benefits give widows only fifty to sixty percent
of what their husbands received, but their expenses are rarely
cut by that much.
Social Security
Women's lower lifetime
earnings makes social security particularly important in their
older years. Forty percent of unmarried women, but less than 30
percent of unmarried men, rely on it for 90 percent of their retirement
income. The fact that social security is almost universal, less
dependent on working full-time for most of one's adult life, and
has more generous survivor benefits than most pensions, results
in a smaller gap in the overall benefits received by men and by
women than is true for pensions. Women's benefits are 76 percent
of those that men receive. Despite vast changes in access to jobs
and in labor force participation, retirement programs still assume
that all women are married, and their husbands earn enough to
provide for them until death. We now know that this is not true,
if it ever was. Thus how to maintain a decent standard of living
in old age is a major policy problem that must be resolved in
the Twenty-first Century. It's front and center right now because
of the many proposals to revamp social security before it hits
a crisis state of too many recipients and too few contributors.
This is a debate in
which women, especially older women, have a lot at stake. IWPR
President Heidi Harmann says that privitization would be a disaster
for women. Others think it would help some women, but not all.
For different views
see:
Institute
for Women's Policy Research
www.ncpa.org/pi/congress/socsec/oct98c.html
www.pacificresearch.org/issues/health/sswomen/sswomen.html