AARP: ASSOCIATION AGAINST RETIRED PERSONS
By James L. Martin, President, The 60 Plus
Association
The American Association of Retired Persons (or AARP) is the eight
hundred pound gorilla of associations supposedly representing senior
citizens.
In actuality, the organization is a huge fraud on seniors,
profiting by commission from a variety of money making schemes,
receiving millions of taxpayer dollars, and promoting programs of big
government and high taxes which hurt, not help, seniors. Considering
the record of the AARP, we like to call them the AARP--the Association
Against Retired Persons.
AARP had an unusual origin but one that gave it a tremendous boost
in members and money. In 1947, Ethel Percy Andrus, a principal,
established the National Retired Teachers Association (NRTA) and, in a
unique partnership with insurance executive Leonard Davis, formed AARP
in 1958. Davis provided insurance policies for NRTA members, and made
a personal (though highly controversial) fortune for himself in the
process.
Charles R. Morris, examining the history of AARP in his book AARP:
America’s Most Powerful Lobby and the Clash of Generations (New
York: Random House/Time-
Life Books, 1996), revealed that for much of its existence AARP was
under the control of Davis thus "operating as a sales network to
hawk very high-priced insurance and a host of other Davis-created
products to old people." (p. 10) A source of controversy, Davis
abandoned his contacts with AARP in the early 1980s.
Clearly, Ms Andrus was well-intentioned in wanting to provide much
needed, low-cost insurance to retiring teachers, and clearly her
original philosophy that the AARP would seek no federal largesse is to
be admired and applauded.
But somewhere down the line, probably after her tenure, the lure of
the almighty dollar proved too much and AARP was under a microscope in
the 1970’s and 1980’s when Mr. Davis was sent packing to Florida, with much of his,
according to press reports, ‘$160 million fortune intact.’
But the full extent of the powerful empire built by AARP did not
come to light until hearings sponsored by then U.S. Senator Alan
Simpson (R-WY). The investigation of the finances of AARP provided a
major bombshell in 1995.
The organization is a tax-exempt group which collects federal
funds, about $86 million annually, from direct grants for such
programs as tax counseling for the elderly to providing jobs for
seniors under the "Senior Environmental Employment Program."
Simpson rightfully raised the question over the use of a non-profit
status for a group which makes millions selling its members medicine,
insurance, and other products.
Senator Simpson’s hearings shined the light on an organization
which claims to represent senior citizens but in reality represents
big government, helped by taxpayer subsidies.
AARP is a large money-making machine of Fortune 500 proportions.
The Internal Revenue Services even looked into the AARP non-profit
status and after some "negotiations" the AARP agreed to pay
$135 million ‘in lieu of taxes’ on its money-making schemes
conducted between 1985-1993. An additional payment of $15 million was
made in 1994. In the latter year, AARP paid the U.S. Postal Service
$2.8 million to settle accusations that it improperly used its
non-profit privilege. The great irony is that these payments were made
to the IRS and the U.S. Postal Service (AARP caught trying to
circumvent the law) at the same time the group was receiving hundreds
of millions of dollars from the taxpayers over those years. AARP can
operate on a low membership annual dues of $8 per member because of
the profits it gets from its other activities and federal funding. In
fact, the $8 is called a ‘loss leader item’ in the world of
business. It gets you in the door at a nominal amount, but profits are
amassed with the products it sells you. The Wall Street Journal
summed it up well in the title of an editorial (June 23, 1995) about
the AARP and other groups who thrive on federal funds such as the
National Council of Senior Citizens and The National Council on Aging:
"Welfare for Lobbyists."
AARP has been consistent in its efforts to promote more federal
spending and bigger government. They were active promoters of the
Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act (1988) which became law; and when
seniors found out the outrageous bill they were paying for this new
government bonanza, their protests became so strong that Congress took
the unheard of action toward a seniors program: it repealed it the
next year (1989). AARP found seniors picketing their headquarters with
"Down with AARP!" signs because of the organization’s
support for it. (Opposition was so strong that one can still recall
pictures of one of the architects of this bill, then Chairman of the
House Ways and Means Committee Dan Rostenkowski, fleeing senior
citizens in his solid Chicago Democratic district who chased after him
in protest after a meeting in August of 1989!)
The AARP opposed a balanced budget constitutional amendment. They
opposed efforts to slow down the rapid growth of Medicare, indifferent
to the need of saving this program for seniors. They oppose reform of
Social Security which would save the system and allow individuals to
have individual retirement accounts. They consistently push for more
spending on entitlement programs. They deny the Social Security system
is in trouble and propose as ‘salvation’ for the program the usual
prescription of big government groups: raise taxes.
And how well do they represent their members? When President Bill
Clinton proposed increasing taxation on Social Security recipients
above a certain income level, the AARP was strangely silent and,
instead of opposing this hardship on seniors, urged approval of a
budget and tax deal which would add these taxes.
As a result of its political stance, the AARP has been losing
members who protest their liberal slant but they continue an
aggressive campaign of recruiting new members
(even lowering the eligibility age for membership to age 50). Their
magazine, Modern Maturity, has a circulation over twenty
million, making it larger than the combined circulation of some
current news magazines. (Besides Modern Maturity and the AARP
Bulletin, it has about seventeen separate newsletters and a large
number of videos, special studies, and pamphlets aimed at targeted
groups.) Still the 33 million members of AARP represents real
political clout, a leverage used to promote big government, encourage
more government spending, and opposing all efforts to reduce
government spending, all to the detriment not only of seniors living
on fixed incomes but for all taxpayers.
The irony is that most AARP members in the 50 states have only a
vague notion of AARP’s political agenda which tilts decidedly to the
left and most AARPites join for the aggressively hawked benefits.
It’s hard to resist a sales pitch that touts AARP’s buying power
based on 33 million members, until Senator Simpson’s hearings
focused on the fact that not only did AARP not beat competitive
insurance plans but made a tidy profit, of hundreds of millions on all
the products they offer their members as ‘the lowest available
price’ thanks to an apparent purchasing power due its massive
membership.
AARP has a number of state groups or affiliates assisting them in
their mission. Horace Deets, an employee of over twenty years,
receives a salary of $292,000 (more than the pay of members of the
President’s Cabinet!) plus $46,000 in a benefits package while 19
other AARP executives receive over $100,000 each. At the latest count,
the AARP headquarters office had a staff of 1,752 which can be
averaged to about 3.27 ‘lobbyists’ for each member of Congress.
(There are an additional 500 technical employees in Hartford,
Connecticut, who exclusively process auto claims for AARP.)
Are all seniors groups out for big government and taxpayer funds?
Not so.
The 60 Plus Association stands for free enterprise, less government
and less taxes for seniors and neither takes nor seeks federal grant
money. We have been called by one source "an increasingly influential lobbying group for
the elderly...often viewed as the conservative alternative to the American Association of
Retired Persons (AARP)."
Taxpayers --and especially senior citizens -- must realize that the
AARP does not represent the best interest of people but serves as a
mouthpiece for those forces pushing for expanded government. Nonprofit
organizations with their own political agenda of liberalism which
receive federal funds should not be subsidized by taxpayers for
lobbying. President Thomas Jefferson said it so well: "To compel
a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and
abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." It is time an aroused
electorate put a stop to this abuse.