Grays on The Go

(7 of 9)
Of such sentiments and statistics is the fear of an age war born. Lured by high stakes and intuitive appeal, the lobbyists are swarming around the "generational equity" issue. Three years ago, Republican Senator David Durenberger from Minnesota helped establish the youth-advocacy group AGE (Americans for Generational Equity) to advance the claims of the young and counterbalance the powerful gray lobby. "The AARP is almost totally focused on the well being of its clients," says AGE Executive Director Paul Hewitt, "but they are going to have to address ways to avoid putting unbearable burdens on the baby boomers' children." Other youth advocates in Congress are also sharpening their blades. John Porter, Republican Representative from Illinois, for example, calls the budget deficit an exercise in "fiscal child abuse."

When the social costs of the age quake -- the arrival of the baby boomers into their golden years -- are tallied, the figures become even more alarming. The $50 billion spent on health care for the old when Reagan came into office is expected to reach $200 billion by the year 2000. Between 1980 and 2040, experts project a 160% increase in physician visits by the elderly, a 200% rise in days of hospital care, a 280% growth in the number of nursing-home residents. Between now and the year 2000, a new 220-bed nursing home will have to be opened every day just to keep even with demand. Without a change in the present system, pension and health-care costs will account for more than 60% of the federal budget by 2040.

So who is going to pay for America to grow old? With each advancement in medical technology, the possibility of extending people's lives increases. Who is to decide who should get the organ transplant or have first access to kidney-dialysis machines? The questions have fired a debate about what society owes its elderly, what should constitute a natural life-span and how far doctors should go to keep elderly patients alive. Medical Ethicist Daniel Callahan, 57, suggests that health involves more than preventing death. "We should seek to advance research and health care that increase not the length of life," he argues, "but the quality of life of the elderly."

Senior citizens deeply resent critics who seem to begrudge them their independence or imply that anyone ever got rich on a $500-a-month check. Many retirees worked hard, lived frugally and saved carefully to guard against the nightmare of a destitute old age. And while it is true the elderly consume roughly a third of the nation's medical resources, Medicare cannot begin to cover all the costs of a long illness. Already senior citizens pay three times as much out of their own pockets for health care as the young do. They view their benefits as a right, not a windfall. "I spent years away from my family fighting in Europe," says Roger Davis, 68, of Los Angeles. "Don't tell me the nation doesn't owe me something in my old age."