Talk:AARP

message: NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of AARP. I am a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. I’m submitting these edits to correct inaccuracies and provide additional detail for the infobox, lead, personal life and philanthropy sections and have provided related sourcing for review. Please let me know of any questions or comments. Thanks for your time and consideration.
-------------------------------------
“History section”
* I am suggesting the following History section edits to 1) add additional context explaining how AARP was formed by Dr. Ethel Percy Andrus, 2) clarify the details surrounding the end of AARP’s relationship with Leonard Davis and 3) request that content better suited for the Criticisms section of the article be moved to that section.
* Edit request 1: Suggest adding a paragraph after the first paragraph of the section and before the third paragraph that explains how Dr. Andrus evolved the NRTA into AARP. See paragraph below. This change would provide factual background about the effort she undertook to start the organization. Currently, her role as founder is downplayed. . I consolidated this and the original first paragraph because there were overlaps in the content.
Andrus decided to seek group insurance coverage for retired teachers through NRTA. She was rejected by dozens of private insurance companies  because companies at the time deemed adults over age 65 to be “uninsurable.” In 1955, Continental Casualty Co. agreed to offer coverage to retired teachers in New York State. The experiment was a financial success, and three years later, the NRTA Health Plan was expanded nationally. In 1958, Dr. Andrus created the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) as a sister organization to NRTA. Through membership in AARP, the general population age 55 and older gained access to the insurance benefits previously limited to former teachers.  Dr. Andrus continued to run AARP until 1967, when she died of a heart attack at age 82. 
* Edit request 2: Suggest replacing last sentence in current paragraph two “Critics of AARP…” with the following two sentences that more clearly represent the transition from Colonial Penn to Prudential. Current sentence as written sounds it’s stating what may possibly have happened vs fact. 
AARP severed ties with Davis in 1979 and began dropping Colonial Penn products. AARP sought competitive bids for insurance coverage and in 1981 chose Prudential Insurance Company of America to underwrite the group health plan for AARP members. 
* Edit request 3: Suggest moving the current paragraph 3 to the Criticisms section of the article. It fits better there with the rest of the content about Simpson’s investigation in the 1990s. Also, source footnotes 15 and 16 don’t support the points made in the paragraph. Source 15 does not mention Blahous or the statement he is credited with. And source 16 links to a blank Des Moines Register archive page. . The content left wasn't sourced and was already in the Criticisms section, so I completely removed it. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: . Heartmusic678 (talk) 13:01, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request: History and Advocacy sections 

message: Here's a good story in Kaiser Health News. While I do appreciate the skills of the AARP communications department, and FleishmanHillard, I think even they would agree that WP:NPOV improves the article and makes it more credible. 
The Criticism section avoids one of the most common criticisms of AARP in WP:RS -- its conflicts of interest -- which are detailed in this KHN story. While AARP is a non-profit, it gets most of its income from royalties, including UnitedHealthCare. In their policy decisions and product recommendations, are they serving the interests of their members, or their own interests of collecting revenue (and executive payments)? Bruce Vladic said that AARP "is in the insurance business." The conservative group American Commitment said that AARP "has grown in to a marketing and sales firm with a public policy advocacy group on the side." This conflict of interest came up when AARP supported Medicare Advantage in 2003, which this Wikipedia article does discuss under "Health Insurance". However, one of the big problems with this Wikipedia article is the section on "Single Payer," which contains a snippit from John Conyers and three paragraphs of AARP official statements explaining why single payer wouldn't work. 
I think the common theme in all of this is that AARP started as an insurance company, and expanded into a large, effective public policy lobbying organization representing seniors, generally advocating liberal and Democratic policies (supporting Obamacare). But many of its critics point to its financial conflicts of interest, which benefit the organization and its well-paid executives, at the expense of its members. This accusation came up particularly in the debate over single payer. 
https://khn.org/news/article/aarp-health-marketing-partnerships-medicare-medigap/
AARP’s Billion-Dollar Bounty
By Fred Schulte
Kaiser Health News
JUNE 6, 2022
There is also a link in this article's archives to an article in the New York Times on AARP by Paul Krugman. 
--Nbauman (talk) 17:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaiser Health News article 

message: NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of AARP. I am a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. I’m submitting these edits to correct inaccuracies and provide additional detail for the Infobox and Advocacy sections and have provided related sourcing for review. Please let me know of any questions or comments. Thanks for your time and consideration.
-------------------------------------
“Infobox section”
I am suggesting the following change to the Infobox to improve the accuracy of the article.
* Edit request 1: Suggest removing the role of National Volunteer President that currently names Catherine Alicia Georges. This role was ended in 2020 and no longer exists within AARP. Source:  
“Advocacy section”
I am suggesting the following Advocacy section edits to 1) add additional context about the history of the Medicare Part D signing, 2) provide historical context to AARP’s lobbying efforts against the pharmaceutical industry, 3) detail AARP’s efforts to improve brain health, which are an important part of the organization’s healthcare story.
* Edit request 2: Two requests here: 1) Update third paragraph under Health care to include President George W. Bush’s endorsement of the 2003 Medicare reform. These changes add context detailing the importance of this legislation to the then-current administration. 2) Update last sentence of paragraph to provide a source for Divided We Fail and include additional context about the program. 
AARP's public stances influenced the United States Congress' passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, which created Medicare Part D, in 2003, and also influenced Congress by resisting changes to Social Security in 2005. President George W. Bush called the Medicare legislation “the greatest advance in health care coverage for America’s seniors since the founding of Medicare.”  In 2007, AARP launched the “Divided We Fail” campaign with the Business Roundtable, the National Federation of Independent Business and the Service Employees International Union. The campaign urged presidential candidates in both major parties to commit to making health insurance coverage more affordable and to strengthen Social Security.   
* Edit request 3: Add additional paragraphs at the end of the health care subcategory to detail AARP’s extensive history lobbying against the pharma industry. These two paragraphs would go after the paragraph that starts with “By 2009, more than 50 million Americans”.
In 2019, AARP mounted a multi-million dollar campaign against the pharmaceutical industry and its high drug prices, an effort that positioned AARP as the “drug industry’s primary opponent.” Max Richtman, head of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, said, “PhRMA is an 800-pound gorilla. And I think they’re meeting another 800-pound gorilla in AARP.”  AARP supported a bipartisan bill that year by Sens. Charles Grassley (R-IA), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) that set caps on drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries and increased pressure on drug companies to lower prices.  In 2021, AARP launched the “Fair Rx Prices Now!” Campaign to support legislation that would enable the Medicare Program to negotiate prices with drug companies as a means of lowering prices for consumers, limit price increases for certain drugs and cap out-of-pocket spending by Medicare beneficiaries. 
As early as 1959, AARP began advocating for lower prescription drug costs to ease the burden on older consumers. Founder Ethel Percy Andrus testified during the 1962 Senate hearings on pharmaceutical industry pricing practices. “Our concern is relief from suffering and improvement of health. We feel that 15 to 20 percent profit earned by several large manufacturers is detrimental to this concern,” Andrus told the committee in 1962.  AARP regularly publishes Rx Price Watch Reports noting pricing trends in popular drugs for seniors and AARP's advocacy for lower prices has put it at odds with the drug industry.  AARP and PhRMA continue to drive the debate about prescription drug prices in Washington.
* Edit request 4: Add a paragraph to the end of the healthcare section after the two above highlighting AARP’s significant investment in brain health research (more than $60 million).
In a 2014 study conducted by AARP, 93% of people identified maintaining brain health as a high priority as they age.  The organization created a brain health assessment and program called Staying Sharp  and it formed the Global Council on Brain Health – an independent, international group of brain health experts and researchers that publishes findings such as the impact of music on brain health.  In 2018, AARP donated $60 million to the Dementia Discovery Fund for research into the causes and treatments of Alzheimer’s Disease.  
Thank you for your time and consideration. Justin Goldsborough (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I've implemented request #1. I don't have the time to read through the rest right in-depth now; some of the language is non-neutral (, for example, contains a quotation that is not attributed to anyone and puts in WikiVoice the claim that the pharmaceutical industry's drug prices are objectively high). And sources like GoBankingRates (see original article) seem more like PR blogs rather than reliable sources. I might take a shot later today at rephrasing some of the information, but the proposed paragraphs in requests 2-4 appear to have issues w.r.t. NPOV and source reliability and cannot be implemented as-is. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for taking the time to review this request. I will update the wording and sources in edit requests 2-4 to align with your feedback and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Once updated, I'll share back on this Talk page and reply to let you know if you wouldn't mind doing a second review. Appreciate it. Justin Goldsborough (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request: Advocacy section 

message: Thank you for your feedback on the Advocacy section edit request from July 6, 2022. The request has been updated based on your suggestions. I added more notable sources, eliminated questionable sources and rephrased language to include a more neutral POV. A summary of the updates for each edit request below has been added.   
NOTE: I’m proposing the following edits for FleishmanHillard on behalf of AARP. I am a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. I’m submitting these edits to correct inaccuracies and provide additional detail for the Infobox and Advocacy sections and have provided related sourcing for review. Please let me know of any questions or comments. Thanks for your time and consideration.
-------------------------------------  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin Goldsborough (talk • contribs) 15:25, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page.  Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 08:47, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your response. I have made the proposed changes to the article. Justin Goldsborough (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow Up To Edit Request: Advocacy Section