Edit: Ninja'd ... didn't spot the potential for grouping error too... good point Zamfir.
I think you've got that the wrong way round:
Motor vehicle crash fatalities were higher for males
than females in all age groups, while the male population
is equal to or less than the female population
in all age groups.
Among the over-65 age group, mean population was 41
percent for males and 59 percent for females from 1996
through 2006. However, the fatalities were 57 percent
for males and 43 percent for females during the same
time period indicating an over-representation of males
in crash fatalities.
That implies that men
over 65 are more likely to be killed in a car crash than women over 65 - which even so isn't really the same thing as being worse drivers. It's overall population they're quoting, not population of drivers, so there's no correction for the percentage of people who drive, nor for the number of miles driven, and that data potentially includes passenger, pedestrian and cyclist fatalities as well as driver fatalities (I can't find anything in that report saying it doesn't). It also doesn't account for the fact that older people in on-average poorer health are more likely to die as a result of any given accident than younger people.
Basically, that report doesn't really support any conclusions at all about who is the worst driver, and it's pretty poor form to use such inappropriate data (which if anything supports the opposite of your conclusion) to support a sexist stereotype.
Appopros of nothing that report appears to be going strong for a "least appealing presentation of data" award.