Изображения страниц

- 4

programs throughout the country? And tens of billions for each of the

other programmatic needs? Certainly not!

Yet our failure to confront

the illusion that the older Americans Act presents solutions to any of

the problems on its agenda lets us ignore the challenges of making priority choices, and the challenges of looking to local priorities and


A third weakness is that the bureaucratic components of the network


the public and voluntary service agencies and the universities and colleges

have quite understandably become preoccupied with sustaining and expanding

the different, thinly-funded program elements with which they are directly

involved. Each program element has a corresponding set of bureaucratic

or educational mechanisms, and each of these sets has developed its own

professional organization or association.

As a consequence, one finds a

great deal of attention given to the apportionment of Older Americans Act

funds earmarked for each of the bureaucratic domains in the network,

but little, if any, attention to how a given problem confronting older

persons is to be solved. In my own state of Massachusetts, for example,

We have continuing conflict among statewide associations for area agencies, for nutrition projects, for home care corporations, for senior centers, and for municipal councils on aging. Last summer this conflict became

so intense, and so unrelated to older persons and their problems, that

the Governor's Citizens Advisory Committee felt impelled to convene a

statewide meeting at which these five state associations were charged to straighten out their bureaucratic differences and come to some

settlements about their division of the territory and its resources. In Massachusetts, as elsewhere, these settlements are not made with an

- 5

eye to solving the problems of older persons so much as with an eye to

entrenching firmly the role of the bureaucratic components.

There are additional problems that we might discuss, but perhaps

[ocr errors]

those I have already addressed are sufficient to convey my basic point

namely, that the Older Americans Act and its programs are not well struc

tured for solving or even for making a substantial impact upon the

problems of aging in our society. The legislation and its programs
have been effective for some essential first-phase purposes, particularly

in spelling out an agenda of issues affecting older persons.

And the

Act's programs have been well designed for helping each Congressman or

Congresswoman know how many constituents in his or her district have

been served a meal or provided with some other form of assistance.


is now time, however, to address the larger issue of how, if at all, the

Act might help solve or have a substantial impact upon one or more

problems affecting older persons.

I believe that one possible way to shift to a problem-solving

orientation would be through a strategic departure

a legislative

[ocr errors]

approach that eliminates the compartments separating the various titled programs of the Act area planning and services, training, research gerontology centers, senior centers, and nutrition and consolidates

[ocr errors]

the funds available.

Each community would receive its total formula

allotment of funds as at present. But, working through its Area Agency,

[ocr errors]

each community would be required to make a priority decision for using

those funds, in order to have a substantial impact upon the most extreme

- 6

problem confronted by older persons in that commnity. The legislation would not provide restrictions as to categories of priority other than

the extensive agenda of legitimate general concerns that has already

been elaborated.

Rather it would provide that most of the funds

available, somewhere between 80 and 90 percent, be expended by each

area for a priority program in accordance with its perception of the most

pressing local concern related to the needs of older persons.

Perhaps this general approach would make it possible to have an

impact upon at least one problem of importance in each community.


would certainly be better than the current situation in which only a very

little effort is put into a great many problem areas, and a tremendous

amount of energy is being expended upon issues of professional and indus

trial domain and stature. Such an approach would also be far better than

persisting with the peculiar assumption that effective community services

can be developed and implemented from our nation's capital, in a country

that has 80,000 distinct units of government. The history of our country

shows rather clearly that effective community services

such as profes

sional fire protection services, police services, sanitation services

have been developed in response to a locally experienced sense of crisis

which transcends the fragmentation of governmental authority. Similarly, the approach I am suggesting today might enable services to the aging to

develop as a concentrated response to the priority crises experienced

by older persons in the many different communities in which they live,

rather than as minimum, token coverage of a large range of possibilities

identified by professionals.

To be sure, few if any professionals in the field of aging would be

happy with the approach I have briefly outlined. Presumably, however,

- 7

the issue here is to consider a strategy that may have substantial

impact upon problems confronted by older persons, not simply to strengthen and enrich the domains of bureaucrats and professionals like myself.

Professionals in gerontology have provided pioneering leadership

in helping us to recognize the tremendous range and depth of issues

affecting persons as they grow older in America.

The first stage of

issue recognition, fleshed out through the Older Americans Act and other

legislation, is drawing to a close.

Not every issue that has been identi

fied can or necessarily should be resolved through federal intervention.

It is time to shift gears to a second stage in which some hard choices

will have to be made among the many issues and programmatic possibilities

that have been set forth.

And those choices can be made with reasonable

effectiveness in local communities, because a network of mechanisms for

local decisions affecting older Americans is now in place. If we use that network for program priority decisions rather than for consumer-partici

pation window dressing I suspect we will get some sound decisions and

some services that have impact. I don't say this out of some sort of

pious Populism. I have generally found, and I am sure that you have, too, that people and communities with problems that are severe enough to require govermental help usually have little trouble in sorting out their


Thank you for this opportunity to outline some of my perspectives

on Older Americans Act programs.

I will be happy to elaborate, or to deal

with related issues as best I can in response to any questions you may


Senator EAGLETON. We are pleased now to have with us the distinguished Senator from New Mexico, Senator Domenici. Welcome, Senator, You may proceed.



Senator DOMENICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. May I say at the outset that I know you have had many serious responsibilities since you came to the Senate, but I don't think there is any more important task than the one what we do this year with the Older Americans Act. I personally am delighted that you are chairing the subcommittee that will redraft and reauthorize the Older Americans Act.

Also I would like to say—as you well know, Mr. Chairman, that there is a Special Committee on Aging in the Senate, and I am privileged to be the Ranking Minority Member of that committee. I want to say to you and to your staff that we have held a number of hearings around the country and here in Washington during the last year on the Older Americans Act. Therefore I hope that, as you proceed through mark-up on this bill, you will call upon us to be of whatever assistance we can be. Our staff is also available to assist your staff and discuss with them our findings.

Some of the members of the Special Committee on Aging will soon introduce, Mr. Chairman-a proposed bill extending and expanding the Older Americans Act of 1965. We understand the grave responsibility you have to come up with the best bill possible and our bill is designed to show you what we have found and what we recommend. It in no way indicates that we have any special lock on solutions to these problems. Having said that, let me ask that you make my entire statement, which is my best efforts to summarize what I think should be in the bill part of the hearing record.

Mr. Chairman, I want to say at the outset that we have been discussing now, for a couple of years, the impact of inflation and the added costs of energy on older Americans. There is no question that the senior citizens in this country are the group most affected by increasing energy costs.

Senator EAGLETON. Yet I note, with a degree of sadness, that the Carter budget cuts back from 65 million to 10 million in this area of energy-I am talking about the emergency program. Anyway, it's shuffled around, what have you. But go ahead, Senator.

Senator DOMENICI. Mr. Chairman, the point I would like to stress is the need to strengthen the Commissioner on Aging. We must move AOA up in the hierarchy of authority where it will get more attention. A more visible AOA will, in my opinion, have a better chance of impacting on the right policy makers in the executive branch and in Congress. For the institutional integrity of the Administration on Aging, the legislation that I will propose will move AOA out of the Office of Human Development Services and make the Commissioner on Aging directly responsible to the Secretary of HEW. This action is designated to strengthen the Administration on Aging and undo some of the damage that I believe has been done by the recent restructuring of OHDS.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »