« PreviousContinue »
Mr. GIAIMO. I hope so.
Mr. O'HARA. I have been informed that a Mrs. Tuller would like to give us the benefit of her views. She is also from the Lodi group. If Mrs. Tuller
Mrs. TULLER. Mr. Chairman, I told Mrs. Athey that I was to speak after lunch and I asked Mrs. Athey to fill in the time that I was supposed to have, and if I may be excused ? Mr. O'HARA. You certainly may. I am
I am pleased that you joined us here today, and I enjoyed talking to you at noon. If anyone else would like to make a few remarks at this point, please stand and come forward.
Mr. O'HARA. Inasmuch as there apparently is no further testimony to be offered, and we are approaching the time when we are due to leave, I would like to thank all of you, the Governor of California, the Honorable Edmund G. Brown, and the officials of the State of California and the State legislature for the many courtesies granted to us. I want to thank all of you for your help and contributions. I would like to mention that the Member of Congress who represents Sacramento in the U.S. House of Representatives, the Honorable John Moss, talked to me about these hearings and told me he would like to be here, but that important committee business in Washington was going to prevent his attendance.
I think we agree that Mr. Sansome has given us yeoman service today and has made our job really very easy. We appreciate what he has done for us.
Mr. SANSOME. Thank you.
Mr. ELLSWORTH. I think we ought to add for the record, Mr. Chairman, that the work done by Margaret Jensen from the Citizens' Advisory Commission in lining up the people for this hearing is appreciated, in lining it up long distance with secondhand information as to who has been invited and who hasn't, to have somebody of her caliber coordinating for us, I think made it a successful 'meeting, where otherwise we might have been talking about different things.
Mr. O'HARA. I join you in those sentiments. Finally, I must announce that although the subcommittee originally scheduled hearings for southern California on Monday of next week, because of circumstances we did not anticipate, that is, because we are going to have a number of important measures before the House of Representatives for a vote on Monday, these hearings will have to be canceled. We shall be in Washington on Monday.
At this point, I shall recess the hearings of the General Subcommittee on Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor.
(Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.)
SACRAMENTO, CALIF., March 21, 1962. DEAR MR. BAILEY: It seems as though the only people who know just what is and is not good for we older folk are those people of a much younger generation. And they have had no experience.
I hope that your hearing here will produce something beside just talk and theory. Very truly,
JOHN H. OHL.
SACRAMENTO, CALIF., March 20, 1962. Hon. CLEVELAND M. BAILEY, Chairman of Committee on Problems of Aged.
DEAR SIR: The crying need for the aged is for the senior homes and lifetime care that is not so expensive. We of the middle class can't afford these expensive senior residence of lifetime care; as e.g., $17,000 to $35,000 downpayments, plus $200 plus for monthly board.
Also individual services are too high for us also, as well as hospital and medical care. A great majority of us do not come under the social security plan, and even so, it is not adequate. Sincerely,
PROBLEMS OF THE AGED AND AGING
SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1962
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Berkeley, Calif. The subcommittee met at 10:10 a.m., pursuant to call, in the Students' Union Building, Berkeley, Calif., Hon. James G. O'Hara (acting chairman of the General Subcommittee on Education) presiding
Present: Representative Robert Giaimo.
Present also: Robert M. McCord, director; Ted Ellsworth, special consultant on aging.
Mr. O'Hara. The General Subcommittee on Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor will come to order.
The purpose of the hearings being conducted in Berkeley today is to take testimony with regard to a number of bills that have been introduced dealing with the creation of a commission, a bureau, an agency, or a committee to coordinate efforts in meeting the problems of the aged and aging.
Among these bills, which differ in a number of respects, are: H.R. 246, by Mr. Libonati; H.R. 280, by Mr. Zablocki; H.R. 306, by Mr. Bennett; H.R. 558, by Mr. Rodino; H.R. 710, by Mr. Lane; H.R. 2377, by Mr. Addonizio; H.R. 2764, by Mr. Halpern; H.R. 3071, by Mrs. Pfost; H.R. 3739, by Mr. Cramer; H.R. 5030, by Mr. Morgan; and H.R. 10014, by Mr. Fogarty.
The question in which the committee is most interested deals with the different approaches suggested by the bills, and, of course, the larger question of whether such an agency or bureau would be helpful. There have been many conferences on problems of the aging. The White House Conference and State and regional conferences have made a number of recommendations.
One of the recommendations by the White House Conference was that some sort of central coordinating body be organized. Some State conferences have proposed that it be established as an independent office or agency. Others recommend that it be established as a division within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
We are interested in discovering, first, whether there is a need for an agency on the Federal level, and secondly, if there is need for Federal, State and local committees and nonprofit research.
We want to determine whether there is confusion because no one agency is responsible for coordinating work on the problems of the aged. We want information on whether needed services are being neglected because of a lack of funds or an agency to stimulate them. If this is true, we hope to determine what type of agency is needed and what form Federal encouragement and support should take.
I am Representative James G. O'Hara of Michigan, acting chairman of the subcommittee at these hearings.
To my right is Representative Robert Giaimo, of Connecticut, and on my left is Robert McCord, the subcommittee counsel. Special consultant on the problems of the aging, Mr. Ellsworth, is on my far right.
The chairman of this subcommittee is Representative Cleveland M. Bailey, of West Virginia, who had planned to be with us today but who was unable to do so because of important business in West Virginia.
Representative Jeffrey Cohelan, of California, who represents the Berkeley area, spoke to us with regard to his interest in this problem. He said he hoped to be here to testify, but he was unable to do so. Mr. Cohelan's interest in these proposals is well known in Washington. He is, in fact, the sponsor of a bill which would establish a special select House committee to deal with problems of the aged. The House now has no single committee to deal with these problems.
The first witness today is Dr. Gordon. Is Dr. Gordon here? Dr. GORDON. Yes.
Mr. O'HARA. Dr. Gordon, thank you for furnishing us a prepared statement. If you will identify yourself for the benefit of the reporter and the record, you may proceed in whatever manner you wish. STATEMENT OF DR. MARGARET S. GORDON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,
INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
Dr. GORDON. I am Margaret S. Gordon, associate director of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California, Berkeley, and I am also at present president of the Western Gerontological Society.
I am very much pleased to have an opportunity to appear in support of proposed legislation of vital significance for the well-being of older persons in the United States. I should like to point out from the start, however, that although I have been introduced as president of the Western Gerontological Society, I am not in any sense speaking officially for that organization. The Western Gerontological Society exists for the purpose of fostering better understanding of the problems of aging and stimulating research and training in gerontology on the west coast, but it does not take a position on legislative matters. However, I believe I am safe in saying that most of our members as individuals would support the general purposes of the proposed legislation. I need scarcely add that I am also not in any sense speaking for the University of California.
It is hardly necessary to elaborate on the social and economic trends which underlie the need for a special Federal agency concerned with problems of aging. The growth of the older population, the inadequate incomes of a substantial proportion of the aged, the shortage of suitable housing and of adequate nursing homes, the uneven distribution of community centers and recreational facilities for elderly persons, the barriers to employment of older workers, and other
manifestations of problems faced by the aging and aged have all been extensively documented in the material assembled in preparation for the White House Conference on Aging and for the Senate Special Committee on Aging.
Despite these needs, the question may well be raised as to why they cannot be met through existing governmental agencies and programs. In my opinion, the case for the proposed legislation does not rest on the fact that the needs of the elderly are being neglected, but on the fact that there is inadequate coordination among a wide variety of programs and inadequate planning in the field of aging. During the last decade, we have made impressive progress in improving income maintenance programs and in developing many special services for older persons, but the policies are uncoordinated, the services and resources are unevenly distributed among States and local communities, and above all we lack a rationally developed conception of priorities in meeting the needs of older persons. Research and training programs are spotty and inadequate, and almost no attempt has been made to develop adequate estimates of the social gains or losses associated with alternative methods of meeting various problems.
These general points could be illustrated in a number of different ways, but I should like to select a few illustrations from the field I know best relating to the economic problems of older people. I am sure that other witnesses, such as the chairman of the California Citizens' Advisory Committee on Aging, will discuss the need for expanded services in other fields.
Let us consider first the problem of employment opportunities for older people. During the last few years a number of States, including California, have developed and expanded special placement services for older job applicants in their local employment offices. Although these services are vitally needed, the older work specialists have been handicapped because of the fact that a large proportion of all job placements occur through channels other than the public employment service. Some of the centers for senior citizens, such as Little House in Menlo Park, conduct a special placement service for older persons as part of a broader program of activities, thereby providing a valuable supplement to the work of the public employment service. If grants to the States are used in part to support the establishment of new senior centers or the expansion of existing centers, as proposed in the type of legislation under consideration, the expansion of special placement services for older persons could be an important byproduct. The formation of local employment committees, composed of representatives of employer and union organizations and of other appropriate groups in the community, could also be stimulated under this legislation.
My second illustration will be from the field of housing which is in large part, though not entirely, an economic problem. In recent years, the Federal Government has adopted a number of programs designed to stimulate the provision of improved housing for elderly people, and California has also recently enacted legislation in this
However, there is a serious dearth of adequate information on the housing needs and preferences of elderly people. This need must be met through expanded research by Government agencies,