Each new year brings great strides of accomplishment and new hope to the aging, thanks to research in vision. Past research has given optometry a fruitful beginning into understanding the prob lems of vision; current research will serve as the road to complete understanding. Gratefully, the aging person may look forward to several more decades of productive, "seeing", alert years - all because of the vision progress being made through research.

SUMMARY

America has entered into a new phase of social development. Greater life expectancy and a rapidly increasing older population has created new problems, more challenges, far greater potential for national growth and development.

Since 1900 the number of men and women over 65 has increased 41⁄2 times, while our total population has little better than doubled. Approximately 1 out of every 12 people are over 65, a total of about 15 million. By 1975, it is estimated the total will reach 21 million people. Another 40 million men and women are between the ages of 45 and 65. This means that almost 50 per cent of our population is over 40.

Our country's great strength lies in our aging and aged. Here lies a vast and growing reservoir of energy and experience. Harness this power through unhandicapped vision .... .. give it expression, dignity and independence, and it becomes an asset. Allow it to degenerate, vegetate and become dependent, and it becomes a liability.

Our age of mechanization and automation has afforded a rise in our standard of living, but it has also increased the amount of leisure. Work has become more specialized requiring greater visual efficiency, leisure time has become broader, requiring better visual acuity for true enjoyment. The frequency of retirement has increased, while age of retirement has decreased, requiring adequate visual acuity to keep the older person occupied. With these newfound "leisures", many older people are making use of their freedom from family and work responsibility. But many find themselves having the desire, but being hampered by visual defects. The un

fortunate part of it all, is that this is a period of life when the person has the experience, knowledge and desire to enjoy life to the utmost, and offer more to humanity.

Perhaps one of the most tragic aspects of old age is feeling dependent, lacking a sense of self-sufficiency, feeling as though not wanted. Much of this lack of confidence is the psychological results of physical handicaps, often those in the vision category.

Through research and development, optometry has surged forward to find new ways and means to keep the visual facilities comfortably active longer. Optometrists discovered long ago that they must prescribe not only for the task but also for the mode of life. This is being done more and more in order to aid the senior citizen. Bifocals, multifocals, coated lenses, light and environment studies, hardened lenses, microscopic lenses and contact lenses, among other optical aids, are serving to prolong the "seeing" life of the aging person.

There is much more to be learned ... much more that the senior citizen of tomorrow can look forward to and see than those of today. But the effort is a worthy and compensating one, because in the senior citizen, you have humanity at its highest level of mature judgement.

In "Federal Responsibilities in the Field of Aging", President Dwight D. Eisenhower said:

"In considering the changed circumstances presented by lengthening the life span, we must recognize older persons as individuals not a class and their wide differences in needs, desires, and capacities. The great majority of older persons are capable of continuing their self-sufficiency and usefulness to the community if given the opportunity. Our task is to help in assuring that these opportunities are provided."

Vision is the precious sense that stimulates opportunities, and fulfills them after they have been established. We are looking forward to even a better life for the senior citizen through improved vision.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair observes our colleague from the Senate, the Honorable John Carroll from the great State of Colorado.

John, we welcome you back to the Ways and Means Committee which served as your committee for some time when you were a Member of the House. We appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to come to us this afternoon.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN A. CARROLL, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO

Senator CARROLL. Mr. Chairman, I am always delighted to appear before this most important committee of the House of Representatives and to meet with some of my old friends.

Today I appear only briefly. I want to associate myself with the remarks of my colleagues, Congressman Rogers of Colorado, and Congressman Aspinall. This has to do with a subject with which I have been familiar at least for 25 years. In our State about 25 years ago we set up an old-age assistance program. I think we have one of the outstanding programs of the Nation. This question of residence requirements is deeply involved with our Constitution. This is the purpose of my coming. Our medical care program is imbedded in our Constitution. We have a $10 million annual medical care program limited to that amount. If more people came in to share in it, less money is left for the others.

It came as a complete surprise to me that there is some attempt to reduce the residence requirements for my State, and for all States, down to 1 year. This would deal a devastating blow to my State.

There would be the question of how long it would take to amend the Constitution, the uncertainty about our medical care program, the uncertainty about our monthly pension benefits.

It has recently been brought to my attention how detrimental the legislation which is before this committee would be to our State and to some 50,000 pensioners. I have been informed-this is from the press-that the Colorado Welfare Board went on record late Friday, this last Friday, as opposing the proposal that would reduce to 1 year the State's residency requirements for the old-age pension. I ask unanimous consent at this point to put this article in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, that may be done. (The article referred to follows:)

[From the Denver Post, Feb. 10, 1962]

WELFARE UNIT OPPOSING CUT ON RESIDENCY

The Colorado Welfare Board went on record late Friday as opposing a proposal that would reduce to 1 year the State's residency requirement for the old-age pension.

A resolution attacking the proposal by President Kennedy was unanimously adopted by the seven-man board which governs the State pension.

Colorado's constitution stipulates that oldsters must have been residents of the State for at least 5 years before they are entitled to draw the pension.

The Kennedy administration has proposed to Congress a complete overhaul of the Nation's welfare program. Under this proposal, States, to be eligible for Federal assistance for pension programs, must not have residency requirements for the pension in excess of 1 year.

Spokesmen for pension organizations have pointed out that, if the Kennedy recommendations become law, Colorado will be forced to change its constitution and reduce the State's residency requirement.

This, it is feared, will lead to a heavy influx of oldsters into the State. Colorado, which now pays pensioners $108 a month, has the second highest pension in the Nation. It is topped only by Connecticut, which pays $110 a month.

The board said in its resolution that a heavy increase in the number of pensioners would have an adverse effect on the pension medical program.

That program, limited to $10 million a year under the constitution, has run in the red the past 2 fiscal years.

About 50,000 senior citizens now are receiving benefits under the old-age pension program.

Guy R. Justis, State welfare director, was directed by the board to write the Colorado congressional delegation to ask them to oppose any change in residency requirements.

In other action, the board heard a report that a State-based cost-of-living index under preparation the past 2 years at the University of Colorado will be finished in April.

Dr. Morris Garnsey and Dr. Leslie Fishman, CU economics professors, told the board a fourth and final sampling of prices in Colorado will be made next week.

The board authorized CU to develop the State cost-of-living index to use in determining the old-age pension, which, under the constitution, is pegged to prices.

NO BLS SAMPLING

In the past, the board, in setting the pension award, has used the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics index. But this has been called into question since, in the past, the BLS has not taken price samplings in Colorado.

A State index will be a better guide to the costs that Colorado pensioners must meet, board members were told.

Senator CARROLL. I have other articles here.

Our State legislative body is in session today. The senate with only one dissenting vote opposes this legislation. The house also has passed a memorial opposing this change.

Frankly, I cannot understand why this legislation is proposed at this time and I am sure President Kennedy himself has not been advised what this program would do to the number of States that have a residency requirement that is over 1 year. It is my understanding that there are 19 States that have residence requirements of 5 out of

9 years.

Mr. Chairman, many years ago when I was a member of this committee, I listened to the arguments pro and con among ourselves as to the contribution on the part of the Federal Government to many States. Some of us we thought had more progressive programs than others and therefore were entitled to a larger cut of the pie because of grants and matching requirement.

I observe here that Arkansas has a residence requirement of 3 out of 5 years.

I observe that here are Arizona and California and Colorado and Florida and Indiana and Iowa, some 19 States, all requiring residence of 5 out of the preceding 9 years.

It is my sincere hope that this committee will not act hurriedly on this matter. Give the Congress a chance to work it out, think it out. I do not think it comes in good grace, in a year when we have more problems than we can handle now, to load this problem on top of the Congress, either in the House or in the Senate. I would say it will take constructive thinking for years ahead.