Page images
PDF
EPUB

it were not for these projects. If we add this to what we already know about the impact of aging with the psychological isolation that occurs, we can predict that out of the 2500 people probably 250 to 500 would require community support of a considerably more expensive nature. . .

[ocr errors]

Dr. Jean Jones Perdue from Dade County, Florida testified that "As a physician of 35 years in Florida, I have cared for many older people and have known that nutrition and prevention of isolation and loneliness, have been the keystone to success in maintaining the well-being of these people. It is extremely difficult for a person alone to keep up interest in eating and living and they soon deteriorate. Depression and apathy then set in and they become ill. In this day and time, with the cost of medical care skyrocketing, the very preservation of health maintenance more than ever becomes a must-both from the humane and economical standpoint. I know of no other measure that will insure this other than enactment and speedy carrying out of this bill."

I would also like to call special attention to the testimony of Honorable John B. Martin, Commissioner, Administration on Aging and President Nixon's close advisor on aging. He admitted some displeasure with certain details of the bill, although he emphasized the need for group meal programs, especially ones that offer a broad scope of services. The Administration, however, is opposed to categorical grant programs and would prefer a nutrition program as part of a comprehensively funded social service program. Mr. Chairman, it has been my experience that administrative agencies tend to ignore the will of the Congress even when we establish categorical grant programs. I am not optimistic that they would carry forward a program of this type unless we specifically instruct them to do so. Nutrition programs are needed now. We cannot afford to wait! If my bill and the companion bill introduced by Senator Kennedy is enacted during this Congress, an estimated 8 million senior citizens could receive immediate benefits. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to report that the proposed low-cost meal program has been given even more support this year than last. As more persons familiarize themselves with the optimum potential of this bill, its reputation grows. This year alone, 116 of my colleagues in the House have supported its quick enactment. A growing number of distinguished members of the Senate are also encouraging its passage.

Both the House and the Senate bills are identical except for one factors. The House bill places the administration of the meal program in the Department of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture has had responsibility for administering nutrition programs for years. They have personnel operating such programs in every county in the United States, I thought the implementation of the proposed nutrition program for the elderly would be enhanced because of the experience that Agriculture has acquired. Senator Kennedy's bill, on the other hand, places its administration within the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. I have no objection to this. My only concern at this time, is our working together to expedite its enactment. We should no longer delay older people the benefits it offers.

Mr. Chairman, it is not without foundation that we can predict the success of this program. To further retard passage of the legislation would be a mere shirking of our responsibility. I urge my colleagues to give the low-cost meal program serious consideration and to actively work toward its early enactment. Senator STEVENSON. That concludes the hearing. (Whereupon, at 12 noon, the hearing was adjourned.)

RESEARCH IN AGING AND NUTRITION PROGRAMS

FOR THE ELDERLY, 1971

MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1971

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGING OF THE COMMITTEE
ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 940 a.m., pursuant to call in room 4232, New Senate Office Building, Senator Thomas F. Eagleton (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senator Eagleton.

Also Present: Senator Charles H. Percy.

Committee staff member present: James J. Murphy, counsel to the subcommittee.

Senator EAGLETON. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Subcommittee on Aging of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare is now in session.

The subcommittee held 2 days of hearings on June 1 and 2 to hear testimony on legislation relating to two disparate issues: (1) Biomedical and behavioral research relating to the aging process, and; (2) nutrition programs for the elderly.

Witnesses appearing on behalf of the administration were originally scheduled to appear at that time. However, at their request that appearance was postponed to allow additional time for the formulation of the administration's position on this legislation. Today's hearing will be devoted exclusively to the administration witnesses.

With respect to S. 887 and S. 1925 we heard witnesses attest to the decline in funds allocated for aging research. It seems remarkable, in light of the miniscule amounts previously provided for such research at the National Institutes of Health, that cuts have been recommended that would limit even further biomedical research in this area.

Under the administration's budget proposal, the amount available for research grants will be reduced from $3,592,000 to $2,251,000. Fellowships will go from $263,000 to $251,000. The result will be that no new aging research grant awards can be made in fiscal 1972.

The request for research funds under title IV of the Older Americans Act was recently increased to $2.8 million-the same figure as last year-only after hearings held jointly by this subcommittee and the Special Committee on Aging demonstrated the deplorable effects of the reductions originally proposed.

The legislation which the subcommittee is considering would not, of itself, provide increased appropriations for aging research. It

(243)

would, however, remedy the existing fragmentation of responsibility for such research and eliminate the duplication of effort, lack of coordination and gaps in overall approach. It would introduce, for the first time, a systematic plan and centralized focus for the conduct of this research.

These bills look to the future in an effort to improve the lot of the elderly through the acquisition of a greater knowledge about the problems that most commonly afflict them. The other bill we are considering, S. 1163, looks to their immediate needs through the establishment of nutrition programs for the elderly under the Older Americans Act. Congress recognized the special nutritional problems of the elderly in 1968 when it earmarked funds, under title IV of the Older Americans Act, for a special research and demonstration program to improve nutritional services for the elderly.

The demonstration projects conducted under this authority are now being terminated, leaving a large gap in the range of services provided for the elderly. However, our experience with these programs provides a sound base for the establishment of a permanent program of the kind embodied in S. 1163.

Such a program has been recommended by both the Panel on Aging of the 1969 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health, and by the President's Task Force on the Aging in its April 1970 report.

The Administration on Aging, it its preliminary evaluation of the demonstration nutrition programs, has reported that "the provision of meals in a group setting is a highly desirable approach because it fosters social interaction, facilitates the delivery of other services, and meets emotional needs of the aged while improving their nutrition.” We welcome this opportunity to hear the administration's views on these bills. I, for one, am extremely hopeful that the witnesses today will give us the benefit of constructive comments and suggestions that will contribute to our effort to meet these problems afflicting so many older Americans.

We have as our witnesses Mr. Stephen Kurzman, Assistant Secretary for Legislation, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and he is accompanied by Mr. John B. Martin, Commissioner of the Administration on Aging; and Dr. Gerald La Veck, Director of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Dr. Charles U. Lowe, Associate Director for Intramural Research, National Institute for Child Health and Human Development; Dr. LeRoy E. Duncan, Director, Adult Development and Aging Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; and Mrs. Isabelle M. Kelley, Assistant Deputy Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service, Department of Agriculture.

Senator Packwood of Oregon has asked me to welcome you on his behalf, as well as mine. Senator Packwood had planned to be here today to hear the testimony of this distinguished panel of adminisistration witnesses but other committee responsibilities have prevented him from attending.

Mr. Kurzman, are they going to appear after you? I don't know what procedure you wish.

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN KURZMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR LEGISLATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE; ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN B. MARTIN, COMMISSIONER, ADMINISTRATION ON AGING; AND DR. ROBERT MARSTON, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

Mr. KURZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We very much appreciate your courtesy in permitting the administration witnesses to appear on a single day rather than on separate days for these bills.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to appear before this subcommittee to present the administration's position on three bills: S. 1163, a bill which proposes to establish a national nutrition program for the elderly; S. 887, a bill which proposes to establish a National Institute of Gerontology; and S. 1925, a bill which proposes the development of a comprehensive Federal research strategy in aging.

I am accompanied by John Martin, Commissioner on Aging, and Dr. Robert Marston, Director of the National Institutes of Health. The hearings before this subcommittee come during a period of increasing public and congressional interest in the very wide range of problems related to the process of aging, including the physical and psychological process, and perhaps more important to many-the human and social problems of aging. I should like initially to direct my testimony to the problems of the aged generally and our strategy toward them.

The White House Conference on Aging is scheduled for the end of this year, the first such conference since 1961. We expect that the conference will provide us with guidance and recommendations to help develop a national strategy for meeting the problems of the aging. This strategy will provide a framework for suggesting appropriate changes in the Older Americans Act which expires in June of 1972. One of the most important elements of this administration's domestic policy is reform of income maintenance programs. Through an effective income strategy, many health, nutrition, and related problems will be alleviated to a significant extent. Greater income benefits to the elderly should serve to reduce malnutrition since malnutrition is often related to poverty.

H.R. 1, recently reported by the House Ways and Means Committee, will have the most significant impact on the well-being of the elderly of any single piece of legislation in decades. The administration's welfare reform proposal embodied in this legislation will provide a floor of income to needy adults who are aged, blind or disabled, administered by the Social Security Administration. The income floor for an individual under this measure will rise from $130 per month in July 1972, when the program is scheduled to go into effect, to $150 by July 1974. Couples will be eligible for $195 per month beginning July 1972 and $200 the following July. These benefit levels substitute cash for food stamps. H.R. I also contains many of President Nixon's social security initiatives designed to improve the lives of virtually all older Americans.

A far-reaching change is that social security benefit increases would for the first time be tied by law to increases in the cost of living. As the Consumer Price Index rises, unless Congress has enacted a benefit

« PreviousContinue »