OLDER AMERCANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 1972

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGING OF THE

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 4232, New Senate Office Building, Senator Thomas F. Eagleton (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Stafford.

Senators Eagleton, Cranston, Kennedy, Beall, and

Also present: Senator Church.

Staff members present: James J. Murphy, majority counsel. Senator EAGLETON. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Subcommittee on Aging of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare is now in session to continue hearings on the Older Americans Act.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS F. EAGLETON, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGING

Today the Subcommittee on Aging will begin hearings on legislative proposals to amend, strengthen, or replace the Older Americans Act. This takes on additional importance now because in just 3 months June 30 to be exact-this act will expire.

During that time the Congress must consider several major issues with potentially far reaching implications for aged and aging Americans. Additionally, this subcommittee must take stock of the accomplishments, as well as the failures, by the Federal Government in the field of aging.

Nearly 7 years ago, the Administration on Aging was created to provide a Federal focus to improve and enrich the lives of older Americans. But from the very beginning, it was treated as a stepchild by important elements within the HEW bureaucracy. It represented something far less than its original sponsors-Congressman Fogarty and Senator McNamara-had wanted. Its budget and powers were limited. And it lacked clearcut authority for coordinating the overall Federal effort in the field of aging.

Clearly, a Federal unit on aging-to be coequal in status with the Social Security Administration-was more than the executive branch really wanted. The then Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare-the very Department in which AOA was placed-opposed its creation.

79-239 - 72 - 10

Viewed against this backdrop, it is no wonder that AOA has found itself at sea in the vast Federal bureaucracy. Subsequent reorganization moves have intensified this dilemma for the central spokesman for older Americans. Within recent years the deterioration of AOA has been accelerated.

In 1967, a sweeping reorganization of the rehabilitation, social and welfare programs led to the creation of the Social and Rehabilitation Service. With this realinement, AOA became one of the several units in SRS. But perhaps more significantly, it lost its direct line of communication with the Secretary.

Then, in 1970, action was initiated to transfer the research and training programs to the SRS regional offices. Further disintegration occurred last year with the approval of the administration's reorganization plan to create a new volunteer agency, to be ACTION. Once again, two more programs administered by AOA-RSVP and Foster Grandparents were spun off to another agency.

Today AOA's program responsibility has been reduced by twothirds. Quite clearly, it falls far short of being the strong and forceful advocate which the Congress intended.

Widespread concern about the flawed and fragmented Federal commitment in the field of aging is intensifying. Typical of this concern was the recent report by the President's Task Force on Aging. Heading the list of its 24 recommendations was the need for a streamlined Government apparatus in the field of aging. I think that the report summed it up very succinctly when it stated:

The experience of the Administration on Aging during the last 4 years, however, makes it abundantly clear that interdepartmental coordination cannot be carried out by a unit of government which is subordinate to the units it is attempting to coordinate.

A little over 3 months ago, the White House Conference on Aging was convened to formulate a long awaited national policy on aging. One of the key elements in this national policy was a strong statement in support of a new and strengthened operating framework in the field of aging.

The subcommittee has under consideration several proposals to implement the recommendations of the White House Conference on Aging with respect to the organization of Federal programs for the aging and the structure of the agency administering such programs. We also look forward to hearing from Secretary Richardson and other members of the administration tomorrow regarding the administration's proposals on this subject.

With this in mind, we will seek answers to fundamental and key issues in the field of aging:

What kind of advocate should the 20 million Americans now past 65 and the millions more nearing this age have at the Federal level? Should the AOA be extended as it is presently constituted? Should it be strengthened? Or, should it be replaced with something entirely new?

How can the widely dispersed programs affecting the elderly be coordinated in a coherent and sensible fashion?

Should there be a special high-level unit for the formulation, of clearly defined policies in the field of aging?

What is the role of the Office of Management and Budget in determining the success or failure of Federal programs to serve the elderly?

We will now receive for the record a statement from Hon. Harrison A. Williams, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Jersey and chairman of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare.

Senator EAGLETON. We welcome the witnesses scheduled to testify today and look forward to receiving their contributions toward answering these fundamental-and difficult-questions.

STATEMENT OF HON. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, I welcome this chance to testify before the Subcommittee on Aging on legislative proposals that should be enacted now to help insure a better life for older Americans.

My remarks today are directed at two such proposals. The first would improve the machinery of Government that deals with the field of aging. The second would result in an important program improvement in the area of transportation, a matter of great concern to senior citizens.

Mr. Chairman, I am proud to have been the author of the legislation creating the 1971 White House Conference on Aging. That Conference called for action on many fronts, including the vital issue of improving the machinery of Government that is meant to serve the needs of older Americans.

And I am especially pleased that the recommendation of the White House Conference on this matter of organization parallel those contained in S. 3181, the Action on Aging Act of 1972 which I have cosponsored with Senator Church, the distinguished chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, and others.

The current Federal organizational structure intended to help America's elderly is ill-designed for this purpose. S. 3181 goes at the job of improving government machinery in the field of aging in three basic ways.

First, this bill would create an independent Office on Aging at the White House level. This Office, to be directed by an Assistant on Aging to the President, would have among its responsibilities the following:

Advising and assisting the President on Federal programs for older Americans;

Providing effective procedures for coordinating Federal programs for the elderly;

Encouraging the development of State and local agencies, both public and private, to carry out activities designed to aid senior citizens;

Developing demonstration programs to meet the needs of older Americans;

Establishing effective procedures for consideration of the interests of older Americans among the Federal agencies and departments conducting programs for the elderly;

Making policy recommendations on programs for senior citizens; and

Reporting to the Congress annually on the activities of the Office. Second, the proposed legislation would establish an advisory council to assist the Office on Aging. This council would be composed of distinguished leaders in the field of aging.

Third, under my bill, the Administration on Aging would be placed under an Assistant Secretary on Aging in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. This is in contrast to the current low profile of AOA, which now finds itself a unit of the Social and Rehabilitation Service, which is, in turn, a component part of HEW. S. 3181 would give the elderly a spokesman with direct access to the Secretary of HEW and with the visibility that is essential for implementing effectively programs under the Older Americans Act.

In short, S. 3181 would improve the policy and coordination functions in the field of aging at the Federal level through the establishment of the Office for the Aging at the White House level. And the programmatic function would be improved through strengthening the Administration on Aging by placing it under an Assistant Secretary.

Certainly, Mr. Chairman, drawing lines on an organization chart is not the answer to meeting the pressing needs of the elderly. But the changes suggested in S. 3181 would bring about fundamental improvements that are essential if programs for the elderly are to have any meaning and success. And my bill would remedy the defects in our current governmental machinery for the aging, which has demonstrated that it cannot do the job.

In addition to getting our organzational house in order, Mr. Chairman, Congress should also improve the programs and types of services under the Administration on Aging. The second legislative proposal which I will discuss today is directed toward that end.

The White House Conference on Aging declared that. "Meeting the transportation needs of the elderly is a problem of vital concern." Legislation which I introduced in March of last year-S. 1124, the Older Americans Transportation Services Development Act-is designed to help solve this problem.

And similar language has been incorporated in the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1972, which is sponsored by Senator Hartke and Congressman Brademas.

S. 1124 would amend the Older Americans Act to authorize a special emphasis transportation research and demonstration program focusing on:

Economic and service aspects of transportation in urban and rural

areas;

Special services in target areas where there are high concentrations of aged persons;

Portal-to-portal transportation services;

Reduced price fares and their impact on the elderly's ridership. well-being, and morale; and

Providing better coordinated services rendered by social service agencies.

A report issued by the Senate Special Committee on Aging-"Older Americans and Transportation: A Crisis in Mobility"-strongly urged enactment of S. 1124.

This legislation could benefit not only the elderly but their children and the business community as well.

For many older Americans, it could help to fight the dreadful isolation that marks their daily lives.

Their children could find less need to assume responsibility for providing transportation for the elderly.

And the business community could find increased profits because greater mobility would permit more older Americans to purchase goods and services.

Mr. Chairman, the White House Conference on Aging conferees stated that: "(T)he transportation needs of the elderly cannot wait for more studies. Immediate action is needed." Prompt enactment of S. 1124 would show that we in the Congress are responsive to this call for action now.

For the reasons I have outlined, I urge immediate and positive action on the proposals I have discussed in my testimony today.

Our next witness is the distinguished Senator from Idaho, the Honorable Frank Church, who is chairman of a brother committee, the Senate Special Committee on Aging.

Senator Church, we welcome you.

Senator CHURCH. I have an opening statement, and I will place it in the record as though read.

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK CHURCH, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO; ACCOMPANIED BY DR. HAROLD L. SHEPPARD, CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING'S ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE ADMINISTRATION ON AGING OR A SUCCESSOR Senator CHURCH. Mr. Chaiman, thank you very much for this opportunity to testify here on legislative proposals to create a strong and effective Federal advocate for older Americans. Nearly a year agoalmost to the very day-your Subcommittee on Aging joined forces with the Senate Special Committee on Aging to conduct hearings on "Evaluation of the Administration on Aging and the Conduct of the White House Conference on Aging."

Those hearings were particularly timely, as you may recall, because a number of crippling blows had further threatened the Administration on Aging. Its proposed funding level had been slashed to the bone at a time when the President was proposing a new "expansionary" budget to stimulate our sagging economy.

Further downgrading occurred when the administration proposed to transfer RSVP and the foster grandparent program to the volunteer agency, ACTION.

Witnesses at those hearings were in virtually unanimous agreement that recent reorganization moves had weakened, instead of strengthened, the Federal commitment in the field of aging. Moreover, there was widespread agreement that the Administration on Aging fell far short of being the forceful advocate which the elderly needed.

It lacked clearcut direction; its authority was fractured. To put it bluntly, the Administration on Aging simply lacked the clout and visibility to provide any meaningful coordination at the Federal level. It was buried in the bureaucracy at HEW.

For these reasons, as chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, I appointed a 20-member panel to develop proposals for strengthening and improving the Federal commitment in the field of aging. And the Chairman for that Advisory Council-Dr. Harold