AARP Gives Us a Snapshot of the Millennial Caregiver

Published in the Woonsocket Call on June 3, 2018

AARP’s latest caregiver report places the spotlight on the Millennial generation, those born between 1980 and 1996, ages 22 to 38 in 2018. “Millennials: The Emerging Generation of Family Caregivers,” using data based primarily from the 2015 Caregiving in the U.S. study, notes that one-in-four of the nearly 40 million family caregivers in America is now a Millennial.

The 11-page report, released by AARP’s Public Policy Institute on May 22, 2018, takes a look at the Millennial’s generational experiences and challenges as they support an aging parent, grandparent, friend or neighbor with basic living and medical needs.

“Caregiving responsibilities can have an impact on the futures of younger family caregivers, who are at a particular time in their lives when pivotal social and professional networks are being formed,” said Jean Accius, PhD, Vice President, AARP Public Policy Institute, in a statement with the report’s release. “We must consider the unique needs of millennial family caregivers and ensure that they are included in programs and have the support they need to care for themselves as well as their loved ones,” she says.

The Millennial Caregiver

According to the AARP report, Millennial caregivers are evenly split by gender but also the most diverse group of family caregivers to date, notes the report. More than 27 percent of the millennial caregivers are Hispanic/Latino, or 38 percent of all family caregivers among Hispanic/Latinos.

The AARP report notes that Millennials are the most diverse generation of family caregivers when compared to other generations. Eighteen percent are African-American/Black, or 34 percent of all African-American/Black family caregivers. Eight percent are Asian American/Pacific Islander, or 30 percent of all the AAPI family caregivers, says the report, noting that less than 44 percent are white, or 17 percent of all white family caregivers. Finally, twelve percent self-identify as LGBT, which makes them the largest portion of LGBT family caregivers (34 percent) than any other generation.

About half of the Millennial caregivers (44 percent) are single and never married while 33 percent are married. If this demographic trend continues a smaller family structure will make it more likely to have a caregiver when you need one.

More than half of the Millennial caregivers perform complex Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), including assisting a person to eat, bath, and to use the bathroom, along with medical nursing tasks, at a rate similar to older generations. But, nearly all Millennials help with one instrumental activity of daily living including helping a person to shop and prepare meals.

While Millennial caregivers are more likely than caregivers from other generations to be working, one in three earn less than $30,000 per year. These low-income individual’s higher out-of-pocket costs (about $ 6,800 per year) related to their caregiving role than those with higher salaries, says the AARP report.

As to education, Millennial caregivers have a high school diploma or has taken some college courses but not finished. But, one in three have a Bachelor’s Degree or higher.

According to the AARP report, 65 percent of the Millennial caregivers surveyed care for a parent or grandparent usually over age 50 and more than half are the only one in the family providing this support. However, these young caregivers are more likely to care for someone with a mental health or emotional issue — 33 percent compared to 18 percent of older caregivers. As a result, these younger caregivers will face higher emotional, physical and financial strains.

The AARP report notes that Millennials are the most likely of any generation to be a family caregiver and employed (about 73 percent). Sixty two percent of the boomers were employed and were caregivers. On top of spending an average of more than 20 hours a week (equivalent to a part-time job) in their caregiving duties, more than half of the Millennials worked full-time, over 40 hours a week. However, 26 percent spend more than 20 hours of week providing family care.

Although most Millennial caregivers seek out consumer information to assist them in their caregiving duties, usually from the internet and from a health care professional, the most frequent source of information is from other family members and friends.

While Millennial caregivers consume information at a higher rate, most (83 percent) want more information to supplement what they have. The tope areas include stress management (44 percent) and tips for coping with caregiving challenges (41 percent).

A Changing Workforce

Millennials are encountering workplace challenges because they are less understood by supervisors and managers than their older worker colleagues. More than half say their caregiving role affected their work in a significant way, says the AARP report. The most common impacts are going to work late or leaving early (39 percent) and cutting back on work hours (14 percent).

As we see the graying of America, it makes sense for employers to change their policies and benefits to become more family friendly to all caregivers, including Millennials, to allow them to balance their work with their caregiving activities.
It’s the right thing to do.

To read the full report, visit: https://www.aarp.org/ppi/info-2018/millennial-family-caregiving.html.

Visit http://www.aarp.org/caregiving for more resources and information on family caregiving, including AARP’s Prepare to Care Guides.

Advertisements

Trump Signs Legislation to Undo Nation’s Banking Rules

Published in the Woonsocket Call on May 27, 2017

On May 22, 2018, The Senior Safe Act, a bipartisan bill authored by U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) to help protect older American’s from financial exploitation and fraud, passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 258-159 as part of a bipartisan banking reform package after previously passing the Senate in March by a vote of 67-31. President Donald J. Trump’s signed the bill into law rolling back regulatory oversight of the nation’s financial industry.

The Senior Safety Act is part of S. 2155, the “Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act,” a bill that modified the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was passed by Congress in 2010 to oversee the financial industry after the financial crash and recession of 2008-09.

Protecting Older Investors from Financial Exploitation

Through the watchdog efforts of the Senate Aging Committee, financial exploitation of seniors was identified as a top senior issue to combat. According to the Government Accountability Office, financial fraud targeting older Americans is a growing epidemic that costs seniors an estimated $2.9 billion annually. These frauds range from the “Jamaican Lottery Scam,” to the IRS impersonation scam, to the financial exploitation of seniors through guardianships. Earlier this year a hearing was held to update the public about the committee’s efforts to combat scams targeting older Americans as well as unveil its 2018.

As the Chairman and former Ranking Member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Senators Collins and McCaskill introduced the Senior $afe Act last year. Existing bank privacy laws can make it difficult for financial institutions to report suspected fraud to the proper authorities. The Senior $afe Act address this problem by encouraging banks, credit unions, investment advisors, broker-dealers, insurance companies and insurance agencies to report suspected senor financial fraud. It also protects these institutions from being sued for making reports so long as they have trained their employees and make reports in good faith and on a reasonable basis to the proper authorities.

“As Chairman of the Senate Aging Committee, I have been committed to fighting fraud and financial exploitation targeted at older Americans,” said Senator Collins. “The Senior $afe Act, based on Maine’s innovative program, will empower and encourage our financial service representatives to identify warning signs of common scams and help prevent seniors from becoming victims.”

Judith M. Shaw, Maine Securities Administrator and chair of the North American Securities Administrators Association’s Committee on Senior Issues and Diminished Capacity, says that this legislation incentivizes financial service institutions, including those in the securities industry, to train key employees on the identification and reporting of suspected financial exploitation of seniors. “This is a significant and important tool in the ongoing efforts to protect senior investors,” she adds.

Adds Jaye L. Martin, Executive Director of Legal Services for the Elderly, “We know from our proven success with Senior Safe in Maine that education of financial services professionals is a key component to identifying and stopping financial exploitation of seniors. There is no doubt this bill will help prevent seniors all over the country from becoming victims.”

With the passage of S. 2155, Keith Gillies, President of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), said, “The Senior Safe Act provides “much needed protection for older investors and will allow advisors to better protect their clients’ interests.”

“Advisors are often the first line of defense for scammers looking to take advantage of investors,” says Gillies, noting that studies have found older Americans are often a prime target.

The Pros and Cons of S. 2155

Since the Dodd-Frank legislation’s passage eight years ago, 20 percent of small banks have been put out of business, said President Trump and a ceremony where he signed S. 2155 into law. He predicted that the roll back of the costly banking reform regulations, both “crippling” and “crushing” to community banks and credit unions, would stimulate the banking industry to increase lending to businesses.

Banking regulations made it virtually impossible for new banks to be established to replace those that had closed their doors, said Trump, denying small businesses with access to capital. “By liberating small banks from excessive bureaucracy — and that’s what it was: bureaucracy — we are unleashing the economic potential of our people,” said Trump.

Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) calls the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act a jobs bill, saying “it is a much-needed solution for the folks who power our local economies.”

In an op-ed in the Greater Fort Wayne Business Weekly, Senator Joe Donnelly (D-Indiana) said, “This banking package is reasonable, balanced, and the result of thoughtful negotiation and compromise. It would take measured steps to encourage community financial institutions to boost lending and provide new protections for consumers. And it’s an example of what we can achieve when we work together to break the gridlock in Washington.”

But others strongly oppose passage of S. 2155.

Although S. 2155 has a provision to protect seniors from financial exploitation, Democratic Policy and Communications Committee Co-Chair David N. Cicilline, expressed strong concerns when the Houses passed S. 2155, he jokingly refers to as “the Bank Lobbyist Act.”

“Ten years ago, Wall Street’s recklessness brought our economy to the brink of collapse. It has taken Rhode Island years to recover. In many ways, we are still recovering.,” noted Rhode Island’s Congressman representing District 1. “The Dodd-Frank financial reform law ended the worst of the Big Banks’ excesses. It established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and gave working people a voice against the most powerful corporations in our country,” he said, noting that the passing of S. 2155 has reversed this progress.

It’s a massive giveaway to the wealthy and the middle class is getting screwed. This is a raw deal for working men and women. The American people deserve A Better Deal,” Cicilline said.

Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, warns that with the deregulation of banks, the GOP “are still gunning for Social Security under the guise of entitlement reform.”

Richtman predicts the passage of S. 2155 and it’s signing into law “makes another financial crisis more likely.”” He asks, “How fair is it to ask workers to be responsible and save when the government strips away protections intended to keep our savings secure?”

“Retirees’ Social Security benefits must be preserved because, at least for now, they are the only thing workers can depend on after the next financial crash,” says Richtman.

The Senior $afe Act was endorsed by organizations, including AARP, the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA), the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), the Credit Union National Association (CUNA), the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions (NAFCU), the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the Insured Retirement Institute (IRI), Transamerica, and LPL Financial.

Keynote: Fine Calls for Community Health Stations Across Rhode Island

Published in the Woonsocket Call on May 20, 2018

Last week, the Rhode Island Minority Elder Task Force (RIMETF) held a Health and Wellness Fair at the Cape Verdean Progressive Center in East Providence to put a spot light on minority health care needs.

Dr. Michael Fine, a primary care physician who formerly was the state’s Health Director, and now serves as Senior Population Health and Clinical Officer at the Blackstone Valley Community Health Care, Inc., gave the keynote address, calling for an overhaul of America’s ailing health care delivery system.

Although RIMETF’s primary mission is to raise money and seek grants to provide limited emergency assistance to low-income seniors in crisis situations, the organization also promotes the advancement of inclusive programs for minority elders, says Susan Sweet, the nonprofit’s founder, a former state official who advocated for, developed and operated programs and services provided to the state’s vulnerable populations, including elders. She continued that work after retirement from the state. “During the last two decades, RIMETF provided more than $53,000 in grants,” she said.

According to Sweet, RIMETF’s $200 grants help low income seniors to pay utility costs, rent, food, medications, clothing, furniture, personal healthcare items and other necessities of life. She says that 80 grants are given out annually, about half going to minority applicants.

But, the decision to host a Health and Wellness Fair on May 11, 2018, was tied to minorities having a lack of access to health care services and to have Dr. Fine outline a better way of providing care to Rhode Island’s minorities, adds Sweet. “To this day the state’s diverse minorities continue to remain in the dark about health care programs and services that they can access and that lack of information has a detrimental impact on their health and well-being,” says Sweet.

Health Disparities in Rhode Island

During his thirty-minute keynote, Dr. Fine, a primary care physician who formerly was the state’s Health Director, and now serves as Senior Population Health
and Clinical Officer at the Blackstone Valley Community Health Care, Inc., provided the details as to how lack of access to health care adversely impacts the health and life expectancy of Rhode Island’s minorities.

According to Dr. Fine, infant mortality in the African American population is about three times as high than in the white population. Diabetes is about two times more common in the African-American population than it is in the white population. He also noted that life expectancy in the United States is 4.5 years less among the African American population than it is among the white population.

Zeroing in on Cape Verdeans, Dr. Fine noted that the Rhode Island Department of Health does not track the health of this minority group separately from other groups. The state’s primary care practices and community health centers don’t have a good way to decide who counts as a Cape Verdean for health tracking purposes, he said. But about half of the Cape Verdean community in Rhode Island live in Pawtucket and Central Falls, so that health information collected using the electronic medical record by Blackstone Valley Community Health Center (BVCHC), Inc, provides the first ever look at the health status of Cape Verdeans in Rhode Island.

It’s difficult to know if that data is complete, because it doesn’t allow us to count all Cape Verdeans at the BVCHC, but only those people who speak Cape Verdean Creole or those who identify themselves as having been born in Cape Verde. “Because we have no complete way to identify the health status of the Cape Verdean population, we have no certain way to identify specials needs and opportunities to provide better health care to this minority group,” says Dr. Fine. In addition, because Cape Verdean Creole is not a written language, “we have no way to certify Cape Verdean medical translators” which means some of the health care needs of Cape Verdeans go unaddressed, he adds.

But, there are better ways to improve the health care of Rhode Island’s Cape Verdeans, says Dr. Fine. “We must make sure that all Cape Verdeans are enrolled in a primary care practice or community health center,” he says, noting that electronic medical systems can provide better measures of the health of this population.

Dr. Fine called for Cape Verdeans to be appointed to boards of health care organizations to represent them in decision of allocation of resources, to demand better translation services, and to improve delivery of health care to Rhode Island’s Cape Verdeans.

As to Rhode Islanders, Dr. Fine noted that 25 to 45 percent don’t get primary care and prevention. As a result, there are 1,200 unnecessary deaths a year from heart disease and stroke. There are 200 unnecessary deaths a year from colon cancer and 65-70 unnecessary cases of HIV. Up to 200,000 Rhode Islanders remain smokers, he says.

Dr. Fine continued to detail the negative impact on the health of Rhode Islanders if they did not visit a primary care physician. More than 1,500 babies are born to teenagers, more than a third to minorities. Not to mention that there are 330 to 400 avoidable deaths from influenza every year due lack of immunization (500,000 Rhode Islanders are currently not immunized every year). And there are 330 deaths a year from prescriptions and other drug overdoses, he says.

It’s Time for a Change

Dr. Fine warns that major changes must be made to the nation’s health care delivery system to reduce spiraling health care costs and to provide better access. This solution can be modeled after his Central Falls Neighborhood Health Station (CFNHS), he says. It’s a multi and interdisciplinary approach, bringing a wide variety of health care professionals together, from physician, nurses, physician assistants, mental health workers, nutritionists, substance abuse workers and midwifes, to rehabilitation professionals, CFNHS’s must also provide urgent care and primary care services, be open on weekends and have “sick today access appointments.” Says Dr. Fine.

Fine has documented early successes in the CFNHS’s delivery of health care. Adolescent pregnancy was been reduced by 24 percent in 2016 and emergency medical service runs were reduced by 5 percent in just 12 months.

Dr. Fine envisions a Neighborhood Health Station in every community of 10,000 persons. When up and running, “we’ll increase life expectancy, reduce infant mortality and revitalize the local economy,” he says, by reducing health care costs.

Concluding the Health and Wellness Fair, Director Charles J. Fogarty, of the Rhode Island Division of Elderly Affairs, who will be retiring next month, was recognized by RIMETF for his 40 years of public service and his support for the work of the Minority Elder Task Force.

For more details regarding the work of the RI Minority Elder Task Force or to make a donation, write RIMETF, 5 Leahy Street, Rumford, RI 02916 or call Lori Brennan Almeida, Chairperson, at 401-497-1287.

A Storm Cloud Looms Over Older Americans Month

Published in Woonsocket Call on May 13, 2018

Two years after President John F. Kennedy had formally designated May as “Senior Citizens Month” at a meeting of the National Council of Senior Citizens in 1963, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Older Americans Act into law, formally declaring May as Older Americans Month. When Kennedy first proclaimed May as Older American’s Month, there were just 17 million Americans who had reached age 65. According to the recently released 2017 Profile of Older Americans, one in seven Americans are 65 or older, and just two years from now, this this demographic group’s numbers will skyrocket to 56 million people.

Nothing but Empty Words

Since Kennedy’s inaugural proclamation, all presidents have proclaimed the month of May as Older American’s Month. Not surprisingly President Donald J. Trump recently proclaimed May as Older Americans Month, too, calling upon “all Americans to honor our elders, acknowledge their contributions, care for those in need, and reaffirm our country’s commitment to older Americans this month and throughout the year.”

Trump even touted his Administration’s priorities on fighting on the behalf of the nation’s older Americans. “The Department of Justice, for example, is focused on protecting seniors from fraud and abuse. My Administration is also committed to protecting the Social Security system so that seniors who have contributed to the system can receive benefits from it. We are also dedicated to improving healthcare, including by increasing the quality of care our veterans receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs and by lowering prescription drug prices for millions of Americans.”

But do Trump’s words in his April 30th resolution to proclaim May as Older Americans Month, match his past political actions. Not so.

Just almost three months ago the President released his 2019 budget and this fiscal blueprint did not show a commitment to aging programs and services.

Draconian Cuts in 2019 Trump Budget

Although Trump’s 2019 budget proposal was “Dead on Arrival” on Capitol Hill, as reported in my February 18, 2018 Commentary, his budgetary wish list of cuts would have been devastating to many programs and services for older Americans, as detailed by a policy analysis performed by the Washington, DC.-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM).

Trump’s budget included $1.4 trillion in Medicaid cuts, $490 billion in Medicare cuts, and repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Breaking his campaign promise not to touch Social Security, Trump called for steep cuts up to $64 billion from the Social Security Disability Insurance program.

Trump’s budget proposal also called for over $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, many of these savings coming from cuts to Medicare providers and suppliers. This was another campaign promise broken.

Trump’s budget cuts would have drastically impacted Medicare’s spending on prescription benefits and beneficiary costs, too. It would save $210 million over 10 years by eliminating the cost-sharing on generic drugs for low-income beneficiaries.

Not surprisingly, Medicaid was not immune to Trump’s 2019 budget cuts. He called for changing the structure of the program into either a per capita cap or Medicaid block grant, with a goal of giving states more flexibility of managing their programs. Through 2028, the president’s budget would cut $1.4 trillion from the Medicaid program through repealing the Affordable Care Act, and restructuring the program.

Trump’s budget proposal also calls for the elimination of the Older Americans Act Title V Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). The program, funded at $400 million in FY 2017. provides job training to nearly 70,000 low-income older adults each year.

Community Services Block Grants ($715 million), the Community Development Block
Grant ($3 billion) and the Social Services Block Grant ($1.7 billion) programs were also targeted to be eliminated. Some Meals on Wheels programs rely on funding from these federal programs, in addition to OAA funding, to deliver nutritious meals to at-risk seniors.

Trump also called for the elimination of funding to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, cutting assistance for heating and fuel costs to low income seniors. It would have also eliminated funding for The Senior Corps programs including the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, Foster Grandparents and Senior Companions. These programs enable seniors to remain active and engaged in their communities, serving neighbors of all ages, with the benefit of enhancing their health and wellbeing.

Finally, research into cancer, Alzheimer’s Parkinson’s and other diseases affecting older persons would be negatively impacted with $ 46 million in funding cuts to National Institute on Aging at the National Institutes of Health.

Also reported in my December 10, 2018 Commentary, Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress successfully passed the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, that was projected to add $1.5 billion to the nation’s deficit over the next decade. Under the 2010 “pay-as-you-go” law, that triggers automatic spending cuts to domestic programs when the nation’s deficit increases, the GOP’s sweeping tax plan (that Trump strongly supported) would have triggered automatic spending cuts to federal programs, including a $25 billion cut to Medicare in 2018 alone. But vigorous lobbying by AARP and NCPSSM, along with a long-list of other aging, health care and union groups, narrowly averted the draconian cuts by convincing the House and the Senate to waive them as part of a temporary spending bill to prevent a government shutdown.

Strengthening Federal Assistance to Seniors

When President Johnson signed the Older Americans Act into law on July 14, 1965, to raise the awareness of the problems facing seniors and to honor them, he formally proclaimed the month of May as Older Americans Month.

This year’s Older Americans Month is celebrated in every community across the nation as Medicare, Medicaid and Older Americans Act programs are under fierce legislative attack by President Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress.

With the 2018 mid-term elections just six months away, older voters can send a message to Capitol Hill – Strengthen Social Security, Medicare, and the Older Americans Act, expand Medicaid, and bring back health insurance to millions of Americans who lost their coverage because of the Republican tax plan that repealed key provisions of Obamacare.

With a Democratic-controlled Congress, next year’s theme for the Older Americans Month, might be “Strengthening Federal Assistance to Seniors.”

“First They Came for the Jews…”

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 29, 2018

On April 26, 2018, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Senate Resolution No. 2696, urging law enforcement officials to recognize white nationalists and neo-Nazi groups as terrorist organizations. The Senate Resolution would enable law enforcement to pursue such groups’ activities and whereabouts with the resources and attention devoted to domestic terrorist groups. It would be tragic for the Senate panel to not pass this resolution introduced by Senators Goldin, Miller, Nesselbush, Quezada, and Crowley. Representative J. Aaron Regunberg introduced the House companion measure (H.B. 8131).

In response to last year’s racially-charged violence in Charlottesville, state legislatures across the nation have considered similar legislation. Roger Williams, founder of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, was a staunch advocate for religious freedom and tolerance. With that commitment, it is important for Rhode Island lawmakers to not send Senate Resolution No. 2696 to legislative purgatory but to pass it to strongly denounce the white nationalist and neo-Nazi ideologies of racial, social and religious intolerance that terrorize the state’s racial, ethnic and religious minority communities.

Anti-Semitic Incidents Increasing in Rhode Island

Last month, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reported that the increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the Ocean State have nearly doubled from 2016 to 2017, with the number of reports jumping from 7 to 13. Let’s put a face on these incidents. According to the Jewish Alliance of Greater Rhode Island, it was reported by media that just one day after an anti-Semitic act of vandalism in the City of Pawtucket, on May 23, 2016, Stebbins Stadium in Cranston was spray painted with graffiti, including swastika symbols as well as hate messages directed to Muslim and African American communities. Among the incidents reported in 2017 by the media: a swastika burned into a sign located on a bike path in Barrington, anti- Semitic graffiti spray painted on Warwick Vets High School and a swastika made from human waste found in RISD dorm bathroom.

But, white nationalists and neo-Nazi hate ideology is also increasing throughout the nation. The increase is reflected nationally with the ADL reporting a nearly 60 percent increase.

The jarring historical imagery of the torchlight procession of supporters of Adolf Hitler moving through the Wilhelmstrasse in Berlin on the evening of January 30, 1933 came to life to Rhode Islanders and to millions of Americans last year when hundreds of neo-Nazis, white nationalists, KKK, militia members and other right-wing groups gathered for a “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Va. Carrying tiki torches, flags with swastikas and confederate flags, they came to the City’s Emancipation Park, chanting “Jews will not replace us”, “Blood and Soil” (a Nazi rallying cry), “White Lives Matter,” along with homophobic, racists and misogynistic slurs.

It’s Time for Rhode Island to Speak Out

While both GOP and Democrat Congressional lawmakers lambasted President Donald J. Trump’s choice of words for laying the blame of violence at the Charlottesville rally at the feet of both the far-right demonstrators and counter protestors, there were some who remained silent or defended his comments, saying his words were adequate.

With the increased public visibility of the neo-Nazis, white supremacist and other hate groups, and with President Trump failing to use his position and moral authority to strongly condemn the ideology of hate groups, the Rhode Island General Assembly is now positioned to take on this responsibility.

In response to the violent weekend in Charlottesville, Va., the Illinois Senate adopted a similar resolution, sponsored by Sen. Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, urging law officials to recognize white nationalists and neo-Nazi groups as terrorist organizations. As a state founded on the principle of religious freedom, Rhode Island can follow.

It is an appropriate time to remember the speech given by Martin Niemoller, a German Lutheran minister who opposed the Nazis and was sent to several concentration camps. He survived the war and explained:

“First, they came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me.”

For Rhode Island lawmakers, it is time for you to speak out.

2050 and the Caregiver Dilemma

Published in the Woonsocket Call on April 22, 2018

The year 2030 marks an important demographic turning point in U.S. history according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2017 National Population Projections, released last month. By 2030, older people are projected to outnumber children. In the next twenty years, when these aging baby boomers enter their 80s, who will provide informal caregiving to them.

Almost three years earlier, in a July 2015 report, “Valuing the Invaluable: 2015 Update Undeniable Progress, but Big Gaps Remain,” the AARP Public Policy Institute warned that fewer family members will be around to assist older people with caregiving needs.

According to AARP’s 25-page report, coauthored by Susan C. Reinhard, Lynn Friss Feinberg, Rita Choula, and Ari Houser, the ratio of potential family caregivers to the growing number of older people has already begun a steep decline. In 2010, there were 7.2 potential family caregivers for every person age 80 and older. By 2030, that ratio will fall sharply to 4 to 1, and is projected to drop further to 3 to 1 in 2050.

Family caregivers assisting relatives or close friends afflicted with chronic, disabling, or serious illness, to carry out daily activities (such as bathing or dressing, preparing meals, administering medications, driving to doctor visits, and paying bills), are key to keeping these individuals in their homes and out of costly nursing facilities. What is the impact on care of aging baby boomers when family caregivers no longer provide assistance in daily activities?

“In 2013, about 40 million family caregivers in the United States provided an estimated 37 billion hours of care to an adult with limitations in daily activities. The estimated economic value of their unpaid contributions was approximately $470 billion in 2013, up from an estimated $450 billion in 2009,” notes AARP’s caregiver report. What will be the impact on the nation’s health care system without family caregivers providing informal care?

The Census Bureau’s 2017 National Population Projections, again puts the spot light on the decreasing caregiver ratio over the next decades identified by the AARP Policy Institute, one that must be planned for and addressed by Congress, federal and state policy makers.

Who Will Take Care of Aging Baby Boomers?

With the expansion in the size of the older population, 1 in every 5 United States residents will be retirement age. Who will provide informal caregiving in our nation with a larger adult population and less children to serve as caregivers?

“The aging of baby boomers means that within just a couple decades, older people are projected to outnumber children for the first time in U.S. history,” said Jonathan Vespa, a demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau. “By 2035, there will be 78.0 million people 65 years and older compared to 76.4 million under the age of 18.”

The 2030s are projected to be a transformative decade for the U.S. population, says the 2017 statistical projections – the population is expected to grow at a slower pace, age considerably and become more racially and ethnically diverse. The nation’s median age is expected to grow from age 38 today to age 43 by 2060.

The Census Bureau also observed that that as the population ages, the ratio of older adults to working-age adults, also known as the old-age dependency ratio, is projected to rise. By 2020, there will be about three-and-a-half working-age adults for every retirement-age person. By 2060, that ratio will fall to just two-and-a-half working-age adults for every retirement-age person.

Real Challenges Face Congress as the Nation Ages

Jean Accius, Ph.D., AARP Policy Institute’s Vice President, Independent Living, Long-Term Services and Supports, says, “The recent Census report highlights the sense of urgency to develop innovative solutions that will support our growing older adult population at a time when there will likely be fewer family caregivers available to help. The challenges that face us are real, but they are not insurmountable. In fact, this is an opportunity if we begin now to lay the foundation for a better system of family support for the future. The enactment of the RAISE (Recognize, Assist, Include, Support and Engage) Family Caregivers Act, which would create a strategy for supporting family caregivers, is a great path forward.”

Max Richtman, President and CEO of the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, gives his take on the Census Bureau’s 2017 statistical projections, too.

“Despite how cataclysmic this may sound, the rising number of older people due to the aging of baby boomers is no surprise and has been predicted for many years. This is why the Social Security system was changed in 1983 to prepare for this eventuality. Under current law, full benefits will continue to be paid through 2034 and we are confident that Congress will make the necessary changes, such as raising the wage cap, to ensure that full benefits continue to be made well into the future,” says Richtman.

Richtman calls informal caregiving “a critical part of a care plan” that enhances an older person’s well-being. “While there currently are programs such as the Medicaid Waiver that will pay family members who provide caregiving support more can be done to incentivize caregiving so that loss of personal income and Social Security work credits are not barriers to enlisting the help of younger individuals to provide informal support services,” he says.

Adds Richtman, the Medicare and Medicaid benefits which reimburse for the home-based services and skilled nursing care “will be unduly strained ”as the diagnosed cases of Alzheimer’s disease skyrockets with the growing boomer population. He calls on Congress to “immediately provide adequate research funding to the National Institutes of Health to accelerate finding a cure in order to save these programs and lower the burdens on family caregivers and the healthcare system. “

Finally, AARP Rhode Island State Director Kathleen Connell, says “Our aging population represents challenges on many, many fronts, including healthcare, housing, Social Security, Medicare and, of course, caregiving. It would be nice to think everything would take care of itself if there were more younger people than older people. But that misses the point entirely. The needs of older Americans are a challenge to all Americans, if for no other reason than most of us end up with multiple late in life needs. And too many reach that point without savings to cover those needs.”

“It’s worth noting, by the way, that many of the solutions will come from people 50 and older — many of whom will work longer in their lives to improve the lives of older Americans. We need to stop looking through the lens of ‘old people’ being the problem and instead encourage and empower older Americans to take greater control over their lives as they help others,” says Connell.

“Congress needs to focus on common sense solutions to assure families that Social Security and Medicare are protected. The healthcare industry needs to face the medical challenges. And at the state and local level, we must focus on home and community-based health services,” adds Connell.

For details about the Census Bureau’s 2017 statistical projections, co to http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/cb18-41-population-projections.html.

For more information about AARP’s July 2015 caregiver report, go to http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/ppi/2015/valuing-the-invaluable-2015-update-new.pdf.

Reply Reply All Forward

House Fails to Pass GOP’s Balanced Budget Amendment

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 15, 2018

Following the recent passage of the $ 1.3 trillion omnibus government spending bill and the massive GOP tax cut bill that added more than a $1 trillion to the nation’s despite economic growth, and with midterm elections looming, the House GOP leadership quickly acted to tackle the spiraling nation’s deficit by bringing H.J. Res. 2, a balanced budget amendment (BBA), to the floor for a vote. Simply put, the amendment requires that total annual outlays not exceed total annual receipts. It also requires a true majority of each chamber to pass tax increases and a three-fifths majority to raise the debt limit.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), introduced H.J. Res. 2, which he notes is nearly identical to text in legislation that passed the House in 1995, but failed in the Senate by one vote. This would be the Virginia Congressman’s last chance to push for passage of a BBA because he is not seeking re-election at the end of this term.

Last October. House Speake Paul Ryan (R-WI) agreed to vote on Goodlatte’s BBA, in exchange for conservative votes from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Mark Walker (R-NC), on a procedural budget measure needed for Republicans to move forward on tax reform.

BBA Gets Thumbs Down by House Lawmakers

As expect, the House GOP’s BBA was defeated by a vote of 233 to 184, falling far short (by 57 lawmakers) of the two-thirds vote required for passage of an amendment under the Constitution. Six Republicans voted against it while only seven Democrats voted for it. But, the GOP’s BBA had little chance of becoming law because the required support of two-thirds in the Senate and Democratic Senators unified in their opposition, and finally the requirement that 38 states ratify the constitutional amendment.

“Our extraordinary fiscal crisis demands an extraordinary solution. We must rise above partisanship and join together to send a balanced budget amendment to the states for ratification.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment and in freeing our children and grandchildren from the burden of a crippling debt they had no hand in creating, so they can be free to chart their own futures for themselves and for their own posterity,” Goodlatte said during the House floor on Thursday evening.

During the four-hour debate, House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), asked Congress to balance its budget like typical families do. She said,“Families across the country sit down at their kitchen tables every month and make tough decisions to balance their budget so that they can make ends meet. Just like American families, the federal government should spend within its means. A Balanced Budget Amendment, which requires a two-third majority in both chambers of Congress to pass, is a needed and important mechanism to restore fiscal discipline. “

On the House Floor, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi called the BBA “a brazen assault on seniors, children and working families – the American people we were elected to protect.”

“Make no mistake, this GOP con job has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. It is not balanced in terms of money because of their GOP Tax Scam that’s placed us in a bad spot fiscally and it’s not balanced in terms of values,” says Pelosi, noting that GOP fiscal responsibility comes down to “ransacking Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and breaking our nation’s sacred promise of dignity and security for seniors and families.”

Before the House vote on the BBA, Darrell M. West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Washington, D.C.-based the Brookings Institution, stated “I would be surprised if the bill made it through Congress.” He added, “It’s hypocritical for Republicans to support a balanced budget amendment after they cut taxes by $1.5 trillion and added significantly to the federal deficit. Voters will see through that and understand the vote is about scoring political points and not making good public policy.”

House Lawmakers Bombarded with Opposition Letters

Days before the House vote the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), AARP expressed opposition to the passage of the BBA by sending a letter to the Hill, urging House lawmakers to reject the GOP’s constitutional amendment. Hundreds of aging, health care, educational, unions, and business groups were cited in the April 12, 2018 issue of the The Congressional Record as opposing the amendment.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM’s President and CEO, wrote House lawmakers warning that a BBA would unravel the nation’s social safety net by making gigantic entitlement cuts by blocking benefit payments from the Social Security and Medicare Part A trust funds because “all federal expenditures, including these earned benefits, would have to be covered by revenue collected in the same year. “

A BBA would also force Congress to make huge spending cuts to Medicare Parts B, C and D, Medicaid, and many other social safety net programs for seniors, to rein in the nation’s deficit and pushing lawmakers to make “massive new tax cuts.,” says Richtman.

“While the balanced budget amendment did not dictate any particular approach to deficit reduction, by altering established Congressional voting procedures it would have increased the likelihood that the fiscal policies adopted in coming decades would favor the well-off at the expense of middle- and low-income Americans. The amendment would have required a two-thirds vote of the full membership of the House and Senate to raise taxes. Spending cuts, by contrast, would continue to require only a majority of those present and voting and could be passed on a voice vote,” observed Richtman.

Finally, Richtman noted that the risk of a federal government default would increase because a BBA requires a three-fifths vote of both the House and the Senate to raise the national debt limit, rather than the current simple majority.

AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond also expressed opposition to the BBA in a letter to House lawmakers charging that the amendment would impact the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, “subjecting both programs to potentially deep cuts without regard to the impact on the health and financial security of individuals.” Programs that provide meals or heating assistance to low income seniors would also see available resources diminish, she predicted, she said.

The lack of a dependable Social Security and Medicare benefit [if a BBA was passed] would be devastating for millions of Americans. Social Security is currently the principal source of income for half of older American households receiving benefits, and roughly one in five households depend on Social Security benefits for nearly all (90 percent or more) of their income. Over 50 million Americans depend on Medicare, half of whom have incomes of less than $24,150. Even small fluctuations in premiums and cost sharing would have a significant impact on the personal finances of older and disabled Americans,” said LeaMond.

Midterm Elections Just Six Months Away

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted early this week that the annual government’s deficit is projected to be $ 1 trillion next year. And the nation’s $21 trillion debt would skyrocket to 33 trillion by 20028. With the midterm elections just six months away, combined with the CBO’s recently released economic analysis, the Republican party’s image as being the fiscally responsible political party is now shattered.

Even controlling both chambers of Congress and with President Donald Trump in the White House, GOP lawmakers must now look for political issues that may resonate with their constituents. Further attempts to dismantle Socials Security and Medicare may not be the way to go.