Discussion Posts

Student 2018

Chapter18.pdf

Home >Applied Sciences homework help >Discussion Posts

PART

PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

Al l ri gh ts r es er ve d. M ay n ot b e re pr od uc ed i n an y fo rm w it ho ut p er mi ss io n fr om t he p ub li sh er , ex ce pt f ai r us es p er mi tt ed u nd er U .S . or a pp li ca bl e co py ri gh t la w.

EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 5/7/2018 6:10 PM via UTICA COLLEGE AN: 672926 ; Sugar, Judith.; Introduction to Aging : A Positive, Interdisciplinary Approach Account: s8331415.main.ehost

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

CHAPTER

277

The Policies and Politics of Aging: A New Paradigm

The learning objectives of this chapter include understanding

What public policy decisions are, and how they are made. ■ The history of age-based public policies since the New Deal of President Franklin D. ■ Roosevelt. The range of debates over entitlement programs and the political forces that impact ■ these issues. The need for a new approach to making public policies in light of a new paradigm of ■ aging. The politics of aging including senior power, the continuing development of the antigov- ■ ernment New Right, and a new focus on an intergenerational approach to making public policies particularly as they pertain to health care, income supports, housing, transporta- tion, long-term care, and overall quality of life issues.

POLITICS AND RETIREES: A CASE STUDY

In November 2010, Michigan, as did some other Midwestern states, elected a Republican gover- nor, Rick Snyder. During the long primary and general elections, he portrayed himself as a rather benign, likable older middle age “nerd,” a multimillionaire who wanted to cut taxes and regula- tions to help a state that was devastated by the loss of jobs in the car industry as well as those businesses that rely on making cars.

One of the fi rst things this new governor did upon taking offi ce was to promote legislation to cut taxes for businesses—big tax cuts, over a billion dollars. To make up this lost revenue he proposed major cuts to education, especially K-12 schools, and taxing the pensions of older people for the fi rst time in the history of Michigan. Indeed, most of the reduction in business taxes was to be made up by taxing the pensions of retirees, and eliminating the earned income tax credits for lower income people, old and young.

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

278 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

For the fi rst time in the memory of some seasoned reporters in Michigan, big protest ral- lies were held at the state capitol in Lansing with some signs saying, “Don’t tax grandma.” In a front-page article about one of the largest rallies, one 40-year-old worker was quoted as saying, “it was about time the older generation chipped in” (Roelofs, 2011, p. A1). A 21-year-old Calvin College student in Grand Rapids said that the governor’s plan to tax older people “makes sense” to her. She went on to say that “she sees a government that is saddling those in a younger genera- tion with a debt burden they didn’t create” (Roelofs, 2011, p. A1). A professor at the same college added, “Around West Michigan, what I am hearing is more, ‘Every person for themselves. I have to take care of myself because government isn’t going to take care of me’ ” (Roelofs, 2011, p. A8; It should be noted that Grand Rapids prides itself as a city of churches—The Grand Rapids Press, April 13, 2011).

A NEW PARADIGM OF AGING POLICIES

A new paradigm of aging directly impacts public policies and the politics of aging in the 21st century. How society views its older members infl uences political decisions that determine resource allocations as well as a wide range of societal policies that local, state, and federal governmental units make on an ongoing basis.

To better understand what all this means, it is important fi rst to look at what public policies are, and why they are important to people of all ages—young, middle-aged, old, and oldest-old.

WHAT ARE PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES?

Much of what is discussed and reviewed in some of the previous chapters directly relates to the development of public policy issues and the political process in America. For many people in contemporary America, including students, this seems to be either a dull sub- ject or something that is not too relevant to their lives. In reality, nothing could be further from fact. The development of public policy and the political process in American life are simply ways of defi ning social decision making. Who makes decisions in a free society? How are they made?

Public policy decisions are ongoing. They deal with important questions all of us face on a daily basis. If Aunt Francis has to go to a nursing home, who will pay the $75,000 bill she will ring up in a year? Why do I have to pay FICA tax each week when I have real doubts that there will be any money in the Social Security trust fund when I retire in 35 years? Why is it important to have entitlements specifi cally for older people when so many kids in our country are so poor? How did the “greedy geezers” get so greedy anyway? These are but a few of the questions and public policy issues people of all ages raise, which ultimately get translated into political issues and become part of the political process.

How Do Public Policy Issues Develop?

In a democracy, the development of public policy and the political process are the means by which we address the pressing issues that many of us face in our daily lives. One might argue that it really is not necessary to do very much, if anything, in a political way to address many of the problems and issues most people face. But in reality, this approach in itself is a way of dealing with issues. In fact, this has been a common approach through- out American history to many policy issues—a hands-off approach. Let each individual

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

18. THE POLICIES AND POLITICS OF AGING: A NEW PARADIGM 279

take care of himself/herself or rely on family or immediate social institutions, such as one’s church, to do so.

When specifi c problems and issues begin to grow larger, either because more and more people experience them, or the problems themselves become more complex and involved, it has been the American experience that they then become the subject of public policy debates and fi nd their way into the political process.

The health care delivery debate is a ready example. Although health care delivery for all Americans was promoted by President Harry Truman in the late 1940s and early 1950s, not until the presidential campaign of 1992 did it become a primary public policy issue and end up as a centerpiece of Bill Clinton’s political campaign. During the George W. Bush presidency, health care for all was not only unimportant, it was opposed by Bush and his top aides. With the campaign and election of Barack Obama, universal health care once again became a key issue. With the economic downturn of the late 1980s and early 1990s, and the Great Recession of 2008 to 2009 substantially leading to the Clinton and Obama presidencies respectively, increasing numbers of people—up to 47 million—found themselves with no health care coverage at a time when medi- cal care was becoming more and more complex and increasingly expensive. Following the presidential elections of 1992 and 2008, the issue became how to achieve universal health coverage, not whether the United States should have health care coverage for all its citizens. Thus, health coverage became a public policy issue that ultimately entered the political arena.

AGING AND PUBLIC POLICY DEVELOPMENT

Dealing with public policy issues that end up in the political process can be looked at similarly. In his book, The New Aging: Politics and Change in America, Fernando Torres-Gil (1992), head of the Administration of Aging in the Clinton administration and professor of gerontology at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), pointed out that the history of aging in America can be divided into three basic periods as it relates to public policy. The fi rst period, “Young Aging,” covers the history of America until 1930. The second period extends from 1930 to 1990 and is referred to as “Modern Aging.” The third period, “New Aging,” began in 1990.

Young Aging Period

The fi rst period, “Young Aging,” extended from the beginning of the nation to the Great Depression era. In this long span of time, the needs of older people were seen as the responsibility of the family and the local community. The family was, of course, the key element. For those poor elderly persons whose families could not or would not provide for them, many local communities established “poor farms” or some such institutions in which they could take refuge. However, it is important to note that there were not that many older people in the general population. With the average life expectancy of some 47 years in 1900, and with older people comprising only 4% of the population, caring for older people was not an enormous issue during most of our early history. Coupled with the agrarian, rural nature of our society at that time, with a large percentage of the people rooted to the land or small towns, providing for the needs of elderly people was relatively manageable.

With the coming of the Great Depression in late 1929, America took a more active role in dealing with its major social issues and problems. Many businesses and industries collapsed, resulting in large numbers of unemployed people across America. Economic

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

280 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

survival became a key concern for most Americans and many problems of daily life became public policy issues, resolved through the political process. The political pro- cess resulted in the coming of the New Deal of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1933. The federal government played a whole new role in developing policies, structures, and institutions to deal with the pressing needs of people. In this period of Modern Aging, the pressing needs of the elderly, as well as the pressing needs of many persons of other age categories, became public policy issues that found their way into the political process (Torres-Gil, 1992).

The economic demands of the Great Depression of the 1930s were not the only forces that brought about a shift in public policy approaches in addressing the needs of older people in the Modern Aging period. Andrew Achenbaum (1983) noted four major shifts that resulted in the coming of the “Modern Aging” approach. These are: (a) demo- graphic trends (increase in life expectancy as well as the numbers and percentage of older people in society); (b) changing images of old ages (older people increasingly looked at as a social problem); (c) group action among older persons (interest group activities and political action); and (d) new directions in social welfare (activist policies and programs as a result of the Great Depression).

THE MODERN AGING PERIOD

This analysis of how America got into the Modern Aging activist period follows our earlier illustration of how problems people face in their daily lives become public policy issues and enter the political arena for possible solution in a democratic process. The numbers of older people began to increase in the 20th century with more and more people living lon- ger. In addition, the problems of this age group became more complex during the Great Depression; families were not able to meet the support needs of a growing elderly popu- lation due to their own pressing economic needs, and the reality that increasing numbers of families were dependent on an industrial economy, which was primarily urban based and in a state of collapse.

The Rise of Senior Citizen Activism

Added to the basic components needed to elevate issues and problems to the status of public policy issues was the development of citizen activism for and by older people—the beginning of senior power. The foundation for this citizen activism was developed in the 1920s, prior to the beginning of the Great Depression in October 1929. Three organizations emerged that promoted the adoption of old-age pensions. They were the American Association for Old Age Security, The American Association for Labor Legislation, and the Fraternal Order of Eagles (Day, 1990). Although all their efforts failed, they were the trailblazers for other movements that would follow.

One of the major efforts to develop public policy to improve the economic lives of older people was the Townsend Movement of the 1930s. This movement was headed by Dr. Francis E. Townsend who was motivated by the plight of so many older per- sons who became destitute as the result of the Great Depression. Dr. Townsend was a 60-year-old physician who had lost his job as assistant medical offi cer in Long Beach, California, during the Depression. He originally outlined his pension idea in a letter to the Long Beach Press-Telegram on September 20, 1933, at the depth of the Depression. His idea grew into a nationwide movement of 2 million people who organized 7,000 clubs. Although the movement never achieved its objective, it stirred public debate

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

18. THE POLICIES AND POLITICS OF AGING: A NEW PARADIGM 281

and elevated the economic security of older people into the public policy arena. It is credited with paving the way for proposals that became part of the Social Security Act of 1935 (Schulz, 1992).

It is important to note that professionals working in the fi eld of gerontology also have a role in advocating for the rights and needs of those aging individuals that they serve. To this end, additional information on the role of professionals can be found in the Practical Application at the end of Part VI of this textbook.

A New Approach to Active Government

With the Townsend Movement of 1933 and the enactment of the Social Security Act in 1935 as a part of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, a whole new approach to deal- ing with the basic needs of older persons in America was launched. In commenting on his 53 years of working in jobs relating to aging, including his early years in the Roosevelt administration at the beginning of the New Deal, Clark Tibbits, one of the pioneers in the fi eld of aging, stated:

I agreed with the late professor, Fred W. Cotrell’s appraisal that enactment of this Social Security legislation represented the most radical extension of government into the private lives of citizens ever taken by the American government. (Cited in Schulz, 1992, p. XIV)

With this new approach to the role of the federal government in providing for the needs of citizens, especially older citizens, senior citizen interest groups and the Aging Enterprise emerged (Torres-Gil, 1992). Over this 60-year period, a whole range of pro- grams, agencies, and benefi ts emerged to assist older people in meeting many of their needs. A variety of providers of services to the elderly emerged. For many of these ser- vices and benefi ts, age was the only criterion for eligibility. These are called age-segregated programs, or entitlements. A person receives benefi ts when he or she reaches a certain age, usually 60, for most of the programs of the Older Americans Act. Torres-Gil has pointed out that it is this series of programs and benefi ts for older people that comprise the sys- tem upon which the elderly of the nation and their families have depended for support. Some social policy experts back in 1990, such as Harry Moody (1990), have contended that these age-segregated programs are based on a view of the elderly that is outdated— a view that portrays older people as a vulnerable or needy group with nothing much to contribute.

IS THE AGING ENTERPRISE ENDING?

With very large annual federal defi cits, the multitrillion dollar federal debt, escalating health care costs refl ected in rising Medicare and Medicaid expenditures, and the sus- picion of younger workers that they are supporting benefi ts for older persons that they themselves may never receive, there is intense pressure to reevaluate the programs and benefi ts of the aging enterprise that have been developed since the 1930s. Fernando Torres-Gil contended that the Modern Aging period has ended.

Former Colorado Governor Richard Lamm caused a public uproar when he agreed that too much is done for the elderly at the expense of younger persons. Organizations such as Americans for Generational Equity and the American Association of Boomers have contended that programs and benefi ts for the elderly should be reduced so that more money could be spent on groups that are needier.

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

282 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

Intergenerational Confl icts

The view of the elderly as needy and dependent began to shift in the 1980s (Torres-Gil, 1992). Greedy geezers became a phrase that portrayed these people as well-off, healthy, enjoying high retirement pensions (including Social Security), and living in luxury and leisure, much at the expense of poorer, younger people in America (Fairlie, 1988). With ris- ing budget defi cits and diffi cult economic conditions for millions of job seekers, including recent college graduates, many viewed the benefi t programs for older persons as luxuries the nation could no longer afford (Torres-Gil, 1992).

Spokespersons for the elderly have for a long time contended that most older people are not greedy geezers. They have pointed out that older people have worked all their lives for the benefi ts they receive, including Social Security income. They also have shown that benefi ts such as Social Security, Medicare, and other age-related benefi ts actually ease the burden on younger members of the families of older people who traditionally assume the burdens of caring for aging parents in American society. Some advocates of the elderly have also claimed that many of the complainers of the younger generation are unwilling to work hard for their own successes. Some have contended that the younger complain- ers are spoiled. “They lived the good life with their parents, and they just expected that to continue,” said Jim Wolverton, an advocate for seniors (quoted in Kellogg, 1993, p. A8).

Some senior advocates have also pointed out that older people have few opportuni- ties to improve their lots in life. Young people may be able to get a job. It may not be the best job, or even a job for which they were trained. Many older people, especially the oldest- old, those with physical limitations, and those particularly discriminated against because of gender or minority status, have few if any opportunities for meaningful employment to improve their economic status. Their incomes are basically fi xed for the rest of their lives, usually based upon earning and economic conditions of an earlier period.

Attacks on Entitlements

Pressures began to surface that indicated tensions between the generations for equal gov- ernmental support that led to the questioning of the scope of the entitlement programs for older people. The portrait of greedy geezers was one of the pressure points, meaning that some younger people felt that older people received too big a piece of the govern- ment support pie. Some of this pressure seemed to ease toward the end of the Clinton Administration when the policies of the government and business prosperity led to large federal surpluses—to the point that there was widespread talk of totally paying off the federal debt owed to private entities by 2012.

All of that dissolved with the coming of the Bush Administration in 2001. Not only did the policies and practices of this group lead to historic government debt (partly brought about by large tax cuts, primarily for the wealthy), but by a growing recogni- tion that this Republican administration, unlike even previous Republican administra- tions (especially the Eisenhower, Ford, and George H. W. Bush administrations) had an agenda to dismantle the foundation entitlement programs that formed the basis of Modern Aging.

Nowhere was this clearer than in the Bush Administration’s assault on Social Security—considered by many experts to be the most successful U.S. government program in history. Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security by establishing private accounts depen- dent on the ups and downs of the equity markets was seen by many as a way to really change and ultimately weaken—and in the long-run, destroy—Social Security. This was the top priority of Bush’s domestic policy following his reelection in 2004. But for a variety of reasons, in spite of tours to key American cities to promote this plan, Americans became less Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

18. THE POLICIES AND POLITICS OF AGING: A NEW PARADIGM 283

supportive of changing Social Security as time passed. A large percentage of the American people saw through Bush’s motives and were not willing to radically change a system that needs some adjustment but is not broken nor really in “crisis” as they were told.

A Crossroad of Values

But in spite of the realization of the true facts about Social Security, the United States is truly at a crossroad in terms of public policy and the politics of aging, which is really part of the larger question of what is the role of government in the problems people face in everyday living. Should we be concerned about the fact that some 47 million Americans across all ages (especially children and young adults) had no health insurance before President Obama succeeded in passing health care reform? Does it matter to Americans that a 2009 Harvard University study determined that over 44,000 Americans die need- lessly every year because they have no health insurance (Wilper et al., 2009)? Or does it only matter to those who have no insurance? Does it matter than most older Americans have no long-term care resources, and that caregiving for the elderly is mostly assigned by default to American women, the burdens of which are clearly detailed in this textbook?

As we move further into the 21st century, these and other basic questions need to be honestly and openly addressed if we are truly to be a just nation. Many politicians have talked endlessly about family values, but the issues outlined above, as well as many other social justice issues, are the real issues that determine our values as a people who live in the richest country in the history of the world.

Political Options

Much of the gloom and confusion surrounding the impact on society of having so many more people reaching old age directly relates to the almost constant drumbeat of too many politicians, policy makers, and pundits who continually predict disastrous results for the nation with the retirement of Baby Boomers. Dr. Robert H. Binstock (2007), a nationally recognized gerontologist, outlined what a new paradigm of aging means politically.

Binstock pointed out that the discussions of many politicians and pundits in regards to old-age policies are worrisome and confusing to most Americans. Much of this chatter about the aging and retirement of the 76 million Baby Boomers would lead one to believe that a demographic tidal wave and economic disaster are approaching the United States. These doomsayers continue to suggest that the aging of Baby Boomers is a real political threat as it will lead to greedy intergenerational confl icts over government benefi ts.

Binstock went on to point out that these doomsayers continue to predict that our present entitlement programs, particularly Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, will not survive the aging of the Baby Boomers unless radical changes are made to them— which usually means greatly reduced benefi ts. These radical changes would include (a) privatizing Social Security, (b) age-based rationing of healthcare, and (c) requiring people to work longer and retire much later. In regard to the last point, as outlined in an earlier chapter, there appears to be a trend developing for people to work longer into their later years. Research has shown that many of these older workers want to continue to work for a variety of economic, personal, and social reasons. But studies have also indicated that many of those who wish to work beyond normal retirement years are among the more educated and well-off categories of workers. This is quite different from all those categories of older workers who, because of physically demanding jobs, declining health, family caregiving demands, or loss of jobs for various reasons, need to retire. If the retire- ment support programs, such as adequate Social Security benefi ts and adequate health Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

284 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

insurance provided by Medicare, are not available, this will present great hardships to these workers and their families.

Other proponents of reducing entitlement benefi ts for older people argue for the following:

Program-by-Program Cuts

Some congressional leaders have proposed other approaches to deal with the spiraling governmental expenditures they attribute to ever-growing entitlements, many of which have been developed for older persons. One such congressional approach is program-by- program cuts. This would involve going through mandatory spending programs one by one, trying to fi nd ways to cut benefi ts, limit eligibility, or require recipients to pay more in the way of premiums, fees, or other payments. In this approach, federal, civil, or mili- tary retirees might have their cost-of-living adjustments cut.

Entitlement Caps

Another approach to curtailing federal spending for older people is to cap, or put a ceil- ing on, entitlements. If Congress is unable to make program-by-program cuts, across- the-board spending cuts on entitlements could be devised. Some have singled out entitlements, and the Americans who receive them, as the target for reducing the federal defi cit. The primary entitlements affecting older people in this approach include Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’ health benefi ts. Horace Deets (1993), a former Executive Director of the AARP, contended that this approach is off target. Entitlement caps, he argued, “would hit the poor, the middle-class, the young, the disabled, and the elderly with both barrels—by lowering income and increasing health care costs. Hardest hit would be low- and middle-income Americans” (p. 3).

Means Testing

Another approach to curtailing federal expenditures for a growing elderly population is to means-test benefi ts for the recipients. In this approach, benefi ts would be scaled back or denied to anyone of more than modest income and resources. Benefi ts would be tar- geted at the truly needy (Hager, 1993).

Fernando Torres-Gil (1992) has argued that means-testing Social Security would result in the loss of its support as a system. “It cannot be means-tested without losing the politi- cal support of those who pay into it through payroll taxes” (p. 112). He went on to contend that in means testing, “the more affl uent and educated will depend on personal savings, asset accumulation, and private pensions. They will lose interest in preserving the basic structure of the Social Security system” (p. 112). He argued that this approach will only put future poor elderly persons in a more precarious situation.

Binstock (2007) described these situ- ations—if they were to occur due to drastic changes and cuts to present-day entitle- ments—“as a return to a poverty-ridden old age for increasing numbers of people. Also, the uncertain and spotty health care of earlier generations of older Americans may again become a reality” (p. 33).

Some older adults’ opinions about Social Security can be heard on Video 2.

Episode 2: Social Security and You

High Bandwidth:

http://raidercast.grcc.edu/flash/2011_2012/grcctv/successful_

aging/success_aging_2_large/grcc_player.html

Low Bandwidth:

http://raidercast.grcc.edu/flash/2011_2012/grcctv/successful_

aging/success_aging_2_small/grcc_player.html

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

http://raidercast.grcc.edu/flash/2011_2012/grcctv/successful_aging/success_aging_2_large/grcc_player.html

http://raidercast.grcc.edu/flash/2011_2012/grcctv/successful_aging/success_aging_2_small/grcc_player.html

18. THE POLICIES AND POLITICS OF AGING: A NEW PARADIGM 285

IS THERE HOPE FOR PRESERVING BENEFITS?

If dismantling major benefi t programs for the elderly is not the way to treat older peo- ple, and not politically feasible anyway, or if cutting programs across the board, cap- ping them, means-testing them, or freezing them is unfair to the needy older people and counterproductive to their stability, are there any approaches to the benefi t/entitlement dilemma that take into account the real needs of the growing number of older people as well as the pressing needs of persons in younger age groups in a nation with a growing national debt? Some approaches to these tough issues have been offered for review and debate by responsible policy makers.

Social Insurance

More recently, Schulz and Binstock (2006) contended that it is essential to maintain and strengthen the social insurance programs we already have rather than initiate some radi- cal changes. These social insurance programs spread the risks people face in their every- day lives—risks from loss of income and risks from health problems and the real costs associated with medical treatments. Social insurance programs spread these risks among a very large pool of people instead of making the individual responsible for all the uncer- tainties of living. On an individual basis, it has been shown that many citizens simply cannot afford basic protections. We only need look at the millions of Americans who do not have any form of health insurance, compared to most older citizens who now have Medicare as signifi cant health insurance once they reach 65 years of age.

Intergenerational Approaches

This intergenerational approach to the key issues and risks facing society as cited by Torres-Gil (1992) and Binstock (2007) is an integral outcome of a new paradigm of aging— looking at the basic needs of older people in the context of the whole society. Using this approach, for example, the health insurance needs of millions of Americans without insurance coverage could be addressed by implementing Medicare (presently only for people aged 65 and older) for all as in a single-payer fi nancing system.

Reimagining America

In the fi rst decade of the 21st century, AARP has taken bold steps to address the major health and income security issues facing Americans of all ages—not just older people or AARP members (membership eligibility begins at age 50). The fi rst of these is an intergen- erational approach called Reimagining America: AARP’s Blueprint for the Future. It contends that the nation “can afford to grow older without economic train wrecks and without pit- ting the needs of the old against the young” (Novelli, 2005, p. 30).

Divided We Fail

Another effort of AARP to effectively address the pressing needs all Americans face was their Divided We Fail movement. Beginning as a joint effort of AARP, The Business Roundtable, and the Service Employees International Union, and quickly joined by the National Federation of Independent Businesses (representing 600,000 small businesses) and the Entertainment Foundation, this movement focused on the major domestic issues facing every American—not just older people or Baby Boomers (Novelli, 2007).

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

286 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

This movement tried to cope with the realities of contemporary American life where most of our political leaders are—and continue to be—stuck in gridlock, where “parti- sanship trumps problem solving just about every time; where millions of Americans also struggle for lifelong fi nancial security, and most older people worry about their children, who for the most part are even worse off when it comes to health coverage and pensions and savings” (Novelli, 2007, p. 32). The AARP’s Divided We Fail agenda was for everyone. Its thrust was to unite millions of voices to press political leaders to overcome partisan- ship and solve the real problems people face daily.

Family Values

Robert Binstock (2007) pointed out that even from a selfi sh point of view, the general pub- lic needs to understand that major changes and cuts to the existing entitlement programs would negatively impact adult children of the elderly and their families. If these entitle- ment programs were cut or eliminated, many more elderly persons would likely become fi nancially dependent on their own families and their local communities. One only has to recall the county “poor farms” of pre–Social Security days when needy older persons who could not obtain support from their families (typically because these families were poor) were sent to a “poor farm.” Binstock pointed out that without adequate entitle- ments, many families would be forced to live in three- and four-generation households, and also be responsible for the hospital and medical costs of their parents.

Binstock (2007) contended that these basic issues facing older people and their families are not divorced from communities and society at large. As he put it, “perhaps the best way to gain intergenerational political support for old-age policies is to frame options as family policies” (p. 33). Put this way the benefi ciaries of these programs in the future “will be all of us” (p. 33).

In their book, Aging Nation, Schulz and Binstock (2006) suggested that one of the most effective strategies to counter what they term the merchants of doom (those politi- cians and pundits who proclaim economic disaster due to the aging of the population) and lessen confl ict among the generations is to have AARP form a coalition that would advocate for all age sectors of society from children (such as the Children’s Defense Fund) to older persons—and everyone in between. This focus would be on the basic needs that persons of all ages face, such as the need for universal health care.

They went on to point out that the merchants of doom promote the idea that “we are a country of age groups, divided from one another . . . engaged in intergenerational political confl ict, young against old” (Schulz & Binstock, 2006, p. 234). They contended that the issues that confront older people are not isolated from the rest of society. One of the best ways to obtain popular support for policies and programs (such as Social Security and Medicare) would be to promote them as family policies because, in reality, that is what they are.

Robert N. Butler, a medical doctor and noted gerontologist who in 1968 coined the term ageism to describe discrimination against the old, wrote extensively on family values and public policies for an aging society. In his landmark book, The Longevity Revolution, he pointed out that, “although rooted in biology, the human family is more than a biologi- cal unit. It is a powerful, cohesive, emotional, economic, and social centripetal force that binds people together” (Butler, 2008, p. 60). Butler went on to point out that the term family values has been taken by the extreme right in the United States to include contraception, homosexuality, abortion, and school prayer, not social insurance, which can actually help families meet their real, and in too many instances unmet, basic needs. Indeed, the authors might note that these divisive issues of the extreme right have for many years formed the major policy planks of what has become of the Republican Party and the Religious Right, which has been a key component of that political party. Dr. Butler stressed that social C

op yr ig ht @ 2 01 4. S pr in ge r Pu bl is hi ng C om pa ny .

18. THE POLICIES AND POLITICS OF AGING: A NEW PARADIGM 287

insurance programs (also known as “entitlements”) for older people in the United States are in reality family-based policies benefi ting family members of all ages.

The Role of Taxes

Dr. Butler (2008) pointed out that the United States has one of the lowest tax rates in the world. And for those who think that taxes are higher now than in earlier eras, a look at the facts is illuminating. For example, when Dwight D. Eisenhower was president back in the 1950s, the top tax rate was 90%. And when President John F. Kennedy lowered the top rate for the wealthy, it went down to 50%, fully 10% higher than the rate President Obama proposed to become effective in 2011 (Harrop, 2009). In addition, President Obama pro- posed raising the capital-gains rate to 20% from the 2009 rate of 15% for families making $250,000 or more a year. Again, some cried a “War on Prosperity” (Harrop, 2009, p. 20A). Actually, President Ronald Reagan, known as an opponent of high taxes, instituted a capital-gains tax rate of 20% and raised it to 28% for high earners.

E. J. Dionne (2009), a noted writer for the Washington Post Writers Group whose work appears in many newspapers across the nation, stated that “the debate on the bud- get is phony, the howling on defi cits a charade” (p. A13). He went on to say that debates about “entitlements reform” (changing and/or lowering social security benefi ts) are more important than ever because so many 401(k) retirement funds decreased as a result of the crashing equity markets in 2008 to 2009.

Toward a New Paradigm of Aging

Tom Brokaw (2007), former NBC Nightly News anchor, has pointed to his own family when his mother was in an assisted living facility in Southern California. He and his brothers were appreciative that he could afford to pay for her care. But more importantly, he pointed out that the nation cannot live with this lottery type of society where some people can afford to pay for care and have peace of mind, while so many others “are liv- ing in a state of terror about how they are going to take care of each other” (p. 35). He continued by saying that it is his (everybody’s) obligation as a citizen to help the general welfare of this nation. All of this is integral to the new paradigm of aging for America.

Coping Strategies

In his book, The Longevity Revolution, Robert Butler (2008) provided a comprehensive plan to transition to a paradigm of aging, which he termed The Longevity Revolution. His politi- cal activist agenda includes, among others:

Supporting equitable distribution of resources across generations. ■ Working to reduce the widening gap of income and wealth and the inequity of ■ longevity. Supporting universal health care. ■ Sustaining Social Security. ■ Establishing geriatric departments or equivalents in all medical schools. ■ Strengthening public education. ■ Protecting the human rights of older persons and the disabled (and all persons) ■ against abuse and other forms of discrimination. Maintaining progressive taxation and estate taxes to avoid dynasties and pro- ■ mote a level playing fi eld for the newborn. Strengthening unions, since labor is the true basis of society and prosperity, and ■ to counterbalance the excess of capital. (pp. 318–319)C

op yr ig ht @ 2 01 4. S pr in ge r Pu bl is hi ng C om pa ny .

288 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

In the preface to their book, Aging Nation: The Economics and Politics of Growing Older in America, James H. Schulz and Robert H. Binstock (2006), leading gerontologists in the United States, contended that with the aging of the 76 (or more) million Baby Boomers, the nation faces many challenges in the 21st century. They state that:

The Social Security program will require some adjustments—not a major over- ■ haul or signifi cant reductions in benefi ts. Employer-sponsored pensions need to be rethought. ■ The Medicare program needs to be sustained so that older persons can share in ■ the medical advances that will come in the decades ahead. The nation’s health care system must be overhauled to contain spiraling costs. ■ New policies will be needed to assist functionally dependent older persons and ■ their families in dealing with the huge fi nancial costs and other burdens of long- term care.

Robert Butler (2008) pointed out that for the fi rst time in history the United States and the world’s developing nations are beginning to see the entire lifecycle unfold for a majority of the population. Nearly all people in these nations expect to experience infancy, childhood, adolescence, early adulthood, middle age, and old age. But in addi- tion to all the challenges older people—as well as people of all ages—face in defi ning and addressing what we call a new paradigm of aging for the 21st century, one hurdle continues that is diffi cult to overcome through public policies and political decision making, although they can help. That is the mind-set toward older people that Robert Butler defi ned as ageism. It is prejudice against those in society who are older. Butler pointed out that ageism is identical to any other prejudice in its outcomes. The prejudice of ageism takes many forms in numerous settings—economics (including work places), elder abuse, health care settings (including many medical schools), nursing homes, age- based health care rationing, and research protocols (health studies), to name a few.

As Eleanor Roosevelt stated, “Beautiful young people are accidents of nature, beau- tiful old people are works of art” (cited by Butler, 2008, p. 59).

SUGGESTED RESOURCES

AARP: www.aarp.org AARP is a nonprofi t, nonpartisan organization that helps people age 50 and over improve

the quality of their lives. It supports staffed offi ces in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Franklin D. Roosevelt American Heritage Center Museum: www.fdrheritage.org/new_deal.htm The museum holds one of the fi nest collections of primary source and other materials related

to the New Deal. Reimaging America: AARP’s Blueprint for the Future: www.allhealth.org/briefi ngmaterials/aar-

pagingamerica-129.pdf The Townsend Plan Movement: www.ssa.gov/history/towns5.html This website contains the plan, an issue of the plan’s newsletter from 1934, editorial cartoons,

decorative stamps, and other items related to the plan. U.S. Tax Rates: www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts Made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served

at the highest levels of government, the Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. Among many other topics, fi nd the Historical Top Tax Rate from 1913 to 2012 and Capital Gains and Taxes Paid on Capital Gains from 1954 to 2008.

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

http://www.aarp.org

http://www.fdrheritage.org/new_deal.htm

http://www.allhealth.org/briefi ngmaterials/aarpagingamerica-129.pdf

http://www.ssa.gov/history/towns5.html

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts

http://www.allhealth.org/briefi ngmaterials/aarpagingamerica-129.pdf

1Practical Application

289

Public Policy Issues

Michael A. Faber

INTRODUCTION

The chapter in this section outlined a new paradigm related to the public polices and the politics of aging in 21st century America. This new paradigm of aging stresses advocacy in the public policy arena for all age cohorts within the population. This approach is designed to decrease intergenerational tension and confl ict, which further divides the nation and contributes to increased age-related bias. Another goal is to overcome ageism so prevalent in our society, as previously discussed in the Part I Practical Application.

Advocacy: A Personal Responsibility?

Serving as an advocate on behalf of the needs and issues of older persons has been a long-established role for many working in the fi eld of gerontology. One cannot effectively work with older people if one is unwilling to advocate for the rights and needs of those one serves. Does the need for advocacy change in this new paradigm of public policy and aging, and, if so, in what way? If anything, the need for continued advocacy exists. The only difference is that one now needs to work for justice and equality in meeting the needs of all members of society and no longer advocate exclusively for the needs of older persons at the expense of other sectors of the population. If one works, through advocacy, toward the common good of all, we will improve the lives of those older persons we serve. Following this paradigm should help to alleviate intergenerational confl icts and dispel ageist stereotypes such as that of the “greedy old geezers.”

If one chooses to work in the fi eld of gerontology, it is important to stay informed on issues of concern to older persons and society as a whole. It is equally important to

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.

290 VI. PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

recognize and fulfi ll one’s personal responsibility as an advocate. This can be accom- plished in a variety of ways including:

Helping to educate others on key issues of concern to older persons; ■ Coordinating letter-writing campaigns on causes of signifi cance (e.g., letters to ■ the editor to local newspapers, letters to politicians, and other public policy deci- sion makers, etc.); Writing letters of support on behalf of valuable community services in jeopardy ■ of losing their funding or in support of needed programs or services; Joining an advocacy group or movement (e.g., AARP); and ■ Becoming involved in the political arena (e.g., helping to get out the vote, assist- ■ ing with a political campaign or cause, or running for offi ce).

Becoming a Model of Lifelong Learning

As noted above, advocacy requires one to remain informed of the issues and concerns of older persons and society. In order to remain informed, one needs to become a lifelong learner. This is just one reason why those working in the fi eld of gerontology should embrace and model lifelong learning. In the longstanding traditional model of learning, work, and retirement, it was thought that learning occurred primarily in youth, that work occurred primarily in mid-life, and that a recreation-based retirement occurred primarily in later life. This traditional paradigm has been challenged, especially by Baby Boomers, and is rapidly changing to a more integrated model of learning, work, and recreation equally disbursed throughout one’s life. This new paradigm supports the concept of lifelong learning.

Personal Comments

One of the things that attracted this author to gerontology over a quarter of a century ago was the fact that it was a relatively new fi eld where one could be a pioneer and make sig- nifi cant contributions to the lives of older persons. As a teaching professional, this author has always felt a responsibility to not just teach aging curriculum, but also to inspire and ignite students’ passion for working with older people. This includes an effort to open students’ minds to the many possibilities that exist in this “pioneer” fi eld.

This author is reminded of an experience that he had during the junior year of his undergraduate gerontology studies. He had decided to take an Introduction to Television Production course, as an elective, with the intention of learning how to use the television/ video medium within the fi eld of aging. During the fi rst class session, the instructor went around the room asking each student to share his/her reason for taking the course. When it came to the author’s turn, he shared the belief that there was a connection between the TV/video medium and the fi eld of gerontology. Everyone in the room, including the instructor, laughed. They just didn’t understand. As it turned out, this writer had the privilege to be involved in both the production and distribution of a television series and nationally distributed educational videos on aging. This is shared to encourage students to continually and creatively think about how they might impact the future of gerontology.

As the aging population continues to grow in the United States and around the world, careers in gerontology will continue to evolve. Many future jobs in the fi eld prob- ably will not be today’s established careers. Many may not be defi ned as gerontology jobs, but gerontology knowledge and skills in working with older people will be a key component of countless service occupations. A new paradigm of aging offers exciting opportunities to students with gerontology knowledge in all kinds of work situations as we move further into the 21st century with the aging of Baby Boomers.

Co py ri gh t @ 20 14 . Sp ri ng er P ub li sh in g Co mp an y.