Copyright 1999 Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.
Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony
April 30, 1999
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1537 words
HEADLINE:
TESTIMONY April 30, 1999 ROBERT D. EVANS SENATE HEALTH,
EDUCATION, LABOR & PENSIONS NONE REAUTHORIZATION OF OLDER AMERICANS ACT
BODY:
The Honorable Mike DeWine, Chair Subcommittee
on Aging Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions United States Senate
Washington DC 20510 Dear Mr. Chair: I write to you on behalf of the American Bar
Association, to declare our long standing support for the Older Americans Act
and the programs it funds, particularly those providing and supporting legal
assistance and elder fights advocacy. We ask that this letter be included in the
record of the hearings your Subcommittee will hold tomorrow on reauthorization
of the Act. Your Subcommittee will have before it at least three proposals to
reauthorize the Act -- S.10, the "Health Protection and Assistance for Older
Americans Act of 1999"; S.707, legislation to "Amend the Older Americans Act of
1965 to Establish a National Family Caregiver Support Program"; and the
Administration's proposed "Older Americans Act Amendments of 1999." As you
consider these proposals, we urge you to retain the language of the current Act
as it applies to advocacy and legal assistance, and to avoid limiting access to
these services. These services are vitally important to the health, well being,
and protection of vulnerable older persons. The Older Americans Act currently
requires states to evaluate the need for legal assistance, and to specify a
minimum percentage of Title III-B funds to be spent by an area agency on aging
on that service. All three proposals would continue this policy, but the
Administration proposal would also require states to consider volunteers as
existing resources as they evaluate the extent to which the need for legal
assistance is being met. We are concerned that including volunteer services in
this context could jeopardize access to legal assistance by factoring in
services that may not be consistently available. The legal profession donates
enormous time and energy to volunteer activities, and well-organized pro bono
programs serve older people in many states. However, the rate of pro bono
activity varies significantly by state and by locale, and it is difficult to
quantify. In addition, since pro bono participation depends upon the core
support of Older Americans Act and other federal and state programs, volunteer
resources are likely to be less abundant and less effectively utilized if they
did not have that support. Indeed, they might not exist at all. Access to legal
assistance could also be restricted by the Administration's proposal to expand
cost sharing. Current law permits area agencies to engage in cost sharing
through the solicitation of voluntary contributions for nutrition services; the
regulations allow voluntary contributions for other services. The Administration
proposes to give states the authority to require payment on a sliding-fee scale,
from recipients whose income is above a certain "low-income" threshold. States
are free to set their own threshold, no minimum standards are provided, and no
reference is made to the federal poverty guidelines. Such a system could result
in tremendous variation from one state to the next. Since "low-income" is not
defined in the Act, states would be free to set thresholds that require payment
from older people whose incomes are below the eligibility guidelines utilized by
the Legal Services Corporation and other legal services
programs for low- income persons. For example, "low- income" could be defined as
80% of poverty level in one state and I 0% above poverty in another. The
Legal Services Corporation guidelines presume that a person
whose income is below the level established is too poor to pay. Moreover, Title
III- B legal assistance providers are already required to target their services
to older persons in greatest social and economic need, including low-income
minority individuals, thereby serving those whom we presume would be unable to
pay. Acknowledging that certain services are essential to the health and well
being of vulnerable older people, the proposal exempts from cost-sharing the
following: information, referral, outreach and case management services;
ombudsman and other protective services; and congregate and home- delivered
nutrition services. We request that legal assistance also be exempted, should
any cost sharing be implemented. By designating legal assistance as a priority
service, Congress has underscored its essential value to persons targeted by the
Act -- those who are vulnerable, and in greatest social and economic need.
Without legal assistance, most people cannot prepare for future incapacity or
protect their rights. They may not be assured the receipt of health care,
benefits and pensions to which they are entitled. They may not enjoy access to
employment in the face of age or disability discrimination, or live in the
housing of their choice. Should they become victims of fraud or abuse, they may
not have the resources to defend themselves. Finally, the regulations to the
current Act require area agencies selecting legal assistance providers to give
priority to those who can provide support to the ombudsman program, which is
exempt from cost-sharing. The ombudsman's efforts to assist vulnerable elderly
clients could be undermined if the clients have to pay for the legal advice or
representation needed to protect their rights. Over the years, Title IV of the
Act has provided a foundation for the development and improvement of numerous
successful initiatives, including legal assistance. The Administration's
proposal strives for increased flexibility by eliminating reference to specific
projects, including Section 424, National Legal Assistance Support. While this
change does not automatically foreclose funding for national legal assistance
support, it does not ensure its future survival. Title IV-funded national legal
assistance support centers currently offer case consultations, training,
substantive legal advice and assistance, and help in the design and delivery of
local legal assistance delivery systems, to state and area agencies on aging,
local legal assistance providers, long-term care ombudsman programs, and other
programs. The centers provide a wealth of expertise on a range of substantive
and delivery issues, and a national perspective from which to assist state and
local agencies. The ABA Commission on Legal Problems of the Elderly, for
example, has worked with other national support centers and with legal
assistance programs, state and local bar associations, legal assistance
developers and others to increase private attorney participation in pro bono
legal services, and to expand the use of senior attorney volunteers in legal
assistance programs. Our Commission has convened national conferences on law and
aging, conducted state and local training for the aging network and the legal
community, and written and disseminated dozens of articles on substantive and
delivery issues. The Commission also provides consultations on legal and policy
issues to state and area agencies on aging, to legal assistance providers, and
to the Administration on Aging. Approximately two years ago, it initiated
Elderbar, a free e-mail listserve for the law and aging network. Elderbar
provides members of the law and aging community, from around the country, the
opportunity to share information on legal issues of importance to older
Americans. As an entity of the American Bar Association, the Commission is able
to leverage private resources, both human and financial, to meet the goals of
the Act. In addition to legal assistance and support, the Act funds the
long-term care ombudsman program; elder abuse, neglect and exploitation
prevention; and outreach, counseling and assistance- -all of which empower
vulnerable older persons and protect their rights through legal rights education
and advocacy, and the coordination of resources (including legal assistance).
The Administration's proposal would replace existing minimum allotments for the
ombudsman and elder abuse prevention programs with maintenance of effort
provisions, and would allow states to pool funds which currently must be
allocated to separate programs. Outreach and counseling on benefits and housing
options would be moved into a new "life course planning" section, which would
also handle the protection of elder rights and the targeting of services. The
proposal would dilute the significance of these programs by according them the
same consideration as social activities and leisure opportunities. We do not
question the value of social and leisure activities, but we do believe that the
Congress should first ensure that the legal rights of our nation's most
vulnerable citizens -- older persons who are economically disadvantaged, or who
are at risk due to disability or cultural, social or geographical isolation -
are protected, and that they have access to essential services. We urge the
Subcommittee to develop a reauthorization bill that retains the legal assistance
and elder rights advocacy provisions of the current Act, ensures vulnerable
elders access to high quality services, and funds those services at a level
sufficient to meet these objectives. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Robert D. Evans cc: Members, Subcommittee of Aging
LOAD-DATE: May 3, 1999 
