Bipartisan Push to Restore House Permanent Select Committee on Aging

Published in RINewsToday on February 9, 2026

According to Meals on Wheels America, every day, 12,000 Americans turn 60. By the end of this decade, one in four Americans will be over 60—an irreversible and historic change in population.  Yet even as the nation ages, older Americans remain without a permanent seat at the House legislative table to shape aging policy.

In 1993, during the 103rd Congress, the House Permanent Select Committee on Aging (HSCoA) was dismantled as part of a budget-cutting push by House Democratic leadership, which stripped $1.5 million from its funding. From 1974 to 1993, the committee had served as Congress’s primary forum for aging issues, initially with 35 members and ultimately expanding to 65.

Looking back, the HSCoA had handled a heavy workload, carefully scheduling hearings and issuing a steady stream of reports.  In a March 31, 1993 St. Petersburg Times article, Staff Director Brian Lutz of the Subcommittee on Retirement Income and Employment reported that “during its 18 years of existence, the House Aging Committee had been responsible for about 1,000 hearings and reports.”

Sixth Time Could Be the Charm

Since its elimination, House lawmakers have made four attempts to reestablish the committee. Former Rep. David Cicilline first introduced a resolution during the 114th Congress, with efforts continuing through the 117th. In the 118th Congress, Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) picked up the baton and revived the initiative. On January 21, 2026, he once again introduced House Resolution 1013 to restore the panel—this time with bipartisan support, including original cosponsor Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL). At press time, the resolution had been referred to the House Committee on Rules for markup prior to consideration by the full House. No Senate action is required.

More than 30 years later, as the older population surges, Congress’s failure to reinstate a dedicated aging committee is no longer merely an oversight—it is an increasingly costly mistake.

“It is about time — or really past time – for the House to re-establish the HSCoA,” says Max Richtman, president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), who served as staff director of the Senate Special Committee on Aging in the late 1980s.

Richtman says that a re-established HCoA would be of tremendous value to older Americans, because it could conduct investigations and develop legislation for the committees of jurisdiction in the House to take up, as the Senate committee historically has done. “We need an HSCoA in the House because its full-time job would be to safeguard the interests of seniors. There is no other House committee that can do that.”

Richtman notes that, without an HSCoA, it can be challenging for other House committees to fully review senior-related issues “that cross jurisdictional lines or involve complex interactions of a wide range of disciplines.”

Opponents argue that eliminating the HSCoA reduced “wasteful” spending, noting that 12 standing committees already have jurisdiction over aging-related issues. Advocates counter that these committees lack the time, staffing, and singular focus needed to examine aging issues comprehensively, as the select committee once did.

“Older Americans are an important and growing part of our population, and they deserve a seat at the table when Congress considers issues that directly affect their lives,” said Rep. Magaziner. “Protecting Social Security and Medicare, strengthening housing stability, and lowering everyday costs—including prescription drugs—highlight the need for a dedicated committee focused on improving seniors’ quality of life.”

“I am proud to reintroduce bipartisan legislation to reestablish the House Permanent Select Committee on Aging so we can better deliver for older Americans nationwide,” he added. “This committee would bring members of Congress together for meaningful work on the challenges and opportunities that come with aging, and I remain committed to working across the aisle to advance this effort.”

Magaziner has acknowledged entrenched opposition from senior committee leaders of both parties who are reluctant to cede jurisdiction. Nevertheless, he remains committed. “I will continue working to ensure older Americans have the focused advocacy they deserve in Congress,” he pledged.

Magaziner’s resolution has been endorsed by the Legislative Council of Aging Organizations (LCAO), a national coalition of advocacy groups currently chaired by Richtman and NCPSSM. “The Select Committee would have an opportunity to more fully explore a range of issues and innovations that cross jurisdictional lines, while holding field hearings, engaging communities, and promoting understanding and dialogue,” said LCAO in a letter supporting the resolution.

An Easy Fix

According to the Congressional Research Service, creating a temporary or permanent select committee requires only a simple resolution establishing its purpose, defining membership, and outlining responsibilities. Funding for staff salaries and operational expenses are authorized through the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill.

Magaziner’s  203-word resolution, amends House rules to establish a Permanent Select Committee on Aging. The committee, having no legislative authority, would be charged with conducting comprehensive studies of aging issues—including income, poverty, housing, health, employment, education, recreation, and long-term care—to inform legislation considered by standing committees. It would also encourage public and private programs that support older Americans’ participation in national life, coordinate governmental and private initiatives, and review recommendations from the President or the White House Conference on Aging.

Aging policy touches nearly every aspect of American life, yet it does not fall neatly within the jurisdiction of any single standing committee. Depending on the legislative, five to seven standing committees may draft a bill affecting older Americans. Without an HSCoA, pressing aging issues may be ignored.  A focused  committee would bring together Republican and Democratic lawmakers from multiple committees to closely comprehensively examine legislative proposals, both transparently, and responsibly.

While standing committees draft legislation, the HSCoA would serve a distinct but equally vital role—providing oversight, public education, and keeping the spotlight on aging issues. Key priorities include ensuring the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, lowering prescription drug costs, supporting family caregivers, combating elder fraud, and addressing affordable housing, healthcare access, and social isolation.

For more than 60 years, the Senate has recognized the value of its Special Committee on Aging. The House once did as well—producing lasting, bipartisan results. The People’s House should reclaim that leadership, particularly as older Americans face rising costs, employment barriers, and growing loneliness.

Capitol Veterans Speak Out to Bring Back HSCoA

According to Bob Weiner, former HSCoA chief of staff director during the tenure of the late Rep. Claude Pepper (D-FL) his tenure as select committee chair, the legislative panel elevated aging issues that otherwise struggled to gain sustained attention in Congress. “The bill stopping end to mandatory retirement would never have happened,” says Weiner who was a confidant of Chairman Pepper.

He recalls how it unfolded: “Chair Pepper and the committee got the President and Congress to abolish age-based discrimination in employment and mandatory retirement. President Carter invited the entire committee to the White House and later signed the bill with a powerful statement.”

“Pepper even went to the Bush and Reagan administrations and said, ‘Over my dead body’ would Social Security be cut or privatized,” Weiner added.

If reestablished today, Weiner believes the committee should draw lessons from its past. “We need full-scale investigations into fraud and scams, along with strong protections for Social Security and the Older Americans Act,” he said. He also argues the committee could play a critical oversight role in accelerating research into Alzheimer’s disease. “Seniors are justifiably terrified of dementia and Alzheimer’s. Advances in biological treatments may offer hope for prevention and reversal.”

Responding to standing committee concerns about jurisdiction, redundancy, and budgetary impact, Weiner dismisses claims of duplication. “The Aging Committee uniquely focused on aging priorities. That focus is sadly missing today,” he said.

Weiner also urged Rep. Magaziner to visibly demonstrate his commitment to recreating the House Aging Committee. “If he talks it up around the House floor like Pepper did, he’ll earn goodwill and support from members of both parties,” he said. “It is crucial that House Res. 1013 pass the Rules Committee. Nothing meaningful on aging will happen without dedicated congressional leadership.”

Momentum or Missed Opportunity

With the midterm elections just 266 days away, and now that Rep. Magaziner has secured support from a Republican lawmaker, he must continue building bipartisan momentum. None of the previous five attempts to restore the House Aging Committee attracted Republican cosponsors.

In the 119th Congress, Magaziner should seek endorsement from the bipartisan House Problem Solvers Caucus, led by Co-Chairs Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA-01) and Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY-03).  Aging policy should not be considered a partisan issue but a bipartisan one.

It would also be extremely helpful for Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar to reach out to the Republican House Caucus, especially to the Florida Congressional Delegation (20 Republicans and 8 Democrat) to become cosponsors of H. Res. 1013, honoring the legacy of the late Rep. Claude Pepper, Florida’s most prominent chair of the House Select Committee on Aging.

“What made the House Aging Committee truly influential was Claude Pepper’s leadership. Others chaired the committee before and after him and did good work, but none brought national attention to aging issues the way Pepper did. Even today, members of Congress still say, ‘We need another Claude Pepper,’  says Thomas Spulak, president of the Claude Pepper Foundation and former chief council when Pepper chaired the House Rules Committee.

“While that will never happen, it would take someone with a rare combination of commitment, visibility, empathy, and knowledge to restore that level of importance to an aging committee, this is exactly why resolutions like this one matter—to remind us of what effective leadership on aging once looked like, and what it could look like again,”  Spulak observed.

The Claude Pepper Foundation should engage these lawmakers to encourage their active involvement in restoring the committee. In addition, the Claude Pepper Foundation should educate lawmakers on the positive benefits of restoring the committee. According to the Foundation’s core mission is to promote policies and programs that improve health, expand economic opportunity, and advance social justice for all Americans—especially older adults. It also seeks to provide policymakers and the public with research and information on these issues, and to encourage actions that enhance the quality of life for all citizens.

Ageism by Omission

“Ageism is as much about what you don’t do and what you do the failure to establish the HSCOA is one obvious example  Why is a HSCOA vitally needed. To help avert Possible major cuts in Social Security in as soon as 7 years. Getting a family caregiver tax credit passed. Renewing the Older Americans Act This House has done so little for older adults. Passing the Magaziner resolution would go a long way to improve on this sad record,”  adds a Bob Blancato, a staff person serving the committee from 1978 to 1993 and now president of Matz, Blancato and Associates,

Gov. McKee’s Proposed FY 27 Rhode Island Budget: What’s in It for Seniors

Published in RINewsToday on February 2, 2026

Gov. Dan McKee outlined key elements of his proposed $14.8 billion FY 2027 budget during his State of the State Address on Jan. 13, 2026. Two days later, his full budget, proposing a 3.6% increase over the previous fiscal year, was officially released via press release.

The budget centers on an “Affordability for All” agenda and a $600 million bond package, covering the fiscal period starting July 1, 2026. Key proposals include a new income tax tier for earnings over $1 million, a permanent child tax credit, a phased elimination of the state tax on Social Security benefits, repeal of a gas tax increase, and continued investments in projects that support jobs and economic growth.

The proposal also aims to shield vulnerable Rhode Islanders from potential federal cuts, including the elimination of Affordable Care Act subsidies, changes in Medicaid eligibility rules, reductions in federal support for hospitals treating uninsured patients, and modifications to SNAP regulations.

“My commitments to Rhode Islanders are clear: putting more money back in families’ pockets, protecting the most vulnerable from President Trump’s safety net cuts, and keeping Rhode Island building to support good-paying jobs and long-term economic growth,” McKee said in a statement accompanying his full budget.

While the Governor’s plan emphasizes affordability through higher incomes and improved healthcare outcomes, along with proposing a 3% tax on high earners, Jesse Martin, Executive Vice President of SEIU 1199NE, cautions, “The plan falls short of what’s needed to meet these goals. What’s more, the state’s recent minimum wage increase has actually reduced take-home pay for low-income home care workers and cut care hours for their vulnerable consumers. Rather than reducing care, the governor should offset these costs through increased federal Medicaid funding.” Martin co-represents over 5,000 health care and service workers in Rhode Island.

Budget Highlights for Older Adults  

For over a decade, the Rhode Island General Assembly has considered measures to gradually eliminate or reduce the state tax on Social Security benefits. This budget proposes phasing out this tax over the next three years. The full cost impact would be $60.1Million in FY 2030.

In AARP Rhode Island’s 2023 Vital Voices survey of Rhode Islanders 45+, 89% agreed that “Rhode Island lawmakers should repeal the state tax on Social Security,” said State Director Catherine Taylor in a newspaper editorial. “This sentiment is consistent regardless of age, gender, or political party,” she said.

Laura Hart, Gov. McKee’s Deputy Director of Communications, notes that senior services funding has grown under his leadership: “In FY21, the budget included $0.8 million for senior services. By FY26, that number had risen to $1.6 million. For FY27, the governor recommends $1.8 million—more than doubling the funding since he took office.”

Hart adds, “Rhode Island is only one of eight states that tax Social Security income. This tax can discourage retirees from staying in the state and contributing to the economy. Under the Governor’s proposal, the phase-out prioritizes 9,000–10,000 early retirees whose average income is $44K single/$75K joint—clearly not high-income earners—and who represent one-third of the population currently subject to the tax.”

Aging advocates continue to push for an increase in funding for local senior centers, aiming for allocations equivalent to $10 per resident age 65 and older.

Support for Nursing Homes and Affordable Housing

“LeadingAge Connecticut & Rhode Island was pleased to see the Governor’s budget proposal include a 2.5% cost-of-living adjustment for nursing home rates, along with an initial rate increase equal to 50% of Rhode Island’s Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner’s biennial rate review recommendation for many Medicaid-funded home and community-based services,” says President Mag Morelli. “We understand this increase is intended as the first phase, with the remaining 50% anticipated next year,” she said.

Morelli also highlights the Administration’s focus on affordable housing, noting the growing need for accessible and affordable options for older adults. She urges further support for Medicaid-assisted living programs to sustain existing services and promote expansion, which she describes as a cost-effective option supporting independence and choice.

Kathleen Gerard of Advocates for Better Care in Rhode Island, a member of the Raise the Bar on Resident Care Coalition, emphasizes the importance of transparency and resources: “As our long-term care system faces increasingly complex pressures, transparency, accountability, and adequate resources are critical to protecting the health and safety of older adults and people with disabilities.”

She adds, “In addition to enforcing the Nursing Home Staffing and Quality Care Act, Raise the Bar is calling for a full Medicaid cost-of-living increase for nursing homes—above the 2.5% proposed by Governor McKee. We also urge new funding for the Ombudsman program, which has gone years without an increase despite its vital role in helping residents resolve care concerns. Finally, we support the Department of Health’s nursing home financial transparency bill to ensure owners are accountable for public funds.”

Other Provisions

The proposed budget also aims to maintain enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies to keep coverage affordable for approximately 20,000 individuals. Without $9.5 million in state funding, an estimated 6,500 individuals could lose coverage.

The budget seeks to curb healthcare cost growth and increase drug-price transparency by authorizing the Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner to set enforceable annual cost-growth targets and requiring Pharmacy Benefit Managers to report detailed rebate, pricing, and fee data. These measures are designed to improve oversight, contain costs, and reduce drug prices for older Rhode Islanders.

McKee also proposes a $19.3 million investment in information technology, personnel, and resources to ensure Rhode Islanders can retain Medicaid and SNAP benefits under the federal reconciliation bill H.R. 1, while maximizing federal funding for these critical programs.

Additionally, the budget allocates $10 million to Rhode Island-based hospitals through the Disproportionate Share Hospitals payment to offset uncompensated care losses. Funding for social and human services providers is increased by $23 million in FY27, and state funds to combat food insecurity are doubled, raising support for the Rhode Island Community Food Bank from $1 million to $2 million. According to America’s Health Rankings, roughly 4.1% of Rhode Island adults aged 60 and older face food insecurity.

Securing Affordable Living for All Older Rhode Islanders

SACRI was pleased to see McKee put emphasis on affordability in his budget address and his expressed support for increasing taxes on higher-income residents to fund essential services, said SACRI Policy Advisor Maureen Maigret. When hammering out the FY2027 budget proposal, she urges the  House and Senate Finance Committees to allocate additional funding for programs and services that assist low- and moderate-income older adults from across the state facing economic challenges. The reality is that  one out of four older RI households have income less than $25,00 and almost half have income less than $50,000. Affordability measures must be aimed at putting money in the pockets of all older adults and not just those fortunate enough to have higher incomes, stated Maigret.

According to Maigret, SACRI has proposed and shared its 2026 Affordability Agenda for Older Adults for the Rhode Island General Assembly to consider as it develops and finalizes the state’s FY2027 state budget. The agenda tackles significant inequities in state programs and services, she noted, pointing out that Medicaid currently allows older adults and adults with disabilities to have only $4,000 in assets (for individuals) to remain eligible. This restriction is particularly unreasonable for those trying to live independently at home, especially since other Medicaid populations do not face such limits. What happens when the roof needs repairs or the hot water heater breaks,” she said.

Maigret stressed that keeping people at home and out of more expensive nursing homes can save the state money over time. She added that in 2025 with strong advocacy from SACRI, strides were made in expanding eligibility for the Medicare Savings Program (MSP), and as of February 1, individuals with incomes up to $2,255 per month are eligible—provided their assets are below $9,660.

SACRI advocates joining at least 12 other states in removing Rhode Island’s MSP asset limitation so that hundreds more Medicare recipients could have their $202.90 monthly Part B premium covered by the federal government. The savings would flow back into the state economy as recipients use the funds for basic needs.

SACRI supports the Governor’s proposed child care tax credit and also advocates for a similar credit for the hundreds of unpaid caregivers providing at-home care for older loved ones, often at significant financial sacrifice.

“We also strongly support Rep. Karen Azalter’s (D-Dist. 60, Pawtucket, Central Falls) and Senator Melissa Murray’s legislation (D-Dist. 24, Woonsocket, North Smithfield) legislative proposals  (H7313 and S2238) to create a 3% surcharge on the top 1% of income earners. The projected revenue of more than $200 million would help offset the modest costs of the proposals in our agenda, as well as other programs affected by federal changes,” Maigret said.

Next Steps

“The submission of the budget by Governor McKee signals the start of the months-long budget process,” says House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 23, Warwick). The House and Senate Finance Committees will hold dozens of public hearings, all televised by Capitol TV, to scrutinize every aspect of the budget.

Shekarchi adds, “We welcome all interested parties to testify at the State House. Once the hearings are completed, the House, Senate, and Governor will work together to finalize the budget in late May for adoption in June. Once enacted, it will go into effect on July 1.”

To view Governor McKee’s full budget submission, visit: https://omb.ri.gov/budget-office/fy-2027-governors-budget.

Shoveling: When a Simple Winter Chore Turns Life-Threatening

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on January 27, 2026

With an upcoming winter storm forecast for New England, Michelle Clark, Executive Director of the Southern New England American Heart Association, is urging older Rhode Islanders to take extra precautions when shoveling snow. She warns that sudden physical exertion in cold temperatures may lead to an increased risk of heart attack or sudden cardiac arrest.

This historic winter storm is already impacting the South and has brought destructive ice and heavy snow across 34 states, including the Midwest and Northeast. The arctic blast has brought extremely cold temperatures to the Eastern U.S. from Sunday through the week.

According to RINewsToday, Rhode Island has receive 16.5″ of light and fluff, on average.  Specifically, official observations compiled by weather services, here are some specifics: Providence and nearby areas saw around 14 5 to 16.8 inches; West Warwick (15 inches); East Greenwich (12.1 to 12.3 inches); Westerly and North Kingston (11 to 13.5 inches); North Providence (18.4 inches); East Providence (12.1 inches); and Pawtucket (13.5 to 14 inches).

Snow Shoveling Can Be Hazardous to Your Health

With heavy snow accumulation comes the responsibility of clearing sidewalks. However, shoveling snow in extreme cold can be dangerous—and even deadly—if proper safeguards are not taken.

“Older adults, especially those with a history of heart disease or major risk factors such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, overweight or obesity, or who currently smoke, should not be shoveling snow under any conditions,” Clark says.

Snow shoveling is a physically demanding activity that can place significant stress on the heart, particularly for individuals who are not accustomed to regular exercise. Numerous scientific studies over the years have documented the dangers of snow shoveling for people both with and without known heart disease.

“The risk is especially concerning for people with cardiovascular risk factors, including a sedentary lifestyle, obesity, current or former smoking, diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure, as well as those who have previously had a heart attack or stroke,” Clark explains.

Clark points to a 2020 AHA scientific statement, “Exercise-Related Acute Cardiovascular Events and Potential Deleterious Adaptations Following Long-Term Exercise Training: Placing the Risks Into Perspective—An Update,” which identifies snow shoveling as a high-risk activity that places added strain on the heart, particularly among individuals who are not accustomed to regular physical activity.

“Research has found that the strain of heavy snow shoveling can be as demanding on the heart as a treadmill stress test,” Clark says. “Shoveling relies heavily on arm work—known as isometric or static exertion—which is more taxing on the heart than leg work. While lifting heavy shovelfuls of snow, people often unconsciously hold their breath, causing increases in heart rate and blood pressure,” she notes.

 Combined with the effects of extreme cold, Clark warns, snow shoveling creates “a perfect storm” for a heart-related event. “The impact can be worse people who are the least fit,” she adds.

 Clark cautions older adults against viewing snow shoveling as routine household work. “The movements are extremely demanding and can cause significant spikes in heart rate and blood pressure. Cold air also constricts blood vessels, forcing the heart to work harder under conditions that limit its ability to function efficiently.”

She emphasizes that warning signs—such as chest pain or pressure, lightheadedness, heart palpitations, or irregular heart rhythms—should never be ignored. “If symptoms occur, stop immediately,” Clark says. “Call 9-1-1 if symptoms do not subside shortly after stopping. If someone collapses while shoveling, call for help right away and begin Hands-Only CPR if the person is unresponsive and has no pulse.”

 Tips to Reduce the Risk of Snow Shoveling

 Clark recommends that individuals with known or suspected heart disease—or significant risk factors—ask someone else to handle snow removal whenever possible.

“If you must shovel, start slowly and pace yourself,” she advises. “Push or sweep the snow rather than lifting and throwing it, which requires less exertion. Cover your mouth and nose, dress in layers, and wear a hat and gloves.”

 She also cautions against shoveling during windy conditions, noting that wind chills make temperatures feel colder and increase strain on the body. 

When possible, Clark recommends using an automated snow blower instead of a shovel. “While caution is still necessary, research shows that using a snow blower doesn’t elevate heart rate as much as shoveling,” she says. “Snow blowing typically raises heart rate to about 120 beats per minute, compared to around 170 beats per minute during shoveling.”