Tag Archives for Matz

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,

In re-establishing House Aging Committee, hopefully the third time is indeed the charm

Published in the Woonsocket Call on February 2, 2020

Twenty-six years after the House Democratic Leadership’s belt-tightening efforts to save $1.5 million resulted in the termination of the House Permanent Select Committee on Aging, U.S. Congressman David N. Cicilline reintroduces legislation to reestablish the House Aging panel, active from 1974 until 1993. Initially the House panel had 35 members but would later grow to 65 members.

According to Cicilline, the House can readily authorize the establishment of a temporary ad hoc select committee by just approving a simple resolution that contains language establishing the committee – describing the purpose, defining members and detailing other issues that need to be addressed. Salaries and expenses of standing committees, special and select, are authorized through the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill.

At press time, for the third time, Cicilline’s resolution (House Resolution 821; introduced Jan. 30, 2020) to re-establish the House Aging Committee has been introduced and referred to the House Committee on Rules for mark up and if passed will be considered by the full House.

The Nuts and Bolts

The House Resolution (just over 245 words) reestablishes a Permanent House Select Committee on Aging, noting that the panel shall not have legislative jurisdiction, but it’s authorized to conduct a continuing comprehensive study and review of the aging issues, such as income maintenance, poverty, housing, health (including medical research), welfare, employment, education, recreation, and long-term care.

Cicilline’s House Resolution would have authorized the House Aging Committee to study the use of all practicable means and methods of encouraging the development of public and private programs and policies which will assist seniors in taking a full part in national life and which will encourage the utilization of the knowledge, skills, special aptitudes, and abilities of seniors to contribute to a better quality of life for all Americans.

Finally, the House Resolution would also allow the House Aging Committee to develop policies that would encourage the coordination of both governmental and private programs designed to deal with problems of aging and to review any recommendations made by the President or by the White House Conference on aging in relation to programs or policies affecting seniors.’

Initial Resolution Blocked by the House GOP

On March 1, 2016, Cicilline had introduced House Resolution 758 during the 114th Congress (2015-2016) to reestablish the House Aging Committee. It attracted Rhode Island Congressman James R. Langevin (D-RI) and 27 other cosigners (no Republicans) out of 435 lawmakers. Seniors Task Force Co-Chairs, U.S. Congress Women Doris Matsui (D-CA) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) also signed onto supporting this resolution.

However, it was extremely obvious to Cicilline and the Democratic cosigners that it was important to reestablish the House Aging Committee. Correspondence penned by the Rhode Island Congressman urged House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and the House Republican leadership to support House Resolution 758. But, ultimately no action was taken because Ryan had blocked the proposal from being considered.

At that time, Cicilline remembers that many of his Democratic House colleagues didn’t think House Resolution 758 would gain much legislative traction with a Republican-controlled House. However, things are different today with Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) controlling the legislative agenda in the chamber.

During the 115th Congress (2017-2018), Cicilline continued his efforts to bring the House Select Committee on Aging back to life. On March 01, 2017, he threw House Resolution 160 into the legislative hopper. Twenty-Four Democratic lawmakers became cosponsors and but no Republicans came on board. House Speaker Ryan again derailed the Rhode Island Congressman’s attempts to see his proposal passed.

Third Times the Charm

Since a Republican-controlled Congress successfully blocked Cicilline’s simple resolution from reaching the floor for a vote in 2017, the Democratic lawmaker has reintroduced his resolution in the current Congress with the Democrats controlling the chamber’s legislative agenda.

Cicilline is working to get support from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers and has approached the House leadership for support. He plans to again reach out to aging advocacy groups for support, including the Leadership Council on Aging Organizations, consisting of some 70 national organizations, whose leadership includes the AARP, the National Council on Aging, the Alliance for Retired Americans, and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

“Our nation’s seniors deserve dedicated attention by lawmakers to consider the legislative priorities that affect them, including Social Security and Medicare, the rising cost of prescription drugs, poverty, housing issues, long-term care, and other important issues,” said Cicilline in a statement announcing the reintroduction of his House resolution to bring back the House Aging Committee. “I’m proud to introduce this legislation today on behalf of seniors in Rhode Island and all across America,” says the Rhode Island Congressman who serves on the House Democratic leadership team as Chairman of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee.

According to Cicilline, for nearly two decades, the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Aging was tasked with “advising Congress and the American people on how to meet the challenge of growing old in America.” The Select Committee did not have legislative authority, but conducted investigations, held hearings, and issued reports to inform Congress on issues related to aging.

“The re-establishment of the Permanent Select Committee will emphasize Congress’s commitment to current and future seniors. It will also help ensure older Americans can live their lives with dignity and economic security,” says Cicilline.

Looking Back in Time

In 1973, the House Permanent Select Committee on Aging was authorized by a vote of 323 to 84. While lacking legislative authority to introduce legislation (although its members often did in their standing committees), the House Aging panel would begin to put the spotlight on specific-aging issues, by broadly examining federal policies and trends. Its review of legislative issues was not limited by narrow jurisdictional boundaries set for the House standing committees.

In 1993, Congressional belt-tightening to match President Clinton’s White House staff cuts and efforts to streamline its operations would seal the fate of the House Aging Committee. House Democratic leadership cut $1.5 million in funding to the House Aging Committee forcing it to close its doors (during the 103rd Congress) because they considered it to be wasteful spending because the chamber already had 12 standing committee with jurisdiction over aging issues.

Even the intense lobbying efforts of a coalition of Washington, DC-based aging advocacy groups including AARP, National Council on Aging, National Council of Senior Citizens, and Older Woman’s League could not save the House Aging Committee. These groups warned that staff of the 12 standing committees did not have time to broadly examine aging issues as the select committee did.

Aging groups rallying in the support of maintaining funding for the House Aging Committee clearly knew its value and impact. In a March 31, 1993 article published in the St. Petersburg Times, reporter Rebecca H. Patterson reported that Staff Director Brian Lutz, of the Committee’s Subcommittee on Retirement Income and Employment, stated that “during its 18 years of existence the House Aging Committee had been responsible for about 1,000 hearings and reports.”

As an advocate for the nation’s seniors, the House panel prodded Congress to act in abolishing forced retirement, investigating nursing home abuses, monitoring breast screening for older woman, improving elderly housing and bringing attention to elder abuse by publishing a number reports, including Elder Abuse: An Examination of a Hidden Problem and Elder Abuse: A National Disgrace, and Elder Abuse: A Decade of Shame and Inaction. The Committee’s work would also lead to increased home care benefits for the aging, and establishing research and care centers for Alzheimer’s Disease.

Aging Advocates Give Thumbs Up

“The Senate has had the wisdom to keep its Special Committee on Aging in business which has meant a laser-like attention on major issues affecting seniors including elder abuse, especially scams and other forms of financial exploitation,” says Bill Benson, former staff director of the Committee’s Subcommittee on Housing and Consumer Interests. The House has been without a similar body now for decades, he notes.

Benson adds, “With ten thousand Americans turning 65 each day we are witnessing the greatest demographic change in human history. It is unconscionable to not have a legislative body in the House of Representatives focused on the implications of the aging of America.”

Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, served as staff director for the Senate Special Committee on Aging from 1987 to 1989. He agrees that it’s time once again for the House to have its own committee dedicated to older Americans’ issues.

With the graying of America it is more important now than ever that seniors’ interests are represented as prominently as possible on Capitol Hill, says Richtman. “There is so much at stake for older Americans today, including the future of Social Security and Medicare, potential cuts to Medicaid, and the myriad federal programs that lower income seniors rely upon for everything from food to home heating assistance. We fully support Rep. Cicilline’s efforts to re-establish the House Permanent Select Committee on Aging,” he states.

“We enter 2020 in the midst of the predicted aging of America including the fact that all boomers are now over age 55, says Robert Blancato, president of Matz, Blancato and Associates, who was the longest serving staff person on the original House Aging Committee, from 1978 to 1993.

“We need the specific focus that only a select committee can offer to the myriad of issues related to aging in America,” adds Blancato, noting that it would be a coveted Committee to be named to from both a policy and political perspective.

Four years after the death of Congressman Claude Pepper, (D-Florida) in 1989, the former Chairman of the House Select Committee on Aging, serving as its chair for six years, would have turned in his grave with the House eliminating his beloved select committee. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi might honor the late Congressman who was the nation’s most visible spokesperson for seniors, by bringing the House Select Committee on Aging back this Congressional session.