Tag Archives for President Donald Trump

Silver Wave of Older Voters Important in Midterm Elections

Published in RINewsToday on October 19, 2026

Over the last four months, AARP has released polling results from nine battleground states to gauge candidate preferences, voter motivation, and the aging issues and policies that voters age 50 and older consider important when deciding who to vote for in the upcoming midterm elections.

AARP conducted the 2026 polls in Ohio (June), Georgia (July), Arizona and Michigan (August), Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Texas (September), and New Hampshire (October).

Now, just weeks before the November midterms, AARP has released its final report, “Targeted Congressional District (TCD) Voter Survey,” highlighting the outsized role older American voters could play in deciding key congressional races. As with its previous nine state polls, AARP commissioned the bipartisan polling team of Fabrizio Ward (R) and Impact Research (D) to conduct the survey.

The 21-page report examines voters in 43 congressional districts rated Toss Up, Lean Republican or Lean Democrat by the Cook Political Report. Its findings show that older voters are particularly concerned about rising prices, especially the cost of groceries and gasoline, as Election Day approaches.

The poll covering 43 competitive congressional districts, found these leading issues among voters age 50 and older:

  1. Rising prices and affordability
  2. Threats to democracy
  3. Immigration

Among persuadable voters 50-plus (21%), the priorities were different:

  1. Rising prices and affordability
  2. Social Security and Medicare
  3. Taxes

“Older voters are the nation’s most reliable voters. They decide elections, so candidates can’t afford to overlook them,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy Officer, in an Oct. 15, 2026 statement announcing the report’s findings. “Older voters want leaders who will protect Social Security and Medicare, support family caregivers, and ensure everyone can age with financial independence and dignity,” she said.

Research over time has shown that older voters make up a large part of the electorate and have a major impact on election results nationwide. Exit polls found that voters age 50 and older cast 55% of all ballots in 2024 and 59% in 2022. In the last midterm election, more than six out of ten older voters went to the polls, compared to about three out of ten voters under 30.

Latest findings suggest that older voters will continue showing up at the polls. Eighty-three percent of voters age 50 and older said they were extremely motivated to vote in November, compared to 66% of voters under 50. About 21% of older voters are considered “persuadable,” meaning they are not firmly committed to either party’s congressional candidate.

The pollsters also looked at the country’s mood and voters’ financial situations. The findings were not encouraging. Sixty-two percent believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, while 59% are worried about their personal finances.

The report shows Democrats holding a slim 3-point lead (49% to 46%) on the generic congressional ballot in the 43 competitive districts, with 5% undecided. President Trump carried these districts by 6 points in 2016.

But these findings show a clear generational divide:

* Republicans lead by 10 points (53% to 43%) among voters age 50 and older – while…

* Democrats lead by 26 points (60% to 34%) among voters under 50.

Looking at race:

* Republicans hold a 4-point advantage among white voters, while

* Democrats lead among Hispanic voters by 15 points and Black voters by 43 points.

Education also plays a role:

* Democrats are doing better among college graduates than among voters without four-year degrees.

The pollsters found that persuadable voters remain closely divided.

* Democrats lead by 6 points (42% to 36%) among persuadable voters overall, while…

* Republicans hold just a 1-point advantage (39% to 38%) among persuadable voters age 50 and older.

* Another 23% of these older voters remain undecided.

Top Issues of Concern

Not surprisingly, rising prices and affordability top the list of concerns for older voters in these competitive congressional districts, followed by threats to democracy and immigration.

For persuadable voters age 50 and older, the top three issues influencing their vote are rising prices and affordability, Social Security and Medicare, and taxes.

Looking more closely at Social Security, 58% of older voters say the program is or will be a major source of household income. An overwhelming 94% say they would be more likely to support a candidate who ensures they receive the Social Security benefits they earned through a lifetime of work.

On health care, 85% say they would be more likely to support a candidate who expands Medicare’s ability to negotiate prescription drug prices.

Caregiving is another important issue. Half of older voters surveyed say they are or have been family caregivers. At the same time, 77% would be more likely to support a candidate who provides a tax credit to help cover the costs of unpaid family caregiving.

Affordability. And when it comes to rising prices, groceries and gasoline remain the two biggest concerns.

Taking a Look at Gray Power at the Polls

Darrell West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former Brown University professor, agrees with the findings of AARP’s latest survey. Older voters have become a crucial swing group that could shape this year’s election, he says.

West explains that seniors don’t vote as a monolith. They regularly shift their votes between Republicans and Democrats. Ultimately, their choices in November may come down to how well candidates protect the programs they rely on most, particularly Social Security and Medicare.

“This invaluable poll illustrates that seniors and older adults matter,” says Max Richtman, President and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). “Seniors will be the largest block of voters, and politicians ignore them at their own peril,” he warns.

“Seniors, who are more likely to live on a fixed income, have been especially hurt by Trump’s affordability crisis. This underlines the importance of Social Security in this election. This is why we say ‘Social Security is on the Ballot!’” stresses Richtman.

Richtman estimates that voters age 65 and older will account for more than 30% of the electorate. While Republicans have historically enjoyed an advantage among these voters, Democrats have narrowed that gap in recent elections, he says.

“Supporting Social Security is both good policy and good politics,” Richtman claims, pointing to the poll’s finding that 94% of older voters are more likely to support candidates who protect their Social Security benefits.

While AARP is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization that does not endorse political candidates, NCPSSM’s political action committee does.

According to Richtman, NCPSSM-PAC has endorsed and supported more than 50 candidates nationwide, including Josh Turek (Iowa), Dan Osborne (Nebraska), Abdul El-Sayed (Michigan), Roy Cooper (North Carolina) and Jon Ossoff (Georgia).

NCPSSM also compiles a congressional scorecard to inform older Americans about how votes in Washington affect Social Security, Medicare and other programs important to them. Based on the organization’s legislative priorities, Democrats generally receive higher scores than Republicans.

Richtman notes that NCPSSM-PAC has been busy educating voters about the stakes of this election through its “Social Security on the Ballot” mobilization campaign. Its message is that the lawmakers elected this November will help determine Social Security’s future and whether beneficiaries receive the benefits they have paid for. The organization is getting that message out through town halls, press conferences, social media, and traditional media appearances. It also works with candidates and campaigns on policy issues affecting older Americans.

Meanwhile, AARP continues its own voter education efforts through its “Social Security, Your Vote, Its Future” initiative, asking congressional candidates how they would protect and strengthen the program.

The nation’s largest organization representing older Americans also provides research and analysis on Social Security policies, works with federal officials and members of Congress, and organizes public education efforts to inform and mobilize its members.

Through its “I Am a Social Security Voter” campaign, AARP encourages voters to prioritize protecting Social Security when evaluating candidates.

AARP’s latest report suggests that in tightly contested congressional districts, the “silver wave” of older voters may be the deciding factor in who goes to Washington and who stays home.

Stay tuned…

The survey was conducted by AARP’s bipartisan polling group, Fabrizio Ward and Impact Research, and interviewed 1,368 likely voters in 43 competitive congressional districts between October 1 and 5, 2026, using a combination of cell phone, landline, and a text-to-web survey in both English and Spanish; the margin of sampling error is ±2.7 percentage points.

Full Survey Results: AARP’s 2026 Targeted Congressional District Voter Poll; go to Targeted Congressional District Voter Survey.

For AARP’s 2026 Midterm Election Polls, go to Older Voters in the 2026 Midterm Elections in Battleground States.

Block and Foulkes address Aging, Disability, Behavioral Health at Gubernatorial Forumof Healthy

Published in RINewsToday on October 5, 2026

By Herb Weiss, contributing writer

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Helena Foulkes and independent candidate Ken Block squared off Friday, Oct. 2, at a gubernatorial candidate forum focused on issues affecting older Rhode Islanders, people with disabilities, family caregivers, and those receiving behavioral health services.

The forum, held at Rhodes on the Pawtuxet in Cranston, was sponsored by the Senior Agenda Coalition of Rhode Island, AccessPoint Rhode Island (SACRI), and the Mental Health Association of Rhode Island.

“It was an honor and a pleasure to partner with AccessPoint RI and MHARI to present this forum,” said Carol Costa, Executive Director of SACRI, emphasizing their continued dedication to the intersection of Behavioral Health, Developmental Disabilities, and Aging.

“It was a distinct honor to welcome gubernatorial candidates Helena Foulkes and Ken Block to a forum focused on issues that directly affect older adults, people living with mental health challenges, and communities across Rhode Island,” said Costa.

“We appreciate the candidates’ time and their willingness to engage thoughtfully on these interconnected priorities,” she noted. “At a moment when democracy and civic discourse matter more than ever, their participation demonstrated a meaningful commitment to respectful dialogue, public service, and the people of Rhode Island.”

Unlike many gubernatorial forums that focus heavily on taxes, housing, education, and the economy, this forum allowed the candidates to address issues that often receive less attention during political campaigns: aging in the community, long-term services and supports, nursing home care, Medicaid, family caregiving, behavioral health, and services for persons with disabilities.

Here is a video of the forum, courtesy of Pat Ford, The Coalition Radio Network. Following the video is a “transcript” of the questions and responses.



We edited the questions and candidates’ responses for length, grammar, and clarity. We did not change the meaning of the questions or the candidates’ responses. Refer to the video here for more information.

Carol Costa announced the following at the beginning of the forum:

“Before we begin, you’re all entitled to know that Aaron Gukian committed to taking part in this forum. He accepted my invitation and we planned this program around his participation. He is not here today. I received a phone call at 3:00 PM that he would not be here. I’m not going to let that take time away from this value forum. We’ve adjusted the program, and we will move forward in a focused and streamlined way so that these candidates who have taken the time to be with this audience get the forum they deserve. But you should know he did make a commitment to this community and he did not keep it.”

Here is what Foulkes and Block told more than 80 attendees at the forum.

Opening Remarks

  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

I really wanted to thank the SACRI for pulling this together, the Mental Health Association of Rhode Island, and AccessPoint Rhode Island for all you do.

I want to say that I feel very strongly that the senior population in our state is an incredibly untapped resource.

The wisdom, the expertise—and we’re going to talk a lot tonight, I’m sure, about caring for many of the elder folks and others in our state who need our support. But I think we often forget how much wisdom exists and how much more we could benefit as a state by tapping into all of your expertise.

I am very excited to be looking to the senior community to help me think about things like a Senior Corps-style effort. How do we take, as I said, the wisdom and expertise and tap into your sense of volunteerism?

I’ve been crisscrossing this state for the last few years, mostly in people’s kitchens and living rooms, listening, showing up, and asking people, “What’s one thing you’d love the next governor to do for you?”

  • Ken Block (Independent):

I’m very happy to be here tonight. Helena and I have been in front of many forums this year, hosted by advocacy groups for different purposes, all providing services or looking out for the interests of different groups of people.

This group has been remarkably effective at educating me about their issues and talking with me about the challenges different groups experience as they age.

I have been on this journey with my parents as they’ve aged and passed away. My wife’s parents are now in their 80s and are experiencing a very different journey than my parents did. They’re aging in place, let’s say, challengingly.

Dealing with that remotely has been a challenge for both my wife and me. It makes me realize that while my parents and Jen’s parents have been really supported, others on the journey don’t have the level of support and family involvement we had.

That’s where groups like this, or advocacy organizations like the ones we have here representing different services that can provide the help people need, are so vitally important.

  1. As governor, what would you do to strengthen the Office of Healthy Aging (OHA) and better support healthy aging and aging in the community?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

On this topic, I absolutely am open to the idea of a cabinet-level position. I need to understand it more closely, but I would say Maryland is a place where this does exist.

I’m good friends with Wes Moore. So this is an example where, using some of my relationships and even many other governors, I’d love to understand what does great look like as we think about serving the senior population.

I also want to speak to the fact that I think we need a whole-of-government approach. Tonight, it’s really hard to give you a hard commitment on dollars given that I don’t know what the state of the budget will be.

You look at education, the Department of Labor and Training, and the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority—lots of places where seniors need access to support. And we’ve got to have, under my leadership, a government that is really focused on how we serve seniors in the state because, to Maureen’s point, it’s a huge portion of our population, higher than most other states.

I would also like to have a master plan on aging. I’m sure many of you have parts of that. I want to pull it together.

So that’s where we need a governor who will set the expectation that I want to see – a plan. I’ll have deadlines because I want to benefit from the expertise, as I mentioned, involving you. Still, I also want to make sure we have a plan where we can hold ourselves accountable to making seniors’ lives better.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

Yes. I believe OHA should be a cabinet-level position for a simple reason: a substantial portion of our population has interests that line up directly under OHA.

And as governor, I want to make sure every large group of people who live here has a voice I can hear. Having OHA as a cabinet-level position gives me the ear I need to hear their needs.

I don’t disagree with anything Helena just said, but I would like to tackle the issue a little bit differently because I don’t think the state is being responsive enough.

I hear a lot of dismay and unhappiness with how responsive the state is to the needs of advocacy groups and the nonprofits that work with it. Several areas of dysfunction seem to be particular sticking points, especially OHHS.

So I describe myself as an operational manager. I’m a specialist in understanding where an organization doesn’t work well, where the friction points are, and what changes we need to make to improve it.

And I look at Rhode Island as a—right now, Rhode Island government’s kind of a target-rich environment.

  1. What steps would you take to reduce the number of lower-acuity residents living in nursing homes?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

I want to start on a human level around this question because I think the idea that more of our senior citizens should be able to live at home and have caregiving at home is a really great aspiration.

I think one barrier is not having the home healthcare workers we need to support folks in the state.

I speak to a lot of caregivers who don’t even talk about the dignity of their own work, how challenging it is, how low-paid it is. Most of the people I speak to don’t even have healthcare insurance themselves.

So I think we need to start by understanding what the gap is to get to this target, what the gap is in terms of the number of community healthcare workers who can do these jobs, and how do we make sure more of them get trained up, paid appropriately so that we can really be providing service.

You have Donald Trump, who is now essentially targeting many of these home-care providers and healthcare workers by threatening to send immigrants out of this country.

And I’ll use the Haitian community as one example of that. An incredible community of hardworking, loving, dedicated healthcare workers who are now unsure whether they’ll be able to stay here.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

Research shows that care for nursing home residents who need lower levels of care can be provided more cost-effectively outside nursing homes.

So from the governor’s office perspective, my job would be to make sure that we can pave the way for these alternative treatment and housing solutions, that they’re available, and that we can help families who might be taking on some of the burden of caregiving by providing resources to them to make the job easier.

As you all know, the state budget is under tremendous pressure, both from within and without. Washington, D.C., is threatening us. We have a structural deficit coming into this budget year, and Helena and I have both heard requests for what I estimate to be billions of dollars in additional funding this year from the different groups we’ve spoken to.

I have no idea how we prioritize all the different needs or how we can pay for them. It’s going to be very difficult.

But what you have done here, and what other groups have done, has demonstrated beyond a doubt that your requests are worthy.

  1. What would you do to expand home – and community-based care for persons with disabilities and behavioral health conditions?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

What I’ll add to my last answer is the idea of helping families navigate the complexity of this and thinking about this concept of “no wrong door.”

The idea is that I could go to a state website and get help figuring out how my loved one gets the best level of care in the state.

It’s really hard right now.

And what I’ve always said in my career is I don’t need to be the smartest person in the room. You all know much more about this than I do.

But what I want to do is ask all of you, as it relates to something like this, what are all the stupid things we do? What barriers do we put in your way, and how can we make it much easier for families navigating the complexities of this issue?

  • Ken Block (Independent):

With developmental disabilities, you have a challenge at some point where the severity of it is such that a home-based solution can be not only very difficult, but at times could also be maybe somewhat dangerous.

So I believe that the state government, the governor’s office, our job would be to make sure that people understand whatever services are available, whatever programs of support are available.

It’s a good idea when it works and as long as we can do it safely. That would be my biggest concern: making sure everybody can be safe.

We know that moving eligible individuals out of group homes or institutional settings and into the home environment can often lead to better results.

  1. What would you do to ensure implementation of the nursing home behavioral health per diem and protect the principles of Olmsted regardless of federal challenges?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

The last couple of years, the drumbeat around healthcare has gotten really loud. People are really worried that their primary care doc is going to retire and they won’t be able to find anyone.

We have two hospitals in our state that are on life support, I would say: Roger Williams and Fatima. We made a deal to keep them alive earlier in the year, but there’s still a real risk in those hospitals.

We have the federal government, which is just ruthlessly attacking people around healthcare in this country, with 40,000 Rhode Islanders who are going to lose access to Medicaid starting in January.

It’s so cruel. It’s so inhumane.

So a big thing that I’ve been focused on, in all honesty, is: how do we make sure people don’t get kicked off of Medicaid?

I want to use the faith-based community. I want to use senior centers. I want to go into some of the high-rises where seniors are living and bring the paperwork and resources to people, because the really sneaky thing about President Donald Trump and what he did with H.R. 1 is he’s making the paperwork so complicated that people won’t get through it and will give up.

I think healthcare will be the tsunami that will hit the next governor.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

I’m really glad Rhode Island cannot mint its own currency, because it would let politicians overcommit.

One of the easiest things for someone like me sitting here facing a room with people like you, on every question that asks, “Can you fund us? Can you fund us? Can you fund us?” The simple question always has the simplest answer, and the one you want to give as a candidate is, “I’ve got you.”

In this circumstance, I can’t tell you that I’ve got you. The General Assembly can’t tell you that they’ve got you. We don’t know what is coming at us.

So what I will tell you is I fully understand the need. I understand completely how important the program is. I get it. I really do.

But what I can’t tell you right now is, because I don’t know what’s coming, to make a promise now that I don’t keep is something that I really want to avoid.

I don’t want to be the guy who said, “Yep, absolutely.” And two months after I get into office, it’s like, “Oh my God, I can’t keep any of the promises that I made.”

My answer to you, with all sincere respect, is I don’t know.

  1. What role should Eleanor Slater Hospital play in meeting the long-term care needs of older Rhode Islanders and persons with disabilities?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

From talking to folks in the community, I know this sector of healthcare has been under a lot of strain for quite some time.

Getting people together and thinking about a holistic healthcare strategy in our state is a big priority of mine.

I think we’ve been putting Band-Aids on a lot of problems, but not really stepping back and asking: how do you serve people, and what assets do we have in the state that can help us do a good job for folks?

And Eleanor Slater is one component of that.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

I’m definitely open to using any existing resources that we have to address the issue.

So the direct answer to your question is I’m open to it. Yes.

  1. What steps would you take to implement Rhode Island’s 2025–2028 State Plan for Family Caregivers, including respite services, the Temporary Caregiver Insurance Program and a family caregiver tax credit?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

I think this relates to having a really solid plan that I talked about at the beginning and, in each one of these, understanding what is required. What’s the community’s priority?

If we can’t get everything done, what do you all see as most important?

It’s an incredibly stressful extra job that caregivers take on. I’ve spoken with many, many caregivers in the same generation, who are obviously working themselves, taking care of kids, and having parents.

And then you talk about the economic stress of just not being able to take time off.

I absolutely believe we need to expand caregiver assistance and support, but I need to understand, at the end of the day, what all of this costs and make sure I’m not making promises I can’t keep.

I won’t do that.

What are your mission-critical issues, and how do we actually work to get them done?

  • Ken Block (Independent):

I watched and participated firsthand in my relative’s home healthcare.

My mom was diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer’s at age 61. We moved them to Providence, to an independent living facility. And my dad was my mom’s caregiver, and I watched the toll that it took on him.

One day I got a phone call, and he said, “Ken, your mom just kind of slumped down.”

I was like, “Oh my God.”

And he’s like, “No, she’s okay. She just slumped down, but she can’t get up, and I can’t lift her, and I don’t want to call anybody at the facility because they’re going to kick us out.”

I raced over, lifted her onto the bed, and that was it.

I realized right at that moment that my dad’s ability to care for my mom had ended.

The emotional and physical toll on caregivers is enormous. Enormous. I’ve watched it.

My dad aged 40 years while he cared for my mom.

And one of the things that I think the state has to watch out for, especially if we’re going to begin subsidizing people to provide care at home, is: how are we going to make sure that we are not putting many more people at risk because they want to take advantage of the money without regard to what the toll is really for both the patient as well as the caregiver?

We have to make sure that we are smart about it.

  1. How would you help older Rhode Islanders and persons with disabilities pay for long-term services without having to rely on Medicaid or sell their homes?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

This is a really hard problem, and I’ve met lots of families who have been put in this situation of selling the family home to put a loved one in a nursing facility.

I believe we need to raise Medicaid rates in the state. Our state has an older, poorer population than most of New England.

And Medicare, unfortunately, is fixed. The federal government sets it. It’d be great if it went up, but we can’t plan on that.

Medicaid: we have an opportunity to raise Medicaid rates by $70 million, and this last session we could have gotten a $126 million federal match. And that would make a real difference in the healthcare system.

I’ve met so many healthcare providers who live in this state and work in Connecticut and Massachusetts every day because they can make 20 or 30% more just by crossing the border.

I will also make sure someone on my team is dedicated to getting every single dollar of federal funds that we can.

And so, the needs are quite great, but a big part of it starts around funding Medicaid the way we need to.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

Medicaid is at the root of a lot of our healthcare challenges.

And in this case, the cost of assisted living is dramatically raised because the same facilities that provide higher-end services, like full-on nursing and memory care, are under-reimbursed by Medicaid, and they make up for that shortfall by sticking it to the private people who are paying for assisted living.

Everyone has to recoup costs, and we see this repeat in many different areas throughout our healthcare system over time.

So, interestingly, the answer to your question is that we have to figure out how to raise reimbursements for both Medicaid and Medicare.

If we do that, in theory, assisted-living costs should come down.

We spend a lot of money. Many different people have told me some of the money’s being well spent, some of the money’s not being well spent, and we have to make some hard decisions and assessments.

So I don’t think we can take the Medicaid budget from $5 billion to $7 billion. We don’t have the capacity for that.

But in that $5 billion, let’s make sure every penny is spent right. And the pennies that aren’t spent right, then we have to put them towards the things that solve the most problems.

  1. Would you support Medicaid reimbursement rates that reflect the cost of care and fair compensation for direct-care workers, while helping build and sustain the long-term care and behavioral health workforce?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): Yes.
  1. Would you support using 30% of state housing bond funds for older adults and persons with disabilities, increasing accessible housing units, and publicly tracking accessible and supportive housing?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): No.
  1. Would you support a small monthly telephone fee, similar to 911 funding, to sustainably fund Rhode Island’s 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline and broader behavioral health crisis response system?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): No (opposed burying another fee in the utility bill. Supports program but not the proposed way to pay for it.)
  1. Would you support eliminating the Medicare Savings Program asset limit and providing an annual cost-of-living adjustment to the state’s SSI Supplemental payment?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): No answer given because he didn’t have a cost estimate.
  1. Would you support developing and providing resources for a Rhode Island Multi-Sector Plan on Aging?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): Yes.
  1. Would you support legislation creating an Office of Elder Advocate?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat): Yes.
  • Ken Block (Independent): Yes.
  1. What would you do to improve transparency and accountability in the delivery of human services?
  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

Yes, we need much more transparency across the state.

Think about bridges and roads, the lack of transparency there. And it really breeds mistrust.

One thing I feel deeply, as I’ve been listening to people over the last few years, is that people have lost faith in government. They’ve lost faith that those of us who are working in government are committed to making life better.

And I know there are so many dedicated public servants, but it is so trust-corroding when we’re hiding information.

So I support anything we can do to increase transparency and make sure people have access to the information.

What programs are working really well? What programs aren’t working?

I was also a big proponent of the Inspector General because I thought, look at the billions of dollars that we got during the Biden administration. We don’t even know where that money went.

What worked? What didn’t work? What should we keep doing? What should we stop doing?

Those are really basic questions we’re not answering today, and I’m very committed to transparency.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

Pretty much my entire adult life has been spent following the data and letting it take me wherever it leads.

I’ve been more frustrated than happy with Rhode Island state government’s ability to provide data. And I know many people have asked the state for information.

They’ve been frustrated, and sometimes people within government can’t even get the data that they need to make decisions.

So this is an area where I literally eat—this is what I do professionally.

I’d like to see a whole—this is really nerdy stuff—but I want to see a bunch of dashboards and other tools that will ultimately help us understand much better than we can now where we’re spending the money and where the data is, so we can make informed decisions.

We can’t make good decisions without the underlying information to tell us what to do.

The challenges that are in front of us are daunting, but they’re fixable. We have seen other states tackle hard problems. We can tackle hard problems.

On the transparency side of things, we have not covered ourselves in glory, and I’ll issue executive orders immediately upon becoming governor that get right at the issue of transparency and make sure that, moving forward, our government is accountable to you.

Government doesn’t serve itself. Government serves, temporarily, the people who elected it into power.

Closing Remarks

  • Helena Foulkes (Democrat):

Thank you all so much for being here, for the great questions, and for your time and energy on these topics.

I want to be a governor for everyone. One reason I did so well in the Democratic primary is that I know Rhode Islanders are ready for change. They’re hurting. Everywhere I go, people talk about how much pain there is in this state, but at the same time, how much people love it here.

I’m optimistic we can do great things together.

When I think about our state, I want it to be a place where our children and grandchildren can live a good life.

I want this to be a place where people can afford healthcare. They can send their kids to a good school. They can have bridges and roads that actually work for them.

So many basic things aren’t working, and I think people lose hope. They lose faith that government can work.

Last night I was talking to a young man, and I always say, “What do you want the next governor to do?” And he said, “I want someone who will be honest with us.”

I’ve never thought I was the smartest person in the room. I will absolutely be leveraging your expertise. You can expect to hear from me, and I’ll be an advocate and a champion for the people that you’re serving.

  • Ken Block (Independent):

Thank you for the opportunity to come here tonight, and thank you for the advocacy work that you do. Thank you for the services that you provide. Thank you for caring so much about the issues that have come out here.

Our government doesn’t work without people outside government making sure it doesn’t forget what it’s supposed to do.

You have seen in both of us tonight the hesitancy and the challenge when we talk about the funding and what’s coming at us.

We’re all feeling the pinch throughout the healthcare system. We are under tremendous stress from the physicians, the providers, all the way across.

For me, as someone looking to buy private health insurance, it’s probably close to $4,000 a month for my family of four.

That is unaffordable for the vast majority of Rhode Islanders. That’s way more than most Rhode Islanders pay on the mortgage.

So, we have what I lovingly call a mess.

And a problem of this magnitude requires a detailed thinker, somebody who’s going to pull the experts together and drive the conversation, and look to provide some structure on something that’s very unstructured right now.

And we have to find savings wherever we can, and put that money to better use.

House Lawmakers Must Not View Aging as a Partisan Issue

Published in RINewsToday on March 30, 2026

The Leadership Council of Aging Organizations (LCAO), representing 69 national groups dedicated to the well-being of seniors, is urging Congress to support H. Res. 1013, a bipartisan resolution introduced by Reps. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) and Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), which would reestablish the Permanent House Select Committee on Aging (HSCoA). Reestablishing this  committee strengthens House congressional oversight, crucial for meeting the needs of a growing older population.

The original HSCoA served as the House’s investigative panel to spotlight aging issues until 1993, when it was dismantled at the end of the 102nd Congress as part of a budget reduction that cut $1.5 million in funding. From 1974 to 1993, the committee fostered bipartisan collaboration to address a myriad of issues affecting older Americans, expanding its membership from 35 to 65 as its political influence grew.  While the House allowed its committee to expire over 30 years ago, the U.S. Senate continues to operate a Special Committee on Aging.

Today’s aging policy challenges now demand bipartisan solutions and comprehensive, coordinated action. The reestablishment of the HSCoA is a necessary, nonpartisan step to addressing these urgent policy needs.

Working Closely with Standing Committees

“Jurisdiction over many programs affecting seniors is spread across multiple standing committees, making it difficult to fully address problems that do not fit neatly into one category,” said Max Richtman, president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare and chair of LCAO. “The nation faces intergenerational challenges, including increasing strain on family caregivers and a persistent retirement security crisis, which demand forward-looking solutions. A select committee with broad jurisdiction is uniquely positioned to address these issues.”

In a March 16 LCAO endorsement letter, Richtman emphasized that a reestablished committee would be active and engaged—holding field hearings, convening teleconferences, and incorporating community perspectives directly into policymaking.

Support from LCAO’s member organizations underscores that the passage of H. Res. 1013 is a national priority, not a narrow concern. As Richtman noted, the nation’s largest aging coalition is calling for the immediate reinstatement of the House Aging Committee.

Reestablishing the committee would also restore balance to Congress’s approach to aging policy, notes LCAO’s endorsement letter. In recent years, the Senate’s Special Committee on Aging has played a vital bipartisan role in highlighting issues such as elder abuse, scams and fraud, high prescription drug costs, the impact of COVID-19, financial pressures on retirees, and the growing crisis of social isolation. The House lacks a comparable legislative panel—an absence that becomes more significant as the population continues to age.

Without a dedicated body to examine the full scope of aging policy, critical issues risk fragmentation, oversight gaps, and delays. In the past, HSCoA hearings provided a forum for bipartisan debate and dialogue, helping bridge philosophical political divides and enabling standing committees to advance informed legislative solutions.

On January 21, 2026, lawmakers introduced H. Res. 1013 and referred it to the House Rules Committee. As of this writing, the resolution remains in committee, awaiting hearings, markup, or a floor vote.

“It is too hard to be a senior in the United States, and Congress has a responsibility to do more for today’s growing population of older Americans and future generations,” said Rep. Magaziner, the bill’s primary sponsor. “Reestablishing the Select Committee on Aging would create a dedicated forum to address these challenges and help ensure Americans can retire with dignity.”

“America’s seniors built this country, and they deserve more than gratitude—they deserve action,” added Rep. Salazar, an original cosponsor. “From rising health care costs to housing and long-term care, their challenges are too important to be buried in bureaucracy. This committee would provide focus, coordination, and accountability, and deliver meaningful solutions so seniors can live with security and purpose.”

As a cosponsor, Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI) supports bringing back the HSCoA.  “With rising costs, threats to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, and scams targeting older Rhode Islanders, it is essential that we deliver real solutions for America’s seniors,” says Amo.

As Co-Chair of the Stop Scams Caucus, Rep. Amo introduced the STOP Scams Against Seniors Act to ensure investigators have the resources needed to protect seniors from losing their life savings and to help them retire with dignity. “I supported reestablishing this committee in the 118th Congress, and I remain committed to elevating the voices of seniors in the legislative process,” he says.

Can a Bipartisan Proposal Pass in a Divided House?

“AARP supports exploring the restoration of a House Aging Committee to help encourage bipartisan dialogue and elevate issues important to older adults,” said Debra Whitman, AARP’s chief public policy officer.

AARP Board Member Bob Blancato, former staff director of the House Subcommittee on Human Services, highlighted the strategic importance of AARP’s backing. “AARP’s support gives bipartisan weight to the resolution and can motivate lawmakers across the aisle to consider it,” he said.

Blancato called restoring the committee a “sound policy decision,” noting that the growth of the older population makes action urgent. “The sheer increase in the number of older adults since 1993 is reason enough,” he said, pointing out that the oldest baby boomers are now turning 80. “President Donald Trump, the oldest sitting president in U.S. history, turns 80 on June 14, 2026,” he added.

He also noted that a single vote in 1993 eliminated HSCoA and several other committees as part of an effort led by House Democratic leadership to reduce government spending. Blancato suggested the resolution could pass in today’s Republican-controlled House if lawmakers see it as politically advantageous, adding that Rep. Salazar, a Republican, could play a key role in building support.

Still, Blancato acknowledged uncertainty about how effective a modern version of the committee might be. “It’s a dicey question—it depends on the issues they take on,” he said. However, he emphasized that a reestablished committee could play a crucial role by holding hearings on Social Security reform proposals from both parties.

Rep. Magaziner’s effort to secure a Republican cosponsor reflects the kind of thoughtful, collaborative leadership our country needs—especially as America’s older adult population continues to grow at an unprecedented rate, says aging advocate Vincent Marzullo, a former federal civil rights and social justice administrator. “By working across party lines, he is helping to refocus national attention on a myriad of pressing challenges facing older Americans,” he says.

“Rep. Magaziner’s bipartisan initiative also underscores a shared commitment to dignity, respect, and opportunity for seniors, adds Marzullo, who serves on the Congressman’s senior advisory council, calling a bipartisan approach a constructive path to addressing the needs of aging communities nationwide.

Robert Weiner, former chief of staff of the HSCoA under the late Chairman Claude Pepper (D-FL), now director of an ongoing op-ed writing group recruiting young journalists, which won the National Press Club President’s Award, noted that similar resolutions have been introduced in six previous congressional sessions. He said bipartisan support—including from Rep. Salazar, a member of the House Problem Solvers Caucus—could improve the resolution’s chances for passage.

However, Weiner argued that attracting Republican cosponsors should not be difficult. “Historically, Republicans have received strong support from older voters,” he said. “Bipartisan sponsorship should help overcome partisan resistance,” he believes.

Given that Rep. Salazar is a Republican member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, Weiner agrees that it is now time to urge the Problem Solvers Caucus to endorse and become cosponsors of H. Res. 1013. “The Aging Committee has always been bipartisan, with House leaders including not only Pepper and  Ed Roybal (D-CA)as chairs, but supportive ranking minority members, including then House members — later Senators — Charles Grassley (R-IA), William Cohen (R-ME), and John Heinz (R-PA),” notes Weiner. He added that the passage could depend on political timing. “It can and should be a shared victory,” Weiner said. “If not this year, then next year.”

A Call for Support

It is time for the Tallahassee, Florida–based Claude Pepper Foundation to step forward and formally endorse H. Res. 1013. The Foundation’s mission—to advance the ideas, values, and public policy legacy of the late Sen. Pepper, ensuring they remain part of contemporary American discourse—aligns directly with the purpose of this bipartisan resolution.

At its core, the Foundation educates federal and state policymakers and advocates for initiatives that enhance the quality of life for all Americans. H. Res. 1013 embodies that commitment. Endorsing this measure would not only honor Sen. Pepper’s legacy but also reinforce the Foundation’s leadership in shaping policies that address the needs of a growing aging population.

The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, established in January 2017 as an outgrowth of the No Labels organization, was created to foster cooperation across party lines on key policy issues. Nearly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, the caucus has demonstrated that consensus-driven policymaking is both possible and necessary.

During the 119th Congress, the Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed 12 legislative proposals. Notably, however, none directly addressed aging programs or services. As an original cosponsor of H. Res. 1013, Rep. Salazar is well-positioned to urge the caucus’s co-chairs—Representatives Brian K. Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Tom Suozzi (D-NY)—along with their colleagues, to make this resolution their 13th endorsed proposal.

Addressing the needs of older Americans should never be viewed as a partisan issue. Reestablishing the House Select Committee on Aging is a practical, bipartisan step that lawmakers from both parties can and should strongly support.

Restoring the committee is essential—not only to revive a once-vital congressional institution, but also to ensure that today’s Congress is now equipped to meet the evolving needs of the nation’s rapidly aging population.

LCAO member organizations endorsing H. Res. 1013 include AARP, Justice in Aging, CWI Works, Inc., Alzheimer’s Association, Village to Village Network, Gerontological Society of America, Network of Jewish Human Service Agencies, Meals on Wheels America, International Association for Indigenous Aging, APWU, Retirees Department, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), PHI, LeadingAge, Aging Life Care Association, National Adult Day Services Association (NADSA), Post Acute and Long Term Care Medical Association, National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA), National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), National Council on Aging, USAging, Mairead Painter, CT State Long Term Care Ombudsman,  National Adult Protective Services; and National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs (NANASP), among others.

Read the full resolution here https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/1013/text

Rep. Magaziner’s one-minute floor statement calling for the passage of H. Res. 1013 – see it here: https://youtube.com/watch?v=IygZGcwnFPg&si=MLAAdY6QctiXd1TF

To read LCAO’s endorsement of H. Res. 1013, go to https://www.lcao.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/LCAO-Chairs-Letter-Endorsing-H.-Res.-1013.pdf.