Caregiving Still a Crisis in America, Pew Report Confirms

Published in RINewsToday on March 9, 2026

Last summer, AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving (NAC) released their 133-page report, Caregiving in the U.S. 2025, widely regarded as one of the most comprehensive sources of data on family caregivers in America. Seven months later, the Pew Research Center (PRC) expanded the national caregiver debate, releasing its own report, Family Caregiving in an Aging America. This report confirmedthe results of AARP and NAC’s sweeping report, while adding fresh insight to a rapidly growing body of research on caregivers.

These two caregiver reports highlight a powerful demographic trend: the continued graying of America’s population, creating a growing need for Congress and state governments to enact laws to assist the nation’s 63 million family caregivers. At the same time, mounting evidence reveals that increasingly family members are stepping into caregiving roles and responsibilities. The Pew survey released last week which examined the experiences of caregivers, found that the demands of caregiving intensify as family members reach the age of 75 and older.

“Aging in America is one of the most profound demographic trends shaping our society today,” observes Kim Parker, PRC’s director of social trends research, in a Feb. 26, 2026, statement announcing the results of its first-ever caregiver study. Parker emphasized that caregiving for an aging family member encompasses a wide range of responsibilities, including running errands, managing finances, navigating medical issues, and providing hands-on personal care.

“Helping in these ways has a direct impact on the lives of caregivers,” Parker said, stressing that caregiving often strengthens relationships between caregivers and those receiving care. But particularly when it comes to supporting an aging parent, many caregivers say it has taken a toll on their personal well-being, finances, careers, and even their social lives, Parker added.

Taking a Look at Key Findings

The study findings revealed that one in ten U.S. adults reported being a caregiver for a parent aged 65 or older. Another 3% cared for a spouse or partner in that age group. Fewer than 1% reported caring for both an aging parent and an aging spouse or partner. However, survey data show that caregiving rates rise significantly among those with older loved ones: 24% of adults with a parent aged 65 or older identify themselves as caregivers, as do 25% of those with an aging spouse or partner.

Consistent with previous research, gender plays a role in taking on caregiving roles and responsibilities. Among adults with an aging parent, spouse, or partner, 28% of women identify as caregivers, compared with 23% of men.

Men and women caring for an aging parent are about equally likely to say that helping with activities of daily living has strengthened their personal relationships.

However, women note that they are more likely than men to report negative effects on their emotional well-being (47% vs. 30%) and physical health (38% vs. 26%).

As to finances, the study found that income also plays a role in who becomes a caregiver. Among adults with an aging parent, spouse, or partner, 39% of lower-income adults identify as caregivers, compared with 23% of middle-income adults and 16% of upper-income adults.

What Caregivers Do

Roughly two-thirds of adults caring for an aging parent (68%) and a similar share caring for an aging spouse or partner (66%) regularly provide help with at least one key activity of daily living. These tasks include running errands, managing household chores and home repairs, scheduling medical appointments, managing medications, handling finances and paying bills, and also assisting with activities of daily living such as bathing or dressing.

The survey findings also indicate that adults who provide care for an aging parent with at least one of the tasks tend to report that this has had a more positive than negative impact on their relationship with their parent. On balance, caregivers find that this experience has a more negative impact on their physical health, emotional well-being, job (among those employed), finances, and even their social life.

While caring for an aging spouse or partner regularly involves helping them with activities of daily living, they say that this experience has had a more positive impact on their relationship. But unlike their peers caring for an aging parent, their views on physical health, emotions, finances, and social life are more mixed, rather than mostly negative.

Advocates Say Caregiver Crisis Demands Swift Action

“The PRC’s survey findings further validate what other research and caregivers themselves have been telling us — that they’re sacrificing their health, their finances, and their careers to care for the people they love, often with very little support,” says Jason Resendez, NAC’s President & CEO.

According to Resendez, the PRC’s survey findings confirm the findings of AARP and the NAC’s Caregiving in the U.S. 2025 report. He noted that caregiving falls hardest on those least equipped to handle it. Lower-income families and women carry a disproportionate share of the load. These patterns are consistent with what caregivers on the ground routinely describe.

Like other research findings, Resendez notes that PRC’s report highlights that social isolation, financial strain, and career disruption are widespread among caregivers — yet these tend to get overshadowed in public conversation by the more visible emotional toll. The sharp increase in caregiving demands once a parent crosses into older age brackets is also an underappreciated threshold that catches many families off guard, he says.

PRC’s survey findings, says Resendez, paint burnout not as a single breaking point but as a compounding experience — emotional exhaustion layered with their own declining physical health, shrinking social lives, strained finances, and career setbacks, all happening simultaneously.

“Women in particular experience this accumulation more acutely than men, suggesting burnout has a deeply gendered dimension,” he says.

“The PRC report shows broad, bipartisan public support for concrete interventions: tax relief, respite care, paid family leave, and direct financial assistance,” says Resendez. Preparation means building infrastructure around these supports before the aging population surge overwhelms families who are already stretched thin, he adds.

When asked what success would look like in reducing caregiver burden by 2030, he responded: “Success would mean closing the income and gender gaps in who bears the caregiving burden, fewer caregivers reporting harm to their health and well-being, and widespread adoption of the financial and workplace supports that the public already overwhelmingly favors. The benchmark is simple: caregiving should not systematically impoverish or exhaust the people doing it,” he says.

Inside the Beltway, aging groups are pressing Congress to support financially struggling caregivers. AARP, representing 38 million older adults, reports that on average, family caregivers spend over $7,200 annually—26% of their income—on out-of-pocket expenses.

“America’s family caregivers put family first, helping their parents, spouses, and others stay at home,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer. “They spend thousands of dollars every year on this care, while juggling work and family responsibilities. We urge Congress to put money back into the pockets of hardworking family caregivers by passing the bipartisan bill, The Credit for Caring Act,” she says.

The Senate bill (S 925), introduced in the Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) and in the House (H.R. 2036) by Representatives Mike Carey (R-OH) and Linda Sánchez (D-CA), offers up to a $5,000 nonrefundable federal tax credit to help offset caregiving expenses, addressing the significant personal and financial sacrifices caregivers make to support their loved ones.

AARP says respite care is essential to preventing caregiver burnout, yet access remains limited and uneven, leaving many caregivers without the breaks they need to continue caring for loved ones. The aging advocacy group is calling on Medicaid to strengthen home- and community-based services, reduce unnecessary red tape, and ensure that family caregivers can access supports such as respite care and training.

Family caregivers provide more than $600 billion worth of care each year, and that labor should earn them benefits through Medicare and Medicaid, says Maggie Ornstein, PhD, a public health geographer, guest faculty member at Sarah Lawrence College, and a family caregiver for more than 30 years who writes extensively on caregiver issues.

Ornstein agrees with AARP’s call to strengthen Medicaid and argues that home care should be a required benefit under the program, just as institutional care is. “Wages for home care workers need to be increased,” she says, noting that providing living wages would make these jobs more desirable and, in turn, better support family caregivers.

“There is also an urgent need for Medicare to cover home care and related services,” Ornstein adds. “Coverage should also be available to caregivers before the standard age of eligibility. Similar to how people with permanent disabilities qualify for Medicare, eligibility could be expanded to caregivers who provide more than 20 hours of care per week,” she says.

Ornstein notes that direct payment to caregivers is popular (63% in PRC’s study) and would have the biggest impact on caregivers. “We know that caregivers often have to reduce paid employment or leave work entirely, so direct payment in the form of wages or ‘caregiver allowances,’ as provided in countries like Canada, Australia, Germany, and the UK, would help with financial security,” she says.

Research suggests, says Ornstein, that caregivers lose more than $300,000 in wages and benefits over their lifetimes. “Tax credits, while often the most widely discussed policy response, would do little to help the lowest-income and most vulnerable caregivers. Proposed tax credits would need to be refundable to have the most impact, but even then, direct payments would better bolster financial well-being, which should be a main policy priority,” she says.

Other policies, such as the Social Security Caregiver Credit Act, need more public attention, too, says Ornstein, emphasizing that providing Social Security credits to caregivers who leave work to provide care would be transformative for their retirement.

Finding a Care Giver Policy Fix in Rhode Island

With the release of the PRC caregiver survey findings, it is more important than ever to spotlight the vital role of our state’s caregivers, says SACRI Policy Advisor Maureen Maigret, who calls caregivers the backbone of Rhode Island’s long-term services and supports system.

According to Maigret, the PRC report highlights that lower-income adults with an aging parent, spouse, or partner are more likely to serve as caregivers than those with higher incomes. “That is why SACRI views the passage of a caregiver tax credit bill as a priority, one that will help offset the financial burden faced by so many caregivers,” she says.

H7241, sponsored by Rep. Susan R. Donovan (D-Dist. 69, Bristol, Portsmouth), and S. 2246, sponsored by Sen. Linda L. Ujifusa (D-Dist. 11, Portsmouth, Bristol), would provide a tax credit of up to $1,000 for a family caregiver caring for an older adult or a person receiving Social Security Disability who requires assistance with two activities of daily living. The proposal would cover up to 50 percent of eligible expenses, capped at $1,000.

Supporters say that establishing a caregiver tax credit would help older adults and people with disabilities remain in their homes while also reducing costly Medicaid expenditures on nursing home care, which can exceed $100,000 annually.

A Final Note…

One of the biggest unanswered questions about caregiving in America today is whether there is the political will in Congress to support family caregiving.

“The PRC’s report shows that relationships are strengthened through both providing and receiving care. When caregivers are not supported in that care, they experience significant stress,” Ornstein said.

“We have an opportunity to value the care provided by family and non-kin caregivers across the country and, in doing so, strengthen our communities. Instead, we have a system that abandons, neglects, and exploits family caregivers. We need more people to decide that this is unacceptable and to demand the support caregivers earn through the work they do every day,” Ornstein adds.

To read PRC’s caregiving report, go to https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2026/02/26/family-caregiving-in-an-aging-america/

To get a copy of Caregiving in the US 2025: Key Trends, Strains, and Policy Needs, go to https://www.aarp.org/pri/topics/ltss/family-caregiving/caregiving-in-the-us-2025/

For state-specific caregiving data, go to https://www.aarp.org/pri/topics/ltss/family-caregiving/caregiving-in-the-us-2025-caring-across-states/

Challenging Ageist Language in Rhode Island

Rep. Carson’s Bill Challenges Ageist Language in Rhode Island Statutes

Published on March 2, 2026

During the 93rd Legislative Session, a law enacted in Massachusetts caught the attention of Lauren H. Carson (D-Dist. 75, Newport), who chairs the House Study Commission on Services for Older Rhode Islanders (HSCORI). Carson was convinced of the need to confront ageism in the state’s statutes. She understood the importance of how Rhode Island lawmakers talk about aging.

On Jan. 9, 2025, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey signed Senate Bill S. 3006, “An Act Renaming the Executive Office of Elder Affairs to the Executive Office of Aging and Independence,” into law. Sponsored by Joan B. Lovely (D–Second Essex), the measure formally changed the name of the Executive Office of Elder Affairs to the Executive Office of Aging & Independence to better reflect the agency’s mission of supporting older adults in maintaining independence and dignity.

Beyond the name change, the law sought to modernize statutory language and reduce the stigma often associated with aging. It replaced outdated terms such as “elder,” “elderly person(s),” and “handicapped” throughout state law with more respectful and person-centered language, including “older adult(s)” and “adult with a disability.”

Carson believed that Massachusetts’ move to systematically remove ageist language from state law was a public policy Rhode Island could follow.

A Rhode Island Response

More than a year later, on Feb. 5, 2026, Carson introduced similar legislation, H. 7496, aimed at reviewing state statutes to identify negative or outdated references to older Rhode Islanders — including terms such as “elders” and “elderly person(s)” — while strengthening advocacy for older adults. At press time, Sen. Victoria Gu (D-Dist. 38, Westerly, Charlestown, South Kingston) plans to introduce the Senate version of this bill.

Carson’s special legislative commission is identifying ways to improve services and maximize resources available to older Rhode Islanders in the face of an expected surge in that population over the next 15 years. Over the more than two years the commission has been meeting, Carson has noted that, with life expectancy having increased over the decades, people over 60 are not all living lifestyles that could be described as “elderly,” and they certainly do not appreciate being labeled as such.

The legislative proposal, referred to the House State Government & Elections Committee, would initiate a review of state laws for references to “elders” and “elderly person(s)” and enable the drafting of legislation next year to replace those terms with the phrase “older adults.”

“Words matter. When we apply labels to people, we are telling them and everyone else how we think of them, what we expect of them. Many people over 60, 65 or 70 are still working like any other adults. They are contributing to their communities, they are active, and they simply are not what we think of when we hear the word ‘elderly.’ They don’t want to be called ‘senior citizens,’” Carson said in a statement announcing the introduction of H. 7496. “Being older than middle age doesn’t mean you are elderly. Our language should better reflect that this is a huge swath of our population that includes a wide range of ages, abilities and lifestyles. They aren’t all elderly.”

Her legislation also specifies that references to “handicapped” and “disabled” in the parts of the General Laws relating to older adults be replaced with the term “adult person(s) with disabilities.”

Carson’s bill, which also includes changes designed to give older Rhode Islanders a seat at the table in state planning and to better empower a panel on long-term care, stems from the work of the commission she chairs to study services provided to older Rhode Islanders.

The legislative proposal makes two additional changes to address issues identified during the commission’s work.

It adds a representative from a statewide aging advocacy organization as a member of the State Planning Council and specifies that the new member must be at least 60 years old. The purpose of the change is to sharpen the state’s focus on issues affecting older Rhode Islanders by ensuring their interests are represented in state planning, helping to prepare and direct resources appropriately as the state’s 60-plus population grows. Currently, more than 240,000 Rhode Islanders are age 60 or older. That number is expected to increase to nearly 265,000 by 2040.

The legislation also makes it easier for the Long-Term Care Coordinating Council to reach a quorum. With 33 members — many of whom are busy leaders of state agencies, organizations or businesses — the panel at times struggles to meet quorum requirements. The bill would allow 12 members to constitute a quorum. The change is supported by Lt. Gov. Sabina Matos, who chairs the council.

Talking About Ageism, Language and Older Adults

At a two-hour HSCORI public meeting held Sept. 18, 2024, at the Pilgrim Senior Center in Warwick, Dr. Philip Clark, director of University of Rhode Island’ Program of Gerontology and Jim Connell, executive director of Age-Friendly Rhode Island, spoke about the negative impact of ageism and the importance of reframing aging using more positive language. It was one of three such meetings held “on the road” in different communities — Newport, Warwick and South Kingstown — to increase public visibility and engagement.

During his 34-minute presentation, Clark argued that language shapes perception and policy, and that the pervasive use of ageist language and stereotypes has detrimental health and social consequences for older adults. Ageism is a significant public health problem, he said, citing research by Dr. Becca Levy of Yale University indicating that negative self-perceptions of aging can shorten one’s lifespan by as much as seven years.

“How we talk about aging matters and particularly ageism language and “older adults.” And the operative word here is older adults. That is the term in the field of gerontology that has become standard language,” says Clark. He advocated using the term “older adults” instead of labels such as “seniors” or “the elderly,” which often carry negative connotations.

“Ageism is the last of the ‘ism’s’ to be recognized and confronted as discriminatory. Even older adults themselves fall victim to ageist attitudes and believes,” says Clark. He identified veiled ageism — including patronizing language such as “dear” or “sweetie” and infantilizing humor — that reinforces negative stereotypes about aging.

Clark stressed the vast diversity within the older population, repeating the mantra, “If you’ve seen one older person, you have seen one older person.” He warned against policies that treat this diverse group as a monolith.

“Older adults are more unique than any other age group,” Clark said, noting that they have had a lifetime to become who they are. Their needs, abilities and desires vary widely, and policy must reflect this diversity rather than relying on one-size-fits-all solutions.

“We must analyze the meaning of words and the wording of meanings,” Clark added, urging policymakers to critically examine language and underlying assumptions in policies and programs to ensure they are grounded in accurate data and reflect values of independence and dignity rather than ageist bias.

During Q&A, Commissioner Maria Cimini, Director of the state’s Office of Healthy Aging, asked Clark how best to balance inclusive language with recognition of each older adult’s unique identity. “When I go into different communities, like the Center for Southeast Asians, they specifically use the word ‘elder,’” she said. “Not ‘older adult.’”

Clark responded, “If you’re in a community where ‘elder’ carries a sense of respect, appreciation, and value, you obviously don’t want to impose your white, middle-class values on that group.”

“We use catastrophic language. It makes the problem seem unsolvable and it makes it very hard for us to be successful in our advocacy,” said Commissioner Catherine Taylor, state director of AARP Rhode Island, reinforcing Clark’s testimony by explaining how negative framing can undermine efforts to secure legislative support for aging-related issues.

“So, to use the right language is really important to the success of our work in getting things through,” adds Taylor.

Following Clark’s presentation, Connell argued that the common negative narrative of aging is incomplete and fails to account for the many older adults who are active, working and seeking new opportunities.

According to Connell, 71% of Americans aged 65 and older say the best time of their lives is right now or still ahead of them. He also cited a recent Harris Poll indicating that 83% of U.S. adults 65 and older feel it is more important to feel useful than youthful in retirement.

Connell introduced the concept of “middle essence” to describe the period from ages 60 to 80, highlighting it as a time for new careers, enrichment and purpose. He emphasized the power of personal narratives and lived experience to counter the societal view of aging as a period of frailty and decline.

Personal stories are a powerful tool for dismantling the dominant negative narrative of aging, Connell said. He characterized the growing older population not as a problem to be solved, but as a “longevity boom” full of potential for personal growth, continued work and community contribution — one that requires intentional, age-friendly planning.

Connell noted that society has gained 30 years of life expectancy since the mid-20th century and said this “longevity boom” must be factored into planning. He warned that “othering” — assuming all members of a group are the same — is the “absolute enemy” of effective planning for an aging population.

Connell concluded by saying: “So this Commission and indeed all of us were well positioned to have the power to change the aging narrative and he use of ageist language in our state. It’s important that lived experience be woven into everything we do. Please keep telling your stories. It’s really, really important.”

Meanwhile, at the same public commission meeting, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 23, Warwick) reported on several recent accomplishments, including passage of accessory dwelling unit (ADU) legislation, a law allowing cameras in nursing home rooms, an increased tax exemption for Social Security income and a state-level cap on insulin costs. He also highlighted a $120 million housing bond question that appeared on the November ballot, calling it a critical opportunity to fund affordable housing for older adults.

Shekarchi further noted the creation of a Senate commission to explore establishing a new medical school in Rhode Island as a long-term strategy to address the state’s primary care physician shortage. He also referenced Gov. McKee’s Healthcare Systems Planning Cabinet as another effort to address systemic issues, including primary care access and long-term care planning.

To watch HSCORI’s Sept. 9, 2024 public meeting, go to https://capitoltvri.cablecast.tv/show/10590.

___

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,