To date, all of the editorial boards have been interested in older adult services issues—either from a professional or personal standpoint—and most of them want to help us keep this issue alive somehow. For example, after our meeting with the Rochester Post-Bulletin, they wrote an editorial that (mostly) told a part of our story as we would tell it. Here is an excerpt:

“We also owe a debt of gratitude to the 112,000 people who are employed in Minnesota's long-term care system. It's an evolving field that is shifting away from traditional "nursing homes" where people used to live for years.

Today, the emphasis is on rehabilitation and getting people back into their homes or assisted-living arrangements where they can retain some independence and a better quality of life in their later years. This wouldn't happen without the tireless efforts of the nurses, home health aides, physical therapists, hospice workers, dietitians and maintenance workers who this year will serve more than 40,000 clients in Minnesota.

 It's difficult, emotionally draining work, and not terribly lucrative. For example, a licensed practical nurse who works at a long-term care facility in Minnesota earns, on average, $7,000 less each year than an LPN at a hospital. For a registered nurse, the gap is more than $20,000.

 That wage gap appears likely to grow. A 2010 Legislative Survey of 206 nursing facilities found that 75 percent have frozen salaries or reduced them; 20 percent have cut the hours of direct-care staff; and 13 percent have cut employees' health care benefits. The state's current belt-tightening effort is only going to make this situation worse, as Gov. Pawlenty's budget proposal would slash another $347 million from the state's health and human services programs.

 And here's the kicker:  A "silver tsunami" is headed our way, as the Baby Boom generation starts turning 65 in 2011. The $1 billion Minnesotans will spend on long-term care this year will likely be a fraction of what we'll be paying one decade from now. . . .”

 As many of the state’s newspapers themselves experienced staff layoffs, frozen wages, declining advertising and reduced copy, the editors clearly understood the workforce challenges—although when most businesses are also freezing wages and reducing hours, our story is not as compelling today. The points that seem to be compelling in our discussions are the projections toward the future—the squeezing of funding which leads to reduced choices at a time when the demographics and expectations of baby boomers exceed the capacity of the older adult system.

There is concurrence that what is needed now is a “do-over” of both the payment and service delivery systems for older adult services.

On a payment level, the mantra of personal responsibility and redefining the government safety net rings a bell. While right now, during this legislative session, we focus mostly on the repeal of the nursing facility rate equalization law as a first step in developing personal responsibility tools, there are many areas where further financing reform work is needed, especially with our business partners. We note our participation with the Chamber of Commerce on their long-term care financing reform policy paper and with the Citizens League on their work developing “The First (Urgent) Steps Toward a Long-Term Care Financing System for Minnesota.”

On the service side, program/service allocation by silos of government at the local, regional, state and national level can no longer continue—inefficiencies, duplication, and artificial roadblocks to service access are the result today. We frankly can’t afford it.To that end, our post-session plan is to convene a summit on “administrative alignment” with the goal of having a roadmap developed for the state’s next governor.

The newspaper editors want to know what the plans are to get us out of this upcoming state budget disaster—how do we restructure the state so we can have an older adult services network that meets the needs of the “silver tsunami”?

They want to know why the federal government hasn’t addressed this when all states are facing this issue—a very good question if you ask me! Our response is to hand them the “Change Is Imperative” document . . . tell them we need to focus on public investment, personal responsibility, and administrative alignment . . . refer them to the initiatives noted above . . . and hope for a new administration that can show leadership from the top down on this issue to compliment our “bottom up” effort.