May 27, 20034
Allison Myhre/218-847-5056 or 218-731-1657
Rural Seniors Shortchanged Again
By U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn)
Once again, Minnesota senior citizens living outside the Twin Cities and its suburbs are being slighted. While Governor Pawlenty has declared May as Older Americans Month, the Minnesota Board on Aging (appointees of the Governor) has proposed changes to the intrastate funding formula for the Area Agencies on Aging that would result in a $667,283 cut for rural senior citizens in western Minnesota.
Older Americans Month is a time when we are supposed to honor and thank America's seniors for their ongoing contributions to society. I was dumbfounded to learn that the Governor's board is proposing to cut funds for rural seniors who desperately need services by implementing an unfair new funding formula.
In the past, Minnesota has sued the federal government when federal dollars are distributed nationwide based solely on population, because we know that programs in sparsely populated areas are as expensive, if not more expensive, to operate. Minnesota has always believed that every senior should be given the same opportunity to access federal programs. Now Governor Pawlenty is using the very formula of strictly population distribution to shortchange seniors of greater Minnesota.
The Minnesota Board on Aging receives most of its funding from the federal government. To my knowledge, there is no federal pressure on the state to change the funding formulas; rather, it appears the pressure for these changes is coming from the metro areas. And it is the board that has decided, after 20 years of distributing an equal base amount of federal funds to all 12 Planning and Service Areas (PSAs), to change to a population basis distribution scheme that disadvantages and shortchanges rural areas of the state. In addition, the board has also decided to implement new staffing requirements, and eliminate of six of the current 12 PSAs, further compounding the effect of these cuts for rural area seniors.
Under the board's new plan, some PSAs cover only seven to 11 counties, while others cover 21-27 counties and have fewer dollars. In the western part of Minnesota, we will lose five different PSAs, leaving us with only two that cover 48 counties (which is more than half of the counties in the State). At the same time these service areas will be cut by more than $600,000. The bottom line is that under this proposal, rural seniors will receive fewer services than those who live in the metro area.
I am disturbed that once again a new state policy is placing the well-being of seniors in rural areas in jeopardy in order to deliver more resources to those living in the metro area. In Congress I have worked for increased funding for the Older Americans Act, and to make sure that all Minnesota residents are fairly served by federal programs.
The question Minnesota’s rural seniors need to ask is, why is Governor Pawlenty - who says he deplores the metro vs. rural mentality - choosing to cut this funding for rural seniors? The Governor’s policy is generating this shift in the funding formula. It’s the Governor's policies that are pitting one area against another.