Offline 
Background
Location:
Indianapolis, Indiana
United States
Indianapolis, Indiana
United States
Quote:
"What we do, we do for all." -- AARP Founder Ethel Percy Andrus
"What we do, we do for all." -- AARP Founder Ethel Percy Andrus
How Can I Complete My Profile?
Add videos to your profile to bring you up to 100%. Add video now!
Seven Deadly Myths of Health Care ReformMy Journals (59)
INDIANAPOLIS – The AARP Foundation today announced a call for entries to its second annual Women’s Scholarship Program. The scholarships will provide funds to women 40+ who are seeking new job skills, training and educational opportunities to support themselves and their families.
“The AARP Foundation is pleased to be offering the Women’s Scholarship Program again this year,” Indiana State Director June Lyle said. “AARP Foundation is committed to elevating opportunities for women. Last year, we were able to provide valuable resources that enabled 74 deserving women to have access to the educational tools to advance their professional goals.”
While many individuals benefit from the work of the AARP Foundation, research shows that women are disproportionately at risk of having insufficient resources in the second half of their lives due to lower earning and different work patterns. The AARP Foundation first announced the Women’s Scholarship Program in August of 2007 to help women 40+ overcome financial and employment barriers by allowing them to participate in education and training opportunities they could otherwise not afford.
The scholarship program is made possible by the AARP Foundation, the organization’s affiliated charity, with generous support from Bank of America and the AARP Foundation Women’s Leadership Circle (WLC). The Women’s Leadership Circle is a national network of volunteer leaders that champion and provide direct support to AARP Foundation programs, including the Women’s Scholarship Program. The AARP Foundation Women’s Scholarship Program is available to eligible individuals with moderate to lower incomes and limited financial resources. To be eligible for the scholarships, applicants must:
- Be female age 40 or over (as of August 31, 2008);
- Be able to demonstrate financial need; and
- Be enrolled in an accredited post-secondary school or training program within 6 months of the scholarship award date.
Priority consideration is given to women in three categories: 1) women raising children of another family member (such as grandparents raising grandchildren, or those raising siblings or nieces/nephews); 2) women who have been out of the workforce for an extended period of time; and 3) women in dead end jobs (those with no opportunity for advancement, low pay and lacking either health or retirement benefits).
Scholarships may be used for any course of study at a public or private secondary school, including community colleges, technical schools, and four-year universities. The program does not provide assistance for graduate degree programs. It seekswomen who are entering two to three year technical or skills enhancement programs, or who are in the final stages of their college experience. Funds are payable to the institution and may be used to pay for tuition, fees, and books.
Interested applicants can submit their application online beginning July 1, 2008 at http://www.aarpfoundationwlc.org. The application process closes on August 22, 2008 and scholarships will be awarded in early 2009.
Scholarship winners will be chosen by an independent selection committee established by the AARP Foundation. They will be chosen on the basis of financial need, personal circumstances and achievements, educational goals, and the likely impact of the scholarship on their lives and their families and communities. The Foundation will award up to 100 scholarship awards ranging from $500 to $5,000, depending on financial need and the cost of the education or training program.
For more information about the AARP Foundation, please log on to www.aarp.org/foundation.
Added: July 21, 2008
Views: 417 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 417 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
INDIANAPOLIS, IN– July 2, 2008 – Gridlock has paralyzed the U.S. Senate, derailing a critical bipartisan bill that would have kept Medicare premiums fair, stopped a 10.6 percent rate cut to physicians who treat Medicare patients, and made significant improvements to a program that 44 million Americans depend on.
Last week, Sen. RichardLugar joined a minority of senators in voting to block legislation that would have given people on Medicare continued access to their doctors and improved benefits for the most vulnerable – while boosting health care quality through national electronic prescribing.
The Senate vote on the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 (H.R. 6331) was purposely scheduled for June 26 so it would become law before the cuts to doctor reimbursement took effect July 1.
Sixty votes were needed to pass the bill. In a procedural move, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., changed his vote to "no" so that he could call the bill up at a future date. Therefore, the measure fell just one vote short of being adopted. “Sen. Lugar could have made a big difference,” said Jon Marhenke, M.D., president of the Indiana State Medical Association.
Earlier in the week, the House of Representatives voted to preserve access to care for Medicare patients in a bipartisan landslide vote, passing H.R. 6331 by an overwhelming margin of 355-59. The House made seniors, the disabled and military families a top priority.
"We are deeply troubled that Sen. Lugar voted to block a bill with bipartisan support that would have preserved patients’ access to their doctors and improved Medicare for the 44 million Americanswho depend on it,” said June Lyle, AARP Indiana state director. “We urge Sen. Lugar to listen to his constituents and reconsider his vote when the bill comes up again after the congressional recess.”
“Because of Sen. Lugar’s vote, the Senate went home for the July 4th recess leaving care for our nation’s seniors, disabled individuals and military families hanging in the balance,” Dr. Marhenke said. “We call on the senator to reconsider his vote and return to Washington to do what’s right – vote to ensure patient access to care and give health care security to America’s elderly.”
In addition to preventing a 10.6 percent cut in payments to doctors, the Medicare bill would have:
- Helped keep premiums fair
- Strengthened protections for lower income beneficiaries
- Improved Medicare’s coverage of preventive services
- Made Medicare more efficient through electronic prescribing.
The Senate is currently scheduled to reconsider H.R. 6331 immediately following the July 4th recess. “We’re urging seniors and their physicians to contact Sen. Lugar on this important issue that will have a huge impact on Medicare patients’ access to doctors in the future,” said Dr. Marhenke.
Throughout the debate on this Medicare legislation, AARP, the American Medical Association and the ISMA have engaged their members in a fight to keep Medicare fair and protect access to doctors. Hundreds of thousands of AARP supporters, including 19,000 Hoosiers, called and e-mailed Congress, signed petitions, wrote letters to their local papers and participated in “Keep Medicare Fair” events around the country in the last several weeks.
More than 41,000 patients and physicians called Congress in June, using a hotline provide by the AMA. During the July 4th recess, the AMA is airing new radio and television ads that urge opponents of H.R. 6331 to put patients’ access to care before insurance profits by voting for the bill as soon as they return to Washington next week.
Representing approximately 8,400 of the state’s physicians, the ISMA has worked for 158 years to promote sound health care policy in the public, private and governmental sectors and to support continuing medical education for the state’s doctors.
AARP Indiana represents 895,000 Hoosiers age 50 and older.
Added: July 2, 2008
Views: 437 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 437 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
By any standard, these are difficult times. Our soldiers are fighting and dying in two wars, the limping economy is sapping our wallets and our aspirations, and there seems no end to “gotcha” politics that offer no clear path forward to better times.
Humorously, Garrison Keilor recommends ketchup and rhubarb pie as antidotes for our distress.
In all seriousness, I’d like to recommend the poet Horace.
Older readers may have studied Horace in Latin class. Younger people may associate him with “The Dead Poets Society,” in which Robin Williams’ character urged his students to seize the day – or “carpe diem” as Horace so memorably wrote in Ode I-XI.
The point is not wine, women and song – although Horace certainly recommended all three (and men, too, as a bisexual Roman of his times).
Rather, Horace urged his readers to savor each moment and each day, to live them as fully as one’s station and opportunities allow, and to always remember that life’s pleasures are fleeting – as are its sorrows.
The English poet Dryden put it this way, in a loose but memorable paraphrase of several lines from Ode III-XXIX:
Happy the man, and happy he alone,
He who can call today his own.
He who, secure within, can say
Tomorrow do thy worst, for I have lived today.
Be it fair or foul, rain or shine,
The joys I have possessed,
in spite of fate, are mine.
Not heaven itself upon the past holds power,
But what has been, has been, and I have had my hour.
Or consider Housman’s translation of a stanza from Ode IV-VII:
Torquatus, if the gods in heaven shall add
the morrow to the day, what tongue has told?
Feast then thy heart; for what thy heart has had
the fingers of no heir will ever hold.
That Housman grasped Horace’s essence is no surprise. His own poems suggest a belief that life’s sweetness is balanced by bitterness, and that we should all prepare ourselves for sorrow and disappointment:
’Tis true, the stuff I bring for sale
is not so brisk a brew as ale.
From a stem that scored the hand
I wrung it in a weary land.
But take it; if the smack is sour,
better for the embittered hour.
Perhaps your disposition is sunnier than Housman’s, less fatalistic than Horace’s. But if, like me, you find a need for solace against life’s slings and arrows, know that kindred souls have felt the same across the centuries, and may provide you with the strength you need to carry on.
Added: June 26, 2008
Views: 299 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 299 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
June 12, 2008
Bipartisan Package Would Have Improved Benefits for Prevention, Mental Health and Low-Income Programs, Boosted Quality through National E-Prescribing
SUMMARY: Today a minority of the U.S. Senate blocked critical legislation to protect and improve Medicare for the 44 million Americans who depend on it. The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act, which would have improved Medicare’s prevention, mental health, and low-income programs and instituted a national program for electronic prescribing, was blocked by a group of Senators during a procedural vote.
Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh voted "Yes" to move the Medicare bill to debate and vote. Sen. Richard Lugar voted against moving the bill to debate and vote.
“While we are disappointed by today’s outcome, we applaud Sen. Bayh for voting to improve Medicare and bring this bill to the floor for an up-or-down vote,” said AARP Indiana State Director June Lyle. “This bipartisan legislation would have helped more Americans afford their health care bills while bringing our doctors’ offices and pharmacies into the 21st century with e-prescribing. We look forward to continuing to work with Sen. Bayh and his colleagues to pass a bill this month to improve Medicare and keep premiums fair for the 44 million Americans who rely on the program.”
Lyle added: “We are disappointed that Sen. Lugar voted to block this Medicare improvement bill from open debate and an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. This bill would begin to bring down health care costs for millions of Americans by boosting Medicare’s prevention, mental health, and low-income programs and promoting e-prescribing—one way to reduce harmful and costly medical errors.”
AARP has been advocating for several months to ensure that people in Medicare do not face an unfair increase in their premiums when Congress addresses physician payment cuts. AARP has also been advocating for improvements to Medicare, particularly the low-income programs, including raising asset limits, simplifying the application process and improving collaboration between Medicare and the Social Security Administration to screen people who may be eligible for low-income help and not know it. The bill brought up for a cloture vote today included all of these changes.
The AARP initiative, titled “Keep Medicare Fair,” to date has generated more than a half million phone calls, e-mails and petitions sent to Senate offices. As part of this effort, an AARP survey released May 19 found that of adults 50-plus, 81 percent oppose additional increases to Medicare premiums and 66 percent are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress who supports those increases.
Almost 16,000 Hoosiers made phone calls, sent e-mail or signed petitions urging Sens. Bayh and Lugar to support the Medicare improvement bill.
AARP notified the 110th Congress that it was tracking roll call votes on key legislation important to its 39 million members and reporting the outcomes of these votes back to its members. “We believe people make the right choices when they understand the issues and position taken by their elected officials. AARP intends to ensure that its members get that information,” Lyle concluded.
Added: June 13, 2008
Views: 306 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 306 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Paul Chase has joined AARP Indiana’s eight-member staff as Associate State Director for Public Policy, filling a post formerly held by State Director June Lyle. Paul is a licensed Indiana attorney with extensive experience in disability rights law and HIV/AIDS issues. He served five years as board chairman of ICHIA, the state’s high risk insurance pool, and has been a lobbyist since 1998 for various nonprofit consumer groups, concentrating on expanded access to health and human services, civil rights, consumer protection, improved environmental quality and sustainable energy policy. He earned his law degree at Illinois Institute of Technology-Chicago/Kent College of Law.
Please join us in welcoming Paul to AARP.
Added: June 5, 2008
Views: 432 | Comments: 1 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 432 | Comments: 1 | Bookmarks: 0
In a 1947 essay called “The English People,” George Orwell tried to assess the English character in full.
The English, he said, were a gentle, orderly people who respected the law and disliked bullies and bullying.
They were also class-riddled, inartistic and distinctly nonintellectual.
Etc., etc., Orwell said, at least to the extent that such a thing as national character can even be described.
Orwell’s words ring clear in light of Indiana’s recent turn in the campaign spotlight.
After all, there is a sense in which the long slog of the presidential campaign, both primary and general, is essentially a search for character.
Candidates in a long campaign inevitably confront events and circumstances outside their control, as well as their own gaffes, miscalculations and revealed flaws. But the particulars seem to matter less than the candidates' response. Can he take punch? Did she show resolve? Did humility or hubris reveal itself, and in the right proportion?
Campaigning for governor four years ago, Mitch Daniels described the process as a long job interview with Hoosiers. But "audition" seems closer to the mark, since candidates must stamp an impression on an audience that has not clearly advertised – and may not even know – the exact qualities it wants in the starring role.
Enter national character upon the campaign stage.
That’s because the gifted politician responds by assessing the audience's character, and framing his or her platform and persona as a natural outgrowth of that character. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were two modern masters of this style of politics, just as Barack Obama aspires to it now.
The gifted politician grasps another fact: Like individuals, our national hopes and aspirations are better, nobler than we are; the successful politician therefore taps our dreams and not our fears, our best and not our worst.
Exceptions abound, of course, as the long line of segregationist governors clearly illustrates. But their “success” was fleeting; Jim Crow died despite their protestations.
Writing against the storm of war and uncertain recovery, Orwell wondered if the great promise of England’s future would be kept. If we wonder the same, against our own war and uncertainties, perhaps we can take some comfort in his words:
“If the answer is to be ‘Yes,’” he wrote, “it is the common people who must make it so.”
Added: May 9, 2008
Views: 486 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 486 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and state lawmakers answered a property tax crisis with landmark legislation this year that caps home taxes at 1.5 percent in 2009, at 1 percent in 2010 and beyond, and provides $870 million in tax relief this year.
It further restricts tax hikes for some 65+ homeowners and boosts the earned-income tax credit for low-income workers.
Among other things, the package relies on strict local spending controls and a 1 percentage point sales tax increase, to 7 percent.
Daniels spoke to AARP Indiana about the changes.
Q. Your goal was “fair, far-reaching and final” property tax reform. Are we there?
A. Yes, unequivocally. It is far-reaching, upwards of 30 percent, and for those hardest hit it will generally be more. It is as fair as I think it can be made. Everyone gets relief and it is delivered through the same mechanism for everyone. I believe we have made assessment more consistent in the future, which will be part of fairness. And I want to say that some of the amendments offered by Democrats, and some Republicans, improved the fairness: the freeze for seniors; the increase in the earned-income tax credit for low income people, which will include some seniors; the increase in the renter’s deduction, which will share the benefits a little more evenly with those who don’t live in a home they own.
So I think the fairness of the plan, nothing’s perfect, but I think the fairness of the plan is reflected in the more than 2:1 majorities it got in both parties in both houses for both measures, the bill and the resolution. Which gets to final. Final, maybe I was sacrificing precision for alliteration a little bit, because nothing’s ever final, and I don’t doubt that over the years we and others will find ways to make adjustments. But by final, I really meant lasting, and the (constitutional) amendment process, which we all have to participate in eventually to make law, I believe, is very important in protecting the tax cuts here and the relief against future politicians or a judge overturning it.
But yes, is it far-reaching? Make certain every reader knows there’s a $1.72 of tax cut for every dollar of new sales tax here. Even if some localities somewhere, they choose as part of their adjustment to use the local option income (tax), there’ll still be a major net tax reduction out of this bill and that’s what we started out to do.
Q. The law puts significant new spending obligations on the state. What’s the long-term state budget impact?
A. We just simply have to manage it as we have the last three years. You have to decide what your priorities are. Our priorities will now include, certainly from me, the full funding of public education. The state was already paying 85 percent of operations, now it’ll be 100 (percent), and these other costs, like child welfare, that we’ve picked up. My view is that if it means lesser priorities have to be economized on, that’s what we’ll do and I’m sure future governors will do. It’s a very reasonable problem to take on in return for delivering major tax relief to Hoosiers.
Q. For many homeowners, taxes soared astronomically last year. How happy can they be with a promised 30 percent cut to their 2007 bills?
A. If your bill went up that much, you'll probably get more relief. And the caps, as they come in, will give you dramatic relief. That’s one reason we went for the caps – one ceiling, maximum ceiling for everyone. So if someone was in one of the places where bills became unaffordably high, they will get much more than 30 percent relief. There are homeowners out there who wound up with bills at 3 and 4 percent of their homes’ value. As we impose a 1 percent cap, they’ll be getting two-thirds or three-fourths relief. The 30 percent is just an average figure across the state.
And it’s exactly those people – some of these were modestly priced houses and some were expensive houses – but it’s exactly those people who got a bill for 2 and 3 and 4 percent of their home’s value and couldn’t afford it that we started out to protect.
Q. They’ll get that relief when they pay their 2007 bill?
A. They’ll get the first installment of relief on the bills of May and November this year. The caps will be at 1.5 percent for homeowners next year, 1 percent in 2010. I wanted to get to 1 percent next year, (but) that was one of the compromises we made. Many of the hardest hit taxpayers will get three rounds of relief: one installment this year, a second next year, and if they’re still above 1 percent, they’ll get a third cut the year after. At that point, every taxpayer in Indiana, every homeowner, will be protected by the same limit, 1 percent of your home’s value, which to me was the essence of fairness. I believe we will now have – again, there is no perfect system – but I believe we’ll have one of the best in America. Our property taxes will be in the lowest 10 states in America, and only one other state has a 1 percent true cap like we will have.
Q. What role did homeowners play in bringing this about?
A. Their role was indispensable. They exercised their citizen’s rights to raise a little Cain and get the attention of policymakers. They cast some votes in the mayoral elections that got the attention, and not just in one place but in many, that got the attention of legislators, and they came to the Statehouse to balance the debate. I said the lobbyists for the spending units were here every day, getting paid to be here, (so) it was essential to have citizens make time, find time – many seniors were a part of this – to come here, and as I say, bring some balance to the debate and remind the legislators that this was about putting taxpayers first.
Q. Anything else?
A. I hope that every taxpayer who wrote a letter, made a call, attended a single meeting or more feels some sense of accomplishment. It would not have happened without them.
Incidentally, the most effective arguments I ever had when I was meeting with legislators were to be able to tell them about seniors, for instance, that I had met, and a specific impact on a specific person. I stood in the yard of a widow in Elkhart, we talked about her bill, and talked about what a 1 percent cap would mean, allow her to keep the home that her family lived in. My friend Dixie Huff came down from Muncie and stood out here with me and we walked through what it meant to her, the ability she will have, I hope, to keep her home. That personal activism was really important.
Now let me go back just for a second, your question’s a good one, you know, about the state (budget) and so forth. Of course it will sometimes be difficult to pay for these obligations that state government is taking on and keep the books in balance. But here’s a fundamental point. The way we’ve always done property taxation, the various spending units decided what they wanted to spend and then passed out the property tax bills no matter how big the total got. Here, now, in state government, we live under a balanced budget requirement. And that will force the kind of tradeoffs and prioritization that was not taking place under the old system. See what I mean? So, yes, I’m sure there’ll be times, and it could be the next budget, when it’ll difficult to make everything fit into a balanced budget. It’s supposed to be. (But) it is going to be a vastly better system now that we are adjusting spending to what the taxpayer can afford, as opposed to raising taxpayer bills until they provide the money that the spenders think they need.
Added: March 31, 2008
Views: 549 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 549 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Manufacturers’ prices for brand-name prescription drugs rose sharply in 2006 and 2007, the first two years that the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit was fully operational.
According to the “Rx Watchdog Report,” published by AARP’s Public Policy Institute, manufacturers raised prices an average of 7.4 percent last year and 7.1 percent in 2006. That compares to inflation rates in those years of 2.9 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively.
The report is based on a market basket of 220 brand-name drugs purchased through Part D, including 212 drugs used to treat chronic conditions.
According to the Watchdog Report, not all manufacturers’ price hikes may pass directly to consumers. But consumers should consider asking their doctors about effective generic substitutes for brand-name medicines.
For more information about generics, visit www.aarp.org/health/rx_drugs. Click on costs and choices. For the complete “Rx Watchdog Report,” visit www.aarp.org/research/PPI.
Added: March 5, 2008
Views: 811 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 811 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
If you haven’t already ordered a free Security Freeze kit from AARP Indiana, here’s another reason to call us today!
The kit already includes all the forms and pre-addressed envelopes that Hoosiers need to block their credit reports from prying eyes. The “freeze” means no one can open new lines of credit or increase existing credit lines without your knowledge and consent – a huge boon in this age of identify theft.
You simply complete the forms, make a photocopy of your photo ID, and send the forms and photocopy to Equifax, Experian and TransUnion – the private companies that create and maintain your credit reports.
It’s free. Absolutely. Positively.
Now we’ve added another tool to help you manage your credit record. Our free Security Freeze kits now include a simple form to order a free copy of your annual credit report from Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion.
Federal law entitles you to one free credit report per year from each of those companies. This form is the no-hassle way to do that.
Don’t wait. Increase your financial security with an AARP Indiana Security Freeze kit.
Call us toll-free at (866) 448-3618 or send e-mail to mdeagostino@aarp.org.
You’ll be glad you did!
Added: January 29, 2008
Views: 714 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
Views: 714 | Comments: 0 | Bookmarks: 0
