By: Gema G. Hernández, former Secretary Florida Department of Elder Affairs

It can be said that the plan to take away the power of elders and organizations serving the needs of elders began the moment Jeb Bush lost his first election for Governor of Florida. This loss marked the beginning of the most phenomenal strategy designed to break and render useless the power of elders as a block and eventually eliminate the direct access organizations such as Area Agencies on Aging, Senior Centers and Community Care Programs have with elders. Jeb learned from his first political loss that once elders are mobilized and energized the results of the elections could change in just days. He also learned that the best way to prevent that from happening again is to: 1) get direct access to elders, 2) provide information to them in a way that advocacy groups cannot deny or even know it exists, and 3) make sure key agencies receive financial support so they would not indirectly contradict his initiatives and legislative changes. Individuals close to Jeb identify the loss of that first election as the main reason the president of the USA today is named George W and not Jeb Bush. The loss was and will forever be painful.

To achieve the above mentioned objectives, during his first term as Governor, Jeb began spending millions dollars creating a “new and improved” management information system designed to centralize in the hands of the Governor’s staff information about individuals and community based organizations. This was a magnificent way to consolidate data and has data available to use in the dissemination of propaganda. The many resources available to state agencies that are part of Governor’s Cabinet began to use their media resources to directly send messages to the citizens of the state that were presented as part of educational campaigns, but in reality they were just political messages. Every week the state’s entire MIS and media systems began promoting what Jeb was doing, minimizing any reference to any other accomplishment or goal reached in the past or proposed by an opponent. For example, under the pretext of making government more efficient the administration coordinated each state agency web page, newspapers, TV capabilities and direct mailing to clients in such a way that it became a shadow political machinery paid by the taxpayers of the state.

Jeb also did not forget the calls agencies made to elders days before his first election, He remembered and in order to avoid the same situation again began monitoring agencies and individuals who had access to elders. To make sure these agencies would never do what they did on behalf of Lawton Chiles, the following was put in place: First, informants were placed throughout the cabinet level agencies and then among the service providers’ network. The role of the informant was to report on an ongoing basis any move or plan of the organizations for example, if they plan to notify their clients of potential budget cuts and oppose the merging of program, or allude to that fact the present administration in Washington should be changed. Second, Web pages such as this one are being monitored on a daily basis and information is being sent to the authors with a simple message: Stop scaring elders. Attempts to respond to the message are unsuccessful, as there is no way of tracking the sender and the message keeps coming back on a daily basis. This is an attempt to intimidate the opposition.

Third, the importance of the Senior Centers, Absentee ballots and Assisted Living facilities were discussed in closed quarters. The first order of business was to secure the loyalty of some Senior Center. The role Senior Centers played in the 2000 presidential election is well known, at least in Florida. An article published by the Miami Times in the summer of 2001, alleges that a senior center director who controls 25 senior centers and who later became assistant secretary of aging was responsible for securing for George W Bush 450 votes. The article goes on to say that in an election that was won by less than 550 votes her contribution was not only significant but deeply appreciated. This is the same type of loyalty the Bush administration in Florida and in Washington are expecting in 2004. Senior Centers are not only precincts where elders physically vote, but they are places where they are highly susceptible to the influence of the environment. These centers have unlimited access to elders and are able to indirectly influence their votes. This includes influencing the votes of those elders that vote absentee.

In addition, some of the Senior Centers also provide home delivered meals to homebound elders. A homebound elder receiving home delivered meals or home health services from a given agency may listen to subliminal messages if not direct political messages given to him or her by agency CEOs and presidents, or better yet, by one of the agencies’ volunteers. Agency newsletters contain photos and articles by candidates. In some cases the organization’s logo is prominently displayed in a candidate’s direct letter to the elders. For example, during the 2002 Gubernatorial elections in Florida, AARP’s logo was prominently displayed in the letters sent to elders by Governor Bush. The implications of the text, logo and pictures were clear. I am expecting the same thing to happen at the national level with the 2004 presidential election.

For those elders that will not be influenced by the political propaganda that in reality these centers are not supposed to promote, but they do it anyway, Plan B was prepared. Plan B makes sure questionable ballots do not reach their final destination. For example, again during the 2002 Gubernatorial elections in Florida, thousands of Bush volunteers visited the homes of the elders collecting their absentee ballots. The data exists as to who votes absentee, therefore, volunteers can be sent to collect ballots of elders and disabled adults who may consider giving the ballot to a volunteer so they can save the cost of the postage. If the volunteer comes with an agency name badge the ballot will be turned over with no hesitation. It happened in Miami and it happened to elders I knew. It is therefore important that if we want to help low income homebound individuals vote absentee we should provide them with the stamp and avoiding the “collection” of ballots. On the other hand if you are considering giving someone your ballot, please don’t do it, mail your own vote.

For those individuals that are going to make their decision about electing a candidate based on the record of that candidate, the Bush family plan strongly believes in creating new realities for the media and the general public. What better way to prevent advocates from educating the public as to what is going on than to change the rules of the game overnight. Changing the rules of the game became another important strategy. By this I mean change the budget categories, the names of the programs, the eligibility criteria of the programs, and the types of clients the agencies are supposed to serve, leaving behind no track record of the past. The process calls for the creation of new initiatives that will take away the role of existing programs. The process also calls for the consolidation of programs into new categories and for changing the mission and objective of each state agency. These new program and budget categories would benefit one sector of the community at the expense of another. The recycling of money among programs and between different types of clients was presented as a cost effective way to run the state budget, but in reality it was a way to cut funding while making the cuts invisible to the naked eye. New initiatives have no budget trails to be compared with what funding was there before, especially if different populations are lumped together like in the case of elders and individuals with disabilities. The historical data of funding and waiting lists disappeared overnight because new initiatives, new agency missions and new budget categories have no waiting list and no track record. This strategy has given the Bush administration a fresh start in the majority of the social programs and domestic agenda, making it almost impossible for advocates to challenge the administration’s numbers when it comes to their claims of increase funding, improving education, adding more jobs, reducing unemployment and improving Medicare services to frail elders.

To make sure the many initiatives appear credible, credibility was automatically given by a friendly agency which coincidentally has been pre identified by the Bush family as an agency with a friendly CEO to the Bush plan. These agencies were targeted to receive most of the funding for the new programs and therefore they were very supportive of the new initiatives even though originally they opposed some changes. This alleged opposition is what increased their credibility.

Some social service agencies and membership organizations were selected for this task because the media and the general public have given them a halo of protection. These agencies, due to their not for profit denomination and their work with the frail, were and are protected from scrutiny. Any attempt to look inside their financial statements and the media would immediately question the reasons why a department head was picking on these good agencies. The few of us that have taken the time to see below the halo have been chastised for our actions. However, what we have discovered is that some of these agencies were protecting not the frail person but the salaries, the cars, the trips and the perks of their presidents and senior personnel. Providing services to elders was just a secondary role. The family knew these organizations were for sale and began slowly purchasing their loyalty one at a time. For example, grants were given exclusively to certain organizations or national programs like the Older Worker Program adjudicated to only one provider.

Bush understood that it is important that elders be divided in different groups; the more the groups the better. In reality, he understood the importance of dividing people and organizations even if he has to financially support that division. For that purpose, the wealthy elders were rewarded with intangible tax cuts that by default affected the poor elders. Less money collected from taxes meant less financial support for the safety net. The family became the center of attention and marriage its most important mechanism. By doing this, the attention was now shifted from how government was helping people age in place with the dignity and respect they deserve to what families were doing to keep their elders at home. Programs began to be evaluated based on the number of years a family caregiver was willing to keep caring at home for their loved ones. No attention was placed on how the quality of life of caregivers was impacted, how children in that family unit were suffering, nor was the attention placed on increases in the number of elder abuse cases resulting from caregivers’ stress and burden. Families that were not able to keep their elders or children at home were negatively judged by the public. The topic became “family responsibility” masterfully by passing the role of government in helping families help themselves. The new program initiatives began reinforcing the new definition of what a family is and their responsibility.

By making the family the focus of attention this also marks the beginning of the diminishing role Medicaid will be playing in financing Long Term Care. Next in the family’s agenda is to reform Medicaid. The administration’s plan is to disengage the Area Agencies on Aging and other key organizations that historically have administered the programs for elders. The plan will ask for organizations to share the cost of keeping elders and frail individuals in their homes. Sharing the cost and capitating the amount of dollars agencies will receive for each client is going to eliminate 75% of the present service delivery network because no Area Agency on Aging, no Community Care of the Elder Program, No Senior Center has the financial solvency to be at risk for the long term care needs of the elders or frail adults they call clients until that client’s death. A form of Managed Care will complete the privatization of services to elders and individuals with disabilities. This change will introduce different players and remove the existing players to a second tier, and just like the administration has done with Medicare, the cuts to the Medicaid budget will be buried deep in the language of the new law.

At this time, the Medicare Modernization Law has capitation language that will automatically generate cuts as early as 2005 for which the administration will claim no responsibility.

The mobilization of elders has begun, and even though this is a page from Lawton Chiles’ game book, I am sorry to say it has become the trademark of the Bush family, a plan more refined and sophisticated than ever before. One final word of caution: The family loves being the underdog. This is a strategy that is used to mobilize every single Republican, so don’t trust the latest poll because the latest poll could be another manipulation of the truth.