Awhile back I wrote a column on a tsunami of aging that is coming to Nevada at Mach I, which I thought might spark some interest in Legislative candidates, but guess what - Not a peep.
Gov. Gibbons' 2011 budget indicates how the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services is handling a 10 percent mandatory spending cut for 2011 that will negatively affect at least 50,000 low-income seniors struggling to remain independent and in their own homes and out of costly institutions.
Due to Nevada's ongoing budget crisis, these 10 percent cuts won't be enough to balance the state's budget by a long shot. The word on the street is that it will take 25 percent to 30 percent in the absence of any new revenue (new taxes) or an improvement in the economy.
So what does that mean for our huge aging population? It means another round of reductions in rates paid by Nevada Medicaid programs to hospitals, physicians, nursing homes and other medical providers for Nevada's most vulnerable population, not to mention the loss of jobs for state workers who administer programs such as dental, vision and pharmacy services, which will disappear. It means that 45 to 50 community-based organizations such as RSVP will lose funding for in-home services for seniors to remain at home which saves taxpayers millions of dollars annually.
Has anyone analyzed the ramifications of losing these vital services to low-income frail seniors, especially in Nevada's rural counties? What will happen to 50,000 low-income seniors who can no longer maintain themselves at home without help? How can Nevada afford to institutionalize this many people? Are there even enough facilities? Ask any Nevadan who has lost his job, or persons 55 to 65 who have no insurance and need medical services whether this tsunami is real or not. They are drowning in it!
Suicides among the elderly have escalated tremendously and elder abuse is off the charts. Will our Legislators in 2011 step up to the plate and raise taxes to keep these services? My guess is no, because it is a political hot potato. The people who scream "no new taxes" to keep these seniors at home haven't begun to realize the cost for mandatory institutionalization. How about $75,000 per senior per year minimum, taxpayers?
We need some brave heroes for the 2011 session who will vote for what is right above what is politically popular. Will it happen? No, and taxpayers will pay dearly in the long run, as taxpayers will pay a lot more in the long run for institutional care, which leaves no winners.
• Janice Ayres is executive director of Nevada Rural Counties RSVP Program.