As a voter, I have been extremely nonpartisan ever since I first became eligible to vote. I proudly vote for Democrats, Independents, and Republicans in whatever combination makes sense - based on (a) an examination of where candidates stand on issues and (b) my level of confidence in their ability to do what they say they want to do.
We now have a choice among four candidates: Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton; John McCain; and Mitt Romney.
I will compare them on perhaps 15 to 20 criteria. Some of these criteria appear below, in case you might find them helpful as you make your choice about the next U.S. President.
Consensus-building. Which candidate can most effectively bring people together - internationally, to address worldwide issues affecting humanity - nationally, to form multi-partisan strategies to achieve our goals - locally, to facilitate collaboration among increasingly diverse communities across the United States?
Pork/Earmarks. Which candidate has the courage to stand up against favoritism and against irrational systems of allocating our national resources? Who is willing to pioneer better ways to address issues and make our government more efficient and effective by taking action to eliminate earmarks and to transform the government bureaucracy?
Environment. We all live in the environment. The environment affects everything we do - locally, nationally, and internationally. We can't replace it with anything else. We can only care for it. Which candidate offers the soundest approach to addressing global warming, energy use, water and air resources, in cooperation with our fellow inhabitants of this earth in other nations? Which candidate will promote wise use of land to save energy and improve air and water quality?
Health Care Coverage for All. Everyone deserves adequate health care. After living in Europe for a year, I realized how shameful it is that we, in the United States, have such a large portion of our population who lacks access to health care. Which candidate can achieve the health care coverage we need in this country? (Although I'm not my sharing ratings of any specific candidates, I will say that none of them has so far proposed a plan for health care that seems both effective and feasible. However, I could be wrong and will continue to analyze this.)
Education Gap. We have two gaps - internal and external. Within this country, Persons of Color constitute our fastest growing populations. They will make up many of the leaders of the future, the workers of the future, the parents of the future. Sadly, our systems have not brought their level of educational achievement up to the level of the White population. Which candidate will best promote school readiness (of both the students and the schools)? Which candidate will best elevate our educational systems? Which candidate will lead the way to ensure that all children graduate from high school, ready for post-secondary education? Externally, some evidence exists that other nations' educational systems out-perform ours. Which candidate can change this, so that we remain on a par with other countries?
The Vulnerable. Our compassion and care for the vulnerable within our communities make up one defining element of our culture. Which candidate offers the clearest vision, and the most feasible approaches, for building the capacity of vulnerable people and enabling them to live with dignity? Whether social spending increases, remains level, or decreases, money is not the answer; creativity, energy, and commitment are what we need.
Housing. A last item I'll mention is housing. Which candidate offers the best strategy for our housing markets and systems to create an adequate supply of housing, accessible to people at all income levels?
Well, as you participate in primaries or caucuses, and as you make your decisions as a voter, I hope you apply these and other criteria, to take a thorough look at who can best provide the leadership we need.
Monday, February 04, 2008
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Homeless Older Adults
People 55 and older make up an increasing number and proportion of homeless adults. That's a key finding in a report presented by our homelessness study team to the Gerontological Society of America a few weeks ago. Ten years ago, about 1 of 25 homeless adults was 55+; today, it's almost 1 of 12.
This reflects a general trend we've noted earlier: With respect to our aging population, we can expect more of everything. More people will live longer. Many of them will remain healthy and active into the 70s and beyond; many others will live with chronic conditions that limit their ability to do everything they want to do, and even to care for themselves. (Some recent research suggests, incidentally, that the generations coming into their sixties and seventies now might not experience the disabilities of aging in the same proportions as previous generations. If this turns out to be the case, as perhaps further research will show, that would be very fortuitous.)
In any case, we can expect more homeless older adults, or at least more older adults at risk for homelessness.
In Minnesota, based on the most recent survey by Wilder Research, the majority of homeless adults are male; 44% of homeless males over age 55 are military veterans. About half of homeless older adults are persons of color, compared to about 10% of Minnesota's overall population.
The Wilder Research study found a number of differences between homeless adults over age 55 and those below that age. Older homeless adults are only half as likely to be working for pay; they more likely receive income from General Assistance, Social Security (old age benefits, disability insurance, and/or supplemental security income). Their monthly incomes tend to be higher than the incomes of younger homeless adults. Older homeless adults report more chronic health conditions that limit daily activities; in general, they have a greater level of physical and mental distress, compared to younger homeless adults.
In addressing homelessness, we need to understand that it can involve all ages, and different age groups can have different types of needs.
This reflects a general trend we've noted earlier: With respect to our aging population, we can expect more of everything. More people will live longer. Many of them will remain healthy and active into the 70s and beyond; many others will live with chronic conditions that limit their ability to do everything they want to do, and even to care for themselves. (Some recent research suggests, incidentally, that the generations coming into their sixties and seventies now might not experience the disabilities of aging in the same proportions as previous generations. If this turns out to be the case, as perhaps further research will show, that would be very fortuitous.)
In any case, we can expect more homeless older adults, or at least more older adults at risk for homelessness.
In Minnesota, based on the most recent survey by Wilder Research, the majority of homeless adults are male; 44% of homeless males over age 55 are military veterans. About half of homeless older adults are persons of color, compared to about 10% of Minnesota's overall population.
The Wilder Research study found a number of differences between homeless adults over age 55 and those below that age. Older homeless adults are only half as likely to be working for pay; they more likely receive income from General Assistance, Social Security (old age benefits, disability insurance, and/or supplemental security income). Their monthly incomes tend to be higher than the incomes of younger homeless adults. Older homeless adults report more chronic health conditions that limit daily activities; in general, they have a greater level of physical and mental distress, compared to younger homeless adults.
In addressing homelessness, we need to understand that it can involve all ages, and different age groups can have different types of needs.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Social Determinants of Health
"Social Determinants of Health" Sounds complicated? Sounds like jargon? It's not, really. In fact, an excellent seminar yesterday, sponsored by Blue Cross/Blue Shield, shed light on how education, income, and the features of the places where we live literally add or subtract years from our lives.
For example, people who don't graduate from high school earn less during their lives than people with more education. You might expect that, but statistics show that they also more often suffer from obesity and cancer; they die at earlier ages. A major study in England, featured in a to-be-released PBS series, shows a strong and direct correlation between income (or social status) and health status and life expectancy.
In the past, we have tended to put emphasis on individual choices and behaviors as the factors that affect our health. If we choose to smoke, our health will suffer; if we choose to exercise, we will remain fit and less likely suffer from many chronic diseases. We have also recognized that we inherit some characteristics from our parents; as the New York Times reported today, commonly-available DNA testing will soon enable everyone to "learn what is known so far about how the billions of bits in their biological code shape who they are."
Our DNA, and the lifestyle choices we make, do influence our health. However, they might explain only a fourth or a third of the differences among people. The research summarized yesterday by Dr. Anthony Iton, suggests that individual choice might account for only 15-30% of the explanation for why some people stay healthier, and live longer, than others. It also showed strong differences in disease rates and life expectancy depending upon people's places of residence. Even within the same geographic areas (Alameda County CA was one example; Louisville KY was another.), residents living just a few miles from one another show great differences in health, in a very predictable pattern: neighborhoods with poorer, less educated residents, with worse housing, with higher levels of uncollected waste, live shorter, less healthy lives. And, this pattern does not just influence the lives and well-being of poor people. Residents of middle class neighborhoods can live 3-5 years less than residents of wealthier neighborhoods.
If you think that these issues do not apply in Minnesota, think again - and watch for data we will report in our Twin Cities Compass project. Disparities do exist. They have real effects, as you will see. The Brookings report, "Mind the Gap", sponsored by the Itasca Project identified disparities based on race, income, and place as some of the most significant challenges for the future vitality of our region.
It's immoral, in my opinion, that we should have these disparities. Total equality might not be possible, but we can certainly bring everyone to a minimum level of education, so they can participate in work life and civic life. We can certainly narrow the gaps to a minimum.
Perhaps the moral argument makes sense, but still does not sway you - consider the practical side. Health disparities affect you very directly. Health disparities cost you money right now, and they jeopardize your future well-being, regardless of your social status. People of color constitute the growing populations in our region. They make up the work force of the future, the parents of the future, the leaders of the future. If the up-and-coming part of our community is less healthy now, we all pay in the form of increased insurance costs and taxes; if they have poor health, and die earlier, in the future, we all lose the value of their productivity and the many contributions they can make to our society.
There is little doubt that we must understand the "social determinants of health" and address the disparities in our region, if we want our region to stand out internationally as one of the best places to live.
(Watch for the PBS documentary, Unnatural Causes, next year. Watch also for the TPT series on disparities in the Twin Cities region, and their effects on all of us. Twin Cities Compass and Wilder Research are partnering with the Itasca Project and TPT on education and follow-up activities for that series.)
For example, people who don't graduate from high school earn less during their lives than people with more education. You might expect that, but statistics show that they also more often suffer from obesity and cancer; they die at earlier ages. A major study in England, featured in a to-be-released PBS series, shows a strong and direct correlation between income (or social status) and health status and life expectancy.
In the past, we have tended to put emphasis on individual choices and behaviors as the factors that affect our health. If we choose to smoke, our health will suffer; if we choose to exercise, we will remain fit and less likely suffer from many chronic diseases. We have also recognized that we inherit some characteristics from our parents; as the New York Times reported today, commonly-available DNA testing will soon enable everyone to "learn what is known so far about how the billions of bits in their biological code shape who they are."
Our DNA, and the lifestyle choices we make, do influence our health. However, they might explain only a fourth or a third of the differences among people. The research summarized yesterday by Dr. Anthony Iton, suggests that individual choice might account for only 15-30% of the explanation for why some people stay healthier, and live longer, than others. It also showed strong differences in disease rates and life expectancy depending upon people's places of residence. Even within the same geographic areas (Alameda County CA was one example; Louisville KY was another.), residents living just a few miles from one another show great differences in health, in a very predictable pattern: neighborhoods with poorer, less educated residents, with worse housing, with higher levels of uncollected waste, live shorter, less healthy lives. And, this pattern does not just influence the lives and well-being of poor people. Residents of middle class neighborhoods can live 3-5 years less than residents of wealthier neighborhoods.
If you think that these issues do not apply in Minnesota, think again - and watch for data we will report in our Twin Cities Compass project. Disparities do exist. They have real effects, as you will see. The Brookings report, "Mind the Gap", sponsored by the Itasca Project identified disparities based on race, income, and place as some of the most significant challenges for the future vitality of our region.
It's immoral, in my opinion, that we should have these disparities. Total equality might not be possible, but we can certainly bring everyone to a minimum level of education, so they can participate in work life and civic life. We can certainly narrow the gaps to a minimum.
Perhaps the moral argument makes sense, but still does not sway you - consider the practical side. Health disparities affect you very directly. Health disparities cost you money right now, and they jeopardize your future well-being, regardless of your social status. People of color constitute the growing populations in our region. They make up the work force of the future, the parents of the future, the leaders of the future. If the up-and-coming part of our community is less healthy now, we all pay in the form of increased insurance costs and taxes; if they have poor health, and die earlier, in the future, we all lose the value of their productivity and the many contributions they can make to our society.
There is little doubt that we must understand the "social determinants of health" and address the disparities in our region, if we want our region to stand out internationally as one of the best places to live.
(Watch for the PBS documentary, Unnatural Causes, next year. Watch also for the TPT series on disparities in the Twin Cities region, and their effects on all of us. Twin Cities Compass and Wilder Research are partnering with the Itasca Project and TPT on education and follow-up activities for that series.)
Monday, November 12, 2007
Veterans Who Are Homeless
About one in four homeless men in Minnesota are military veterans. 600+ veterans live in shelters or on the street; most are men, but a few are women. Let's remember them on this Veterans Day.
Perhaps most tragic is that some of our veterans from the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts are among the homeless. Many in this country oppose the war, but regardless of our opinion about whether we should have our military in Iraq, it seems unconscionable that we can't care for those who so recently served their country in the military.
Wilder Research has conducted a statewide homeless study every few years since the early 1990s; we conducted it on a more limited level beginning in the early 1980s. Over the years, we witnessed increases in the number of homeless people, with especially large increases in the number of children. Evidence from our most recent study indicates that the total number of homeless people might have leveled off, or even declined slightly.
That's good news, if it holds up when we repeat the study in 2009. Nonetheless, we cannot rest on our laurels, even if we have really turned the tide. Work remains to be done.
Last week, the Minneapolis Foundation brought together hundreds of people concerned about homelessness. We looked at the Wilder study data; we listened to Housing Finance Agency Commissioner Tim Marx describe how we can take action. Paul Williams, Richard Amos, and Gabrielle Strong highlighted the practical issues that challenge us, along with homeless people themselves, if we want to solve this issue.
We look forward to continuing to shed light on homelessness. If our collaborative effort to end long-term homelessness succeeds, it will be testimony to the strength and the will of Minnesotans to show compassion for the vulnerable and to include in our economy and civic life all who want to make their homes here, but have run into a few extraordinary difficulties in doing so.
Perhaps most tragic is that some of our veterans from the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts are among the homeless. Many in this country oppose the war, but regardless of our opinion about whether we should have our military in Iraq, it seems unconscionable that we can't care for those who so recently served their country in the military.
Wilder Research has conducted a statewide homeless study every few years since the early 1990s; we conducted it on a more limited level beginning in the early 1980s. Over the years, we witnessed increases in the number of homeless people, with especially large increases in the number of children. Evidence from our most recent study indicates that the total number of homeless people might have leveled off, or even declined slightly.
That's good news, if it holds up when we repeat the study in 2009. Nonetheless, we cannot rest on our laurels, even if we have really turned the tide. Work remains to be done.
Last week, the Minneapolis Foundation brought together hundreds of people concerned about homelessness. We looked at the Wilder study data; we listened to Housing Finance Agency Commissioner Tim Marx describe how we can take action. Paul Williams, Richard Amos, and Gabrielle Strong highlighted the practical issues that challenge us, along with homeless people themselves, if we want to solve this issue.
We look forward to continuing to shed light on homelessness. If our collaborative effort to end long-term homelessness succeeds, it will be testimony to the strength and the will of Minnesotans to show compassion for the vulnerable and to include in our economy and civic life all who want to make their homes here, but have run into a few extraordinary difficulties in doing so.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Becoming a "Greener" and Stronger Community
Improving the well-being of our communities requires, obviously, that we address local issues and concerns. However, it also requires attention to national, international, and global issues. The quality of our environment, while it may seem like something over which we have little control, is one of those issues that relates fundamentally to our local quality of life. We need to do our part to preserve and enhance the environment.
For example, Wilder has a commitment to build an energy-efficient structure for our new Wilder Center at the corner of Lexington and University in Saint Paul. We hope to receive gold certification for the building; we'll be one of very few such buildings in the state, but hope that we are one of many over the next 10 years.
My annual visit to the Minnesota State Fair a month ago prompted me to wonder if we could make major progress toward a better environment through simple steps at public events like the Fair. Can the State Fair take visible action toward reducing waste and, through its example, educate Fair-goers, who will then increase their attention to environmentally friendly behavior?
One thing that struck me: the number of disposable items - cups, spoons, napkins, etc., -distributed by vendors, used by patrons for only a few minutes, and then discarded. Why not require that Fair-goers bring their own cups, or purchase one "souvenir cup" from the Fair, and then have vendors dispense portions into those cups? This could greatly reduce the 1,000 plus tons (2 million plus pounds) of garbage that the Pioneer Press reported the Fair produces. More important, though, it brings 125,000 people per day to realize that they should, and can, do their part for the environment.
Vaclav Havel, the author and a former president of the Czech Republic wrote recently that "Maybe we should consider our sojourn on earth as a loan. There can be no doubt that for the past hundred years at least, Europe and the United States have been running up a debt, and now other parts of the world are following their example. Nature is issuing a warning that we must not only stop the debt from growing but start to pay it back."
If all of us listen to nature's warning and do our small parts for the environment, the collective result will be very positive. We'll help the world, and we'll help the Twin Cities region!
For example, Wilder has a commitment to build an energy-efficient structure for our new Wilder Center at the corner of Lexington and University in Saint Paul. We hope to receive gold certification for the building; we'll be one of very few such buildings in the state, but hope that we are one of many over the next 10 years.
My annual visit to the Minnesota State Fair a month ago prompted me to wonder if we could make major progress toward a better environment through simple steps at public events like the Fair. Can the State Fair take visible action toward reducing waste and, through its example, educate Fair-goers, who will then increase their attention to environmentally friendly behavior?
One thing that struck me: the number of disposable items - cups, spoons, napkins, etc., -distributed by vendors, used by patrons for only a few minutes, and then discarded. Why not require that Fair-goers bring their own cups, or purchase one "souvenir cup" from the Fair, and then have vendors dispense portions into those cups? This could greatly reduce the 1,000 plus tons (2 million plus pounds) of garbage that the Pioneer Press reported the Fair produces. More important, though, it brings 125,000 people per day to realize that they should, and can, do their part for the environment.
Vaclav Havel, the author and a former president of the Czech Republic wrote recently that "Maybe we should consider our sojourn on earth as a loan. There can be no doubt that for the past hundred years at least, Europe and the United States have been running up a debt, and now other parts of the world are following their example. Nature is issuing a warning that we must not only stop the debt from growing but start to pay it back."
If all of us listen to nature's warning and do our small parts for the environment, the collective result will be very positive. We'll help the world, and we'll help the Twin Cities region!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)