In last week’s reader poll we asked which presidential candidate would best prepa
re America to care for its aging population. So far, 81 percent of readers have chosen Barack Obama.
Although neither candidate has provided a detailed plan for dealing with this crisis, Obama has at least acknowledged the significance of direct care work by walking a day in the shoes of home care worker Pauline Beck and by choosing to feature Beck as a speaker at his nominating convention.
Why do you think Obama is so heavily favored?
Are you a McCain supporter? Tell us why you think he would do a better job.
If you haven’t voted, the poll is still open.
Aaron Toleos, Online Communications Director
atoleos@phinational.org
This post is a perfect example of political stuff that doesn’t belong here. We could go on and on and debate for days, why each candidates positions would benefit or erode the work of direct care givers.
For what it’s worth, Hillary Clinton had the most comprehensive plan of them all. She included DCW in her platform- regarding education, training, skills and that sort of thing. Along with this, her plan also included pay and benefit possibilities.
Neither McCain nor Obama have such detailed statements.
Obama is supported because people believe he can change the economy. That’s up for debate.
McCain could potentially lower the quality of the workforce with his immigration positions- which are fact.
Obama shares these same positions, almost word for word. To me, both candidates offer nothing that would make this work better. If anything, they both threaten our elderly and disabled people by supporting immigration policies that will lower the standards and increase the problems.
Neither candidate deserves to be endorsed by stakeholders who have done their homework AND who can keep the personal political beliefs out of professional advocacy. Individual citizens vote for their candidate based on their own personal impressions and thoughts, perceived needs and political philosophies. Very few people base their vote on what is best for their work or career, least of all their professions.
PHI has always been an advocacy driven organization.
It seems this has changed.
It’s difficult to see the advocacy through the politics.
I am really disturbed at the tone of this post. Has PHI decided to push an agenda that shares the views of the Democrats? If so, I won’t be back here. I have little need or desire to read more polls, more rhetoric that is not useful to my work.
Patti,
Thank you for your comments. We started the PHI blog this year expressly for this purpose—to engage our readers in more conversation about how to improve the quality of direct-care jobs.
In recent weeks, we have covered the race for the presidency, because we believe that the election provides a context in which to raise the profile of our issue. We apologize for any pro-Obama bias you may have picked up–that was not our intention. We wanted to let readers know what the candidates were saying –- and to encourage themto visit the candidates’ websites and ask questions of their campaigns. In all of our posts, we’ve noted that neither candidate has addressed the crisis we face as a country—a demographic shift that could, without leadership, leave America unprepared to care for its growing numbers of elders and people with disabilities. Also, our blog posts bring new people to the PHI website where they can learn more about direct-care workforce issues.
PHI will continue to advocate for quality direct-care jobs by pushing for better public polices as well as through interventions such as improved training, opportunities for advancement, coaching supervision and peer mentoring. With the national election behind us, we will be pressing the new administration to take seriously the needs of America’s elders and the workers who care for them.