When 25% (842) of the 3,430 students participating in the 2007 APPIC Match were not placed, the Editorial Team of Training and Education in Professional Psychology (TEPP) expressed considerable concern about the significant barrier that exists for a sizable number of students seeking internships. The numbers of unplaced applicants has increased significantly during the last few APPIC Matches (Keilin et al., this issue). Unfortunately, the TEPP Board does not anticipate that this anxiety-provoking trend will reverse or end. We believe that the profession of psychology should be more than concerned. We believe that they should take action. In an effort to provide a framework for discussion, the TEPP Board decided to offer those involved in this problematic situation an opportunity to (a) describe their view of the problem, (b) discuss the effect of the problem on students and the profession, and (c) provide suggestions to improve our internship system to deal with this crisis point in the sequence of psychology education. The TEPP Board invited the leadership from the following associations: Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC), American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS), Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs (CCPTP), Council of University Departments of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP), and National Council of Schools and Programs in Psychology (NCSPP) to provide a statement of their view of the problem and potential solutions. In addition, Dr. Greg Keilin, the APPIC Match Coordinator since its inception, was invited to provide an overview of the APPIC Match data and Drs. Ron Rozensky and Cynthia Belar were asked to provide an overview article based on the American Psychological Association’s Center for Workforce Analysis. The TEPP Editorial Board would like to thank these authors for contributing to this special issue and hopes that this issue of TEPP contributes to the national dialogue and the eventual solution of the internship logjam. After extensive discussion, the TEPP Editorial Board decided to provide their view of this supply and demand problem and some possible solutions. This editorial statement was a collaborative effort by the members of this board, who expressed a wide range of opinion about both the problem and the solutions. We hope that our view transcends our individual specialties and will serve as a model of communication that needs to occur in our profession to assist in the development of a consensus view of this match problem and its creative solutions.