Hearings to examine seniors and the workforce.

1[Senate Hearing 119-417]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                      S. Hrg. 119-41756                          EXPERIENCE MATTERS:7                       SENIORS AND THE WORKFORCE8=======================================================================910                                HEARING1112                               BEFORE THE1314                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING1516                          UNITED STATES SENATE1718                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS1920                             SECOND SESSION2122                               __________2324                             WASHINGTON, DC2526                               __________2728                             MARCH 25, 20262930                               __________3132                           Serial No. 119-273334         Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging3536[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3738        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov3940                              __________4142                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4363-837 PDF                    WASHINGTON : 202644=======================================================================4546                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING4748                     RICK SCOTT, Florida, Chairman4950DAVE McCORMICK, Pennsylvania         KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York51JIM JUSTICE, West Virginia           ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts52TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama            MARK KELLY, Arizona53RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia54ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ANDY KIM, New Jersey55JON HUSTED, Ohio                     ANGELA ALSOBRO, soS, Maryland56                              ----------57                McKinley Lewis, Majority Staff Director58                Claire Descamps, Minority Staff Director5960                        C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S6162                              ----------6364                                                                   Page6566Opening Statement of Senator Rick Scott, Chairman................     167Opening Statement of Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, Ranking68  Member.........................................................     36970                           PANEL OF WITNESSES7172Rachel Greszler, Senior Research Fellow, Economics and Workforce,73  Advancing American Freedom, Washington, D.C....................     474Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., SHRM-SCP, President and CEO, SHRM,75  Alexandria, Virginia...........................................     676Jason Fichtner, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, National Academy of Social77  Insurance, Washington, D.C.....................................     878Dan Adcock, Director of Government Relations and Policy, National79  Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Washington,80  D.C............................................................    108182                                APPENDIX83                      Prepared Witness Statements8485Rachel Greszler, Senior Research Fellow, Economics and Workforce,86  Advancing American Freedom, Washington, D.C....................    3087Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., SHRM-SCP, President and CEO, SHRM,88  Alexandria, Virginia...........................................    4089Jason Fichtner, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, National Academy of Social90  Insurance, Washington, D.C.....................................    5591Dan Adcock, Director of Government Relations and Policy, National92  Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Washington,93  D.C............................................................    699495                        Questions for the Record9697Rachel Greszler, Senior Research Fellow, Economics and Workforce,98  Advancing American Freedom, Washington, D.C....................    7999Jason Fichtner, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, National Academy of Social100  Insurance, Washington, D.C.....................................    81101Dan Adcock, Director of Government Relations and Policy, National102  Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Washington,103  D.C............................................................    84104105                       Statements for the Record106107AARP Statement...................................................    90108Alliance for Retired Americans Statement.........................    97109American Psychological Association Statement.....................   100110Bipartisan Policy Center Statement...............................   106111Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Statement.............   112112SSA Office of the Inspector General Statement....................   113113114                          EXPERIENCE MATTERS:115                       SENIORS AND THE WORKFORCE116117                              ----------118119                       Wednesday, March 25, 2026120121                                        U.S. Senate122                                 Special Committee on Aging123                                                    Washington, DC.124    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:38 p.m., Room125216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Rick Scott, Chairman of126the Committee, presiding.127    Present: Senator Scott, Moody, Gillibrand, Warren, and Kim.128129                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR130                      RICK SCOTT, CHAIRMAN131132    The Chairman. The U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging133will now come to order. In December, this Committee highlighted134the positive impact that having a purpose and engaging with the135community has on older Americans.136    Witnesses shared powerful testimonies and firsthand137accounts about how staying engaged, whether through138volunteering, mentoring, or taking on new responsibilities,139helps seniors live a happier, healthier life with a renewed140purpose and goal for their next chapter. Not only is this kind141of activity enriching and beneficial to seniors, but also it142helps their communities too.143    In our December hearing, we just spoke about the many, many144ways older Americans strengthen the U.S. economy, thanks to the145expertise and perspective they bring to the job. The truth is146that retirement doesn't have to be the end of one's career. For147many, it is the start of a new, purpose driven chapter in their148lives.149    Seniors can and should use this time to chase and reach new150goals and dreams. Maybe try the new hobby they hadn't had time151for in the past. Start a business doing odd jobs around their152neighborhood. Volunteer at their church, or even substitute153teach at their grandkids' school.154    In all of these things and more, seniors offer valuable155insight because they have lived a full life of experiences and156knowledge that can be passed on to the next generation.157However, in that hearing, witnesses also shared some of the158challenges members of our aging community face when their goals159and dreams involve continuing to work, or if they are going160back to work full or part time.161    In today's hearing, we will look more closely at what these162challenges are and how Government is making it worse. The fact163is, there are laws on the books that penalize older workers164unfairly. The Retirement Earnings Test is one of them. This165test punishes workers between the ages of 62 and 66 who start166to claim their benefits, benefits they are absolutely entitled167to and have earned.168    It essentially takes $1 of their benefits away for every $2169they earn once their income hits $24,000 a year. The retirement170earning test was passed during the Great Depression171specifically to push older Americans out of the workforce and172free up more jobs for younger Americans but as we are all173aware, it is not the 1930's anymore, and we shouldn't expect174our seniors to be punished today by outdated policies passed175then. Aging Americans deserve better.176    That is why I have introduced the Senior Citizens Freedom177to Work Act, along with my friend and fellow committee member,178Senator Tuberville. Our bill will get rid of the unfair179Retirement Earnings Test so that seniors who want to stay in180the workforce can do so without being punished or robbed of181their hard-earned benefits but we need to do more than that.182    Even if we get the RET repealed, seniors still face183mountains of administrative red tape to get information on how184their benefits are impacted by--when they retire. The same red185tape also makes it hard for seniors to decide when they should186start withdrawing their benefits. Many Americans don't realize187that when they start withdrawing could actually impact how much188they will be entitled to.189    This not only affects our seniors retiring today, but all190Americans who are actively planning for their future. We191shouldn't be making it more difficult for our seniors or future192seniors to find the information they need to make the best193choices for themselves and their families. We should make it194easy, straightforward, and transparent so all Americans can195make the decisions as they plan for retirement.196    That is why I co-sponsored the Claiming Age Clarity Act,197which also has the support of two of my colleagues on this198Committee, Ranking Member Gillibrand and Senator Warnock. This199bill would give seniors better and more straightforward200information about how their Social Security benefits change201based on when they retire and when they start claiming their202hard-earned benefits.203    The fact is workers aged 55 or older have been the fastest204growing age group in the labor force for more than two decades.205In 1994, they made up just 10 percent of the workforce. In2062022, 24 percent. People are living longer, staying healthier,207and wanting to keep working and giving back to their208communities and pursuing new goals and challenges. If our209seniors want to stay at work, we should be empowering them and210giving them all the information they need so they know what211that means for their future.212    It is not the government's job to tell Americans when they213should stop working or when they should claim their benefits214and it is definitely not the Governments' role to punish those215who want to continue their careers later in life. Government216should be working for our aging population, not against it. We217should be giving our seniors transparent information and ample218freedom to choose what is best for them.219    We should not penalize hard-working Americans for220continuing to work after they reach retirement age. Because at221the end of the day, it is older Americans who bring the222experience and expertise necessary to get the job done.223    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about224how we can get Government out of the way, inject transparency,225and make seniors have the information and freedom they need to226make their later years their best years. Now I will turn it227over to Ranking Member Gillibrand.228229                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR230             KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, RANKING MEMBER231232    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That was very233well said. I appreciate your hearing--calling this hearing234today, and I would like to extend a special thank you to our235witnesses for sharing your stories, expertise, and knowledge236with us today. We can't make these decisions without the input237from our constituents and smart experts like you, so we are238very grateful for the collaboration.239    As mentioned by the Chairman, when we look at the U.S.240census demographic data, approximately 65 million Americans, or241nearly 20 percent of the Nation's population, are currently242over the age of 65, and that population is continuing to grow.243By 2040, we expect one in five Americans will be 65.244    The U.S. workforce is rapidly changing. According to GAO,245older workers now represent nearly a quarter of our total246workforce, a growing share that reflects broader demographic247shifts but for that reason, we must evaluate our programs. We248have to evaluate our rules and our laws, and make sure that249both employees and workers can navigate today's environment.250    Since the 1930's, Social Security has provided the251financial security to retirees and protected individuals252against risks like disability and death. Today, 74 million253Americans rely on Social Security benefits, and 184 workers pay254into the system. One of the biggest retirement decisions255Americans make is when to claim their Social Security.256    That decision gets even more complex for seniors257considering collecting Social Security while also working,258particularly because of the program's Retirement Earnings Test.259Certainly, there are lessons to be learned from the successful260bipartisan reform in 2000, while the congressional record also261points to budgetary and poverty issues that we also have to262evaluate.263    Rising costs are forcing many older adults across the264country to remain employed or to consider returning to work.265For many, this is not a life choice but is--it is not a266lifestyle choice. It is an economic necessity driven by the267skyrocketing cost of healthcare, housing, groceries, and268utilities and when these individuals decide to reenter the269workforce, they can face real barriers like age discrimination,270the need to develop new skills, and other challenges that make271it harder for older adults to live financially secure,272independent lives.273    These individuals, like all Americans, deserve seamless274access to the Social Security Administration but my275constituents are telling me otherwise. They report long wait276times, both on the phone and for in-person appointments,277difficulty finding out whether field offices are even open, and278significant delays in obtaining those answers. This is279happening at an agency that has cut nearly 7,000 staff since280the start of 2025, marking the largest workforce reduction in281the Social Security Administration history.282    I will continue to fight on behalf of my constituents for283an agency that functions well, treats its workers fairly, and284provides employees the training they need to properly serve the285American people. There are many solutions that Congress can286undertake to support our seniors' economic resilience.287    I am also committed to strengthening--I am also committed288to strengthening and protecting Social Security while also289supporting older adults in the workforce by banning forced290arbitration in cases of age discrimination, which can be291achieved through a bill I have, the Protecting Older Americans292Act.293    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about our294Nation's work and retirement landscape. Thank you, Mr.295Chairman.296    The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Gillibrand. That is297awesome. Great to work with you. I would like to welcome our298witnesses to today's hearing. They are experts in workforce and299retirement policy and are here to discuss the important role300older Americans play in today's workforce. First, I would like301to introduce Rachel Greszler.302    Rachel is a Senior Research Fellow in the Plymouth303Institute for Free Enterprise and Advancing American Freedom,304AAF, and a Visiting Fellow in Workforce at the Economic Policy305Innovation Center. Prior to joining AAF, she spent 12 years as306a Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and307previously served for seven years as Senior Economist on the308staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress.309    She is recognized as an economic expert in workforce,310Social Security, pensions, family policy, fiscal policy. I want311to thank you for being here for the third time. Your expertise312is clearly very much appreciated here. Please begin your313testimony. Nice to see you.314315         STATEMENT OF RACHEL GRESZLER, SENIOR RESEARCH316317           FELLOW, ECONOMICS AND WORKFORCE, ADVANCING318319               AMERICAN FREEDOM, WASHINGTON, D.C.320321    Ms. Greszler. Thank you, Chairman Scott and Ranking Member322Gillibrand for the opportunity to be here today. In my323testimony I would like to review the role of older Americans in324the workforce, and then explain a simple and pro-growth325proposal to support instead of penalize older working326Americans.327    Older workers are the fastest growing segment of the labor328force accounting for three-quarters of total employment growth329since 2000. While part of this rise is due to the sheer number330of the aging Baby Boomers, older Americans' labor force331participation rates have increased six percentage points, even332as younger people's participation rates have declined.333    Today's seniors are redefining what retirement looks like.334Rather than a one-time permanent exit from the workforce, about335half of Americans are choosing non-traditional retirement336paths, including transitioning to more flexible part-time or337independent work, as well as un-retiring, by coming back into338the workforce after an initial exit. This shift reflects new339opportunities and changing preferences.340    Americans are living longer, healthier lives, and many want341to remain engaged and productive and doing so provides342physical, mental, and financial benefits. At the same time,343flexible and independent work arrangements have made it easier344for older Americans to continue working in the ways that work345for them.346    Older workers' positive contributions cannot be347understated, especially amidst cultural shifts that cry out for348older generations to impart their wisdom, experience, and349resilience to younger generations. Yet certain Government350policies make it harder for seniors who want to continue351working to do so.352    One policy in particular directly penalizes them. That is353Social Security's Retirement Earnings Test, which is a relic of354the Great Depression when policymakers wanted to push older355Americans out of the workforce to try to free up jobs for356younger workers. Today, we want and need older workers. While357the Retirement Earnings Test is little known and often358misunderstood, it functions like an initial 50 percent tax.359    For individuals who first claim Social Security benefits360before their normal retirement age, which is going to be 67361next year--and this is what most people do to claim benefits362early--they lose $1 in benefits for every $2 that they earn363over the limit of about $24,500 per year.364    This results in, for example, a marginal tax rate of 74365percent for somebody who is making $29,000, and a marginal366taxpayer 84 percent for somebody who is making $70,000. Not367surprisingly, studies show that this causes people to work less368and earn less than they would otherwise choose.369    While those lost benefits are gradually added back into370recipients' monthly checks after they reach the full retirement371age, most people don't know that, and they perceive the test as372a pure tax and subsequently reduce their earnings or stop373working altogether. Moreover, individuals with lower life374expectancies typically don't recoup all or sometimes any of375those loss benefits.376    The earnings test is also confusing for seniors, and it377costs the Social Security Administration $70 million per year378to administer, and this includes hundreds of thousands of379improper payments issued through it.380    Now, if somebody wants to stop working at age 62, that381should be their choice but unlike their Great Depression era382counterparts, today's older workers shouldn't be ushered into383an early exit by an outdated Social Security provision. Ending384Social Security's Retirement Earnings Test, as Senator Scott's385Senior Citizens Freedom to Work Act of 2026 would do, is a win-386win.387    In addition to erasing confusion and administrative388burdens, I estimate that it would add up to one million workers389to the labor force and increase personal income by up to $66390billion per year. That extra work and earnings would generate391up to $18 billion in annual tax revenues, including an392additional $8 billion per year for Social Security, which would393modestly extend the program's solvency.394    The last time that Congress addressed the Retirement395Earnings Test by eliminating it for everybody above the full396retirement age, the bill passed with 100 percent bipartisan397support and now that the retirement age is almost 67, it is398affecting millions more seniors.399    Americans of all ages should have the freedom to work, and400Social Security recipients should not have their benefits taken401away because they are positively contributing to the workforce.402In summary, many older Americans are already leading the way403with their continued contributions.404    Policymakers should clear the path for current and future405seniors to remain engaged by removing outdated barriers and406supporting flexible work. Ending the Retirement Earnings Test407is a practical and pro-growth place to start. Thank you.408    The Chairman. Thank you, Rachel. Thanks for being back.409Okay, next we have Johnny Taylor. He is the President and Chief410Executive Officer of the Society for Human Resources411Management.412    His career spans more than 20 years as a lawyer, human413rights--human resources executive, and CEO in both the not-for-414profit and for-profit spaces. Thanks for be here. Please begin415your testimony.416417              STATEMENT OF JOHNNY C. TAYLOR, JR.,418419               SHRM-SCP, PRESIDENT AND CEO, SHRM,420421                      ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA422423    Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Chairman Scott and Ranking Member424Gillibrand. Thank you for this opportunity to testify today.425Let me begin with a sort of simple reality, America's workforce426is changing. We have all talked about it. The fact of the427matter is we know it. You have pointed out that in 1994, about42812 percent of Americans in the workforce were age 65 and older.429    Today, that is closer to 20 percent. We also know a430shocking stat, that I often tell people, that the fastest431growing segment of the U.S. workforce are people 75 and older.432Not just 65--75 and older, albeit on a smaller base, but the433fact of the matter is people are working longer, much longer434and this is not a temporary trend. It is a structural shift,435and it requires us to rethink how we approach work and436retirement. First, as you have all pointed out, this is good437for people.438    At SHRM, where we represent approximately 340,000 members439across the country in every industry, we are seeing a clear440shift. People are not just working longer because they have441to--there are some--but they are working longer because they442want to. Because work provides more than a paycheck. It443provides purpose, as you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, and444connection.445    Research consistently shows that older adults who remain446engaged in work, they experience better mental and physical447health outcomes, including lower rates of depression and448stronger cognitive function. Why? Because work keeps people449connected and engaged so when we talk about extending workforce450participation, we are not just talking about economics.451    We are talking about quality of life and dignity. Second,452this is sort of good for employers, really good for employees.453Latest JOLTS report says we have 6.9 million open jobs in454America. Nearly seven in ten organizations report difficulty455filling roles, and yet one of the most capable talent pools in456America is often overlooked, experienced workers.457    At the SHRM Foundation, our philanthropic arm, we call this458untapped talent--skilled individuals, including older workers,459who are often overlooked, and we actually need them in the460workplace. This is not just a social good, it is a business461advantage.462    Research shows that companies with more workers over age 50463are more productive, believe it or not. In fact, increasing the464share of workers aged 50 and older by just 10 percent is465associated with a 1.1 percent gain in productivity,466contributing to stronger economic growth and higher GDP per467capita and SHRM data reinforces this.468    Over 80 percent of H.R. professionals say older workers469bring exceptional reliability and expertise, and more than 90470percent--and by the way, you don't get 90 percent of H.R.471people to agree on anything--say they perform as well or better472than other employees. Now, in a labor market defined by473uncertainty, experienced workers provide consistency, judgment,474and stability.475    We are already seeing what this looks like in practice. At476Publix, a Florida based company, where I am a Floridian--a 95-477year-old associate that works alongside colleagues of all ages.478That gentleman is helping model service and mentorship that479strengthens the entire team and at MasterCard in New York,480reverse mentoring programs pair younger employees with senior481leaders, creating a two way learning that blends experience482with new perspectives.483    My friends, these are not exceptions. They are signals of484what is possible when we treat experience as an asset but our485systems simply have not kept up and you have heard this a lot.486Too often, workplace practices and policies still reflect487outdated assumptions that retirement is a single moment, that488contribution declines with age.489    Today's workers want flexibility. They want phased490retirement and opportunities to continue contributing in ways491that fit their lives and when we don't provide these options,492we are not just timing individuals or limiting individuals. We493are limiting our economy and that is why this alignment494matters.495    Let me close with this. The talent is here, the experience496is proven, and the opportunity is ours to unlock. If we support497flexibility, invest in lifelong learning, and remove barriers498to continued work, we strengthen both our workforce and our499economy, because in America, talent does not expire, it500evolves. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.501    The Chairman. Good job. Thanks for being here. Publix is a502great company.503    Mr. Taylor. Yes, it is. Great State of Florida.504    Senator Gillibrand. We love Publix in Florida.505    The Chairman. Yes. I think it is our--yes, it is clearly506our biggest employer now.507    Mr. Taylor. That is right.508    The Chairman. Yes. All right, our next witness, Dr. Jason509Fichtner. He is the Executive Director of the LIMRA Retirement510Income Institute, previously served as the Acting Deputy511commissioner of the Social Security Administration--a nice,512easy job--and their Chief Economist.513    His area of expertise focused on Social Security, federal514tax policy, federal budget policy, retirement security, and515policy proposals to increase saving and investment. Thanks for516being here. Please begin your testimony.517518           STATEMENT OF JASON FICHTNER, PH.D, SENIOR519520                  FELLOW, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF521522               SOCIAL INSURANCE, WASHINGTON, D.C.523524    Dr. Fichtner. Good afternoon, Chairman Scott, Ranking525Member Gillibrand. Thank you for inviting me to testify today.526Again, my name is Jason Fichtner. I am also a Senior Fellow at527the National Academy of Social Insurance, as well as a Senior528Policy Fellow at The Center for Social Development at the Brown529School of Washington University in St. Louis.530    As Chairman Scott mentioned, the Executive Director of the531LIMRA Retirement Institute. I am also on the Board of Directors532for the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, and a Member of533the Puerto Rico Pension Reserve Trust, where I serve on both534the Pension Benefits Council and the Pension Reserve Board and535as mentioned, I previously served in several positions at the536Social Security Administration, including the Deputy537Commissioner of Social Security and Chief Economist. All538opinions I express today are my own and do not necessarily539reflect the views of any organization with which I am540affiliated.541    I want to also thank Chairman Scott and Ranking Member542Gillibrand for your leadership in ensuring that important543public policy issues involving aging and Social Security get544the attention and the debate they deserve, and that ideas and545viewpoints from all sides are aired in a collegial, productive,546and respectful manner. It is truly a privilege for me to547testify before this Committee today.548    My testimony today focuses primarily on the importance of549reducing confusion around the Social Security Claiming Decision550related to Retirement Earnings Test, or RET, and the551nomenclature that Social Security Administration uses to552describe the various ages at which a beneficiary can claim553retirement benefits. One of the key financial decisions facing554older Americans is when to claim Social Security retirement555benefits, as Ranking Member Gillibrand mentioned.556    In fact, when to claim Social Security may be the most557important retirement decision someone will make. While these558benefits are available as early as age 62, claiming later559permanently raises monthly benefits, with the maximum benefit560available to those who claim at age 70. Delaying claiming is561thus equivalent to purchasing a greater inflation adjusted562annuity that will be paid for as long as the beneficiary lives.563    Most people, however, do not claim Social Security at their564optimal age, usually because they claim too early. Research565demonstrates that many people lack the financial education and566understanding to make complex financial decisions, including567about risks in retirement. The information people receive and568the form it takes can also influence how people make financial569choices.570    For example, with respect to the claiming decision, people571act differently to the framing of age 62 as the early572eligibility age than they would if we framed claiming at age 62573as a penalty that results in lower monthly benefits for the574rest of your life. In 2008, when I was at SSA, and based on575research, we removed the so called break even analysis from use576by claims representatives when talking to the public about when577to claim Social Security because we recognized that the framing578was potentially biasing people toward early claiming.579    We want the public to have necessary information education580presented--sorry, necessary information education presented in581a manner so that they can make informed decisions. We changed582this because it was very important. As provided in detail in my583written testimony, I hope to lead the Committee with the584following takeaways.585    First, the Retirement Earnings Test is overly confusing and586should be eliminated or at least rebranded to better educate587the public about its rules to clear up considerable confusion588about the relationships between working and claiming retirement589benefits. Second, the official names of claiming ages that SSA590uses should be changed to better reflect the implications of591claiming decisions.592    For example, SSA could rename the early eligibility age,593the minimum monthly benefit age, and age 70 as the maximum594monthly benefit age. Third, when thinking about framing, a595phrase I would like for retirement security is, "income is the596outcome."597    We need to modernize the traditional three-legged stool to598bring the concept into the current age by focusing on how we599can promote additional income in retirement, which includes600reducing barriers for those who want and are able to continue601doing so and working in their later years.602    Along with reducing confusion in the Social Security603claiming decision, this includes reducing the barriers for604seniors to continue working in the later years. Fundamentally,605claiming Social Security does not mean one needs to stop606working, nor does stopping work mean one must claim Social607Security at the same time. Many people will either want or need608to continue working and saving into their later years.609    Public policy should be designed to allow them to do so.610Thank you again for providing me with the opportunity to611testify today, and I look forward to answering your questions.612    The Chairman. Thanks for being here. Let me turn it over to613Senator Kim to introduce the next witness.614    Senator Kim. Yes. Thank you, Chairman Scott. I want to move615to introduce our next witness, Dan Adcock. Mr. Adcock is the616Director of Government Relations and Policy for the National617Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. Previously,618Mr. Adcock served as Legislative Director at the National619Active and Retired Federal Employees Association.620    During his time there in September 2000, he helped to621create the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program and622advocated on behalf of beneficiaries enrolled in the Social623Security, Medicare, and Medicaid programs.624    Mr. Adcock also served as a Professional Staff Member with625the House Committee on Education and Labor, where he helped626write the 1992 Reauthorization of the Older Americans Act. Mr.627Adcock, you may begin your testimony.628629              STATEMENT OF DAN ADCOCK, DIRECTOR OF630631           GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND POLICY, NATIONAL632633             COMMITTEE TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY634635                 AND MEDICARE, WASHINGTON, D.C.636637    Mr. Adcock. Thank you. Dear Chairman Scott and Ranking638Member Gillibrand, thank you for inviting the National639Committee to testify for you today. Max Richmond is sorry he640could not join you, particularly because he was a Staff641Director of this Committee, and because he worked closely on642the Senior Citizens Freedom to Work Act with Senator John643McCain leading up to its enactment in 2000.644    Workforce participation depends on the older worker's645health, but it is also influenced by their financial646circumstances, the availability of jobs, and the willingness of647employers to invest in older workers.648    Congress must remove impediments older workers confront649when deciding whether to continue work, while ensuring any650changes do not inadvertently force seniors into the workforce651because they simply cannot afford to retire. One piece of this652puzzle is repealing the Retirement Earnings Test.653    The National Committee supports Chairman Scott's repeal654legislation in concept. However, before Congress enacts such a655major change to Social Security, we believe this Committee656should carefully explore three basic questions.657    Number one, will everyone benefit from repealing the RET?658If some workers end up worse off, are there ways to mitigate659the financial impacts on these workers and their families?660Number two, will repealing the RET actually increase the661participation of older Americans in the workforce, or are there662other legislative changes that should be to advance this goal.663    Number three, what will the impact of repealing the RET be664on the Social Security Administration's ability to implement665the change, and on the solvency of the Social Security trust666funds? I know from attending town halls with seniors that667repealing RET would be extremely popular.668    After the last repeal of the RET in 2000 for claimants who669reached the full retirement age, I know that many seniors who670were not covered by the law complained that they had been left671out. In part, this is because the RET is extremely complicated672and tends to induce fear and uncertainty.673    Many seniors don't realize that Social Security benefits674withheld under the RET are later returned to them through675higher monthly payments for the rest of their lives. Those who676don't know about this feature of the RET may find it difficult677to fully weigh the impact on their own family's finances. For678Congress, it is this element of the RET that contributes to the679challenge of projecting the positive and negative impacts of680the RET repeal legislation. While we hope the repeal of the RET681will increase older worker employment, that won't happen if682employers continue to discriminate in hiring based on age.683    That is what this Committee found at your September 3, 2025684hearing. To address this challenge, you focused on bipartisan685legislation, S. 2703, the Protecting Older Workers--Older686Americans Act of 2025, which the National Committee supports.687This bill would eliminate the current practice of employers688utilizing forced arbitration to resolve age discrimination689complaints, which would shift some of the leverage in these690claims back to the workers.691    The National Committee is also concerned about the Social692Security Administration's ability to implement the RET repeal693since the agency has undergone a dramatic downsizing as a694result of DOGE inspired staff cuts. In the short term, SSA will695be required to modify its computer programs to reflect the696elimination of the RET's impact on early retirement reductions.697The education piece of an RET repeal is especially important to698help beneficiaries make good decisions about when to claim699retirement benefits.700    We urge you to ensure that SSA has enough additional701resources to do this work, so it is not forced to shift702resources from its other operations, which are already severely703underfunded.704    Finally, we know from former Social Security Chief Actuary,705Stephen Goss that RET repeal will ultimately reduce trust fund706costs, but we are concerned how paying more benefits shortly707after the RET appeal is enacted would affect Social Security's708solvency when reserves are expected to be depleted by 2034.709    The question needs to be answered before repeal receives710serious consideration. In conclusion, I want to thank you again711for holding this hearing--this important hearing and for712inviting me to testify. Thank you.713    The Chairman. Thanks for being here. Thanks for your714testimony. Now we will get to questions. Rachel, the Retirement715Earnings Test was originally designed to help younger Americans716get jobs when unemployment ran rampant during the Great717Depression. Does that make sense to keep in place now nearly718100 years later?719    Ms. Greszler. No, it doesn't make sense anymore as we are720needing more workers and more producers and even that original721thought was a little bit flawed to begin with, because you722actually want more workers to produce more to generate more723demand, so on both ends, that should have not been the policy724to begin.725    Absolutely today, not only do we want more people working.726We need more people working. By 2034, there will be more727seniors in the U.S. than there are children for the first time728in U.S. history and so, we need those older workers.729    The Chairman. Mr. Taylor, you have written extensively on730the value that older Americans bring to the workforce. What are731you hearing from employers? Are they trying to recruit and732retain older workers, or is there still quite a barrier of age733discrimination?734    Mr. Taylor. There is no question that ageism is alive and735well and unfortunately, or fortunately I should say, during the736post-COVID period, when unemployment was sub two percent in737some states, we didn't see as much rampant ageism because we738needed the talent.739    We continue to need the talent. That being said, there are740still certain barriers. We have got to work on changing the741language, as you have described in many ways--how we speak742about older employees.743    That continues. There is a built-in narrative that it is744time for you to move on. There is a perception amongst younger745workers that you are keeping me from my next opportunity746because you won't move on, so there is an inherent intention747that is----748    The Chairman. That never happens in politics. Never749happens----750    Mr. Taylor. As a result, that really does present some real751tensions--some significant problems in the workplace. Younger752employees want their next shot, and the older employee isn't753moving on, so what we are trying to do is describe these754diverse mentoring programs, opportunities for people to take on755part-time roles, which older employees are willing to do,756especially if you solve for the RET challenges.757    We think we can solve this. The other big challenge is758flexible work. What we need increasingly, because of worker759productivity and lower worker participation rates, we need760older workers in the workplace and so, there is not as much of761a barrier as there has been when it comes to ageism, but it is762alive and well for people who have their own biases.763    The Chairman. That makes sense. Now whenever you are going764to run for re-election, everybody wants to run for your office.765They want you to move on. They have something else for you.766    Mr. Taylor. That is right.767    The Chairman. Mr. Fichtner, there is a problem with how the768Retirement Earnings Test is discussed with beneficiaries. It is769complex and not very transparent. What does research show about770how well older Americans actually understand these rules?771    Mr. Fichtner. It is a great question, Senator and as you772guessed, it does not--the research shows they don't understand773it very much at all. In fact, they are confused what the RET774is. They hear retirement earnings, and they hear tax, not test775and that discourages work, as Rachel Greszler pointed out in776her testimony, and you mentioned your opening statements.777    What is interesting, and this is also what my colleague778mentioned, that people hear this, and then they see this idea779that money is being taken out of their Social Security check,780so they actually then think it is a tax. They don't understand,781potentially, they might get it back and that, technically, it782is actuarially neutral but no one likes to hear, well it is783actually neutral.784    We will take it out today and give it back to you tomorrow.785No one likes that idea, so it discourages work. We are not sure786the research shows why it actually--if people are not working787because they are confused about it, or if they just don't want788to work. If they do want to work and then claim Social789Security.790    The language we are using we know is confusing, Senator and791that is why we very much want to change the language on the792Claiming Act and also get rid of the Retirement Earnings Test.793    The Chairman. Makes sense. Mr. Adcock, how can employers794better recognize and leverage the experience and institutional795knowledge that older workers bring?796    Mr. Adcock. Well, I think it is kind of a mixed bag. I797think that especially with workers who are professionals and798who are white collar jobs, I think at minimum they are in tune799to the idea of trying to bring people back and value that800bringing back older workers and the experience they have.801    Also being flexible about how they bring them back, because802some workers may not want to work full time. They may want to803have a glide path toward retirement, so maybe for five years,804they want to work part time or as a consultant and I think if805employers do that, I think that is the case.806    I think where it becomes very challenging is blue collar807jobs, where people are physically not able to work any longer,808or employers don't perceive that they have that ability and are809reluctant to keep them on.810    I don't know that a lot of that is happening in that811particular part of employment but certainly, if workers are812physically able to do it and can, they should.813    The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Taylor, you lead an814organization that represents hundreds of thousands of H.R.815professionals from basically every sector of the economy. Your816organization sets the standards for how employers think about817talent. Is there more that can be done to improve how we treat818workers over 60 to help them be viewed as an asset rather than819a problem?820    Mr. Taylor. Yes, Mr. Chairman. There are three things in821particular. One, screening practices, such as focusing on822graduation dates and people's resumes. You are talking about an823obvious way to commit ageism without leaving a trace of it, is824you look simply at a resume, and you can do the math and825conclude the age of a person.826    We are advocating for individuals to actually exclude827graduation rates from their resumes. That is something828employers can do. Second, coded language that we use, like829digital native or fast paced environment, words that suggest we830are looking for younger people without saying younger people831explicitly, which would violate, obviously, ADA and other laws,832local and state laws.833    Then excluding older workers from upskilling opportunities.834There is this really interesting practice that we had835historically, which was we provide a lot of training and836development opportunities for newer workers and then when you837hit about 55, we stopped sending you to training because you838were on the other side of your career.839    What we are saying is employers have got to be more mindful840about the idea that you might actually provide training841opportunities specifically in this AI world for older workers,842so you are not messaging to them that they have outlived their843shelf life.844    The Chairman. Senator Kim.845    Senator Kim. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you all for coming846out here. Mr. Adcock, I would like to start with you. I847recently became now a caregiver for my own father, and I know848one in every four Americans currently serve as a caregiver849providing uncompensated care to a family member.850    Many individuals who are caring for their family members851are forced to either choose to leave a job or choose to figure852out how they can do that and balance it in terms of taking care853of their loved one and depending on when the caretaker leaves--854a caregiver who believes a workforce, this can often855shortchange Social Security benefits.856    There are other also increased challenges for older857caregivers who are living on Social Security alone upon858retiring. In either scenario, it is often the case that859benefits are often not enough to get past daily expenses, let860alone expenses associated with caregiving.861    I guess I just wanted to ask you, as we are considering862solutions that could better reflect the work lives of863Americans, how could we reimagine Social Security to capture864the needs of caregivers in our society?865    Mr. Adcock. Thanks, Senator Kim. I agree, that is a great866question. First, for somebody who is still working, I know that867when we talk about a more broad picture of Social Security868reform, one of the things that we support, the National869Committee, is that there be a Social Security caregiver credit.870    Because if you are leaving the workforce to care for either871a child or an elderly parent, it means for every year that you872are out of the workforce, your Social Security record is873reducing your Social Security benefit for the future.874    Legislation has been introduced in the past, which would875provide basically a proxy for the time someone left the876workforce while caregiving to enable them to have a higher877Social Security benefit than they otherwise would.878    That is one thing I would do. I think once somebody has879retired and is on Social Security benefits, I think that is a880harder-to crack. I mean, obviously, with regard to Social881Security itself. That is why we, you know, obviously as an882organization, we are concerned more than just about Social883Security, about Medicare and Medicaid and the Old Americans884Act.885    Those programs, various of those programs have various886supports for caregivers that we think are really essential and887need to be beefed up, especially home and community based care888that the Medicaid program provides and ensure that that program889is there for the long haul, and that the Old American Act also890is enabled to provide family caregiver support, which it has891inadequately been funded in the past and it needs to be fully892funded.893    Senator Kim. Yes. As you said, there are different894scenarios in which this happened and for instance, you know, we895have been talking to people that are caregivers who claim896Social Security benefits early due to their caregiving related897income loss.898    I guess the question that we are trying to think through,899how do we make sure that they are not structurally900disadvantaged in the long term, you know, when it comes to, you901know, being under Social Security policy? What you raised are902important questions that I think a number of different903scenarios that are out there--and I think it would be good for904our Committee, as well as broadly here in Congress, be thinking905through those different scenarios.906    Mr. Taylor, I would like to just turn to you. Just kind of907building off of some of the questions that the chairman asked908about--you know, about older Americans who want to be able to909continue on to work and just thinking through, you know, what910kind of policy should we be considering and pursuing here at911the federal level to advance accommodations or flexible912solutions that could increase workplace accessibility for older913Americans.914    You know, you talked about some of these different ideas915that are out there, including some of the, you know, the916language side of things. I am just wondering if there are917certain tactics or tools that you have seen, or opportunities918for policies that you think are ones that we should be919considering from a legislative standpoint.920    Mr. Taylor. Senator, our belief in SHRM is that from a921private employer perspective, that there are sufficient922legislative policies in place to address age discrimination.923    Frankly, employers are best positioned, as it stands, to924audit themselves, looking at hiring and talent practices, to925remove biased language, for example, from job descriptions and926postings, to ensure equal access to training and development927opportunities, as I mentioned earlier. Frankly, there is not a928sense that any piece of additional legislation or policy is929going to solve for that.930    Employers need the talent. They are convinced of it. We are931past the day of saying that, you know, people have outlived932their value to us. What we have got to do is just be very933intentional about ensuring that our practices don't934unintentionally exclude people from the workforce because of935their age.936    Senator Kim. Yes. Thank you. With that, I yield back.937    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. Senator Moody.938    Senator Moody. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you so much to939our witnesses for being here today. We really appreciate it. In940Florida, as you know, we have a very large senior population. I941think that is growing. Some people refer to it as a silver942tsunami, which I love.943    I think a large driver of that--you know, I want to say944over 50 percent of returning seniors to work talk about extra945money and I think it is--in Florida, thankfully, we have a946thriving state, very easy to start a business, number one, in947entrepreneurship--new business formations, we rank high in the948Nation. A lot of opportunities. You know, I want to better949understand what the impediments are if someone wants to go back950and work in their senior years, what those impediments are.951    I want to understand how we might be able to as lawmakers952address current law to allow for that, so they don't fit--they953don't feel bound in order to receive their Social Security954benefits or other benefits. They don't feel bound to not955working because they--if they make more money, they won't be956able to receive those earned benefits over the course of their957life.958    I think that is wrong and we need to fix it, because we959know that this has become--going to become more and more of a960problem. I think by 2030, all baby boomers will be over the age961of 65. My office staff keeps thinking that I am a baby boomer,962and I keep assuring them that I am not but I think, by 2034,963seniors will outnumber children for the first----964    [Laughter.]965    It is true, oh, Senior Senator of mine from Florida. By9662034, seniors will outnumber children for the first time in967U.S. history. I want to get it right before then.968    I want to start working on that now. I am so grateful--our969chairman, I think this has been the most active Aging Committee970maybe in the history. It makes sense since we have a chairman971from Florida. We know that more and more workers over age 65972are coming into the employment sector, and it has grown by 117973percent within 20 years, so giving these realities, I want to974hear from you.975    I mean, you are the experts. Again, the chairman has put976together a great panel. What are the main impediments? Why if977someone wanted to work, they wanted to earn the extra income,978and we know that cost of living is going up--and specifically979related to health care and drug prices.980    We are trying to do everything we can to address that, drug981pricing transparency, all of the things that we are doing to982address that but, you know, as they are wanting to make more to983cover these increased costs, what is the main impediment that984they are facing if they want to go back into the workforce? I985will start with you, Ms. Greszler.986    Ms. Greszler. Thank you. I would like to talk about two and987first is that Retirement Earnings Test and so, somebody who is988making a modest amount, $29,000 per year, facing a 74 percent989marginal tax rate, in terms of what they get from that990additional dollar that they work and earn.991    When you see that only $0.26 of a $1.00 coming in in a992paycheck, that encourages people to just stop working, and so,993just eliminating that test is just a common sense one, and it994would improve the economy. It would improve Social Security, so995getting rid of the penalty first.996    Senator Moody. You think that is the number one thing to997do?998    Ms. Greszler. I think that combined with----999    Senator Moody. For triaging our approach.1000    Ms. Greszler. Yes, that is the first thing and second, I1001would address the people who want to transition out of a formal1002nine-to-five job into part time, more flexible work, enabling1003them to first be able to have that opportunity, so things like1004clarity and what is an independent worker versus an employee.1005    There are two bills on that, the Modern Worker Empowerment1006Act and 21st Century Worker Act, that would just provide that1007clarity to make those opportunities available and then1008addressing the benefits side of things.1009    If somebody is, say, 62 and they want to start1010transitioning out, but they don't want to lose access to their1011health insurance and maybe they still want to have a retirement1012account, having those types of portable benefits be an option1013through independent work as opposed to the formal employer are1014things you could do.1015    Something like Unlocking Benefits for Independent Workers1016Act, so just expanding the flexibility. Neither of these things1017are like new mandates on employers. They are just removing1018current barriers that the Government has created.1019    Senator Moody. Does anybody else want to comment on that?1020    Mr. Taylor. That is what the Government can do, but what1021private employers can do--we know specifically that there are1022four things that older workers say are barriers to them1023returning to the workplace. One is flexible working hours. We1024as employers have the ability to impact that.1025    Second, they want us to develop more wellness programs that1026specifically address age-related health needs, so gym1027memberships are nice and things like that, but ultimately they1028want things that are responsive, that are age-appropriate, if1029you will. Third, phased retirement options.1030    Being able to do this--you don't have to go from, you know,103180 to 0 in terms of miles per hour that you can take this down1032and maybe do it over a period of time and then fourth, part1033time scheduling opportunities.1034    Dr. Fichtner. If the chairman will indulge me with 301035seconds. I can bring it back to the Claiming Clarity Act, which1036I think is very important because culturally, we still have1037this notion that you turn 65 and you retire and I think that is1038a cultural thing.1039    The language we use, the terms we use. People hear the term1040early eligibility age, and no one wants to be late for their1041Government benefits. We don't talk about the minimum monthly1042benefit age and when I was at Social Security talking to1043beneficiaries, just telling them, oh, you are here, you are 62.1044Do you realize this is a minimum monthly benefits?1045    They would say, wait, minimum? What do you mean, that I can1046get more? The framing is very important and if we start1047disconnecting, stopping work from Social Security claiming,1048then we can start talking about how people could use different1049types of income, working in retirement, when to claim Social1050Security that is best for them without confusing them with1051confusing language.1052    I think that is something Congress can do, and we should1053all do culturally, is maybe we retire the word retirement.1054    Senator Moody. I am out of time, but I don't think the1055Chairman would let me end with just you on the end.1056    Mr. Adcock. Yes. Well, thanks, Senator and just to say it1057briefly, I think probably the biggest impediment is age1058discrimination. I think that there are situations where people1059really do want to go back to work, but their potential employer1060doesn't value their work, and so that is a real problem. In1061terms of, you know, what my colleague just said, I think that1062is a really huge deal.1063    You know, we are talking today about repealing the earnings1064test and for some individuals, that might make sense but I1065think the bigger problem is just misunderstanding of how all1066this works and how it is a good thing or a bad thing for1067individuals and especially that people need to go into this1068with their eyes wide open.1069    That they need to understand that they actually do get this1070money eventually back. It is currently withheld by the1071Retirement Earnings Test and if it was repealed, would it make1072sense for them to do that?1073    Also, they need be cognizant of the fact that if they1074decide to claim benefits early, that that is going to change--1075you know, that that is going to lower their benefits for their1076lifetime and not only for them, but potentially for any1077survivors they have in the future, so they really need to1078really understand that before making those very important1079decisions.1080    Senator Moody. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1081    The Chairman. You think they do?1082    Mr. Adcock. What was that?1083    The Chairman. Do you think people know?1084    Mr. Adcock. I think sometimes they do. I think, sometimes,1085they don't. That is why, if your legislation became law, I1086think it is really going to be incumbent on the Social Security1087Administration to educate potential beneficiaries about what1088decision is in their best interest.1089    The Chairman. I am trying to think, I don't think on what--1090I get a form every so often, right. I don't think it has ever1091talked about survivor benefits that I remember. I have to look1092at it. Senator Warren.1093    Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, so when he ran for1094President in 2024, Donald Trump repeatedly promised that he1095"wouldn't touch Social Security." As soon as he took office, he1096immediately directed Elon Musk, who thinks that Social Security1097is a Ponzi scheme, to DOGE his way through the Social Security1098Administration.1099    He slashed staff. He created new administrative hurdles1100that make it harder for Americans to get their checks, money1101that they earned. That is effectively a benefits cut. Now,1102Senate Democrats have fought back, and we have forced the Trump1103Administration to reverse course on some of their most harmful1104policies, but this fight is not over. Social Security1105Administration is still facing a customer service crisis, and1106the Trump Administration and the Republicans are still looking1107for ways to cut Social Security.1108    Their current approach is making Americans work until they1109drop dead, so just listen to what Trump's appointees are1110saying. When asked about raising the retirement age, Social1111Security Administrator Frank Bisignano said, "everything is1112being considered and will be considered." Mr. Adcock, you are a1113Social Security expert. How would raising the retirement age1114affect Americans' benefits?1115    Mr. Adcock. Simply put, it is a benefit cut. Doesn't matter1116whether you claim Social Security benefits at 62, or 70, or how1117long you live, it is a benefit cut in any way you slice it.1118    For every year you decide that you are going to raise the1119retirement age, you are taking about--well, you are losing1120$24,000 of income for every year but then in your future1121benefits for every year that it is increased, you are losing1122about seven percent of your benefits.1123    Senator Warren. Raising the retirement age on Social1124Security by one year cost $24,000, and over your lifetime is1125about a seven percent benefit cut. Is that--?1126    Mr. Adcock. For each year.1127    Senator Warren. For each year.1128    Mr. Adcock. Yes, that is right.1129    Senator Warren. For each year, okay.1130    Mr. Adcock. Because some of the proposals that are being1131discussed would raise it from 67 to 69, or 67 to 70.1132    Senator Warren. If you go to 70, if you do the math, how1133big is the cut?1134    Mr. Adcock. Well, the math ends up being--it is a 201135percent future cut.1136    Senator Warren. A 20 percent future cut.1137    Mr. Adcock. Yes.1138    Senator Warren. Okay. Frank Bisignano is not alone in this.1139After the Republicans blew trillions of dollars on a tax cut1140for their rich buddies in their Big Beautiful Bill, Dr. Oz said1141the way we dig out of a deficit is having, "the average1142American work a year later" and not retire. Mr. Adcock, how1143many Americans without a college degree work in physically1144demanding jobs?1145    Mr. Adcock. In that category, if people don't have college1146educations, about 41 percent of them.1147    Senator Warren. What does it mean to work an extra year?1148    Mr. Adcock. Well, it means an extra year that you don't1149have benefits and especially when we are talking about this1150particular group of people who need to retire early, generally1151their longevity isn't as long. I mean, I think I have seen1152studies where when you take the bottom half of the income1153scale, they live about five years less than the people at the1154top end of the income scale, and especially the other part of1155this is that if you do have a physically demanding job, and you1156are likely also to be from a community of color, in these1157situations it means that you are going to need to claim1158benefits early.1159    Today, under current law, if you claim early at 62, you are1160taking about a 30 percent cut to your benefits, had you not1161waited until your full retirement age currently at 67 but if1162you were to raise the retirement age to 70, we are talking1163about a 50 percent cut.1164    Senator Warren. Wow, wow. I just want to add in this, there1165are obviously also people who have college degrees who also1166have physically demanding jobs.1167    Mr. Adcock. Sure.1168    Senator Warren. Am I right on that?1169    Mr. Adcock. Oh, yes, absolutely. Yes.1170    Senator Warren. Right. My favorite example are kindergarten1171teachers. Try it sometime. Unsurprisingly, Dr. Oz is not1172thinking about the millions of Americans who work in manual1173labor, who have physically demanding jobs, many of whom have1174ground their bodies for decades at construction sites, hauling1175boxes in warehouses, scrubbing bathroom floors, and literally1176may not be capable of adding work.1177    Indeed, as you say, these are often the people who have to1178retire early because they are just physically spent and look, I1179am all for older Americans working longer if they want to work1180a lot longer, but let's not confuse wanting to work with being1181forced to work because the Trump Administration is taking a1182sledgehammer to Social Security.1183    Instead of hanging those workers out to dry, we should be1184expanding and protecting Social Security, especially when1185tariffs and war are now driving up prices for our seniors, for1186everybody in this country, so Mr. Adcock, how could we pay for1187bigger Social Security benefits?1188    Mr. Adcock. Our preferred solution would be making the1189wealthy pay their fair share.1190    Senator Warren. Yes. That seems right to me. Look, we have1191got to make sure that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair1192share, and not force seniors to work until they drop dead.1193Right now, a billionaire, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Elon Musk,1194pays as much in Social Security taxes as someone who makes1195$175,000 a year.1196    I have got a bill to fix that, and it would raise enough1197money to increase benefits by $200 a month for every senior and1198help stabilize Social Security to make sure it is around for1199the long haul. Social Security is not charity. It is a promise,1200and it is a promise that people have earned.1201    The Trump Administration is trying to strip away that1202promise, trying to chisel it, trying to shrink it up, and then1203rebrand it as an opportunity to work. Americans aren't buying1204it, and we are going to keep fighting back. Thank you, Mr.1205Chairman.1206    The Chairman. Thank you. Raking Member Gillibrand.1207    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to1208our witnesses. I want to address the question of privacy1209concerns that people whose data is on the Social Security1210Administration servers are facing.1211    On March 10th, the Washington Post reported that Social1212Security Administration's Office of the Inspector General is1213investigating a whistleblower complaint alleging that a former1214DOGE employee assigned to SSA improperly stored beneficiary and1215worker sensitive personal information on a personal thumb drive1216and further shared it with his employer, a publicly traded1217information technology company.1218    This follows allegations in 2025 from SSA's then Chief Data1219Officer regarding the improper actions and storage of SSA1220beneficiary information. In November 2025, and again in1221February 2026, joined by Senators Schumer and Alsobrooks, we1222requested that the IG initiated investigation determine once1223and for all the scope of the personal information that was1224compromised.1225    Mr. Adcock, can you discuss the potential risk to both1226Americans, individual Americans, and our national security of1227having the most sensitive and personal data insecure?1228    Mr. Adcock. Sure. I mean it is something we hear from our1229members quite a bit from that they are concerned about it,1230along with other chaos that has happened because of DOGE and1231the managing of the Social Security Administration.1232    Yes, you know, they understand so much of their personal1233information, both health care and other, and Social Security is1234part of that data base and before, they believed that that was1235a pretty secure site, that they didn't really have to worry1236about it but now, basically, because of this information1237disclosed in court cases that it has been sold to third1238parties, I think it is very troubling for a lot of our members.1239    They are really concerned about how this is being managed1240and it speaks to just the overall data base itself in terms of1241proposals to try to take it from the current system to a new1242system in a very short period of time without any extra money1243and what that could mean for ensuring that all the information1244that is there, like work histories that determine benefits,1245that that stays pristine and that still is enable--that that1246data base is intact so that we can ensure that benefits are1247really what they should be.1248    I mean, that is why for instance people have been--we have1249advised our members to go on to Start My Social Security1250account and to save all their work history, so in case that1251information was ever lost by accident or what is going on at1252the Social Security Administration, they would have that.1253    Senator Gillibrand. Yes, we hear--I have been on the Armed1254Services Committee for almost 20 years, and if you lose your1255data about what you did in the military, it is very hard to get1256your benefits sometimes, so I think this data protection is a1257very big issue that we all have to be concerned about. Mr.1258Fichtner, would you like to add to anything?1259    Dr. Fichtner. Actually, I would, Senator. This is a very1260important issue on privacy, and I am a little bit out of the1261loop on this one. It has been a while since I was digging in1262this, but when I was at the Social Security Administration, we1263were so concerned that working with Congress, I think that is1264when we got rid of the Social Security number off of Medicare1265cards.1266    We went to a Medicare number and I think one of the things1267to start considering, as you think about privacy, is the Social1268Security number has become a de-facto national ID number, and1269it is linked to everything you do. It is on your tax return. It1270is on your employment records. It is everything. Maybe it is1271time to start thinking about how you can segment those.1272    You can have a separate number for your tax return,1273separate number from Medicare, for Social Security, so if some1274hacker gets one number, they don't get your entire life and I1275am very concerned about this from an administration standpoint,1276because you are putting so much information now into Social1277Security, which also processes W-2s for the IRS.1278    They have tax information. If that information gets out, it1279could be very valuable and it could be very detrimental to1280people when it comes to fraud.1281    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. I now want to address some1282of the issues that we talked about earlier in terms of1283improving the public's access to Social Security1284Administration.1285    The Social Security Administration lost 7,000 workers,1286which is a lot, because DOGE encouraged and pushed them out,1287and pushed out the more experienced workers, the ones who had1288more years. I have heard from New Yorkers, they have really1289struggled to be able to talk to somebody at the Social Security1290Administration and hard to get an appointment. In March 2026,1291the approximate wait time in an office--for an office1292appointment was 35 days.1293    The agency has limited publicizing its casework metrics, so1294we just don't have a lot of insight into this, so one potential1295burden reduction on Social Security Administration would be to1296eliminate the need to administer the Retirement Earnings Test.1297This is something that this chairman and I are looking into as1298a reform that I think is interesting and good.1299    For beneficiaries who remain in the workplace, what major1300challenges do members report when dealing with the Social1301Security Administration, and are there any unforeseen1302challenges with this change that we are talking about? Why1303don't you start, Dan, and then we can go down the line.1304    Mr. Adcock. Yes, no clearly, we have been, you know, for1305more than a year now that we have received lots of calls from1306our members that have made similar complaints. That they have1307had to wait a long time to make an appointment with the field1308office, if they can get in touch with the field office.1309    Now that is being compromised in some sense because in1310order to make an appointment at a field office, you can't do it1311individually with an individual field office. It is being1312switched now to a national call center in which you have to1313make those appointments. I think the same is true in also1314accessing the 800 number, awaiting a really long time in order1315to get calls.1316    You know, obviously, Social Security disability insurance1317claims, we don't work as much on those as other organizations1318do, but we have heard that the lengthy period of time in which1319it takes to adjudicate those cases has really increased too, so1320yes, all of these things have been a huge problem in terms of1321people being able to talk to the agency and--transact business1322with the agency.1323    Senator Gillibrand. Mr. Fichtner.1324    Dr. Fichtner. It is a great question, Senator and the one1325thing I would point out is that before I was asked to testify1326on this hearing about the Retirement Earnings Test, I have been1327working with some advocates about the possibility of moving the1328administration of the RET over to the Internal Revenue Service,1329because this is an income based issue we are talking about.1330    Who is better to manage income-based issues when it comes1331to working is the IRS, not SSA and IRS also has funding1332challenges as the Social Administration but as Rachel Greszler1333pointed out in her testimony, the agency spends $70 million1334administering the RET. If they are not administering RET, that1335is $70 million they can put on someplace else, including1336customer service.1337    I think one of the things, to now channel my old boss,1338Commissioner Mike Askew, who came before you, you know, the1339Committee on the Hill, on the Senate and the House, asking for1340more money and said, here is what I need, and here is how we1341will demonstrate and prove to you that we are doing what we say1342we are going to do--hold the agency accountable.1343    If the agency needs more money, have the Commissioner come1344in and say, here is what I plan to do with this money, and here1345is how I will report to you how we are coming along, which1346could be public hearings.1347    For a while, the agency was putting on YouTube its1348operational meetings so you could see their metrics. That is no1349longer there. I would love to see that back. It was very much a1350transparency issue to see what the agency is doing in their1351metrics instead of hiding them--making them public.1352    The Chairman. Why aren't they doing it?1353    Dr. Fichtner. Very good question, Senator. I do not know.1354    Senator Gillibrand. We could maybe do a letter on that,1355asking them why. Mr. Taylor, anything to add?1356    Mr. Taylor. Wouldn't add anything.1357    Senator Gillibrand. Ms. Greszler.1358    Ms. Greszler. Yes, so from 2019, we know that the RET1359affects--could affect about five million people and about1360500,000 individuals did have their benefits reduced or1361completely eliminated.1362    That is 500,00 individuals who many are going to be1363confused and are going to call the SSA, try to schedule a1364visit, so by eliminating the test, you could immediately1365eliminate all of those things and so, it is a very kind of1366quick simplification.1367    The one thing that you would need to do is those who are1368already in that 62 to 66 age range who have had some benefits1369held back, you would have to figure out how are we going to get1370those back to them? Is it going to be an immediate, like one-1371time refund, or are they going to be in the old system and1372still move forward and wait until their full retirement age?1373That is a pretty easy fix to make.1374    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1375    The Chairman. Yes. I am fine. I mean, we ought to get the1376information. I mean we ought to find out.1377    Senator Gillibrand. Yes, I agree.1378    The Chairman. You know, both of our states have a lot of1379seniors. Ms. Greszler, can you speak a little bit about the1380positive potential impact that repealing the RET will have on1381the trust fund?1382    Ms. Greszler. Yes. It is a modest impact. I have estimated1383up to about $8 billion additional dollars per year and this is1384because individuals are working longer and as they work longer,1385they are paying additional payroll taxes. That boosts Social1386Security's revenues, Medicare's, state and local income taxes,1387federal income taxes, so it is really kind of a spillover, not1388just to Social Security, but to all the other Government1389revenues as well.1390    The Chairman. Mr. Taylor, from your perspective, what are1391the most common misconceptions employers have about older1392workers, and how do those perceptions differ from the evidence1393you seek?1394    Mr. Taylor. Number one, it is that they are unwilling to1395learn new ideas, and particularly in this AI environment and1396what we have learned is there are just reticent. Obviously, for1397good reason. They are not, as we use the term, digital natives,1398so we have got to be more intentional about training and1399creating training and development opportunities for older1400workers.1401    It is two-way, so some of that has some value to it. The1402reality is I am one of those, right. I was born a Blockbuster1403kid, another Florida company, and the world is just different,1404right. My 15-year-old has to teach me how to do things but I am1405willing to be taught those things, and we have to be1406intentional about it. The second area that we find is a1407perception that they won't work as hard.1408    That younger generations have more youth vitality and1409therefore are willing to put in more hours and actually, the1410data would suggest the opposite but that is some of the1411perception, so much of the work that we are doing is around1412narrative building and storytelling.1413    We have to convince our colleagues, as well as leaders,1414that in fact older workers are just as valuable, if not more1415valuable in some ways than some of the younger workers at this1416point.1417    The Chairman. I think my generation, I think probably1418everybody thinks their generation is the hardest working. I am1419sure my parents thought their generation was the hardest1420working and I think it could actually--it could be true, right.1421Who knows. Mr. Fichtner, can you explain how repealing the RET1422test would also provide freedom and flexibility for older1423Americans when making benefit claims?1424    Dr. Fichtner. Oh, definitely. Thank you, Senator. One of1425the issues people see is they still have this cultural issue1426that when they stop working, they have to claim Social1427Security. If they claim Social Security, they stop working.1428    One, if we disconnect that, that is the first thing. When1429they see the Retirement Earnings Test, they think, whoa, I am1430going to be taxed for me working after 62. Why am I even1431bothering to work then? Most of them take the benefits and they1432don't work and I think this is also very important when1433thinking about the importance of income and the benefits.1434    Just to give you an idea, Senator, so when I was--I have1435been working on this issue for almost 20 years now, so I really1436want to thank you for your efforts with this, and Ranking1437Member Gillibrand as well. Because one of the things I did at1438Social Security is we got rid of that break even analysis and1439made it a personal decision where the agency talks to1440beneficiaries about them, their spouse, survivors, and they1441have a double sided one-pager that I put in my written1442testimony.1443    To give an idea how important the claiming decision is for1444income, if you were scheduled to get just $1,000 at age 67,1445just $1,000, claiming at age 62 would give you $700. That is a144630 percent reduction in your monthly benefits for the rest of1447your life. If you claim at 70, it is $1,240 benefits. That is144824 percent increase. Now, for those who can't do math quickly,1449the difference between that 62 benefit and age 70 is a 771450percent increase in your month benefit that is inflation1451protected for the rest of your life.1452    When may need that money the most? When you are older,1453might have health concerns and costs, that claiming decision,1454that transparency, will help you make a better informed1455decision, then telling people, look, you can work and get1456Social Security. You cannot work and get Social Security.1457    You can do whatever you want. The idea is not thinking1458about income as the outcome, and how to help you to make a more1459informed decision and again, I applaud you for your efforts in1460this.1461    The Chairman. Does anybody want to add anything?1462    Ms. Greszler. I would just like to bring up a point on the1463solvency of Social Security and the issue of raising the1464retirement age. The reality today is that Social Security does1465not have the ability to continue paying benefits when the trust1466fund runs insolvent sometime between 2032, the most recent1467projections, and that is an across the board 23 to 28 percent1468benefit cut. The reality of that is that even if you waited1469until 70 to start collecting your benefits, you would not get1470what the current program pays today.1471    Dr. Fichtner. Mr. Chairman, if I can because the comment1472came up--I am sorry----1473    The Chairman. No, please, please.1474    Dr. Fichtner. Whether or not to touch Social Security, like1475hands off Social Security. What I would encourage the Senate is1476to put their hands on Social Security because the default is1477trust fund depletion.1478    The Chairman. The default is horrible.1479    Dr. Fichtner. The default is horrible. It is roughly a 231480percent benefit cut across the board. Technically, you could1481say Social Security is solvent because it is designed not to1482pay benefits greater than it has in revenues but that default,1483again, is the worst option and so, I think I would love to1484encourage--and the trustees have been saying this for over 201485years. The sooner Congress acts, the better, so I would1486encourage----1487    The Chairman. It is really not fair. I mean, it is not fair1488to people that, you know, that rely on it. I was Governor of1489Florida, and I think when I went in, the pension plan was like149080 to 83 percent funded and people act like that is okay, so1491wait a minute. How is that okay?1492    Dr. Fichtner. Well, and again, I chaired----1493    The Chairman. The private sector can't do that.1494    Dr. Fichtner. I chaired the Puerto Rico Pension Reserve1495Trust and out of the bankruptcy of Puerto Rico, their public1496employee pension plans were underfunded to the tune of $01497dollars, and a $40 to $50 billion of liability, which we are1498turning around but this is important to do things earlier, not1499wait until the last minute.1500    Mr. Taylor. The point that I wanted to make is that, you1501know, we talk about how these plans impact older workers, but1502we haven't oftentimes asked older workers how they actually1503feel about it and our research at SHRM suggests that there are1504four things. They say, one, I get to stay mentally active and1505engaged.1506    Seventy percent of older workers 67 and older say, this is1507good for me, so you may think this is negative, but it is1508actually good. Second, to maintain financial stability. I1509actually want to do this. Not that I need to maintain financial1510stability, vacations, trips, taking care of the grandkids,1511etcetera. Third, to avoid boredom. The reality is people work1512for a purpose in retirement.1513    Then finally, to continue using their current skills and1514their experiences, so this idea that it is a bad thing and that1515we are working people to death doesn't exactly sync with what1516older workers are telling employers.1517    The Chairman. I mean, some of the jobs are too demanding,1518you know, right. I think, I mean everybody wants to have--I1519don't know anybody that doesn't want to have purpose. I don't1520plan on retiring. I believe we do have to--we have to figure1521out how to preserve Medicare and Social Security.1522    I have only been up here seven years. It is pretty hard to1523have a conversation right now. If we don't, it is not fair to1524the people that are relying on it. It is like when I was1525Governor of Florida, I worked hard to get the pension plan1526fully funded, so it is hard. Anybody else? [No response.]1527    I want to thank everybody for being here today and1528participating. I look forward to continuing to work with1529members.1530    If any Senator has additional questions for the witnesses1531or statements to be added, their hearing record will be open1532until next Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. Thanks each of you.1533    [Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]1534=======================================================================15351536                                APPENDIX15371538=======================================================================15391540                      Prepared Witness Statements15411542=======================================================================1543[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]15441545=======================================================================15461547                        Questions for the Record15481549=======================================================================15501551                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging15521553            "Experience Matters: Seniors and the Workforce"15541555                             March 25, 202615561557                        Questions for the Record15581559                            Rachel Greszler15601561                   Ranking Member Kirsten Gillibrand15621563    Question:15641565    Why in your view is the repeal of the Retirement Earnings1566Test a better policy proposal than further liberalizing it, for1567example by increasing the current dollar exemption amounts?15681569    Response:15701571    Increasing the current dollar exemption for the retirement1572earnings test (from the current $24,480 in 2026) would be1573helpful because it would reduce the number of working seniors1574who are hit by the test and who lose Social Security benefits.1575Moreover, among those who continue to lose benefits, it would1576reduce the amount that some of them lose. There are two primary1577reasons, however, why I strongly support complete repeal of the1578retirement earnings test rather than an increase in the1579exemption amount:1580    First is that an increase in the threshold contradicts the1581primary remaining justification for the test, which is a1582paternalistic attempt to protect older Americans from making1583decisions that might not be best for them. Specifically, this1584refers to the decision to claim Social Security benefits before1585the full retirement age, thereby exchanging a lower monthly1586Social Security benefit for a longer period of receiving1587benefits.1588    The rationale behind the retirement earnings test is: if1589you are still working and earning over $24,480, you may not1590need as much income now from Social Security, but there is a1591chance that you will need a higher Social Security benefit in1592the future when you are less likely to be able to work and may1593have used up other non-Social Security savings.1594    In this way, the retirement earnings test essentially takes1595away individuals' choices over when to claim benefits if the1596government thinks that they are A) earning enough to not need1597as much in benefits now, and B) are at risk of outliving their1598savings and may need higher Social Security benefits in the1599future. Increasing the exemption amount eliminates the policy1600for those it is most likely to "protect," while leaving it in1601place for higher earners who are less likely to outlive their1602savings.1603    From a fiscal and economic perspective, raising the cap1604would be significantly inferior to eliminating it because1605people who are still working and earning significant incomes1606between ages 62 and 66 tend to have longer life expectancies,1607and thus are more likely to come out ahead, in terms of total1608Social Security benefits received, as a result of the1609retirement earnings test.1610    Second, an increase in the exemption does little to reduce1611administrative costs and burdens on the Social Security1612Administration. If any level of retirement earnings test1613exists, the Social Security Administration has to monitor the1614earnings of all beneficiaries between the ages of 62 and 66,1615approximately five million individuals. While the number of1616people affected by the test (roughly 520,000 in 2019) would1617decline, and the SSA would have to withhold fewer benefit1618checks and respond to fewer calls and visits from those1619affected by the test, the SSA would still have to send notices1620to and monitor the earnings of millions of individuals who are1621below the full retirement age. Eliminating the retirement1622earnings test would-in the long run-save the entirety of the1623estimated $70 million per year in administrative costs and1624eliminate all confusion caused by the test.1625    In the near term, immediately after elimination of the1626retirement earnings test, the SSA would need to address1627individuals who have had benefits withheld by the test and who1628have not yet reached their full retirement age. The simplest1629way to do this would be to move up the re-calculation of1630lifetime benefits from individuals' attainment of full1631retirement age to the year of implementation.1632    Thank you for the opportunity to further explain why I1633believe eliminating the retirement earnings test entirely is1634the best way to help workers and reduce administrative costs1635and complexities for civil servants at the Social Security1636Administration.16371638                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging16391640            "Experience Matters: Seniors and the Workforce"16411642                             March 25, 202616431644                        Questions for the Record16451646                           Dr. Jason Fichtner16471648                   Ranking Member Kirsten Gillibrand16491650    Question:16511652    Based on your prior management roles at SSA, what impacts1653would repeal of the Retirement Earnings Test and the Claiming1654Age Clarity Act have on agency operations and budgets, and what1655advice can you share on how best to support effective agency1656implementation of these potential reforms?16571658    Response:16591660    I am of the view that the Claiming Age Clarity Act would1661have a negligible impact on SSA's budget and operations. Short-1662term costs to changing terminology in communications and policy1663documents, training staff, etc., are real, but at the margin1664the costs would be negligible.1665    If the Agency has not yet shared a cost estimate of1666implementing this legislation, the Senate should ask for an1667official cost estimate. I am also of the view that additional1668appropriations are not necessary to implement the bill. That1669said, a small amount of dedicated funding would likely make1670implementation more effective, and support for that funding may1671address any administrative cost concerns that legislators or1672the Agency has if this bill were to become law. Recently, the1673Bipartisan Policy Center Action submitted a letter to the1674Senate and House Labor, Health and Human Services, Education,1675and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee (March 19,16762026) where they supported "including at least $10 million in1677dedicated funding to improve SSA's communication with1678individuals considering when to claim old-age benefits. This1679funding should support the adoption of clearer, more intuitive1680claiming terminology-consistent with the intent of H.R. 52841681and S. 1504-and enable updated systems and publications, as1682well as expanded outreach, education, and decision-support1683efforts to help beneficiaries choose the claiming age that best1684fits their individual circumstances."\1\1685---------------------------------------------------------------------------1686    \1\ https://bpcaction.org/wp-content/uploads/BPCA-FY27-LHHS-1687Appropriations-Requests.pdf16881689    I will add that the act will likely reduce administrative1690costs in the long term because of the increased clarity the new1691claiming language will provide the public.1692    Likewise, the repeal of the Retirement Earnings Test (RET)1693would also have some short term costs, including reprograming1694systems, communications and policy documents, training staff,1695etc. In her testimony before the committee during this hearing,1696Rachel Greszler referenced an SSA OIG report that SSA spends1697approximately $70 million annual administering the RET.\2\ If1698the RET were to be repealed, the Agency would eventually free1699up $70 million annually for other administrative purposes.1700---------------------------------------------------------------------------1701    \2\ Office of the Inspector General, "The Social Security1702Administration's Enforcement of the Retirement Earnings Test," Social1703Security Administration, February 2, 2024, https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/1704uploads/a-08-21-51049.pdf17051706---------------------------------------------------------------------------1707    Question:17081709    I am a strong supporter of ABLE Accounts that support1710people with disabilities and empower them to fully engage in1711their communities. From your time at SSA, how can the agency1712better publicize and educate beneficiaries and their families1713about these accounts?17141715    Response:17161717    While SSA does provide information on ABLE Accounts, for1718example on the Agency's website,\3\ the Agency could do a1719better job promoting the benefits of ABLE accounts through1720targeted outreach to the SSI community. In a 2023 research1721paper by the Center for Financial Security at the University of1722Wisconsin-Madison, researchers documented "...an array of1723barriers, including financial constraints as well as diverse1724administrative burdens and misperceptions, that deter eligible1725persons from opening ABLE accounts."\4\ Lack of understanding1726and awareness of ABLE accounts was one of the key findings of1727the report, leading to a recommendation that "...state1728administrators might offer stronger campaigns to increase1729overall awareness of ABLE."1730---------------------------------------------------------------------------1731    \3\ https://www.ssa.gov/ssi/spotlights/spot-able.html & https://1732choosework.ssa.gov/blog/2023-08-22-able-accounts-what-you-should-1733know.html1734    \4\ https://rdrc.wisc.edu/files/working-papers/WI23-10--Working-1735Paper--Pollack-et-al--4.24.pdf17361737---------------------------------------------------------------------------1738                        Senator Elizabeth Warren17391740    Question:17411742    During the hearing, you mentioned that the Social Security1743Administration (SSA) under the current administration has hid1744metrics from its operational meetings. What metrics has the1745agency concealed, and what do these metrics show? Please list1746the metrics that are no longer being reported and the function1747they have.1748    Under which commissioner, did SSA stop releasing these1749metrics? Have past administrations released these metrics, and1750if so, which ones? How does concealing these metrics impact the1751agency's functions and Americans' ability to interact with SSA?17521753    Response:17541755    Unfortunately, I have not kept records on SSA's reporting1756of operational metrics overtime, nor by individual1757commissioners. During my testimony, I mentioned that Acting1758Commissioner Lee Dudek was posting SSA operational meetings to1759SSA's YouTube channel\5\ and offering metrics online, including1760real-time data on hold times and callback times on the 8001761number.\6\ These posts were removed from YouTube shortly after1762Commissioner Frank Bisignano took office. News articles have1763reported some of the information that was presented during1764these meetings.\7\ I personally found this type of disclosure1765to be of benefit to the public. The real-time metrics on the1766800 number were a laudable improvement in the ability of the1767American public to interact with SSA to allow them to make an1768informed decision about when to call the agency or to schedule1769an appointment. The loss of this level of detailed public1770disclosure, as well as the manner in which it was transmitted1771via YouTube videos, is loss of that may make it more difficult1772for the public to view and understand the critical challenges1773now facing the agency. This loss not only impacts the public,1774but also impacts Congress, which could provide oversight,1775instructions, or dedicated funding to address customer service1776challenges.1777---------------------------------------------------------------------------1778    \5\ https://www.youtube.com/@SocialSecurity/playlists1779    \6\ https://www.ssa.gov/news/en/press/releases/2025-03-24.html1780    \7\ See for example: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/16/us/1781politics/doge-social-security.html & https://www.londondisability.com/1782ssas-push-for-transparency-youtube-videos-and-more-what-it-means-for-1783your-disability-claim & https://www.youtube.com/shorts/P0--8GK--JJnY1784(accessed April 11, 2026).17851786---------------------------------------------------------------------------1787    Question:17881789    How is SSA deploying call-sharing - or the redirecting of a1790call meant for a local field to a field office in a different1791region - on its national 1-800 hotline?1792    Have the older Americans that your organization works with1793reported having their calls redirected, and if so, how does1794this mechanism impact their ability to talk to an SSA1795representative and have their question resolved?17961797    Response:17981799    Based on what's been reported, SSA now shifts calls from1800one field office to another once they go unanswered for a1801certain period of time. Other organizations have been1802publishing reports about SSA customer service metrics,1803including the 800 number.\8\1804---------------------------------------------------------------------------1805    \8\ https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/trump-1806administration-personnel-policies-harming-social-security-customer18071808    Katie Savin, also a Fellow at the National Academy of1809Social Insurance (NASI),\9\ has been quoted in the New York1810Times,\10\ about how staffing reductions at SSA have made it1811difficult for claimants to get customer service assistance.1812---------------------------------------------------------------------------1813    \9\ https://www.nasi.org/fellows/1814    \10\ https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/24/business/social-security-1815customer-service.html18161817---------------------------------------------------------------------------1818    Question:18191820    Have the older Americans that your organization works with1821reported increases in the wait time for scheduling an in-person1822appointment at an SSA field office?1823    If so, how many days are they waiting for an appointment,1824on average?1825    Response:18261827    Unfortunately, I do not personally have any direct1828knowledge or information to be able to answer this question.1829SSA does report wait times on its website.\11\1830---------------------------------------------------------------------------1831    \11\ https://www.ssa.gov/ssa-performance18321833---------------------------------------------------------------------------1834    Question:18351836    Reports indicate that the drastic staff cuts the1837administration has made at SSA have forced some rural field1838offices to close. Has your organization heard of any SSA field1839offices closing completely under the current administration -1840or having such limited capacity due to staff cuts that they are1841unable to perform their usual services and are effectively1842closed?18431844    Response:18451846    I am not aware of any field offices being permanently1847closed as of this time. SSA occasionally temporarily closes1848field offices to deal with maintenance or other issues and then1849reopens those offices once the issues have been resolved. The1850last SSA public notice I am aware of is dated March 27,18512025.\12\1852---------------------------------------------------------------------------1853    \12\ https://www.ssa.gov/blog/en/posts/2025-03-27-b.html1854---------------------------------------------------------------------------18551856                 U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging18571858            "Experience Matters: Seniors and the Workforce"18591860                             March 25, 202618611862                        Questions for the Record18631864                               Dan Adcock18651866                   Ranking Member Kirsten Gillibrand18671868    Question:18691870    Your organization was closely involved in the successful1871and bipartisan effort to reform the Retirement Earnings Test1872during the Clinton administration. What would you advise1873policymakers to take into account when considering repeal in1874this era?18751876    Response:18771878    Earlier claiming reduces monthly benefits for life,1879especially if people do not fully understand the adjustment,1880which has implications for old-age benefit adequacy. In fact,1881the misunderstanding that benefits reduced by the Retirement1882Earnings Test are "lost" continues to be a problem to this day.1883For the current proposal to repeal the RET for 62- to 66-year-1884olds, claiming decisions are more consequential for long-term1885benefit adequacy since early claim results in much lower1886lifetime benefits.1887    Finally, the administrative burden of the 2000 RET repeal1888was real. The need to track earnings, withhold, and later1889recompute benefits cost SSA on the order of hundreds of1890millions of dollars annually in operations and contributed to1891beneficiaries' confusion. Given that mass staff reductions at1892SSA and flat funding has hollowed out the agency, it is hard to1893see how SSA could absorb the administrative requirements of1894repealing the RET for 62- to 66-year-olds.18951896    Question:18971898    In your view, why ultimately did Congress elect to retain1899elements of the Retirement Earnings Test, and are any of those1900considerations still valid today?19011902    Response:19031904    Repeal of the RET was promoted as a way of increasing1905participation in the workforce by older workers, much as the1906current effort to eliminate the RET for those between ages 621907and 66 is proposed. However, research has shown that, while1908elimination of the RET does result in some additional workforce1909participation, it also would result in a significant number of1910workers who claim their Social Security benefit early. This1911decision to claim early has two major consequences -1912permanently reduced benefits for those workers least able to1913afford to lose this income, and potentially accelerated1914insolvency of the Social Security Trust Funds. Both of these1915concerns would have been known to the authors of the 2000 RET1916repeal and presumably influenced their decision to retain the1917RET for those claiming benefits at ages 62 to 66.19181919    Question:19201921    Do you see any potential positive outcomes from a renewed1922repeal initiative?19231924    Response:19251926    We know from seniors we have talked to at townhall meetings1927across the country that repealing the rest of the Retirement1928Earnings Test would be popular. In some cases, claiming1929decisions motivated by repealing the RET might benefit some1930people but before this legislation is approved and enacted,1931Congress must determine if there are ways to mitigate the1932permanent loss of benefits for those workers and their families1933who might be hurt by the change (like improving survivor1934benefits), if there are really jobs available for people ages193562 to 66 when age discrimination in employment is pervasive,1936and what will be the short term impact on Social Security Trust1937Fund solvency if the RET is repealed.19381939    Question:19401941    How can we best protect and strengthen Social Security for1942retirees, the disabled, and survivors, and what should we bear1943in mind regarding the program's annual cost-of-living1944adjustments, particularly at a time of soaring costs for1945Americans?1946    Response:19471948    The best way to protect and strengthen Social Security for1949retirees, the disabled, and survivors, as well as for all1950workers and their families, is by extending Social Security1951solvency and improving benefits by finally making the wealthy1952pay their fair share in FICA contributions. Because of decades1953of stagnate middle class wages, income inequality and the1954erosion of employer sponsored retirement benefits, a growing1955share of Americans will depend on Social Security for all or1956most of their income in retirement. That's why any conversation1957about Social Security reform must include benefit adequacy if1958the program is going to allow retirees to maintain a modest1959standard of living in retirement.1960    The number one benefit improvement our members tell us1961would be to make the COLAs more accurate so that they take into1962consideration the disproportionate share of income seniors1963spend on out-of-pocket health care costs. Undervaluing the COLA1964has significant long-term impacts as its' effects compound over1965time. That leaves the oldest retirees, who presumably are the1966least able to work, and are the most likely to have exhausted1967any other resources and have the highest health care costs,1968with the deepest financial burden caused by years of1969underestimating the inflation they experience.19701971    Question:19721973    Last year, the Secretary of the Treasury stated that1974efforts to build wealth were viewed as "a backdoor to1975privatizing Social Security". However, Americans can best be1976served in retirement with support from both Social Security and1977private savings. In your view, how can Congress move the needle1978on expanding access for the millions of Americans currently1979shut out of the retirement system?19801981    Response:19821983    There are many proposals - some well-meaning - that would1984help workers save for retirement. It is commendable that1985lawmakers are trying to fill the gap in retirement savings left1986by some employers that don't help their employees plan for1987their golden years. Part of the challenge remains that so many1988workers are struggling to simply afford the daily costs of1989living, that even when retirement savings plans are offered by1990their employers, they simply do not feel they have enough1991disposable income to take advantage of them but the wheel does1992not have to be reinvented if we have a highly successful1993retirement program that could be enhanced if benefits were1994improved - and that program is Social Security.19951996                        Senator Elizabeth Warren19971998    Question:19992000    Has the insolvency of the Social Security trust fund been2001accelerated under the current Trump administration?2002    If so, what actions taken by the administration have2003contributed to this acceleration?20042005    Response:20062007    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act included a temporary2008additional deduction of $6,000 per eligible individual age 65+2009through 2028. Because of how this tax cut indirectly results in2010less taxation of Social Security benefits and since this2011taxation helps fund benefits, the trust fund will receive $302012billion less revenue a year which will accelerate insolvency.20132014    Question:20152016    Do you expect the unprecedented levels of workforce2017reductions at SSA, and the ripple effects these reductions have2018had on key agency services, to also contribute to accelerating2019the trust fund's insolvency?20202021    Response:20222023    Potentially, yes. We have heard from some people in their202460s that they have claimed benefits earlier than planned2025because of what might happen to the program as a result of the2026mass staff reductions and chaos caused by DOGE at SSA. The next2027Social Security Trustees Report may show whether such early2028claiming is having an impact on solvency.2029    While not related to accelerating solvency, we are2030concerned that the DOGE staff cuts and mayhem at SSA could2031soften public support for the program which would make it2032easier for some lawmakers to enact legislation to cut earned2033benefits.2034    Question:20352036    How is SSA deploying call-sharing - or the redirecting of a2037call meant for a local field to a field office in a different2038region - on its national 1-800 hotline?2039    Have the older Americans that your organization works with2040reported having their calls redirected, and if so, how does2041this mechanism impact their ability to talk to an SSA2042representative and have their question resolved?20432044    Response:20452046    The National Committee has not heard from members about2047redirection because they may not even know it is happening and2048it only becomes apparent when the caller is ill-advised and2049shows up at their local field office. In other words, if a call2050is redirected, the SSA employee does not say where they are2051physically, so the claimant/beneficiary has no idea and that2052adds to the risk of not knowing local information (e.g.,2053claimant/beneficiary's local records, state taxation of2054benefits, etc.) and this is all very compounded by the2055reassignment of SSA personnel into these front-line jobs by2056staff not properly trained or acclimated. Very general2057questions work well with call redirection, but specific,2058personal issues do not and the consequences of bad information2059can be huge.2060    As for the reassigned SSA staff, whatever work they did in2061their former jobs is likely to be neglected, particularly2062because of the mass staff reductions. For example, the SSDI2063backlog will grow if adjudication staff were reassigned to the2064national call center. Likewise, overpayments could become a2065greater problem if operations staff are now answering calls.20662067    Question:20682069    Have the older Americans that your organization works with2070reported increases in the wait time for scheduling an in-person2071appointment at an SSA field office?2072    If so, how many days are they waiting for an appointment,2073on average?20742075    Response:20762077    We don't have a good number from our members about how much2078wait times have increased, but what we hear anecdotally is that2079beneficiaries are waiting months for an appointment.20802081    Question:20822083    Reports indicate that the drastic staff cuts the2084administration has made at SSA have forced some rural field2085offices to close. Has your organization heard of any SSA field2086offices closing completely under the current administration -2087or having such limited capacity due to staff cuts that they are2088unable to perform their usual services and are effectively2089closed?20902091    Response:20922093    While the SSA website lists multiple field office closures2094in 2025, some field offices still open are effectively closed2095because many of their staffers were let go by the DOGE mass2096staff cuts. That means seniors and people with disabilities -2097many with mobility issues - are traveling farther and waiting2098longer for an appointment at a field office.20992100                        Senator Raphael Warnock21012102    Question:21032104    Since January 2025, the Trump administration has cut more2105than 7,000 Social Security Administration (SSA) employees, and2106Georgia lost nearly 10 percent of its SSA workforce between2107Fiscal Year 2024-2025. Due to limited workforce, older2108Georgians must wait weeks to schedule an appointment with the2109SSA field office and an average of 11 months for their2110disability claims.2111    How can Congress improve the SSA workforce capacity and2112address the declining quality of customer service in states2113like Georgia?21142115    Response:21162117    Because the appropriation process tends to be bipartisan in2118the Senate - unlike the House - there are more opportunities2119for Democratic Senators to call for increasing appropriations2120for SSA and for including instructions in the Labor-HHS2121appropriations bill for SSA to more adequately staff field2122offices, including in Georgia.21232124    Question:21252126    According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy,2127the average driving-age person in the South will pay $39 more2128per month in higher gas prices, compared to $34 nationally or2129$24 in the Northeast. Food prices have also increased by over213023 percent compared to 2020, and nearly 10 percent of Georgians2131age 65 and older are food insecure. Seniors in Georgia are2132facing a calculus of whether they will have enough money,2133through Social Security or savings, to retire.2134    What steps can Congress take to address the concern over2135rising costs of living among seniors and ensure older Georgians2136have a pathway to a financially secure retirement?21372138    Response:21392140    Congress can enact legislation that would base Social2141Security cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) on a fully2142developed Consumer Price Index for the Elderly (CPI-E). The2143CPI-E would more accurately measure the spending patterns of2144seniors, including the disproportionate share of income they2145spend on out-of-pocket health care expenses. Georgia seniors2146could also better afford rising costs if Congress passed S.21473078, the Social Security Emergency Inflation Relief Act which2148would increase Social Security benefits by $200 per month.2149=======================================================================21502151                       Statements for the Record21522153=======================================================================21542155[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]21562157                          [all]