ysz$q(rn quite a while

we should be in the habit of doing which we have done. bipartisan wins, recognizing the house is . the senate is narrowly ic. if anything is going to only passed or signed into law it is bipartisan. doing so in no a way that shows the seriousness plenty food fight and the nonsense us out w here.

i think that tone we set has been followed there by the members this committee. i was so pleased when yesterday someone interviewing complimented both of us who has been watching our h noted. and committed both of us that. that is on the firston the second though, quite appropriately there also a set of issues themselves to strong partisan differences because they reflect the honestly held ideological differences between a proudconservative of west texas and a proud democrat from that grew up in a labor family. i do and medicare certainly are in that latterff when i think of two of the main reasons democrat, social security and medicare will be two of the first i would mention. they represent the core the coalition franklin roosevelt put together a century ago that soul of

the working americans likeamilies in my district and certainly the family in which i raised. social security is t history. medicare, the idea of four was first laid out by franklin roosevelt was not achieved in his presidency. harry truman really picked up thend fought valiantly for it was not able to get it done and then in 1965 lyndon johnson with a truman standing right next to himas able to sign that into law. i believe deeply in social security and medicare andt they represent even beyond the paychecks. what they say people is that we have a basic commitment of those who are in our society that we are you most need it. we are not going to poverty or essentially d prematurely in old age because you lack health insurance and could no can no

work. that is what i and with those principles in guiding me, i have certainly work to do everything i can to medicare will be there not just today for both after working in manual labor jobs for more than a half a century print intorust funds for both. that it will be there for myself when i retire and my generation as well as the generations to come. now, we has is i'm sure we'll hear more abo we have until 2035 for insurance trust fund. as well as 2036 for medicare. congress must ensure these programs attempting to put our money we should have more funds but actually putting legislation into plar co-authoring it to

ensure that we would havet. i am proud of introduce the bill along myhe lead democrat on the senate budget committee sheldon whitehouse. the namelation is in medicare and social security fair share act. which honors the commitment that i have about by closing corporate tax loopholes and equitably applying the payroll tax to the top 2% of earners. both the actuaries with us t have verified that my bill would heolvency of social security and medicare indefinitely all without raising taxes even a 1 penny under $400,000 a year. so that is one is the approach that poll after poll has shown is supported by the vast majority of americans. even a sizable number of republicans who are polled when asked about thath. however, to be fair that is not the only approachdhat iere and in the interest of bipartisanship mr. speaker

budget is not getting as much attention should. let me help republican friends with that and get a little more pr for their budget. i would say well the study committee budget not the budget passed out of this committee 80% or so of house republicans areincluding i believe every member of republi is not exactly like we are talk about some small their proposal and i give them credit for honesty as t this out and put it in black white their plan cuts social security benefits 257 million people. three o americans. they would age from what will soon all the way up that is completely unnecessary. and let melear it represents a top insubstantial cut because of couer earn back the revenue they would have received

without some sort of an increase in the retirement i finally want to make this pointnd pause it there. there is a lot of confusion people bring up deficit and debt erstandably get concerned about some of the projections but get concerned withn-dollar debt figure. let's be has not added to 1 penny to our national debt. not make the mistake of confusing a c about our annual deficits where the cumulative deficits meeting our national debt on the solvency of al security or the solvency of the medicare trust funds hntirely separate issues with that i see a bird he got over my time ithe indulgence mr. chairman and i yield back. colleagues of letting you go three minutes spoken longer than you. [laughter] >> you are due at least three and half minutes i admit soce our guests

and they will start the questioninged folks who are here and by the way we've got a lot of things happening. important issue for every member on the committee. presentations. the interest of time any member wants to give an opening statement ióórhp decline 2.6 trillion

at the start of 2024 to reserve depletion in november of 2033. at which .79% of scheduled benefits would be payable. this projection has slightly impr the 2023 trustees report because the economy and emp then had been assumed in the 2023 report. trust fund reserves continue rising in the future with annual incomet of paying scheduled benefits through 2100 and beyond. on a combined basis will decline 2.8 trillion at the beginning of 2024 to depletion in june 2035 at83% of currently scheduled benefits would be payable. jections of trust fund reserve in 2035 stands in contrast to the projection for reserve depletion and 2063 that was made of the 1983 amendment.

well process% of gdp is now 5% than projected back in 1983 and will be cost as percentage of our higher than had been projected back and will be through 2035 the primary reason ings of the top 6% of workers whose earnings exceed the taxable level under social security expectedly grew faster than for workers between 1983 in 2000 and percentage of covered earnings that's actually taxablero in 1983 in expected in the future to just 82.5% by the year 2000 and there changing age distribution of the population to really pro birth rates since 1965 the improvement and life were well anticipated and accurately anticipated back in addressed with a permanent solution at that time. of earnings now subject to payroll

further legislation legislative change has been accelerated with forward to working with you undeveloped in changes. >> thank you. will now moved the question and answer portion of our hearing. i will start. i'll have five minutes and then we'll have our colleagues also have five dialogue. let's start or pick upocial security trust fund. how many people are going on to this earned benefit program a date? is it's true it is 10,000 a day that retirees are entering the beneficiaries? >> very close to the because of the storage of the baby boom. thel retirement history of the world. en consider as we consider it making thisork for seniors today but solvent and

seniors in theure. the only responsible way to look at this is to think about seniors today and the children. let's another trend a worker trench per retiree ors that a ratio that's going up or dá worker per beneficiary ratio? >> worke down one thing saving us a little bit on that the so-called baby boom generation is reaching retirement age of is starting to get benefits are working longer and higher ages to prior generations were getting some help on that.iciary ratio is definitely declining over a pretty challenging forces on the solvency of the program. 10,000 a coming onto the program. the b of a revenue stream to support it. it waset up to be self-sustaining. that is not a self-sustaining set of trends the math will not

work won'tto the trustees insolvent by 2033? were we are not bringing e revenues to pay the full benefit to every 60 plus million beneficiary who is in this benefit from this 's 2033 is exactly right. it'sd basis is 2035 records of current path with the by 2033 what will be essay. >> 2035. >> 2035 on a combined >> within roughly 10 years there is going to be a point we are not able to pay beneficiaries their full how much will they take an automatic if we, as congress dother it's a programmatic reform to make it more susta or pay board to make it sustainable what is that cut look like? once you're confidentou all will make these changes. but if, as you are suggesting we di have such changes we

will be in a position in 2035 to be 83% or 17% reduction in total ex what is intended for the full schedule benefits. that cut seniors will take question was the cut to the >> 17%. >> automatic cut? seniors need to hear that. 17% automatic cut if we do nothing, correct? okay you have more confidence in congress the most of ourents. but, it happened that h when was the last time this program was close insolvency what happened that happen and what happened and how did they address that solvency and who addressed the solvency? >> the last time was really in 1982 in t program was approaching this the congress did act is so-called greenspan commission came up with some ideas. recompleted that. >> let me ask you this was t precede theby congress that is the greenspan commission was it a bipartisan commission?

once it was a bipartisan commission because a bipartisan commission look at ways to find consensus to make this work. fast-forward and get to the punch line. president ronald beloved republican leader of our american leader of our country and tip o'neill republicans all came together to support and dory for our seniors. were revenues and expenditures part that combined reform initiative to make it solvent into the future? indeed. >> so i'm going to just to put the sharp point on the end of conversation the last time we are facing insolvency republicans and democrats came together through anism of a commission, bipartisan then you had a republican very conservative president and a liberal speaker in tip o'neill and they struck a deal to save social security. they had programmatic reforms as

part of their initiative. i suspect that's probably what's going to happen in the future if are that i'mi would ask my ranking member first q and a. >> thank you mr. chairman before i start questions i ask unanimous consent to submit rickman the president ceo ofe to preserve social security and medicare the record. without objections to order. >> thank you. just a few different points i ll down on. first we have this conversationt 2033 versus 2035. some of the confusion might be some of the projections a couple of years ago were we until 2023 but we've gotten good news social security and medicare that wee hav more years of full solvency 2035 social security 2036 when it comes to me that is because of stronger economic growth then it was projected a couple of years ago.

to speak about that and draw the link between the is we now have until 2035 and 2036espectfully and set ofinstead of a date this closer? because i think over the time. the improvement is largely us economy. there has been improvement in productivity in the labor force is brought in more revenuencreasing costs and also employment rates have been very strong.hings that is been a really good as mentioned already it was theet reneration upon us. now. which i very, very positive effect is not just in congress. [laughter] i don't know if you had anything going to add to that pic figure very similar story on medicare hi trust fund ast years years ago the trustees were projecting trust fund would become depleted in 2026. as you noted in the 2024 depletion was about 10 years later, 2036 that istic

change and there has been a dramatic change in the finances of the. both on the income and the urit side. on the expenditure side the until 2360-point we arerojecting depletion and expenditures are expected be three-point to percent they were just for years ago on the2020 trustees report. at the same time the income projections are 11.6%. and so there is dramatic change in income projections. >> yes quickly ian topic. because if i could combined trust fund reserve component depletion days bee and 2035 for the last 13 years. we are at the top end of that it's been a very stable projection. >> with medicare or social the good news of the strong economy obviously helping us and giving us more time to grapple with this issue here in cw, let me transition to immigration is does immigration help or hurt the

financing of social security and medicare? >> let me start at least. immigration typically is for people in their be late 30s. generally speaking when people enter immigrants along many cases with children of the people o wor younger age when they come to the country they tend to come in for economic opportunity enter the entered the labor force it's very much a positive that helps us come in. eventually they will develop assays to get benefits. not necessarily all of them you will have someo the system but will decades later. >> absolutely. another positive is peoplnt e their 20s, 30s et cetera as immigrants they children on the weight that as of the births we have in our country that help solve some of of low birth rates. >> given every country in the challenge from a birthright perspective and will increasingly be challenged over the next 48 -- 50 years. also

touched on it as well. i just want to it again crystal clear for everyone.ecurity does not add one dime to our national could you briefly explain why that is? >> that is exactly right. social security does not have any authority in tt8 law to have borrowing. again the money it's potential to the trust funds is dedicated to just go in the trust funds it n only be used for one purpose or paying expenses of social security cannot be used for any reason this is per the laws you have all pas so again any money that comes up reserves actually helps cover roughly $35 trillion of overall debt we have we spend on the trust fund that is an increase in total debt limit it simply means he gets shifted a little less of it or overtime covered by the monies the general fund to

future beneficiaries to more of it being covered by borrowing directly from the public. >> those in the public interest back. >> you still have three more minutes ihi t [laughter] >> a judgment yields the judgment recognized. [inaudible] i guess it is. okay the medicare trustees the trust fund than income in the next decades can you explain the reasons why expenditures are going up quicker than income and i will given i don't if you're qualified to answer. >> sure there are severalc& reasons why expenditures of the trust fund or growing faster than income. mentioned most significant one thahet t demographics. as the baby boom generation in particular has b retiring they are moving from employed

paying into the program into beneficiaries receiving benefits from the program that is the largest component of why the change occurs pickwick that makessense. but how much are we spending say per peart 72-year-old, whatever. is the healthcare spending per person going up relative to inflation? works on a per capita basis spending in the medicare program has been tracking pretty to general inflation. there is been pretty consistent increases in the recentees report there is a projected the per capita costs will increase at a rate in the near future and into future. mostly because healthcare costs rease faster than other sectors of the economy. >> is exactly what we are trying to g a few years later that has not been going on but in general healthcare costs are going up quicker than rate right? >> yes.

>> okay. do medicare costs vary dramatically from one part of the country to the? >> are certainly regional variations. there arees in medicare spending in urban areas versus rural areas forxa there are consistencies well. >> okay could you give me some examples like high and the degree to which there is a variance from state to state? >> the one that jumps to mind in particular with respect to the advantage program went medicare rates are set they are set at a example medicare spending in miami countyally higher than it most of the parts of the country. that >> give me an example of how much higher dollar wise. i've heard before miami is high. because i be happy to give you a the details. >> is it great is it like 5% higher? 25% higher? >> it is in many% higher.

>> i 25? >> i do not want to misspeak it. fair. you did not come prepared for that today. know if you do get the answers for the if you could tell us where we could be at could we solve this problem if everybody were at fifth of spending per person with that be enough to real debt to the problem? exercises if payments that solve the medicare problem? from a theoretical perspective that is accurate for practical perspective is not all that meaningful. >> i don'tnow. that's an interesting thing. we would love to hear that.cipation rate could you tell us right now a lot of people they retire as result

restrictions on how much they can makeeagan to reduce social security benefit rate? reset cut off their 19000 20000 we will be into it say less money the more you work? excellent it is in the order between 15 and 20000 i do not have it exactly at my fingertips. important part of that is the reduction from the retirement earnin applies for people up to age 6767 and aboverently at 67 and seek normal or full retirement retirement earning test stops. >> the good news is a reduction in their benefit if they start receiving benefits before 67 a reduced monthly benefit at any point before 67ill recompute your benefit for

thereafter and take away the reduction for have received benefits. >> okay i will go on record as saying 70 israzy. directness for five9 minutes. okay thank you. thank you mr. chairman whoever is here. glad to see you. so let me say to my republican colleagues when you talktting social security and medicare in any way reducing the benefits i say to you make my. these are our ranking member said the most popular programs

country. soroblems is to cut these programs make my let m this. are 67 million americans right now who rely on social security. once again say this is not an entitlement program. they pay every to the earned benefits the idea that it would be cut we did confirm and have confirmed several times social security does not add a pennye have. sayommittee has said we have to do somethi there was also discussion there

is a something there are aer of somethings that are going to be done. you briefly talk we do need to act there are plans to do that. there are a number of potential we have developed estimates on our webpage for various kinds of approaches back in 2016 we developed which means secretary johnson for changes we developed estimates for a number of members o cgress including ranking member boyle and others people in the senate and house would fill proposals that would large revenue as chairman mentioned obviously there are a lot of possibilities here. reinvestments would close the gap and it is mr. boyle already indicated the estimates we developed about a year ago for the proposal whe a 75 year gap but put us into

something refo solvency. we would be projecting the trust declining.oming depleted anytime in the foreseeable future. there are possibilities. >> many possibilities that i want to get onto youril is a really good one. i wanted to ask something like that i am sorry. >> i would say i am sorry. so when it comes to medicare i ed you to tell me are we seeing even for lower drug prices number. of negotiating for lower prices that's going to be coming in in full force. aren't we seeing that hints of lowered the cost of

drugs? >> inflation reduction introduced all of those drugs in the medicareand themedicare program some are benefit expanding and cost increasing to the medicare program. and others such as provisions and the linkage of prices to cpi are cos reducing. the net effect time. initially there's the impact of the reduction act is increasing weltimat provisions and the other cost-containment on the inflation reduction act will lead to spending reductions. >> in my almost out of time? am. i didn't want to say i think we have to do somethi advantage. and i think there needs toe medicare advantage that we have right now. oh no, i am not out of time. good. i wonder if you could talk a little bit about that.

we have seen there is over. >> i am over time okay i yield back. >> thank you. now it reckons a gentleman from virginia for five minutes. >> thank you i was disappointed h in the minority said said talk of cutting social security medicare benefits makes her day. the first person i've heard mention that today. i'll be exciting to someone talk opportunity to cut social security and medicare benefits of maker day. mr. goss you. review suggested earlier we have true cash reserves and the trust fund versus i owe you and those funds areh2ot b effvely used to cover other deficit spending? >> do for $2.8 trillion of excess taxes paid in by american workers andthey were invested in the trust funds. >> what is unfunded liability on social security? >> per the don't talk

about is that liability butn obligation in the future. a little semantic difference there. i do not have the number exactly bids many, many showings of dollars per all that repre shortfall in the future of the total amount of scheduled benefits under law versus what is scheduled for have to better align those in the future. >> would it be true matching i'm sorry. otdatory programs include social security and medicare did not match or not exceed total revenue coming ithis point? >> social securitymoment is in fact expenditures are exceeding the amount of revenue coming as for the trust fund borrowed every single discretionary dollar is we recognize that. estimate the typical lifetime payment into social security versus the lifetime typical benefit? dollar wise? how much is a typical person

paid i security over the life sent with recipient benefit is. >> we have a number of notes on the web address the interesting part is whether you compare the are to contribute under current law versus the other question versus the benefits that are scheduled in theefits that will in fact be payable under current law. scheduled taxes for at theearnings levels compared to the scheduled know we are under finance for paying those that is very generous but not possible under current law. the ratio of what you can expect to receive to what you havean very because we have a progressive payment system for security and we are all familiar with the benefit formula for thater earners. >> the typical person and social security pays about how much per month for say 40 years question example when they retire they paid much in versus how they

typically receive social security ahe is? surely you have estimate of how those two numbers compare. >> a little arithmetic quickly for 60000-dollar a year worker $5000 a month. they are paying six-point themselves. >> sooner bucks a month $3600 $3600 year takes at times 20 years that be $70000. >> will be a lot more their lives average recipient this 20 years,0 month for that is $18000 a year, $80000 your times honey resisr $60000. he just told me or they're paying 70000 and receiving with an estimate anyway three and $60000 wit have any 80s are paying into adverse of the of what was that number like. rivers began the ratio was 41 but course 41 yes a pay versus recipient now. >> it is now between two and three and heading down

into. >> but of course from the very beginning of that official italy benefited 1940 and pay for it for at least two prior to no many 70s to the 80 or 90 -year-old were eligible so thi the number moved. >> do need to have it sustainable. >> yes we do need to act. >> think you very much. >> thank you and now refinements to german from michigan sue and thank you and the or witnesses for being here and following up on la on his comments would i think a good job highlighting the fact that we do have a problem i think where we maybe diverse is how we address that problt looks like and i represent evil in michigan my home statever 2 million seniors just to make ends meet for many of the seniors. and is the most important source of retirement income some it's our only source of retirement income medicare is soul

healthcare coverage. these programs are not handouts as know. the americans contribute to social security and medicare with paycheck and have the right to expect that they will be there retire the sort of the deal that we made iay by the rules to make a contribution coming want to be able to retire with that was exceptionally wise social secury medicare were put on the books in the first place to prevent the kind senior elder poverty was so preval place. and we have other side of the dice, our solutions to shore up the social security tru fund and simultaneously by the way increased benefits for future retirees it by making the wealthiest americans pay fair share pretty and everybody has to agree with that we put our plan paper and have presented it the s stark contrast to what the proposals butblicans maybe not all but the republicans committee was 80 percent of the republicans the house recently released their budget plan and

under that plan, they propose cutting benefits in order to deal with this in fact. in their which raises the retirement retirement age. and cuts of benefits is not the wa ot scares them. and so the answer i don't believe is to cut benefits positive the problem of this ofn making $400,000 a year from this question by the may seem familiar at the weitzen meeting committee the person making $400,000 a year, versus a person maki you just scribble them up a of a person's incomehose two cohorts, the percentage of their income goes to social security. at, they pay have by their employer for

person making i'm sorry 400,000. >> yes 400,000. >> they pay this year up to one or $68600 that position of payment of that their earnings we cover the total 400,000 about 5.2 maybe two-point by then the 2.6 percent whether employer i y could just also comment and acting our proposal you don't have to find on the spirit but the proposal to the payroll t over $400,000 what effect would that have on the o fact, mr. boyles bill from the set aside also, i think i have ever here of what we have and it would actually reduce l deficit from 3.5 percent of the payroll by 2.26 by almost two and so it would reduce long-term shortfall by about two thirds

would be a big start towards aligning some really see if hemight come in and help of the questions how repealing we pounded to negotiate drugñes would affect seniors through the expenditure cost mentioned if a number of provisions somebenefit because increasing the ones you mentioned negotia provisions of the latest into inflation and those are cross reducing it so if those provisions specifically revealed >> thank you and i am out of time and nobody has to like our plan with the fact of the is the ruling and are willing to put one on paper hannah solves the problem. our wai the alternative to show up in until it is going to stick with us because i think this would get us where we go and without i yield back.and thank you and i recognize myself for five minutes to follow up on some questions her a

start off mr. stephen goss with some of the questions that was asked earlier and i know that it be quick thumbnail sketch maybe it is something that you need to after the hearing is over but it he hypothetical example of a person making $60000 unit opinion versus what they've received it in benefits and how that iecurity trust fund that operate on that event i know that if you don't have any your fingertips a little bit more thahat have to mr. goodman i would ask you if you could sketch that with over a 35 y career of p-letter paying out to current life expectancy and expect is a. >> you have a couple of items on the web that we redevelop to pretty much annually, money ratios is what were talking about the relative to the amount of berate of return rate of return would be required under the money ratios if we look at compared with the benefits are scheduled to be the future, then

those are in reasonable alignment of what we currently have though is the situation what our available in the future based on t contributions that have been made will be made in the changing life expectancy not life expectancy be largely to the changing age distribution of thexg population summa guest. >> we would consider a much more for the record on this yes maybe something that is a follow-up infmation research on that because to some a math problem on social security is about a money goingthe money going out to make process and two doctors and one the number of workers retirees how is been paid in life expec you mentioned earlieras the life expectancy when social security was created at 65 as the age at which payment to thefull retirement payment was made was life expectancy at that pointne.

>> will event to the trustees to get the number but i can assure you is when it is interesting detail was back the time last major amendments we first were sayin would happen who are projecting that about 2015 or 2018ebenefit of the life expectancy at age 65, would ris number was 16 or 16.1 years that is much more than that back in 1983 in earlier part and we years and lo and behold that turned out to be very it occurs or projections about the decline is been very accurate sample i was thinking life expectancy and 937 was year olds it is kind of i was trying to confirm versus today thectancy is you mentioning about it is closer depends on when you calculated and it has an impact on the amount of time that you have payments g out. >> very much and we try to a great extent of life expectancy is this of age ofh of the improvement of life expectancy many years about because of the reduction of and mortality

into mortality is so a lot of thattriction to maybe 60th because many people unfortunately pershing in a a very of age even before they waited for the workforce. >> right right and so can't speak a little bit well so corrected in 2033, the trust retirement fund will be depleted rundown and his appointed time was the latestec their estimate of the shortfall 23 percent range. >> a little bit less i think were at 79 percent payable at that point of this fund. >> so i think there's some numbers between ceos of security which sometimes it dependsn your estimated it and i guess my concern about that is that if nothing is is currently getting it $1000 ath will have a check cut down $790 to 79 percent payable in the now and then so

that is i guess the driving force in the concern i think part of a lot of fol we need to step up and do n order to make sure the folks that have paid can get the payment out that they are expecting is the problem we i've run out of time and so now i yield t mr. peters for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you for having this hearing is been too long and but before or since we have heard from you and teammates we would talks a lot about social security medicare i the 118 congress by the programs we have to and there's needs to beormed to be able to express to pay our obligations have for us to be ab assure their it available for future generations as well or veryut the prospects for getting social security and medicare read anything on aisle we all agree that the republicans proposals are far too extreme republica committee's 2025 budget enefits to transfer medicare to a premium

support p i want only the most r trustees report shows that some improvement in the social security finances trust funds remain in trouble. are still going down bill of about20 percent across cut benefit cuts the next ten are 70 to two or whether you're rich or poor. congress has been kicking the can down the road and were kicking world down the road this problems only getting worse and closer to us and is people would like to cut social security and worried that a 2034 those people will say you know the 20 percent tech say okay, let's compromise quality 15 percent inste the room the more time that we wait to fix the problem and itrotective social security and medicare now longer that we wait to start the project, p where leverage those of us who want to preserve the benefits we lose. and more expensive of solutions that it becomes in a: fiscal commission out with m bill for michigan and the villa cosponsors including

congressman -ere on this committee and any enduring efforts to strengthen sociity will require bipartisan think that everybody said that so far. anng. as much it will vertically among two leaders of thi committee like if there is, we are not getting close to a solution and i believe are best shot is an open door publicf[ dialogue to a bipartisan commission and we do not a commission to create under work is probable will get his with thin of the ordeal between party aders. and if that's not what you want, is thet on and 20 we the tax increases if we wait until just before solvency you explain what that is >> i'm sorry if we wait just to the point of 2033 or 2035 we know the extent of the increase of taxes that will be required. where we have about it 20 percent shortfall are the benefits by about or

the increased have to be at that moment increase about 525 percent that point because of the graphics things good little bit worse there after we've ears later in the 2080. we we would have to have a reduction on the order of like 25 percent the benefits and about 33 percent increase in bets. >> okay so i remember you cannot miss my stu variable syllogistic benefits as they are andtax hikes pretty how much harder without be to do active today with the quantity differencl describe going people with the differences would be. >> will be advantage of making change this case particularly rates early on we would have to max ten years in which weue coming in. would not be depleting our reserves during thes we be obtaining that would help us out of mouth that we would have to taxes increase but the bottom is between 2035, andt we have to make that up in his earlier but that bit more cross generations has often sai total amount.

>> let me say we do know start for us toll opinions about what should happen in a perfect world about you know this requires and 60 votes and is not really doing anything a i just want to express my appreciation to you for your work my colleagues your willingness to sit down and for the commission it would be the best route to figure out how program survives that is the democrats i think were particular proud o it and we went to her constituents to save and mr. chairman i yield back. >> thank you i now recognize oklahoma for five minutes. >> thank you very much chairman. this is an education to be peace to this the american people deserve and deserve to know what will happen in the deserve to know this cause problem so you here speaking towards medicare and social so some point here. so theeen talking about this in the last hour. be insulted

by 2033 medicare by 2036. in these programs have sustained american seniors generations initially and a pilot program fundamentally altered notably 1983 to the point that we thought that we would have solvency we see that willot be the case social security started to get as an antipoverty program ano time but according to the social security administration average life expenses 9040 missing 21 years old males at 65 for females and a few americans are mated 65 was expected to get anger work, the phone and average and for another ten ye s to ensure that seniors and elevate in abject poverty about thei with that the basic 024 life expectancy ever was 7 f for females many reach 73 on average with well into their 80s and women it reached 79 years old lived on the average until 90 years old and social changed and transformed into a retirement program culturally

some individuaiv social security nearly as long as they were employee this is putting program especially when you consider the difference in the ratio of the river to recipient when the programs began notably social sy until now. and out long after its inception in 194160 workers cover the cost benefits one social security recipient to workers they cover the cost of fully 21 recipient. this totally unsustainable and it shows the system large retirement population than ever before in the united states and time when we havemere labor shortage in the lower birthright than ever before in the same time is problems medicare and more recipients longer lifespans and paying into the something that i think it's important for people to know the medicare not supported by a payroll tax i contribution for the general fund is important to know tha is were trying to categories is supported fully by the payroll which receive som general programs which it does have an impact on how we'll

figure that out for congress for general verseial security will go insolvent aent cut. in the benefits and stephen goss talked about about 79 percent between the percent cut and so is a factor two with the average pain is the average in 24 was $1900 a month is that >> i thank you so right smack will is a 21 percent to drop makeup $1500 and that peer receiving $1500 one-time spoke with his 18000 a and to be us news this week the magazine to make 96000 live comfortably within a major united states city that of course not rural areas within within the u.s. city when medicare goes insolvent the hospitals will have 11 percent cut of payment for medicare party in hospitals this committee held a hearing a few concerns over possible consolidation and rural areas rural hospitals will be a bigger and bigger impact in economies

for the bigger was a congresses known as hit in the century at is not acting partially because of discuss the reforms programs reforms about to many people consider political subsided luckily, eight years and so i'm well make sure hopefully operating in truth and not political calculationnsolvency winning is that the federal government will have to pay back the 2.6 borrow the money it ao social security administration and positions person concerned boy to print 2.6 trillion just make aayment and inflation will increase. enemy assisting with this because a lot of the time for the rest of this at mr. stephen goss command five things would you think two different things that you thi you do this year with social security. >> i'm sorry to get to you that that of part of the vulgate we tried not to would talk to be done but we do know that over the long-term social security were

foundation of combination and on the order ofercent reduction level of scheduled benefits for future 33 percentasn revenue for the program that it is really up tos elective representative for the market people to decide which wayo tkly by the way would have the benefits how much of your career retngurp so higher for older fate folks had lower percentage for high fate folks and seconded think that i think it would all talking about replacement levels is appropriate testing will be about right s sustain reserve possibility of getting a changing issues population having only change to affected because we have so many relative to the elders because the birth rate simile going to have to have higher tax rates to be able to sustain the obligation. >> thank you in his time is expired and now real five minutes from the gentleman from

texas peanut think you for your testimony today and clearly programs that you played such an important role arrival dignity for millions of americans we need to be concerned that only about the dignity of existing seniors what about our grandchildren and great-grandchildren to ensure the medicare and social security are there for them i was sworn into this congress the same day the newt soreness speaker of the house pretty in o the point i thank you so guided republicanon to 70 medicare reforms throughout the and because i have serve the chair of the health subcommittee of the ways and means committee enough to i will focus my remarks on medicare even though i realize very widely important social se committee report and this congress should shift thoseo relied medicare, to about your system where they have no guaranill be anything other victims scamplans private

insurance programs do not guarantee that the doctoried on vacancy medicare will timely delivered as part of the medicare with her on tat we have to resist at every here is not so much spinning prices for the political crisis and we party that is intent on providing ancuts and benefited the wealthiest few inter willing to spend trillions of dolla to continue those tax breaks for those of the and claim that we have to make significant changes medicare and social security to balance things out. the good news is, there are plans they can ensure a sta school approach for medicare and for over 20 of those areod introduced by 61 democratic cosponsors in the assuring medicare promise act.e do is to extend the

solvency ofe by requiring that those cordially avoiding the debt investment tax to no longer do self n the medicare as was in the house through the build back better legislation which unfor not approved over and senatelt braided the presidents medicare proposal goes to step further and i believe that you have done an anaf presented it to us indicating that the presidents initiative whiche additional taxation and i believe the here from the cms offe, isou hr program and it would be sufficiently funded indefinitely is that correct. >> that is correct the work we did in analyzing the budget proposal included in this year's budgetgested that additional revenue would make bhi trust fund solvent indefinitely. >> my concern of course is not

only that of solvency, coverage and medicare and the fact is, manyer today that it does have a number of serious gaps f health of our seniors and two thirds of americans suffer from hearing loss and yet only about 30 percent of thepeople who require hearing aids get them in vision los another chronic condition among injuries from loss of cogni function and diversity without about 70 percent of our seniors wh suffer from serious perionta disease i want four do not have any teeth at all. and i believe we can cover the cost of this kind of care of strengthenincial security memory outrageous prescription drug pricesri anywhere else in the world and i believe you havelso that to the extent, the congress might choose to cover more drugs is covered with a very provisions of the law that is in place on drug negotiations has

the extent remove some of what i consider to be outrageous restrictions from the types of drugs can be we expand negotiation not only we save money for it will mean a better position for the medicare trust fund. possible that including more drugs generate additional expansion to the medicare program. >> in the other area that the independent pack is recommended you, as a way to strengtn the is looking medicare presented to us as a way to save money but cost for every recipient cost much moreg through traditional medicare gentleman ter expired if you must ask another question weekend of the moment i'm okay with it then we need to get going. appreciated and appreciate your testimony i think that we have a prescri a for medicare strengthening and expanding it and not undermining it in the voucher system and i yield back. numbing printed to texas

the last remaining member here although the matrix went pretty in my friends in california jimmy for five minutes. >> thank you what io some change. >> and thank you. [laughter] and appreber in the way you do things.having hearings like this so thank you very much and obviously, this is one of many important hearings we've got here the budget committee given the long-term solvency challenges to medicare and social security trust fund. i think know as we for today americans made of these trust funds of her moste in return, and return of the expect to receive benefits from these two trust funds medicare social security however as we know the solncyuture of the programs. so clearly we will hearing the issue today and ideally we want to get as i always say to solutions. and of theld age survivors insurance trust expected to deplete its assets in 2033 in the insurance trust ixpected to deplete the assets in 2036 pretty basically nine years were the first to trust fund based

solvency and as on financial matters often make those matters worse and mr. stephen goss how woected the scale of the changes needed and changes are made it in the projected data trust fund solvency what kindsd to be required.ees have consistently for many many yeare of acting which are ible more options on the table and assume react the answers we get more morningn the 30s that of reductions that are neces might be somewhat less not dramatically lesson as indicated, if we were to actually enact and changes immediately that would help us in terms satisfying reduction in as a whole the years with the keeping really i think trustees before this to enact as soon as possible so that we will have a lot of can

spread the actions over the crosso generations we have been to f noticed people estimate they will be facing. >> the skill of the reaction over the next 75 years is basically the same total amount of money in present value the great advantages to enacting and even starting testimony effectively so i think you and >> will forcefully cbs2 and is delaying the response and the need to be more dramatic response later on and so the are different than the medicare specifically for the hi trust fund card action means a more action will need to be taken a that point. >> i want to talk about the question dealing with payroll tax cap and obviously age trust fund disability insurance trust hospital and for treasures trust fund they rece of their income on payroll and taxes pretty however, according to security your report on the

income taxes yesterday counted for approximately 90 ready 7 percent 8488 percent have each trust fund total in is income that is subject to social security payroll taxes and mr. stephen goss and social security houses cap grown in relation f the average american will for. >> will the laws and really 80s the maximum has been indexed automatically to be the averagege level of all workers in any economy and is one of that right and our issue is that n a redistribution of earningsos the top 6 percent of the earners in the bottom 94 percent governors that in 1983 and when of having a muchr share of all earnings going to the top 6 percent is and it's not suffered by fund. that is an issue.

>> you note little-known the top 6 percent and 198,302,017 your time, the rope grossed over about english be the average earnings for pere who are in the top 6 percent, your time for the was 17 percent of real growth on the average earnings of his been that really does shift it is really changed us from h expectation depletion way back in now >> thank you for that explanation and i yield back. >> anything for jim in california and we've exhausted everybody's who has been present in the questions and comments. and think she was going to be get back, mr. peters you have another comment or a question you would like to ask. okay well let me just close that and if she is back with time and finishing with my one minute closing remark witeg comment but i

will which is when the information you mr. stephen goss the lesson we address these issn a meaningful way in a sustainable way, there was a bipartisan commission calle green _-dash commission and there wereleaders like tim o'neill and ronald reagan will willing to work together no party has been to run a unilateral faces that dress this issue how grand the plan promote come of it not been able to get across transit not within the republican party with the party itself i'm from west texas and it just seems to me, than common sense reduction to arrive at like a bipartisan commission leadership that we parties together in the various strategies to solve the insolvency and unsustainability programs and she is here and i've done my best to have my best and i did my best act and

filibusters. nobody's been with three friends like scott peters leaders infant ladies and children and you and your five minutes and we will wrap this up. >> hey i appreciate that very much. i apologize up ingr you're running between two committees which was the case today for me. so i appreciate mr. chair in your to be your and is an important ise represent vermont we hav in vermont and we are tiny but mighty. as a roughly six and 40000 people have 183,000 are people over 60. so, medicare social security incredibly important to my constituents. i would've found is a lot of myths regarding social security inar that

distress many seniors in my state but alsoer people really fear from they hear around social security that there will be nothing left for them when they getretired agent so recently found that 74 percent of gen z fear the social security will run out of funding their lifetime and 45 percent believe they will not get any social social security benefit and millennial's roughly feel the same. s security medicare ported protest show the combined aging survivors in the disability trust fund they will00 percent of scheduled benefits until 2035 andrwards 83 percent of you know if it's will be met and so the question i mr. stephen goss do you believe social security will of money before the younger adults can receive the benefits and i thank you so very important for uso address this

>> if you say completely run out of funding living prohe point we needed to please about 2.8 chile dollars ofçe reserves, and we have that savings account depleted w will still have coming in on a daily basis but revenues from puerile taxes and income taxes that the beneficiaries paidfhetinue coming it is you indicated that point, r depletion but 83 percent of continuing would not be zero but that would not be money benefits for introduction unless youogether the. >> right and so i just think iis such an important point because or when we use rhetoric like bankrupt, and blasting there will be nothing nxiety for people also think it paralyzes us need to make sure that people can retire with dignity and security and so democrats have putorward a

plan to protect social security for future generations security 2100 act bill to me my colleague congressman larson and will increase the average for all social security beneficiaries with fir 52 years and so, from your perspective. what is it that understand about social security generally how can we be better about messaging for them know basically what is done for them and what it them and how do we go about protecting it move beyond the rhetoric. >> this will. >> when we take over i think that one of the things that's important for people totally understand from the very beginning, social security was intended to bewas unintended to provide everything that you would want retirement to my financial planner say t should expect making 7580 percent of your earnings

level that you had when you were working to continue social security in only about or 40 percent or maybe a little higher so people have some and hopefully have a provided planet some of those are not bit sure the people very much understand that it kno not a bank account and all the money that you puts not saved up for you when you tire this is the sort of will be full. as you go system an intergenerational reduction of the first rated teaching age distribution as result throughing pressure on doing that if we have fewer workers per beneficiary because of the birth rate was lower would have lower benefits for beneficiaries for higher taxes for the worker has really not a lot of weyer about we just have to make adjustments. >> app amount of time and i don't want to keep everyone longer than we already have and on the other this though good mr. chair is supposed

to be supplemryentaenge for all of us right now is a wealth gap in this c becoming chasm and so we are not being the most working people have anything left over to put aside for retirement thankeally do appreciate your time. >> this is important we need the fullness of o understanding into yourhe approach we need an understanding by the americanoint you get about supplemental nature and not to put all of your eggs in one savings in one basket per but among other things that we need to educate the american people on in this for your comments now to our last member and the last democrat have one more but they just keep coming in the hits keep coming. he still safer five minutes. >> thank yf( good afternoon mr. stephen goss and mr. paul spitalnic andnot be eager

to hear much of the discussion here and i have already been covered this is a really and so but i'm really grateful to the german for continuing to talk abois new each of you for being here we obviously work to ensure the promise of social security medicare people been paying into the system those promises toe know that structurally going forward if changes are made won'tortant conversation you want to talkt mr. paul spitalnic the medicare funding morning and this year medicare funding morning and can you explain what that and what is not require is a response from the legislature or the president andt that is intended to require some action so give us a background on that sue met with shore come i think it started back the modernization act back in 2003,

putting this apartment where the trustees would evaluate the portion revenues the rededicatednd when the proportion 45 percented morning in effect triggered if certain conditions were consecutive years have there wasmore than two consecutive y of general revenue or government contributions medicare programs that exceed 45 percent. somewhat of an arbitrary to apple why do we because numbers. an arbitrary as said but the idea >> so when thisthe care funding in the congress is asked that the president response and the subsequent budget would ride proposals that would that circumstance and so thedown to the 45 percent level my understanding that executive rent party

leadership's have each concluded that in their opinionthat requirement that they actually provide in response to(z