when we in the medical community talk about the ozone impact on public health it sounds like public health is a high-level concept. it really is not. public health is the accumulation of all the personal stories that make up america,, including the mother of the child with asthma who was in the emergency room worried whether there's some will recover. ..

the proposed rule is based on the early hundreds of studies that demonstrate the current standard is not protected. the studies employed multiple scientific methods and models as mentioned by previous speakers but the data are clear. the current ozone standard is not productive, protective of public health and the epa must issue a more protective standard. thank you. >> thank you very much doctor. let me ask a few questions and let me start with dr. weil nas. you have done some impressive work in rhode island studying heat related deaths and

hospitalizations. is ozone formulation, is ozone formation exacerbated by climate change in your view and what is the linkage between added heat and added ozone? >> thank you senator for that question. >> at a local question in rhode island. >> in rhode island but we have looked at is the relationship between warm temperatures and extreme heat and the number of emergency department visits and deaths in the state of rhode rhode island and we have found a strong association that means more people are hospitalized and died for heat related illnesses on those hot days. what we are trying to explore right now is whether that is made worse on high ozone days. we think from that other studies in other parts of the country and across the world days that

are both hot and high ozone are generally worse for people than days that are hot or ozone but not put together so we are looking at that currently in rhode island. i don't have the results to show you today but we'd be happy to provide this in the future. >> dr. shaw did not choose to attend the hearing but he did file pre-filed testimony with us in which he told us asthmatics are not in fact at greater risk of adverse health effects from ozone. do you have any reaction to that statement? >> i think it's just not true to be frank. there is substantial evidence that asthmatics are at least as great at risk as nonasthmatics to the health effects of ozone. as with any body of science and body of evidence not every study shows that but the overwhelming consensus in the field is that people with asthma are at greater risk.

>> ms. patton the existing standard, the previous standard was criticized at the time that it was adopted by the clean air scientific advisory committee saying, actually took the step of writing to administrator johnson to say that they do not endorse the new primary ozone standards being sufficiently protective of the public health and that decision quote fail to satisfy the explicit stipulations of the clean air act that would ensure an adequate margin of safety for all individuals including sensitive populations. you were at epa for a while and you are familiar with the scientific advisory panel the case back. was that an unusual step for them to take?

>> it was an unusual step senator whitehouse. it also highlights why the clean -- greater scientific advisory committee was so clear about its findings. it wanted to leave really very little room for ambiguity about the foundational science that supports to central conclusions. one is that the current standard is not adequate to protect public health and that is what that body found in june and its recommendations to the administrator and also there is clear evidence warranting a stronger standard. the 2008 standard was criticized sharply at the time not only by a bit greater scientific advisory committee but advised epa to establish a stronger standard but a number of leaders

in the medical and health community. >> somebody obviously didn't find the clean air scientific advisory committee to be very credible and ignoring their recommendations back in 2008. what can you tell the committee for the record and this hearing about the credibility and the credentials of the clean air scientific advisory committee? should we pay attention to what they say? >> the clean air scientific advisory committee is established under the law to provide the administrator with independent scientific and medical advice on these really important public health questions and so this particular advisory committee that most recently communicated to the administrator in june is

comprised of leading scientific experts at institutions across our country from leading academic institutions in north carolina to the research arm about the u.s. power industry the electric power research institute. a wide variety of experts on a wide variety of expertise in epidemiology and toxicology, the leading white scientific foundations and they have communicated clearly to the minister that it's her solemn responsibility to strengthen the healthy standard for ozone. >> so private citizen listening to this hearing can take comfort that the clean air scientific advisory committee is a reputable and reliable body? >> that body is a reputable,

highly-regarded body of leading scientific experts. its recommendations are also confirmed by the leading medical and health associations, the american lung association, the american public health association. >> you said the american thoracic society. >> a an extensive body of medical and health associations experts that further confirm the findings and recommendations of the clean air scientific advisory committee. >> you have made a perfect segue to dr. ferkol. tell us about the american thoracic society and presume that i have challenged the credibility of the american thoracic society. presume that i have comment i have, you at the point of view that this is an irresponsible liberal organization and explain

what the american thoracic society actually is. >> actually we are anything at that. we are somewhat egalitarian when it comes to our political leanings. the american thoracic society is based organization, professional organization of over 15,000 members that includes scientists, physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, patients, families all of whom are interested in improving the pulmonary health of patients meeting with patients who are critically ill as well as focusing to some extent on sleep disorders. it is a very prominent organization. there are a lot of different people with a lot of different views with a lot of different political leanings. i would say that we are neither left nor right in that respect. >> and so the american thoracic society in your view is also reputable and reliable when it makes a recommendation like this

within its expertise? >> i would hope so. otherwise i don't think i would want to be its president. >> thank you. so let's say you are a mother in rhode island or a father. it's a summer day and you wake up in the morning and you are preparing breakfast and you are listening to the radio and your kids are home and they are sma small. the radio announces that today is a bad air day in rhode island and children should be kept indoors. you are not really sure what that means. you take your child out to get some sunshine, to run around a little bit. is there harm that could be happening to that child that wouldn't be apparent to the data or the mom? >> i mean the scenario that you get is a very common one and it's a dilemma that families have especially when you hear about particularly bad air days. we have them in st. louis as

well. yes, there is in fact harm and is invisible. you don't smell ozone. you don't see ozone but you are being exposed to ozone and the effects of this noxious agent in the air scheme elected. it's not just to go out and get exposed to ozone and you suddenly have an asthma attack. this is something that certainly can precipitate asthma and that that's very clear as one of the causative factors but it also can lead to key militant damage to your lungs that makes your lung function worse. it may lower the threshold for the next time you have an asthma exacerbation. >> so the risk is not that the child with a vulnerable person is going to suddenly begin coughing or having shortness of breath or have an asthma attack. it's outlasting permanent insidious damage being done to

the loan that is not apparent that day. >> that's exactly right. certainly i'm sure it's contributing to the inflammation and the inflammation of the air where that leads to an asthma exacerbation but the cumulative effect and i use the word insidious. it sneaks up on you. snakes upon the patient's mixup on the family and how much of that influences the progression of lung disease, how much of this contributes to lung disease in adults is something that is a very interesting question and we have more than a few concerns about is happening happening. >> oval marble person that goes out on a bad hair day and experiences no apparent immediate effects does not feel shortness of breath and coughing doesn't anyway have a presence cents during the bad air day that they have been affected. nevertheless they could be suffering harm as a result.

>> it doesn't mean there hasn't been incremental injury to the airway to the child or when the child grows up to have problem with their lungs. >> is the problem seemed to be cumulative? >> i would probably defer to dr. wellenius. >> the type of harm we have been discussing that is not manifest any particular discomfort or shortness of breath during the day but nevertheless it's happening and could potentially manifest months or years later, correct? >> yes, absolutely. the strongest evidence is for the short-term effects. you could be outside 100 days high ozone days and not suffer an obvious effect and on the 101st you could suffer an asthma attack or land you in an

emergency depart or symptoms. there are also a cumulative effects that we have been talking about and those are not just respiratory effects that there is increasing evidence that those could also be cardiovascular effects. we are very concerned not just about the short-term effects of ozone but the longer lifeline effects. >> and you did say that they were cumulative. could you explain that? >> the science still needs to be refined in the area of what timeframe they can be cumulative but some of the cardiovascular effects can be seen in young adults with enhanced cardiovascular damage from the lifetime exposure to ozone and there are some studies demonstrating that. >> i will ask you to stand by for one moment.

[inaudible conversations] >> all right, i think at this point i will conclude the hearing. i do want with unanimous consent of all present to put into the record a combination press release and letter issued by the ranking member of the committee actually inviting the republican witnesses not to attend so their failure to appear was not just a failure to appear at their own. they were invited not to appear

by the ranking member and i would also like to state for the record that the question about proceeding with this hearing after the adjournment of the senate last night was one that we have taken up with senate legal counsel. we have been advised that we can proceed with a legitimate hearing and so we have moved forward with that advice. so we are going to continue to treat this as a legitimate hearing that i believe that it is and that means the record of the hearing remains open for an additional week. after the conclusion of the hearing and let me also add to the record a statement for the record by senator inhofe. chairman whitehouse thank you for holding this hearing and so forth. senator inhofe statement will be

entered into the record alongside senator vitter's press release denying that this is a hearing. it's getting interesting around here already. anyway, the record of the hearing will remain open. let me think again all of our witnesses for coming down. this is in my view a long-overdue change in a rule that had no validity from the very beginning and thank you very much for not only your support for the epa action but for your support for epa pushing towards a local -- lower 16 part per billion standard which i believe is the unanimous recommendation of the assembled panel. so without further ado we will adjourn the hearing and again thank you all very much for your participation. [inaudible conversations]

next united nations secretary-general ban ki-moon holds a year-end news conference. he comments on a range of topics including today's announcement to normalize relations between the u.s. and cuba. he also talks about the ebola outbreak in west africa. his recent trip to lima on climate change and the

humanitarian crisis in syria. from new york city, this is 45 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon. the secretary general will make opening remarks and then we will be delighted to take your questions. welcome and the floor is yours. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. it's a great pleasure to see y you. i am very glad to see you so bright-eyed after last nights dinner. in fact we have some pieces of cake left if anybody wants, you

are welcome. thank you for all your friendship and cooperation and support for the united nations work and thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen since i have just come back from lima after attending the climate change meeting let me begin with climate change. in lee, governments depend on the success of the climate change summit which i convened in september of this year and place the building blocks for a meaningful universal climate change agreement in paris next year. member states advanced on several fronts. first they agreed to serve as the basis for the next round of negotiations beginning in february in geneva.

second, they provided clarity on the commitments to be included in the national plans of action or what we call ind c.. this is an abbreviation of intended nationally determined contributions due in march. they built confidence and trust most notably by capitalizing the green climate fund with an initial $10 billion. fourth they advanced an action agenda designed to show the wealth of opportunities offered by the transition to low-carbon pathway.

taken together these are steps maintaining the momentum towards paris and there is still a great deal of work ahead on difficult issues. but civil society now agrees that they must curb the growth in emissions. in my eight years as secretary-general that was the eighth conference meeting and that was the most encouraging conference i have attended. ladies and gentlemen we have also made progress this year towards finishing the job of millennial development role -- goals and laying the groundwork for a new agenda including a set of sustainable development goals and the resources needed to achieve them. in the year ahead three

high-level meetings in new york and paris give us the opportunity to turn a new era of sustainable development. as you know in july there is going to be high-level conference on financing for the government an inch in the president of the general assembly is going to contain a high-level meeting on climate change near the point of december. and we are going to have a special session on sustainability in september, a summit meeting. as i indicated in my report a row to dignity the stars are aligned for the world to take

historic action to transform lives and protect credit. alongside these gains the world has come through a year of discord, disease and disruption. peace operations, diplomacy and humanitarian capacities have been pushed to their limit. more than 100 million people need assistance and more than 50 million people have been driven from their homes since the second world war. the outbreak of ebola in west africa has challenged the community in unprecedented ways. the united nations mobilized its first-ever systemwide emergency health mission. i love to visit liberia mali and

sierra leone the four countries most affected by the ebola outbreak as well as ghana where the headquarters are located. this will include five countries during my visit. i was accompanied by dr dr. margaret chung director of w.h.o. and the special envoy on ebola. mr. anthony barberie special representative in ghana will join me to hold affected countries from ghana. i want to see the response for myself and show my solidarity with those affected and urge even greater global action. the responders are doing heroic work. national governments are highly engaged. there has been an impressive outpouring of lifesaving

contributions from across africa and across the world. the ebola response is working and we are beginning to see improvements. now is not the time to ease up on our efforts. as long as there is one case of ebola or risk remains. we must do everything we can to get 20. at the same time we remain shorter people and resources. moreover the ebola continues to drive up food prices, taking children out of school and driving -- away from business activities. ladies and gentlemen this ear in syria the successful dismantling of the chemical weapons program has been of little consolation to the people who have seen the

war rage raged on. in south sudan the policies have saved many thousands of lives but our peacekeeping bases where we are sheltering 100,000 people remains fragile as it does throughout the country. nigeria and iraq have spread insurgencies. in ukraine this situation risks freezing in place with regional and global -- instability remains widely spread in afghanistan. following these hostilities in gaza the leaders of israel and palestine have a responsibility to step back from the brink is the current tensions and salvage a two-state solution. that is looking ever more remote. ladies and gentlemen it is time

for global action. i would like to highlight four imperatives. first, ambition is high to forge a huge government agenda and seek climate change agreement. second 2015 must be the year in which we and the nightmare in syria and avert the escalation of other situations. third, we must do more to counter the rise of far right political parties that target minorities, migrants and in particular muslims. fourth, we will continue to adapt the united nations to a new global landscape. a number of key reviews of united nations have come -- will

come to fruition in 2015 including panels on peace operation which i launched last month, peacekeeping by the general assembly and humanitarian financing and implementation of the security council's resolution 1325 on peace and security. these assessments are an opportunity to build on the other reforms we have pursued throughout my tenure. in my travels this year i have seen so much suffering from gaza to the refugee camps. i have met so many people whose lives who are at risk and struggling to build a better life for themselves and their families. as you mark the 70th anniversary of united nations next year we have a duty to answer the call of people across the world for shared prosperity

and a sustainable future. i would like to extend my best wishes to all of you for a happy holidays and a happy new year. i thank you very much. >> thank you we will take questions. we don't have much time. please keep your questions short. >> i will make it very fast. on behalf of u.n. correspondents association happy new year. my question is about cuba. the u.s. is beginning normalization processes. the u.n. general assembly voted annually to lift the embargo. can you comment on where the united nations might go with that especially since you visited? >> i have been informed by the u.s. government. this news is very positive. i would like to thank president barack obama of the united

states and president raul castro for taking this important step towards normalizing relations. as much as the membership of the united nations have repeatedly emphasized through a general assembly resolution for many years it is time cuba and the united states normalized their bilateral relations. in that regard i welcome today's developments. i sincerely hope that this measure on this announcement will help to extend farther the exchanges between the people who have been separated for a long time. the united nations stands ready to help both countries to

cultivate their good neighboring relations. >> thank you. >> secretary-general u. said in 202015 new hope is the year to end the nightmare in syria. your representative seems to be doing crisis management for a very terrible place in syria. do you approve of the piecemeal approach that is being criticized and what makes you confident that you would presume that geneva. >> of course we would like to have a comprehensive peace and stability and development. that is basically our principle approaches.

but what the special envoy has been doing is not piecemeal. he has proposed a freeze in aleppo. this is not a substitute for broader comprehensive peace arrangements. but when you want to really have a broader comprehensive approach you should have all the elements starting from smaller things are easier things. of course even having this freeze in aleppo is not easy. karzai to through his meetings with president assad of syria and many actors in the region, this is gaining political support. most recently the european union

foreign ministers gathered. we will try to build upon it but what is most important at this time after almost four years of killing each other the violence must stop regardless of what kind of arguments or difference of opinion there may be. the violence must stop and they should sit down together to talk about their own future in a peaceful manner. this is what is demonstrated to me. >> as we started the geneva meeting we need to sit down together sort of a geneva two or

whatever it may be called but unfortunately it has not been created. i am making it clear that aleppo is not the substitute. as you say it is not a piecemeal approach. this is part of a comprehensive approach. >> thank you secretary-general. i have a question on the dprk human rights issue. this year we have seen a lot of unprecedented development in this issue read the coi report was pointed out a lot of allegations and examples of human rights in the country with the country has not accepted it and next week the secretary council is expected to have a discussion about that issue. what is your view on this latest

developments and do you think a discussion by the security council will help the situation get better cracks. >> the human rights situation in dprk has become has received acute attention from the international community. most recently the third committee has adopted the resolution and the general assembly is going to take action on this. there is again discussion in the security council that the dpa agenda should be adopted in the security council. these are matters for the member states either the general assembly where the council to determine.

in many situations of serious humanitarian and human rights violations, there has been a risk of social economic and political instability. we have seen many such cases. there are displaced people and refugees and it impacts the well-being of people as member states and i myself was the secretary-general through my own report to the general assembly, i have made it quite clear that the dprk should listen carefully and sincerely to the course of the international community to promote and protect human rights and also to do all they can to

increase the well-being, promote the well-being of their own people. that is my sincere wish. >> mr. secretary-general earlier you mentioned the situation in ukraine and the original situation and the foreign minister of affairs said russia supports integrity of ukraine. from your point of view how can we stabilize the situation but. >> the situation in ukraine has been a source of deep concerns for the whole international community, not to mention the people of ukraine and the countries and people in the region. the situation in ukraine has

very serious global implications. that is why the whole world particularly the european union and usa and russia they have been heavily engaged. i am deeply concerned by the continuing situation, the narrative situation in ukraine. while the recent agreement seems to be holding but still we have seen a lot of casualties. just since september 5 when the parties have agreed on the minsk protocol and memoranda more than 1000 people have lost their lives. it has impacted seriously and

economically and it's going to impact the economic, regional economic situation. therefore i am urging that the parties should sit down together to abide by fully the letters in the spirit of minsk protocol and memorandum. this was the one that resulted in very intense consultation in negotiations with the help of many important regional countries. and i'm urging them to really abide by this. as far as the united nations is concerned the human rights monitoring mission will continue next year. the mandate was december of this

month but it has been extended. we will try to mobilize humanitarian assistance to deliver assistance wherever it may be needed. >> "associated press" of pakistan. mr. secretary-general, thank you paid you have spoken out strongly on the slaughter of children in pakistan yesterday. subsequently have you been in touch with pakistan leadership and would you think there should be much stronger international support and support for countries like pakistan but the threat of terrorism? >> recently that terrorism community has been -- the spread of terrorism and extremism. what we have seen in pakistan is

a totally unacceptable. that is why i have condemned it in the strongest possible terms. we have seen so many things in pakistan and afghanistan and nigeria and somalia and elsewhere. it's important, most important at this time how the international community must mobilize all resources and political will and help those countries affected to address extremism and terrorism. as you know the united nations has established to counterterrorism center on the department of political affairs. we are now actively engaging with the countries who are in

danger to this terrorism and extremism and we will try to help those member states to strengthen their national capacity. for example we have been in contact with the nigerian government to organize capacity building workshop in january of next year. i will also consider what we can do with pakistan and other countries. >> thank you mr. secretary-general. as i'm sure you know there have been some intensive meetings going on in the past few days on the israeli-palestinian confli conflict, the possibilities of trying to get some action here at the united nations.

what would you like to see, out of the security council? what kind of resolution? >> i understand discussions are taking place on the issue between members of the security council and relevant stakeholders. this is a matter for the security council to decide. that being said i would certainly welcome the engagement and guidance to advance the middle east peace process. i have been personally meeting and engaging with the leaders of palestine and israel. the leaders in the region and global leadership.

as a member of the quartet and as the secretary-general of the united nations. we are strongly urging that the israelis and palestinians, the leadership sit down together and resolve this. the security council can take their actions but it is up to the two parties come the two leaders so that they can discuss all the pending issues. i believe that they have identified all the issues. they know what are the fundamental issues to resolve the i have been urging and i am urging again that they can realize a two-state solution. israelis and palestinian people

can live side-by-side in peace and security. this is a two state vision and i hope that we will see such peace and stability come to their people. >> just as a quick follow-up you mentioned the quartet. it seems to many people and many observers that the quartet has really failed to produce any significant progress. >> the principle level quartet has not been taking place. the envoys have been continuously meeting among themselves to discuss and provide the recommendations for the principle leaders to engage with concerned parties. >> thanks. the u.s. recent released its

report on torture over the last 11 years. were 12 or 13 years. and the high commissioner for human rights condemned it. what lessons do you think should be taken away from this scandal if we can call it that and particularly in terms of not just the torture or enhanced interrogation techniques that were used but also countries cooperating with secret detention centers and things like that? >> the release of the torture report by the u.s. senate shows that torture is still taking place in many parts of the world and around the world. as you know there are 56 countries who have joined this convention against torture.

it's a stark reminder that we still need to do much more to stamp out torture practices everywhere. as i have often said the prohibition of torture is an absolute principle. there are no situations where it should be used under any circumstances. the release of this report is to be commended by shining a light on what happens in that area. i think we can stop this torture. this is one of the important principles to promote human dignity and to protect human rights. this has started the conversation not only in the united states and around the

world and i am urging all the countries and particularly political leaders and security related officials to do their utmost efforts to protect the human rights and human dignity. as this report has been released this should be the start of a discussion on how the international community can completely stamp out this torture practice. >> i have two questions. one is about -- the fact that you wanted to see the response on the ground yourself do you have any specific good news to share with the people on the ground who are looking for one thing which is a vaccine and my second question is if you don't

mind. >> translator: the general assembly has just officially launched a list of african persons and how do you see that evolving and the next 10 years and how do you think that will change relations? for persons of african descent and those responsible for the transatlantic slave trade? >> the main purpose of my visit is clear. i just wanted to demonstrate my strong solidarity on behalf of the united nations and on behalf of the whole international community. the people have been dying without much help. therefore that is why the united nations really mobilized in an unprecedented way the massive support financially and

logistically providing all we can do to treat them. as you know we have stated five principles and establishing -- first to stop this ebola virus and second to take all necessary measures to provide necessary essential services and preserve stability in the country politically and economically and prevent further outbreak of this ebola. all these proposals are being met. where our strategy has been properly placed i think we have been seeing the results.

this curve is now pending that there is no time to be complacent. we have to make sure the last case will be cured. that is why i am going to ask the five countries and i'm going to meet our staff. i will try to visit some facilities provided by a key countries like the united stat states, the united kingdom and some other places and local centers. also to share my strong support. then i will discuss further with member states what needs to be done.

as i said still we are in need of much more support logistical and financial support. the speed up this virus is in a sense outpacing what the international community has been doing. this is my main purpose. i have an opportunity meeting you on my return. i will brief you on what i have seen and what the international community will need to do more on. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: as to your question in french, thank you for that question. throughout the world people of every dissent are continuing to look at the challenges.

they are often am forced in the most marginalized. they are dealing with discrimination and we must do more to ensure that they are a portable he treated specially in the areas of justice. this decade as an opportunity to launch -. i hope that in 10 years their situation will have been greatly -- improved throughout the world. i am counting on commitment from everyone including the member states in order to make a difference through initiatives.

you can count on me as secretary-general. i will work closely with particularly the african union and the countries of africa. thank you. >> thank you secretary-general. the palestinian people have been subject to the most -- for 47 years. occupation is illegal as you know and he keeps saying i am proud to be a custodian of the u.n. security council resolution in the u.n. security council. there are many mandates by people who are under occupation to resist occupation. their land has been confiscated. >> the question please. >> my question is do you agree sir that it's fine to speak out for a real independent

palestinian state and if everything fails in the security council do you agree that the palestinian people have the right to resist occupation? >> as you said there are generous assembly resolutions and general counsel resolutions. it's up to the member states. the responsibility should rest with the member states to implement and applied by these resolutions particularly when the security council resolutions are binding. unfortunately because of lack of political will of concerned parties the palestinian people have not been able to enjoy what they should enjoy as a human being. that is why negotiations are

important. there seems to be a lack of political will to sit down together and there is a lack of political -- which are conducive to the resumption of dialogue. therefore it is absolutely necessary that the parties concerned should take very careful and sincere positions to create a certain political -- and refrain from taking unilateral actions. of course this occupation is illegal and it has been clearly defined by the united nations resolutions, by the security council. therefore what is more important it is while the international community is now ready to support their cause it's up to

the two parties who are directly concerned whether to sit down and be ready to engage in dialogue. i have been meeting with prime minister netanyahu and his predecessors and i have been meeting with president abbas numerous times and i have been repeating them. as a neighboring, as neighbors they have no other alternatives but to live in peace and security and harmoniously. ..

>> >> to be more effective in the efficient. i am aware of that kind of assessments in the wake of the ebola outbreak provide help the of member states to discuss this when does the secretary general with the agency's. >> thank you very much.

mitt sations.

at seven pm eastern. >> coming up, the senate finance committee hears testimony. tax and retirement policy analysts speak about the gap between how much americans are saving and savings needed. this runs two hours. [inaudible conversations] >> the finance committee will come to order. where you take a look get this state of retirement savings in america is clear that something is out of

black american taxpayer delivers $140 billion per year to subsidize retirement accounts. but still millions of americans near retirement have little or nothing saved. of the incentives for savings are just not getting to those that need them the most under steady spells out the issue the federal reserve found last month an employee would nibble at the savings at $59,000 set aside for retirement but according to the gao 9,000 taxpayers have i.r.a. accounts more than $5 million per though it would take several lifetimes of work for the

middle class americans to save that much money. also had this massive i.r.a. accounts come to the? they seem to be sweetheart stock deals that most investors would have never have access to. executives buy stock and rock-bottom price sometimes of fraction of a penny her share an used as a tax shelter. the stock starts soft dirt cheap and then it turns to gold and the i.r.a. issued set up in value. no one should begrudge them their success but it was never intended to be a tax shelter for millionaires but designed to help typical americans say before retirement we continue to

work on modernizing the tax code and looking to fix this issue. with limited resources it is crucial to use taxpayer dollars as wisely as possible. the same study included another piece of information nearly one-third of workers have no pension and nothing said aside for retirement. it is a fact that with today's economy millions of americans are walking on the economic tight rope banner unable to save. report after report shows america's middle-class is at best struggling to stay afloat. five years after the great recession is tough for people to find a and keep a steady job. si la cost of a college education continues to rise is in many are not even

close to a full recovery of many working families ha -- continue to see there take-home pay drop. and young people are changing jobs more frequently than ever and they find it difficult to save without a portable savings accounts. women have a special part with savings accounts the leave it to beaver idea that the employee stays with one firm 40 years is soaring the outdated. retirement policies need to keep up with the times of the finance committee will begin to examine those issues. one proposal pursued by my home state of oregon and businesses offer retirement plans and many have trouble

saving anything at all. so the state set up a retirement savings task force to look at solutions did yesterday their recommended there is the auto eire program for any worker who was not covered by the employee retirement plan and a percentage goes into savings accounts and the contribution would rise with time and it would not be mandatory and employees could opt out anytime but certainly has the potential to be a first step of retirement security. the tax code in my view should give all americans, all americans a chance to get ahead in making it easier to save is the best way to accomplish that that is why at a bipartisan basis we need to look at the savings and venture they help

middle-class americans prepare for retirement and not just set up tax shelters for millionaires. senator hatch welcome your statement. >> this is an important hearing and an important topic with an outstanding panel of witnesses. retirement policies are always in important topic to this committee and it is always better bipartisan. legislation has been named for senators for the committee. and it was known as carted for those colleagues of us of the committee.

the bipartisanship i believe will continue. during the recent highway bill markup we work together our multi employer pension reform. and now we have one for the modern economy that last week received high marks from the urban institute and in fact, received the highest marks i hope bipartisanship will continue for the next retirement bill that becomes law. we have lawyers and had incentives to encourage savings for retirement but there are no bad savings. incentives on occasion with the eye and incentives to increase savings. in 2001 congress increased the limits to the contributions to the 401k

play and so today a worker can contribute $17,200,500 and 5,000 to the i.r.a.. it also added a catch-up contribution feature to allow workers to contribute several thousands of dollars more beginning in their fifties when they start to get serious about savings or for those spouses have the opportunity to say it again. congress believed it was important to increase the amount of the employee deferrals under the plans and a better enable participants to say bandit reap -- it worked. retirement assets rose from $3 trillion to nearly

6 trillion despite the market's downturn in 2008 for his grown-up to 6. $5 trillion in increased contribution limits work so well that congress made it permanent and it was overwhelming 93 to five. bid last 25 years democrats and republicans work together with a mutually shared goal and republicans agree to a small business owners need to haveinners need n the game to take on the burdens to maintain a retirement plan.

will leave the i become concerned to turn pension policy in to another piece of background and retirement policy as another friend -- another front for congress. i read to disregard that bipartisan bill would be unfortunate mr. chairman what i hope to hear today is a policy consideration we need to know how much income americans are projected to need and if there is a shortfall what policies say recommend to help americans close the gap but the upside down tax incentives or pension in the stripping

without substantiating data. there are serious policy proposals new suit -- needed and thank you again and scott has done excellent work helping it the people of utah to save and i am greatly would travel to be here today it's. >> the bipartisan tradition to focus on the savings incentives and that is fact driven is the gao to help us

with the most recent developments of savings and weaken the the committee and afford to pursuing that. we still have one very talented member who was battling amtrak delays we're hoping she will be with us it we're trying to navigate through that. [laughter] of course, the founder and former ceo of vanguard than the next witness is the chief economist in myth third witness is senior vice president of national benefit services. then the professor of public

policy in corporate management at the kennedy school of government. with a 401k plans and no number of colleagues are interested to discuss that. and from the american enterprise thing institute invited say that i wore my doc tied to day and they did not wear it or to weeks after is the triumph over michigan state. [laughter] and i could not hold off any longer. [laughter] there will be another day. >> ironclad the fight is between two democrats this time. [laughter] we look forward to your presentation finally have a

tight schedule so mr. brown will begin. >> good morning. i am honored to be with you. my career in the financial-services begin more than 63 years ago and in 1974 i founded the vanguard group the new company and the mutual-fund scene we now manages $3 trillion of other people's money and have become the largest mutual-fund firm in the world. the principal reason for that success is that since 2008 it has accounted for almost one half of the mutual-fund industry entire cash flow. we were funded with a single focus to serve mutual fund investors. our management company is

owned not by the public gore a conglomerate but today it is the corporate structure we your own and by our mutual fund that is owned by the 20 million shareholders. we are a mutual mutual-fund is operated at the at cost basis and the profits you otherwise make or rebated to the shareholders and also founder of the first index mutual fund is simply mimics the portfolio of an index of prices peso investment advisory fee it carries a

rock-bottom expense ratio of 0.05% compared to other groups charging 200 basis points is that has accounted for more than 350% of u.s. equity net cash flows taking in $750 billion in the picture is pretty clear to now constitute 33%. and at vanguard $1 trillion for corporations large and small.

of all the contribution plans we're now the largest provider in mutual-fund assets. we have a huge stake with businesses to ensure the nation's retirement planners structured efficiently and to have that menem -- management cost outside those costs are grossly excessive but unfortunately the retirement system today is better structurally efficient nor fiscally sound each leg of the retirement system is headed for serious train wreck others assume social security and pension funds are soundly financed but they're not mine is a social security with a few changes to moderate the

growth of contributions. a of the defined benefit plan letter mostly the deeply under water by $4 trillion or more will require more investor returns as well as higher employer, to regions and lower employee benefits with the largest and fastest component over time crying over structurally efficiency and production the retirement fund is slashed simply if they invest a low-cost mutual funds then investor's return the long-term wealth could be increased by 65 percent from

five mitt is $61,000 from $927,000 and $366,000 advantage by taking the cost of the system down to where it would re-read the larger contributions to reduce the withdraw savings on demand and have some requirements to maintain contributions to have access to the plans and we need to limit the participation of high-cost of the i.r.a. we also need of federal standard of fiduciary need including fund managers so far there virtually ignored by policymakers regulators and legislators and i will explain more fully in

prepared testimony by overtime. thank you for hearing me out. >> very thankful and helpful. >> figure for the opportunity to testify per gram the chief economist the world's leading association of regulators we manage assets of more than $17 trillion in serve more than 90 million shareholders the point of today's hearing that is half of the defined contribution plan. to devote years of research and resources to making in communicating an accurate assessment today's such an assessment recognizes three key facts first american's retirement system build retirement security for a majority of americans. the tax incentives are in

deferral our key to this excessive strength of that system. and while there are opportunities to improve to build upon the current structure in not the system times. and to contradict what you hear so let me explain. not only does it cover all working americans but 80 percent of 2013 had improved pension benefits with industry research demonstrates the system was stronger in the past half century. the poverty rate among the elderly have fallen since 1966 from 30% down and 9% the lowest among all age groups. since 1975 assets earmarked has increased sevenfold

after adjusting for inflation retirees receiving private sector pension income has increased by more than 60% in the median private sector income after adjusting for inflation has increased by 40 percent the statistics speak to the impact of the bipartisan efforts to transform social security and to a strong foundation for america's retirement system to have laws and tax incentives as important as it is for employers to offer employees to participate in nature is misunderstood the tax incentives take the form of a tax deferral because earnings through a traditional plan are taxed with a retiree withdraws the income it is different from

the tax deduction were the initial tax is never recovered. in economic terms the after-tax rate of return that is the incentive to save they invested the zero tax rate for all income groups so to create that upside down incentive tax deferrals equalize all savers with all income groups to encourage support among a wide range of workers. those including tax incentives in the fall 2013 survey 86 percent to eliminate the defined contribution plans in 83 percent oppose any reduction of limits. despite the strength and success mitt could be improved but changes the

current system should not put a better risk. we support measures to promote retirement savings and put social security on a sound footing as the universal employment base plan for all americans offer innovation and growth, helps smaller employers to offer simple plans and easier access to multiple employer plans and also to retirement in combat the essential is that they build upon and do not replace the system and it is dependent on what congress provides for savings so with the employer sponsored plans reduce their desire to participate but instead undoubtedly reduced the employers that sponsor

of many benefits of plant participation it has many strengths and successes and believe it will enhance security for regeneration is to cover our look forward to your questions. >> up next is mr. scott. . ., ranking member, members of the finance committee for the opportunity to talk with you. my name is scott betz, senior vice president of national benefit services. a fee-for-service third-party administrator. more than 225 employees located in west jordan, utah and supports more than 7500 retirement benefit plans. 7500 retirement benefit plans. our goal is to give every working american the ability

to save for a comfortable retirement. i have been working with employers for almost 20 years and can tell you firsthand that qualified retirement plans a proven successful for millions of workers. what i see every day is born out of some important statistics, middle-class statistics, middle-class families representing the overwhelming majority of participants, 80% make less than a hundred thousand dollars a year. 43 percent make less than 50,000. an analysis by the nonpartisan employee benefits research institute found over 70% of of workers aren't between 30,000 and $50,000 participated $50,000 participated in employment sponsored retirement plans whereas less than 5 percent without access contributed to an ira. in other words, workers in this group were 15 times more likely to save for retirement at work than

on there own. own. if increasing retirement and financial security is the goal increasing the availability of workplace plans is the way to get their which is why it is so important that no harm be done to the current structure. the the tax incentive for retirement savings is unique , a tax deferral, not a permanent permanent right off. contributions made this year are not tax this year. also, the tax incentive for employer-sponsored plans unlike exclusions, with nondiscrimination rules and limits to ensure contributions do not discriminate in favor of more highly compensated employees. the result is tax incentive that is more progressive.

in chart three you will see families earning under $50,000 pay 9% of income taxes that received 27 percent of the benefit of the tax deferral. the good news is over 60 million working americans currently benefit through participation in employer-sponsored retirement plans. the bureau of labor statistics reports report 70 percent of full-time civilian workers have access and 81% of those workers participated in these arrangements. in spite of these positive numbers there are millions who do not have plans available. more can and should be done. employees can say for their retirement. there are some changes that can and should be made to streamline plan operations, eliminate pitfalls and penalties. you're safe retirement act has the right focus and

strikes the right balance. the starter 4o1k plan proposal would allow business owners a way to offer employees a chance to save. another important change proposed would allow employers to adopt a qualified retirement plan after the end of the year when the final results of business for the prior year are available. this would literally open a window for more plans to be adopted and more employer dollars contributed. also permits small employers to band together in multiple employer plan arrangements while providing critical safeguards through creating a new designated service provider. finally, we also address many of the inefficiencies and traps for the unwary employer. retirement system works well, but we need to do more

enact reforms that will further and sent employers to provide a retirement savings vehicle. your bill is big step in the right direction to removing complexities and expanding the availability of workplace plans some more business owners will be able to provide a better retirement plan. thank you, and i'm happy to answer any further questions >> thank you, you, and thank you for being here. >> chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and share my thoughts. public policy has historically promoted savings using financial incentives. in the united states the primary inducement to save is the exemption of retirement savings plan contributions. the joint community on taxation places the magnitude of this tax expenditure at $127 billion annually.

lower income taxpayers are eligible for the saver's credit have a further -- has a further enticement. public policy encourage employers to provide there own financial inducements, namely the provision of an employer match. a match. a large body of academic literature has examined the responsiveness of savings. a rather consistent finding is that the behavioral response to changes and incentives is not particularly large. in a recent paper i surveyed academic literature on the impact of one kind of financial incentives on savings plan participation and contributions. the studies using the most credible empirical methods find strikingly similar results using a variety of different data sources. matching contribution of 25% increases savings plan participation by roughly

five percentage points. modest at best. conditional on participating in a savings plan financial incentives can impact how much individual save, but this does not come from the magnitude is so much as ron the fact that at some.the incentive expires. and many plans the employer provides a match a match but only up to a certain fraction of pay. the savers credit gives eligible low and moderate income households of financial incentive to save for retirement but only for the first $2,000 contributed when financial incentives to save our limited to savings below a certain threshold this threshold becomes a a focal.as individuals decide how much to save. data shows data shows that savings plan participants overwhelmingly choose contribution rates that are either multiples of five or the match threshold. this

finding suggests the match threshold may be a much more important parameter than the match rate. the relatively small impact of financial incentives suggests that a failure to save is not primarily the result of an adequate financial incentive, rather there are other barriers to savings not addressed by traditional policy solutions the literature on behavioral economics points to a marriott afflictions that impede successful saving, procrastination, lack of financial literacy coupled with the complexity of determining how much to say and how best to invest, inattention, and the temptation to spend. in many cases countering these corrections leads to increases in savings plan participation and the accumulation to surpass the financial incentive. before discussing policy alternatives to financial incentives that are informed by behavioral economics let

me note that from a behavioral economic standpoint the tax code is particularly ill-suited to generating financial incentive. first, the tax code is complicated. it is difficult for the average taxpayer to assess the financial incentives he or she faces. for example, in a research project am working on my co-authors and i have found that most individuals do not accurately understand the tax implications of saving and in a roth versus a regular 4o1k. the low or moderate income taxpayers assessing the incentives would likely be a daunting task. indeed, i attempted to do so and repairing -- preparing these remarks and quickly gave up. individuals are more responsive to immediate and delayed financial incentives that many of the financial incentives to say that operate through the tax code in the late. the benefits are delayed, as

are the benefits of tax to the actions or credits that are not processed through payroll deduction or reduced taxes. ironically what could be a very effective financial incentive to encourage individuals to enroll in a workplace savings plan, a small but immediate financial reward is not allowed in savings plans under current law. financial incentives are not a a savings panacea. the most effective method is automatic enrollment. the impact the impact of automatic enrollment on participation rate can be sizable and is greatest for the groups with the lowest saving rates initially younger and lower income workers. expanding the reach of automatic enrollment is the most promising policy step we can take to increase american saving for retirement which means continuing to increase the number of employees with savings plans, increasing

the number of employees who offer savings plans and providing simple savings alternatives for individuals who are self-employed for employers who do not and are unlikely to ever sponsor a savings plan. policy initiatives that support these measures include auto ira proposals and legislation to facilitate multiple employer plans. paradoxically a savings system that in the absence of automatic enrollment makes saving complicated by the same time making it easy for individuals to tap into their retirement savings, another policy response needed is to encourage retirement wealth accumulation, reduce leakage in conclusion, the lessons are clear. if you want individuals to save, make it easy. if you want individuals to save more, make it easy. if you want employers to help the workers save, make it easy. if you want you want individuals to spend less, make it hard. >> i got the draft.

i just want to make sure everyone understands something. you have been a leading scholar. you still you still give the individual the last word. the individual can choose not to automatically enroll. >> yes. >> okay. welcome. >> chairman, ranking member, thank you you for the opportunity to testify today the word crisis is often overused. generally this is harmless. the perception of a crisis sometimes causes people to leave before they look. this is the case today. one well-known study claims that when 50% of 50 percent of americans are at risk of insufficient retirement income. another study another study claims 85 percent. the total retirement savings can reach 40 40 trillion.

americans collect only a pittance. in response some are proposing expensive expansions. others argue that they are not working. these claims are overblown and the policies are not solutions. this this kind of analysis is necessarily complex. first,. first, the majority of today's retirees are doing well. 75% tell pollsters tell pollsters they have enough money to live comfortably. data on poverty and other measures show that most retirees today are able to match the preretirement standard of living. the best research out there from a model developed by the social security administration using input from the best retirement experts projects that future generations will have about the same level of retirement security as today's retirees

specifically ssa projects in retirement generation x will have the same replacement rate as individuals born during the depression who supposedly enjoyed a golden age. this model incorporates some of the same data from the federal reserve study you referenced earlier. the earlier. the employee benefit research institute projects retirement security for future generations will roughly hold steady. put those two facts together and you come to this conclusion. if we don't have a crisis today it does not appear we we will have one in the future. around 25 percent are unprepared for retirement with relatively modest savings shortfalls. these are targeted. one study finds that single, less single, less educated women are likely twice to fall short for retirement. while we do not need to reinvent the wheel, we need to do something.

i am in favor of auto enrollment pension plans. .. so personal savings can only go so far for these individuals. at the same time though social security treat single women far less well than it does married

women so they are not getting much help from that end of things either. that's one reason i and others have proposed reforming social security to provide a flat universal benefit for all retirees regardless of income participation. on top of that individual would save in accounts provided through their employer or of not available through the government. this approach is qualitatively similar to that of the u.k. australia canada and new zealand. in the u.s. context you can affordably reduce the elderly poverty rate from today's level of roughly 9% to approximately 0% while increasing the retirement savings among the middle and high high-income workers who truly should be saving more. the lesson in all this is that there is no simple problem and no simple solution but a small if more complex problem is better in the retirement crisi crisis -- then a retirement crisis. >> senator brennan we have a hearing in a few minutes we will start with him.

>> thank you mr. chairman. thank you for this special dispensation here. 1970 a political scientist named ben wattenberg decided to try to find out what person represented america the best, who was the prototypical american and he settled on a white woman in dayton ohio married to a union machinist who had a pension plan, a defined benefit pension plan. in those days of family income was about 60,000. she was right in the middle. half of america was poorer than she and half of america was wealthier than she. today that machinist wife in dayton probably wouldn't, she certainly wouldn't have a defined pension benefit. she and her husband would probably have less equity in their home. depending on the estimates if she is in her mid-50's she would have savings of somewhere in the vicinity i know scholars differ

on this from as little as $11,000 she would be worth. if you look at fed numbers to up to $50,000 take the middle, whatever that number is she will have to rely on social security for most of her income when she retires. in fact today in my state ohio is not much different from other states the majority people on social security rely on social security for more than half of their income. the person in the middle will get no more than 13 or $1400 a month so we know an enormous percentage of the american worker she is in the middle. half are poorer than she is. for this number social security is in doubt. you make a number of important points about adequacy. one point is about the high cost funds and too many choices can rob sophisticated investors those in the middle or slightly lower can rob in their ability

to adequately save. my question to you is should congress make it mandatory to auto one role and auto escalate into low caste -- low-cost index funds? >> auto enroll is easy to say why not have it mandated. i for one would be the champion for index funds. for heaven sakes let's look at this way senator. all of the investors in america all of us total the us total stock market together. they are a giant index fund so they can go to an index fund -- or the stock market for two to five basis points and if they want to fight among themselves to see who is the bus and get managers to help outguess the others they will get the return less 200 basis points. so it's mathematically correct and i probably shouldn't get

into this here but it's probably politically undoable. it is should be made a more important qualification for entry into the system. >> is auto escalate good? >> auto escalate as good. >> is people's income go up a slightly higher percentage will go into that fund. >> these things are right and correct as principles and the fact of the matter is every family is different. should you want to escalate for a man with six children all going to college and a wife who is maybe ill? in other words when you go from generalities and particulars it's a tough. >> but that mr. bogle is why you have the option to opt out. thank you mr. bogle. dr. madrian he said he should not have to be in the middle class to get access to tax preference same as vehicles. they should be designed to help workers get into the middle

class. what policy changes do we need to make to ensure this happens for instance ways -- raise the minimum wage? what policy changes do we need to give people a lift to give assistance to get into the middle class to get access to these vehicles? >> in my mind the biggest problem with the current system is that many workers don't have access to save for retirement through payroll deduction because their employer is not offering a savings plan or they are not eligible for the savings plan that their employer is offering. so i think initiatives to encourage small employers to offer a savings plan and a small employer is a lot like the individual investor. joe from joe's pizza doesn't have an mba, doesn't have

dedicated human resources professional and is no better at picking a savings plan for his employees and his employees are at picking from 8000 mutual funds what's the best way to save for retirement is. so having an option that the ec for joe's pizza and other employers like joe would help close the access gap. so allowing communities to have the chamber of commerce sponsor a multiple employer pension plan where joe doesn't have to worry about fiduciary liability, picking the right or wrong investment options and the employees who are in the same workforce and locality have a similar benefit plan. they can talk about it and they can learn about it. things like that would go a long way towards closing the access gap. providing incentives for companies to open a savings plan

to all employees so if some companies part-time workers are excluded. these are simple measures that could go a long way. another point that i brought up in my testimony is current law right now does not allow for companies to give a small financial incentives to sign up for the savings plan in the first place so if he didn't have automatic enrollment or even if you did to encourage employees to opt in rather than opt out you could not for examples they sign before the end of the month and you will get a $50 amazon gift card or sign up by the end of the month and we will let you in a drawing for an ipad. things that banks have used in the past to get people to sign up for a savings account, phone companies that used to get employees to sign up for their cell phone plan. those are not allowed under current law even though the literature on employee behavior

suggests small and medium financial rewards are in fact very effective types of incentives. >> we have to move on at this point. thank you senator brown. senator hatch. >> thank you mr. chairman. i would just assume you go ahead of me. mr. betts you have been trying to convince small employers to adopt a retirement plan for their workers. can you explain further number one what are their motivations when they make a decision to offer a plan and what would convince him to say no to setting up a new plan? >> thank you senator hatch for the question. working for many years it's been that the incentives that the government has allowed in these plans incentivizing employers to set them up. incentives motivate the employers to buy this retirement plan for their employees and there's a very powerful

incentive. many employers like to do it because it's the right thing. it's also many jobseeking employers that have the 401(k) plan but that incentive is a key piece. if that were changed or removed any employer would end those plans. also the incentive is what allows new employers to start and get benefits in these plans. so i think the power that is their bit as demonstrated in the numbers of americans that are saving today. >> thank you dr. betts and dr. biggs the end result many proposals i read about what effectively cap employee deferrals. all of these proposals seem to align on the premise of lower contributions for workers to increase their savings rate. the proposals also assume their reduced tax incentives for companies would have no effect on the willingness of the

business to keep its plan in operation or to start a new pl plan. i don't believe that. i think if we go back to the time it was enacted increased tax incentives to save two things will happen at a minimum. first businesses venturing to pension plans because they are too complex and expensive to put up with without adding tax incentives and secondly employees saving so much because the tax incentives will be left for most workers. i don't think academics generally understand either of these points. mr. betts what is your real world experience working with business people making these decisions tell you and after you finish maybe dr. madrian he would care to comment. >> is very powerful and the middle-class americans making these decisions the tax incentive to contribute is very

motivational. i agree with a lot of the auto on romans that has added to the number of americans participating but it's really the incentive that motivates people to enter those plans. >> dr. biggs. >> there are two points i would like to make here. the first is about the tax incentive and what is the incentive to save? this is really the key question. as you know the current system for retirement savers is that we do for our taxes so when we make a contribution we do not pay income taxes on the money we put in or the earnings they build up but when we take money out of the traditional retirement plans a 401(k) or an irs we pay the income tax when it comes out. it's therefore a deferral not a deduction or an exclusion exclusion in what the deferral does is it effectively gives a zero tax rate on investment income in that plan and that is the incentive. if we move the tax and allows

the return for the investor to come to a market return as opposed to a below market return. why is that important? some of these proposals to cap the upfront deduction would actually turn on its head the tax incentive. one example for instance is the upfront deduction that 20% will give you credit. anybody with an income tax level above 20% let's say 35% would have to pay a tax going into the plan and then they would pay their full tax rate coming out the plan. what this effectively would do is disincentivized someone who is putting into that plan in the upper income level and actually make it almost preferential to put into a taxable account. they would have to hold the money that retirement plan for 13 years to catch up for that extra tax hit at the beginning. i think these proposals to cap

the deduction may get a credit and put a tax penalty on a would be very detrimental because hiring calm, many of them would be -- the second is the contribution limits are important. one reason that contribution levels are important is because people's ability and willingness to save for retirement changes over their lifetime so we find individuals as they move into their 50's and 60s are more likely to participate in good shape at the limit. 15% of people in their 50's and 60s there can contribute in at the contribution limit. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator hatch please go ahead. >> i would like to ask a question of dr. madrian. while behavior economics has shown a couple of successes some of us are concerned that the field contains some who rather than providing a nudged to help people navigate difficult decision-making would provide

full-fledged -- of private citizens. it seems as though some behavior is the notion of academic and government technocrats are infallible and need to tell private citizens of their mistakes and how they should leave their -- lead their lives greatest example the former treasury professor has written about a fairly informed financial services regulation unquote. one of the proposed schemes is to nationalize all late fees on credit cards, gift card issuers a small amount determined by some government technocrats and hughes funds for financial education and other ways to help private citizens. dr. madrian what do you feel about such a proposal and you believe infallible government technocrats need to effectively make decisions for private citizens on credit cards or retirement savings under the