remittances to the treasury and federal reserve, which have been written -- have been very large since 2010 would decline to more typical levels. beyond 2025, is current laws remain in place them same pressures that contribute to the rising deficits in the next decade would accelerate that -- would push debt up sharply relative to gdp. when interest rates return to more typical higher levels, federal spending on interest payments would increase substantially. because federal borrowing reduces national savings over time, the nation's capital profit would ultimately be smaller and total wages would be lower than if debtor smaller. lawmakers would have less flexibility to use taxing and spending policies for changes. for the economic outlook, our budget reductions are built on the economic forecast leverage anticipate that the economy is

expected to grow modestly this year and a solid pace through the next few years. although real adjusted inflation grew weekly in early 2015, the economy now appears to be on firmer ground and we expect the pace of economic activity to pick up over the next calendar year and the next few years. after that, we expect to see moderate to constrained early growth in the workforce. real gdp will grow by 2% this calendar year, by 3.1% in 2016, and by 2.7% in 2017. above its potential or maximum sustainable rate over that time frame. the economy will grow at an average rate of 2.2%, equal to its real growth rate.

this will be driven by consumer spending, business investment, and residential investment. over the next few years, the faster pace in growth output is expected to reduce the quantity of underused resource, or slack, in the economy. the estimate was about 3.4% in 2014. cbo next to narrow that gap to its historical average by the end of 2017. although labor market conditions continue to improve significantly, in the first half of 2015 there is still significant slack in the labor market. key measures include the labor force participation rate that remains about 1% below its potential rate, the employment rate, which is 0.5% higher than it was the beginning of the session, and the share of those super for part-time over

full-time work, which is about 1% higher than the last session. the direct consequence is that wages continue to grow more slowly than they did before the recession. we expect that as slack diminishes, increased competition for fewer available workers will lead forms -- firms to increase wages more rapidly to attract available workers. we project further hiring will reduce unemployment further to 5.0% in the first quarter of 2017. currently however, most of the labor force slack that can be seen is in the low labor force participation rate. we estimate that the current employment shortfall with the number of people who would be employed if the unemployment rate equaled its rate in 20 -- in 2007 is about 2.7 5 million people.

people. the unemployment rate accounts for only about one fourth of that amount. the depressed employment rate accounts for the other three fourths. that development will slow the long-term decline in labor force participation, which is attributable to the underlying demographic trends and federal policies, but it will also slow the following unemployment rate. over the next few years, depressed slack in the economy will put pressure on upward interest rates. nevertheless, cbo expects the rate of inflation as measured by the price index for personal expenditures to remain the same through 2017. an outcome that is consistent with some remaining, but

diminishing slack in the economy and widely held expectations for slowly rising inflation. interest rates have been through -- have been near zero through 2009 will rise to 3.4% by the end of 2019. the rate in 10 year treasury notes, cbo expects, will rise to two point -- to 4.2% by the end of 2019. those rates rise with the increase in the federal funds rate and the improving economic conditions. we are now happy to take questions. if you could say your name and/or news organization. -- and your news organization. >> how do you account for the $60 billion or so drop in the deficit beyond that revenue is

hard? and why is revenue hard, as thought back in the spring, and also your projection on when treasury will run out of room for extraordinary measures, the difference between what you set now and you said earlier. keith: the tax revenues have been higher than anticipated, and we now forecast about $70 billion in tax revenue this year. the slower growth will go away. we expect about $10 billion in revenue, so we did that net increase of $60 billion. >> why? keith: it is not because of the slower growth.

it just seems to be that tax and this higher forecast of revenues in our estimation is pushed back until we run out of money between mid november and keith: it is actually from both corporations and individuals. both were higher than expected.

>> john nicholson with bloomberg be in it. -- with bloomberg bna. in recent days, we have seen the stock markets particularly going through some troubles. to what extent -- in the event since july 7, where would it shape the forecast now and what would you expect to see on paper now? keith: economic growth has been stronger than we thought since july 7. if we were to change things, probably stronger growth for this year and then a little weaker for the next two years. with respect to the stock market, i'm not sure we would change anything yet. fluctuations in equity markets are fairly common. they affect something like when julian dollars worth of wealth -- one trillion dollars worth of wealth that has been lost up to yesterday.

but that does not translate into change behavior by either consumers or businesses right away. >> how much are you worried about those gyrations at best? -- at this point keith: -- at this point? keith: economic fundamentals, at least so far, have not been changed. i don't feel too worried about it. >> steve with tax notes. the report make the comment that tax revenues are lower because expired tax revisions did not get renewed at the end of last year. as you know, congress is you need to think about extending those provisions again will stop -- again. can you make the case by passing -- and you have done it here several times -- that the section 19 business expansion, that has been renewed and will

bring the debit closer. there is more spending and the limit will be closer than estimated in november. keith: that is right, we expect that the spending provision will not be renewed. and if it is, obviously will have an effect on revenues. >> [inaudible] sooner? keith: i'm not sure, to be honest. we would have to sit down and count. i have to be honest. >> federal health care spending, it has been growing faster than the economy, of course. do you see any differences in that trend? do you see a faster rate of growth for federal health care spending, or do you see? it slowing down at all

any changes -- see it slowing down at all? any changes? keith: we do not have some of the data yet. we will probably have that by the and in the year. we do expect premiums to rise anyway. and the uptake in exchanges is always a big unknown in our forecast to my because we do not have any experience with that yet. >> just to follow-up looking at the larger picture, there has been in the past several years a slowing in the growth rate in the federal health care spending. the question is, will that continue or will the growth rate return to a faster pace? do you have any better sense for that growth rate is headed at this point? keith: it is certainly part of our forecast that spending on

health care will increase significantly going forward. it has been a long-term trend, and then of course, the effect of the subsidies is a big unknown in the exchanges. we do expect that health care spending is going to continue to rise. >> any differences in your projections between now and march traceable to the health care law? keith: no, it is pretty close to the same right now. >> on your revision of the increase and potential labor force participation, what drove you guys to make that change? has there been any interplay with the afford care act on your projections with labor force participation? and could it inform any thinking about slower wage gains so far over the past 18 months or so?

keith: i think our notion of a slightly higher labor force participation in part comes from the pattern. we find people returning to the labor force a little bit faster than we would have anticipated. it makes us think that the cyclical impact of the labor force is bigger than we thought before. that is the main reason. i don't know that we have seen any impact on the labor force participation from the aca. it is hard to know how much that is going to affect things. certainly, you want to keep monitoring it and get an idea of what the impact would be. one of the big issues is that the employer mandate is only partially kicked in this year and we have more to kick in later. we will have to see what impact that has. >> on interest rates, in your changes from the market a sign -- from the market baseline, you

indicate 3 million plus downgrade in interest payments. can you explain that? talk about why that is, because i thought you made a decision on lower than historic rates previously. what new information is there that is lower, or is that just fluctuations in the forecast? and how does this play into the idea that our interest will become such a big word and that we will have trouble in five or 10 or 30 years paying our continued interest? keith: the change in the interest rate forecast really came from a look at the financial markets and the expectations in the financial markets. we are beginning to expect a little lower growth in interest rates than we did. we made an adjustment for that. but we still anticipate a rise in interest rates, a significant

rise in interest rates. in fact, the picture is still up there. we will also have a very large increase in interest payments as interest rates go up. >> on the interest rate question, or related i guess, there is a line about no expectation for a cola for interest rate inflation. do you have new data on disability and when that will be exhausted in your estimates?

keith: the social security is set by law to follow the consumer index. i forget exactly, but it's a one or two your time change. -- or two year change. the way it looks now, there will just not be much inflation on the cpi to give much of an index on social security. that is what we anticipate. and the other part, i'm sorry? >> on disability insurance. keith: i don't recall what it was last time, but i know we talked about it in our long-term budget outlook. but i don't recall. >> if they haven't already, democrats will probably use this report to say, look, no need to cut spending. republicans will argue long-term we need to do something about

it. who is right? [laughter] keith: this doesn't change our long-term projection, or even our 10 year projection. the pattern is very much like it was in march, very much like it was in january. under current law, the growth in debt is not sustainable. at some point it will get to a very high level. obviously, you cannot predict tipping points, but at some point this becomes a problem. the wave is going, it is not just that the debt gets to a high level, i think something like 70% of gdp by 2025. but there is also the trend. 70% and growing. that factors into things as well. this is an unsustainable path here for the federal debt.

>> does your point take into account any kind of economic boost from cutting taxes? in other words, do we use dynamic scoring to indicate revenues would not be as low as previous they suggested? keith: implicitly there is dynamic analysis in this work all the time. it is sort of been nothing new in the economic force that we rely on, the current law that we rely on, and part of the fact -- part of this is the growing debt probably having some effect on crowding out investment and slowing economic growth going forth. >> speaking of dynamic, since you brought it up, you guys just recently issued your dynamic estimate of a particular bill, the extenders back in early august. i wonder you could give us the

aspects of how that decision was made in terms of the formatting, the table and so on. and also, how much of that was made in discussion with the budget committees, particularly the senate budget committee? keith: they certainly requested the estimate and i believe it was large enough for the automatic dynamic analysis to begin. we did that analysis along with jct. part of the analysis is figuring out how to effectively communicate the impact. we did our analysis on that particular tax extension relief act of 2015. we estimated it would increase the deficit by $87 billion over a ten-year timeframe. we also put in the estimate that without the macroeconomic effects, you can see where those effects are.

>> in terms of the fort amounting, was that -- the formatting, what was -- was that decision made here? keith: oh, it was our decision. we also anticipate it will improve the quality of our estimates to be able to improve that -- include that. there was perhaps an issue of our estimates not being centered without having the -- the macroeconomic effects included. that is probably true to an extent, but there is always uncertainty in terms of forecasting the effects. we are kind of used to the idea of uncertainty in our macro forecast. >> you mentioned center.

could you go over that issue again? keith: sure, the tax extension -- the tax relief extension act is a good example. the increasing deficits with by about $97 billion, but you expect the lower income tax rate will have some sort of macroeconomic effect, reducing a little crowding out and such. we anticipate an increase deficit by less than that, by about $87 billion. we had a shift of about $10 billion to our point estimate to the impact, if that makes sense. >> how much of a challenge has it been to -- i mean, it is easier probably to do a range of dynamic estimate. you estimate a range of the dynamic impact of inflation as opposed to a single number.

has it been a challenge or an issue to do a single number rather than a range? keith: in my mind it really happened in, because we are asked for our best estimate. we could put a range around estimates without macro effects just like we can with one with a macro effect. i think we are doing a good job to give a pointed estimate. this is our best estimate. but it is also probably true to communicate the uncertainty in the range. we can do that at least wanted to play. it is hard to do it numerically -- we can at least do that qualitatively. it is hard to do it numerically. >> was the range what you expected, or more than you expected? keith: i think it was pretty

much what we expected. i did not sit down and try to predict it, but we have been using the macroeconomic effects for a while now and we have the models down, so we have a feel for what that will look like. as estimates continue forward, it is important to be transparent on the modelers so we can get some discussion about how we do the estimates and maybe we can improve that over time. >> how much more uncertain is this tax extenders bill, how much more uncertain is this dynamic score of $87 billion than the standard score of $97 billion? because we hear the score is less certain. this is only a $10 billion difference. what would your thoughts be? keith: on the difficulty with the macroeconomic effects and really, almost all of our estimates, is that there is an unknown thing there. we all know how accurate it is,

what the ranges. when we do our forecast, especially something like the long-run forecast, we will do a parameter of values to give you a feel for the accurate a. but that is not released this is the goal standard error -- that is not really a statistical standard error or something like that. hopefully over time we will get a better notion of that and be able to begin communicating that a bit better going forward, what the likely range will be. >> do the tax cuts pay for themselves? keith: no, the evidence is that the tax cuts do not pay for themselves. and you so -- and our models show that in the tax extension relief act. we are hoping the estimate is more centered now, that we are going to get into the right -- that the point estimate is being more accurate.

>> there has been uncertainty lately. not to be a pessimist, but we do have a fed at the zero lower around. we do have an historically high and growing amount of debt to gdp. what are the risks to these two conditions should there be a global recession, which is presumably not unthinkable given what we are seeing in some of these markets. keith: i'm not sure the markets are suggesting anything about a global recession as of yet. as long as the long-term economic fundamentals remain and change, then this is not some we should worry about stop and what i have seen -- what we should worry about. and what i've seen from the fed is that the fluctuations in the equity markets, that's not the same thing.

that is one of the reasons why we are concerned about the growing debt, because as debt continues to grow in handcuffs the government if we go into another recession about what they can do policy wise to work through it. we lose flexibility. and to give you an idea of how important that is, i will repeat something that you probably know. but keep in mind the jet to -- the debt to gdp ratio in 2007 was something like 30% of gdp. we are now up to 74% and that is a huge change. that is a difficult thing. starting at 74% would be a difficult thing to do with another downturn like that.

>> there was something in the changes about -- between march and last week about the $200 million in related health care. -- $200 billion related to health care. it was reclassified in march and then reclassified again this time. can you walk us through? keith: i think it was a technical change, but the fact that it was in our forecast in march makes it a change that affected our estimate of revenues, but it did not fall into the technical category. >> what was the original thing to come up with $200 billion? what was the treatment in march and -- the treatment in march versus the treatment now? keith: that i do not know. i have had too many things to look at.

>> we can follow up. keith: so it is absolutely clear we have left you with no questions? >> seems like there are not as many changes in this update as in a lot of the previous reports. it seems like minor changes. keith: i don't have experience with previous reports, but certainly the economic change, the drop in and disappointing first-quarter with growth had a bit of an impact. and even now it looks like since july 7, even less of an impact than first thought because the data looked a little better going forward. and then, i guess, the revenue rise. but other than that, we really haven't changed our views on the

potential of gdp in the long-term view of the economy and the budget going forward. we have not changed that much. we still have a tricky time because we are still looking at significant slack in the economy. we've got until the end of 2017, at least by our forecast, until that slack is gone. and until that goes, we don't anticipate the wage growth will be what we would like it to be, what it should be until that slack goes away. i think that will be a challenge going forward. >> this may be outside your purview, but any thoughts on what kind of policy changes could accelerate that growth and reduce the slack? keith: i wouldn't want to set speculate -- to speculate on that. it is oh is difficult to imagine

imagines difficult to what will spur the economy in the short run. we are doing now is the setting of the automatic stabilizers. the demand has faded from that. that is what we are dealing with, but you are always dealing with that in a recession. one of the things that i think looks like a real almost unknown challenge right now is productivity is not growing like it usually does through a business cycle. and i think that is probably a real concern not just to the united aids, but around the -- the united states but around the world. productivity growth being strong. it is actually part of our forecast that we will get a bounce back in productivity, but in some ways it is overdue right now.

>> is it that worldwide productivity growth is weak? keith: it is. there is no real clear answer. hopefully when we see it bounce back we will figure out why it was this low. -- so slow. but that is an important part of this forecast and the revised forecast, productivity. when he gets back to something like it usual long-term range of growth. -- like it's usual long-term range of growth. >> can you walk us through where that potential gdp has been to where it is now to where it could go? keith: something like potential gdp, it requires a number of things. you get back to full use of economic resources. you get your labor force balancing back -- bouncing back and unemployment to bounce back.

we've probably got some catch up in capital investment. in fact, part of our forecast is a little ketchup in business investment. in his news investment. actually, that is one of the things that we differ a little bit from some of the other forecasters. we are a bit more bullish about a bounce back in investment. but you get labor force back and investment back, and in you hopefully get this productivity back. that is sort of the at -- the recipe for economic growth going forward. and although we've had some disconnect between productivity and wage growth, a number of years ago growth in productivity is now following labor compensation. they still are related and we are still expecting you will need to have growth in productivity and competition. and that is one of the things, too, the share of gdp is still

low. that needs to bounce back. that will be part of getting rid of the labor market slack and increasing demand for labor services. more questions? >> one completely -- well, not completely unrelated. the friday release of the economic analysis of obama's budget, one thing that struck me in that is that you talk about the gmp will be higher, but per capita gnp will be lower because of the immigration aspect of the president's budget. my limited reading of that is that there are more poor workers and therefore lower wages. i take it if that is not -- i

take it that is not that simple. would you walk me through that? keith: part of it is that immigrants are below average in their earnings, their income. if you increase immigration, even if you increase employment with immigration, because they are below average you lower the per capita gdp. and that will be a challenge going forward when we have this declining labor force to begin with. we are obviously slowing our forecast for gdp growth in the future. and we've got the issue of a ratio of people working to not working in the economy as the population ages. if you have slower gdp growth and youth have still a large -- and you have still a large population, population, you will

have maybe a slowdown in per capita gdp growth. but that will be something a lot of economies will experience because of the aging population, the aging labor force. >> to follow up on that, the immigration proposal, let's assume that is passed and we have more low-wage workers in the country. that would reduce the average wage. but would it necessarily reduce other people's wages? i mean, middle and upper income wages, -- it could reduce the average wage, but does that also mean it could reduce the wages of some existing workers who were working before the change in the law? keith: our reading of the economic literature is that it doesn't, it doesn't reduce other wages. that is part of the forecast. and the analysis of the president's budget.

i hope i have that right. other questions? you've held up great, though. thank you. is there any reason to continue? i guess i could ask you questions now. [laughter] >> that could go a long time. [laughter] keith: thank you. thank you for coming. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the grexit coming up on c-span, a senate hearing on immigrants working later in life.

that is followed by coverage of post-katrina recovery. ted a, a discussion on banking access in various countries and how technology can expand it. live from the center for technology at the brookings institution here on c-span. >> this sunday night, brookings institution senior fellow brown talks about the u.s. -- counterinsurgency and state building efforts in afghanistan. 0 the u.s. did achieve improvements in security. i increasingly question myself. we don't know how it will end. there is a moment of tranquility if we withdraw now that may collapse. it is also possible that five years down the road, we will be

back in a new civil war in afghanistan. isis is slowly emerging in the country. it is much worse than the taliban. the taliban is deeply entrenched. if we end up five years down the road in new civil war in afghanistan, new safe havens for the taliban and isis, then i would say it was not worth the price. 0 sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a ergo >> next, members of the senate committee on aging look at the future of retirement and the issue of more americans continuing to work later in life. witnesses include a senior citizen from maine and a virginia human resources director with a large number of older workers. this is an hour and 15 minutes.

>> this hearing will come to order. good afternoon. in the iconic 1985 film "back to the future," marty and doc ride in a time machine 30 years back in time. they end up in 1955, the middle of the baby boom, where they save the past and then blast off again to an impossibly distant future, the year 2015. that film comes to mind as i think about the changes we are

seeing in how seniors approach work and retirement, the topic of today's hearing. in many ways, the baby boom generation is leading us back to the future, where seniors stay actively engaged in the workforce, contributing their years of wisdom and experience to employers and colleagues while shoring up their own financial security. for most of the past century, seniors have been withdrawing from the workforce since americans came to view retirement as the time of uninterrupted rest and leisure that could last for decades. by the year 2000, only 32% of americans aged 55 and older were still working, and the average age of retirement had dropped to

just 63. the baby boom generation has reversed its trend. today, 40% of workers 55 and over remain in the workforce, a ratio not seen since the eisenhower administration. the baby boomers are remaining in the workforce longer for many reasons. one leading reason is the need for financial security. many americans today don't have the resources they need to live comfortably in retirement without working. it used to be said that retirement security was a three-legged stool. the first leg being an employer provided pension. the second, social security, and the third, retirement savings. with the estimated $7.7 trillion

gap between what americans ages 32-64 have saved and what they will actually need for retirement, that third leg has become wobbly. and a fourth leg continued work has been added to the stool. experts tell us that the real engagement of seniors in the workforce could not have come at a better time for our economy. according to human resources professionals, 40% of u.s. employers are struggling to fill jobs with qualified workers and could face a crisis if they lose their older workers. but employers don't need these workers just to fill positions. they also need their talent,

their institutional knowledge, and especially their strong work ethic. compared to younger employees, with all due respect to my staff, workers age 55 and older are significantly more engaged in their work. in fact, an engaged workforce is so important to the bottom line that a fortune 1000 company could improve its profits by $150 million a year if its entire workforce were as engaged as older workers, according to the aarp. as we will hear from our witnesses today, financial needs are not the only reason that baby boomers want to continue working. they also want to stay active mentally and physically. working also helps seniors stay

socially connected and preserve a strong sense of purpose and self-worth. more than half in this generation who do retire return to the workforce after just a few years. they use this break to catch their breath and retool, sometimes for less stressful work. because these retirees can rely on social security, medicare, and other sources of retirement income, they have the flexibility to pursue work on their own terms. taking a break from the workforce is not without risk, however. seniors may find their skills have become out of date, and they've lost touch with key contacts and business trends. some of them face unspoken and misguided bias that is difficult to prove but widely reported.

whatever the reason, it takes twice as long for a senior to find a new job than it does for a younger person. and the job hunt can be especially tough on workers late in their careers. as this generation heads back to the workforce, employers who want to attract and keep older workers should recognize that many returned to work because they want to, not just because they have to. these workers are looking for flexible workplaces where they can continue to contribute, and where there's -- where their skills will be valued. our witnesses today have a wealth of knowledge on how attitudes toward work and retirement are changing today and what it means for employers for older americans.

i look forward to their testimony today. i'm now pleased to turn to our ranking member, senator mccaskill, for her statement. >> thank you, senator collins. i am said to say from looking at the numbers that it appears to me that most of us on this committee would be deemed older workers. the most recent aarp study defines an older worker as over 50, except for tom cotton. i can see him over there. he is too young. the most recent aarp study defines an older worker as over 50. i reluctantly confess to meeting that threshold easily. i think our own personal experiences can add a level of expertise in terms of our capacity to grow and change over time. many of us baby boomers are dealing with a different work landscape than the ones we

entered decades back. we are a competitive bunch. i have trouble with this concept that we can't adapt to changing technologies. and that aarp study, a business case for workers aged 50 and above, goes a long way to debunk this myth, along with many others. more than nine in 10 workers over 50 have a computer, tablet, or smartphone. those numbers have been growing significantly. fewer than one in five of seniors surveyed felt they had trouble keeping up with the technology needed to do their jobs. don't tell me that you can't teach an older dog new tricks and don't tell me that older workers talked too much. due to our shift away from defined benefit, adding a worker over 50 is not much different to a company's bottom line than adding younger workers. the fact of the matter is our workforce is getting older.

in under a decade, more than one in three workers will be older than 50. in missouri today, more than one in five workers is 55 and older. some older workers want to stay employed to feel productive and challenged. many other americans, i hasten to say that i believe the majority, are doing so out of necessity. this is a new era of retirement. few people have that pension check for life and must set aside their own money for their golden years. longer lifespans mean we are talking about retirements that could last decades. it is no wonder why older americans are nervous to stop working altogether. the smart companies have figured out that the changing demographics and have developed ways to capitalize on the skills and experience this large group of workers can bring to the table.

one of those companies is represented here today. i don't know if i am going to bring us this right. is that right? she has for years recognized that it makes no sense to see the best and brightest workers walk out the door at age 55, when most nurses tend to leave the hospital floor. to combat this, they've developed a phase retirement system. that employs these workers in a variety of roles. they also adjusted benefits packages so these older workers would not be penalized for reducing hours. the program works across demographics. this calls for a flexible work schedule not just for the older worker, but for the reservist, the mother, or any other employee who cannot work a full schedule but still brings essential skills to the job. ssm health care st. louis offers

its own system. allowing employees over 62 to collect their pension while working a more flexible schedule. hundreds of employees have taken advantage of this plan. while working longer is a viable option for those seeking a way to build a more secure retirement, it is not the answer for everyone. some people have spent years working jobs that are so physically demanding that asking them to do any kind of work into their 70's is not realistic. we still need to work to develop strategies for this group of workers but that should not stop us from exploring more ways to help older workers stay engaged and continue to earn income if they so choose. with that in mind, i look forward to hearing the testimony from today's panel and i thank all of you for being here. >> thank you very much for your testimony. i will confess before this entire room that it was the ranking member who convinced me that i had to get an iphone.

[laughter] >> we are also pleased to be joined by, i believe the person who is the youngest member of the senate. is that accurate, senator cotton? >> it is, but i'm old in spirit. >> we are pleased to have you here as well. now we will turn to our panel of witnesses. first, we will hear from dr. sara rix. she recently retired from her position as the senior strategic policy advisor for the aarp and is now a consultant specializing in working and aging issues. we will then hear from susan nordman, who is the owner of a specialty handbag company located in rural dexter, maine. she will testify about her experience starting over in a

new field at an older age as well as her experience in employing an older workforce. i particularly want to thank her for traveling down from maine to be with us today. third, we will hear from kerry hannon, and author, a new york times columnist, and a continuing -- a contributing editor for forbes. finally, we will hear from james godwin, the vice president of human resources at bonn secor, the virginia health system's enrichment virginia. thank you all for being us -- with us today. we will start with dr. rix. dr. rix: thank you for inviting me to testify today about the challenges and opportunities involved in prolonging working

life. prolonged employment stands to benefit employers facing labor and skill shortages and the economy. it can also enhance the retirement security of workers and their families by increasing social security benefits by as much as 8% per year, by giving workers more time to save and benefit from a 401(k) match if offered, and by reducing the number of years spent in retirement unless the supplemental income is needed for retirement years. workers are already remaining longer in the workforce. one statistic highlights this point. among persons 55-69, those we've traditionally thought of as retirement age, the labor force participation rate has risen from about 18% in 1985 to over

-- to nearly 32% in 2014, by over 70%. we cannot credit any single policy or program for higher participation rates at older ages. the older population is extremely diverse and responds in different ways to different incentives and disincentives. rising educational attainment does seem to be a major determinant, accounting for perhaps half of the increase in participation among older men according to one study. up to 80% of workers say they expect to work in retirement and we've just heard some of the reasons. they need the money, but they also enjoy what they are doing. they want to remain active. they hope to make a contribution. far fewer workers actually remain in the labor force than say they expect to because of job loss, health, and caregiving

responsibilities. others may be unable to find opportunities that could keep them at work, lest amending jobs, new career options, good part-time jobs, and flexible work schedules. when to retire is a decision over which workers have some control, not total control, but more than they have over the stock market or housing values. exercising that control my working longer is what i think we have been seeing, including during the recent recession, when labor force participation rates rose for older workers, but fell for younger ones. employers have considerable say in what workers can and will do. on the plus side, employers tend to be very positive about older workers when it comes to loyalty, dependability, customer relationships, and the like. on the minus side, many employers harbor negative attitudes about older worker

costs and technological competence. the new survey just mentioned may alleviate some of those concerns. moreover, if employers need workers, they will do what is necessary to obtain -- to retain an adequate supply. that will include drawing upon what is available. older people ready and eager to work. just what public policy initiatives would encourage even more employment at older ages in a scalable, cost efficient manner, and in a way that does not hit generations against each other, is not so obvious. in my written testimony, i offer several suggestions. if i could identify only one this afternoon, it would be to promote older workers' skills development, to ensure those workers have the qualifications they need to find work, change jobs or careers, or reenter the

labor force after retirement. this means more money for the nation's workforce development system, as well as monitoring older worker outcome. it is also incumbent upon us to promote lifelong learning to make sure that tomorrow's older workers do not face the same employment barriers that today's do. this will not be inexpensive. before going further, i suggest that we might be well-served by taking stock of what we know and do not know about what fosters longer work lives, so that appropriate policies can be crafted to achieve our objectives. i shall conclude with an appeal for more funding for the department of labor to address a range of questions about how best to incentivize more older workers to work even longer and more employers to hire and retain them. thank you. >> thank you very much for your

excellent testimony. ms. nordman. ms. nordman: chairman collins, ranking member mccaskill, distinguished members, thank you for inviting me to testify. my name is susan nordman. i'm the owner of a small manufacturing company and maker of handbags. i grew up in rural maine in the 1960's in an agricultural community. i left home for college and employment. i settled in the new york city area and built a life with a family and several successful businesses. it has always been my intention to return home to maine. in 2006, my husband and i headed north, planning to retire. we settled outside of portland. in 2012, a business broker sent me a listing on a small company in northern maine. the company was intriguing but the location was not. too far north, too remote, too

rural. the idea was dropped until a year later, when i saw a display of handbags in a gallery. the bright colors and quirky shapes demanded further investigation. the facility was in an old barn in the middle of nowhere. as soon as i walked in, i was hooked. the smell of leather, bright roles of fabric, and a group of women stitching, was mesmerizing. the company had fallen into disrepair and was poorly managed. i knew i could fix it. i bought the company in late 2013. along with the asset purchase, i inherited a group of older women. if i moved the company too far, they would all be unemployed. georgia was 69. the rest had 60th birthdays together. i felt obligated to find a solution that did not leave them behind.

we moved one town over to dexter, maine. warren buffett improved most of the infrastructure in town, so we had reliable electricity and a road that ups trucks drive on. the equipment needed updating. the new space gave me an opportunity to design a more economic workforce. two questions are asked of me when the topic of older workers comes up. do older workers cost more? the answer is, older workers cost different.

i have found an older worker is quick to assimilate new ideas, partly because they have a larger set of building blocks were a new concept. i suspect that it old dog that does not like new tricks was also a young doctor that had an aversion to tricks. i recognize the importance and i created worksites in more studios and factories. each bag is made one at a time by one person. varietyes each person a of duties and creates ownership and pride in their work. an older worker tends to be more balanced in their personal life. work is important but it does

not dominate. it is a benefit that cost me little and goes a long way to trading a better workplace. my employees are paid hourly, not by the piece. they get sick days, holidays, and vacation. we break for chi gong sessions and have a massage therapist once a month. there is the necessity to work for most of my employees. they were -- they worry about the longevity of social security and health care costs. you can find our handbags throughout the country in galleries, museums stores, and some national parks. we are an older group of 230 learning the trade. a workforce that includes older workers is more balanced and more interesting. i do not know what will government should play in this issue, if any, but it is worth

discussing. we will keep making handbags and learn from each other old too young and young to old. you forcollins: thank your testimony. i understand you have a handbag with you. i do.ordman: but it is not one of the pretty ones. so that welins: could see it. we should have asked you to bring a display. mrs. nordman: speaking of technology, i can put one in the card right now. senator collins: that is impressive. hannon? mrs. hannon: thank you for beforeg me to testify the committee on aging and facing the challenges that

americans over 50 face in the workplace. i spent three decades covering all aspects of business, careers, and personal finance and am alarmed by the disconnect between employers and older workers. work at an older age is becoming increasingly common. some retirees have always taken part-time jobs out of financial need or to stave off board om. stave off boredom. what is different is that their approach and work not as an afterthought, but as a pillar of their retirement plan. , just 11% of workers expected to retire after age 65 according to the employee benefits research institute. retirement confidence survey. today, more than three times that number expect to retire

after 65. 10% do not win to retire. two thirds of worker plan to work for pay in retirement. here is the hitch. many workers say they will work in retirement, but a very small percentage do. working for pay a few years longer can make a huge difference in financial security as we age. i suspect one of the reasons people are not continuing to work is that they could find a job and give up. as i travel around the country, speaking to audiences of people over 50 who are looking for jobs, i have seen a palpable fear in their eyes that they're going to outlive their money. simply put, they need to work. when it comes to getting a job, it is a struggle. i will not sugarcoat it. here's what i find and advise. an employer is concerned an older worker is not up for the job -- they do not have the

stamina and energy. other people come up to me and ask if they should get botox or younger. hair to look i say no, you need to be physically fit. you give off a certain energy. and a can do spirit goes a long way to fighting ageism. the second thing employers worry about is that you are not up to speed with technology. they might be right. in today's work world that is nonnegotiable. i encourage workers to take courses at a community college or local library. is imperative if you want to stay relative in the workplace. the third thing is that you are not going to play nicely with the other kids, and by that i mean younger workers, or be comfortable with a younger boss. comfortable inng the culture. you need to go out of your way to show that you have had great

walter generational work relationships. workers will worry that you are overqualified for the job that you apply for our would not be happy with the salary and will recent it over time. it is a stark reality. many older workers that i know go back to work at lower salaries than they had with their former employer. often older workers start their own businesses were switch careers, but money is the biggest stumbling block. you will probably start with a lower salary. if you are starting your own business you will have the cost of startup and will not be able to pay yourself a salary. you need to be financially stable. debt is a dream killer. inc. of ways that you can -- putk of ways that you can your skills in other fields and not replicate your former job. whereare different jobs your expertise is valued. if you are out of work right

now, do something. keep your resume a live up by volunteering for a cause that you care about. you never know who you might meet that can point you to another opportunity, where you work might turn into a full-time job. be willing to take on a contract or consulting job, because it ee gaps on your resume. work gives us a sense of purpose, feeling connected and needed. work makes us feel relevant. studies show it keeps us healthier and keeps our mind sharper here it i could go on, but my time is up. i would like to thank the committee for allowing me to be here today. senator collins: thank you, so much, for your testimony. mr. goodwin? mr. godwin: on behalf of the more than 13,000 employees of bon secours virginia health system, i thank you for the opportunity to share insights on

how we attract and retain older workers. my name is jim godwin and i'm the vice president of human resources at bon secours. today i want to share with you why we value the knowledge and expertise of old workers in how they contribute to our success in our culture. as a roman catholic nonprofit health care system, bon secours is part of the maryland health care system. bon secours virginia has 8400 employees in richmond and 5000 employees in hampton roads, virginia. with five hospitals in the richmond area, three in hampton roads, dozens of an military care sites andy support centers along with a college of nursing and school of medical imaging, we take our mission of providing good help to those in need to heart. the sisters of bon secours started our ministry in paris and remain a guiding force of our values and vision. nearly all the sisters are 60

years old or older and many continue serving well into their 80's and 90's, providing strategic direction and guidance. for us, workers of this age are common and we celebrate their vision, wisdom, and contributions. in our virginia health system, 35% of our employees are 50 or older, 11% are in their 60's. we have 126 employees in their 70's, and a remarkable 12 in their 80's. some 82% of our workforce is female and more than one third are nurses. we value each employee in his or her unique qualities and life experiences. we believe our older workers' wisdom and institutional knowledge are invaluable. let me tell you about our long-term employees. one of them turns 81 this year and has worked for us for an amazing 58 years so far, starting in 1957. she tried retirement for a few months but her respect and compassion for her back.

after six decades, she still works part-time in preplacement, connecting physicals, drawing blood, and helping to induct new employees into our workplace. our oldest employee is virginia abbott. virginia is 89 years old and celibate 29 years of service -- and celebrates 29 years of service this year. outside of her incredible work stamina from what is so amazing about virginia's cheated not even come to work for us until she was 60 years old. yet she has been with us almost 30 years. we have five employees with 49 years of service. clearly work is the new fountain of youth for many of these employees. a former high school administrator and a professional firefighter both recently graduated from the bon secours memorial college of nursing with bachelor's degrees in nursing. both of these men are over 50 years old and are enjoying second careers in our health system. another recent graduate was 62 years old.

bon secours is committed to our culture that attracts, retains, and values workers that are over 50 years old. in fact, aarp has ranked us as the best employer for workers over 50 since 2003. we have been on "working mother magazine's" top places to work for years and added to the international listing of great workplaces annually since 2007. these accolades benefit bon secours because we are able to attract and retain a highly engaged workforce of all ages and lifestages. this directly benefits our patients, who have better care experiences and rate is higher on patient satisfaction surveys. let me show you how experienced nurses benefit patient care. the robert wood johnson foundation reports that our on -- that registered nurses on average are spending 2.5 times

more than their peers did in the 1980's and 1990's. that is a good thing for bon secours. we need them. as nurses age they report higher job satisfaction, much higher than other professions. that means as more baby boomer nurses age, they are more likely to be satisfied and keep working. that kind of experience and knowledge is invaluable when it comes to patient care and patient safety. however, working in a hospital setting can be hard on nurses due to the physical challenge. our patients are much heavier than they were in the past and heavier patients mean more workers prone to injury. that is why we have limited -- we have implemented mobility lift teams to healthy older workers with the regular turning of patients. we have seen a reduction of muscle fatigue in older nurses as a result. our workforce is changing and working hard to adjust to the changes. america continues to face a nursing shortage. finding the right nurses for the right jobs at the right time remains difficult.

we are going to need to keep our health care employees satisfied with their careers because the demand for health care is growing. at the same time, people are living longer and healthier lives, and the majority of u.s. workers are delaying their retirement. by offering initiatives such as phased retirement, flexible work schedules, intergenerational programming, bon secours has been successful in retaining its valuable older workers. today we have 100 virginia employees to which -- you receive a retirement check and a paycheck for us. our comprehensive benefits are flexible and our on-site family centers are a good example where we allow employees to have their grandchildren in the daycare centers as well as their parents. we have eldercare programs that benefit older workers in the sandwich generation where they are having to provide care for their parents as well as often for their children or the children who have returned home after graduating from college. in closing, i remind you to remember employees of bon

secours virginia, like 89-year-old virginia abbott, who is a wonderful lady, people who working beyond their retirement age allow us to keep our mission viable and alive and thank you for the opportunity to share our story today. sen. collins: thank you, mr. godwin. ms. nordman, you mentioned in your testimony that you had run a number of other businesses before you return home to maine. i am assuming that those businesses probably had a younger workforce than the workforce that you now employ. is that true or not necessarily? ms. nordman: that's true, but i've never hired on the basis of age or anything. i always try and get employees who are going to fit into the team. at one point i had a good seven -- i had 37 employees in one company, and we really did run the gamut of twentysomethings

all the way up to 55 was probably the oldest. at that time. sen. collins: with older employees, do you find there is less turnover? ms. nordman: less turnover, less texting, less boyfriend drama. [laughter] sen. collins: all advantages of hiring of an older worker, no doubt about it. did you have less turnover and spending less on retraining? ms. nordman: i am spending less on retraining -- when you bring a person into a tiny group, it -- into a tightknit group, it takes a lot of wiggling for that person to settle in and become part of the group. the better i can retain a worker, the better it is for the company come which is why it takes me so long to hire. process for me is at least three weeks because i want the right person. sen. collins: thank you. dr. rix, skill development

programs, and if you and ms. hannon have mentioned the importance of skill development, but several skill development programs are aimed at young workers. we have excellent apprenticeship programs, for example, that are aimed at people who are just coming out of community colleges for technical schools. -- or technical schools. we have other programs that tend to be aimed at people who are younger. and yet it may well be that an older worker, particularly one who has been out of the workforce for a while and has difficulty, as ms. hannon pointed out, in coming back into the workforce, may need a refresher on their skills or entirely new skills. i see this in maine, where we have had paper mills closed

down, and people have worked for decades making very good paper and they are excellent papermakers, but that is what they have done their whole lives, and they are frequently in the 50's and all of this is in their face with having to switch careers. so i would be interested in any comments that each of you might have on current federal programs or other programs that you may be aware of, and whether they do a good job of helping older workers. one that i know of in the department of labor is called the senior community service employment program, and it is aimed at lower income individuals, aged 55 or older, but it has been pretty criticized for a number of reasons. do either of you have any suggestions for us as we look at

federal job training programs? i will start with dr. rix and go to ms. hannon. and i'm going to ask you to turn on your mic. thank you. ms. rix: you mentioned one of the federally funded training programs for older workers. you are quite correct that we have not invested the federal resources in older workers. it it appeared they were singled out in the job training partnership act. for example, there was a special set aside for older workers that did not make into the workforce investment act and they have been singled out once again as a group with a special barriers to employment in the workforce innovation opportunity act. i think what we need to do -- what i would recommend is more older worker specialists in the

american job centers that could help older workers be directed to programs in the community that would provide them with the appropriate skills. i'm not suggesting that the federal government set up special programs along the lines of the senior community service employment program, but rather, make the financial resources available to workers through the job centers or through other mechanisms along with the guidance that workers need about where the jobs are going to be and what type of training they need to obtain in order to get those jobs. a big problem that workers have faced in the job training environment is that they often engage in training, often using their own hard-earned resources, only to find that those training opportunities lead nowhere as

far as jobs are concerned. we have to start at a very basic level, understanding what the labor market opportunities are in a particular area, namely, what the jobs are, what they are going to be, working closely with employers, job training providers, and government entities with the resources to help older workers and indeed workers of all ages know what they need to do to get what they want to find, good, secure employment providing decent jobs and benefits. sen. collins: thank you. ms. hannon? ms. hannon: i agree with dr. rix's points there. a really important thing is helping older workers identify the skills they have. they have been there for years and they don't even see what they are good at anymore. the one-stop career centers often have coaching available there. a lot of individuals i have talked to find that working with

the coach actually helps them identify skills that they had come and how they can redeploy those. get some confidence and lifted them out of the depression that they often fall into. it is a very important resource. if we could expand that to a certain degree in those centers, employers, if someone currently holds a tax incentive to offer educational assistance to employees is often a nice thing, if not all employers offer that, it is not a huge number, but i do believe that employees have access to even education that they can pay for with dollars that aren't taxed, it could be fantastic to encourage that because you have to continue motivating the learning cycle in order to move into these jobs. as we have discussed here, the certificate programs are terrific but some of them lead nowhere so you need to be cautious about people taking the path for a quick hit to learn a new skill. i find it is important to identify where these opportunities are going to be,

and the department of labor has the occupational handbook, which i like a lot. the identify the fastest growing industries, things that are coming down the road, and they spell out what certifications you need to do this job. what is the median salary? it gives workers some starting point. it is great research. sen. collins: thank you. senator mccaskill. sen. mccaskill: thank you. let me ask first, mr. goodwin, is your culture of flexibility born out of necessity due to the nursing shortage, or did it happen organically because the recognition of the organization of the skills that were walking out the door? mr. godwin: well, the shortages of health-care workers in general, not just nurses, but health-care employers across the nation to be more flexible.

it is somewhat easier to be flexible for us because we have such a wide variety of types of jobs and schedules and so forth. in health care we have historically had a mostly female workers, and because of how things were in the and 1950's and so forth, we had to be in a position to work around school schedules and so forth. that flexibility transcends all aspects of our workforce. being flexible helps older workers and it helps national guardsmen and also some other -- sen. mccaskill: right. mr. godwin: it is organic in that sense. sen. mccaskill: it seems like the flexibility at work schedules has become much more in the last decade, but still, there's a lot of excitement of our economy out there that have not recognized the validity of flexibility. i noticed, ms. nordman, you have flexibility for your workers in terms of the schedules. how many employees do you have right now? ms. nordman: we have 10

employees and we are looking to hire two more. sen. mccaskill: for older workers, one of the things that i think is a big topic that hasn't been discussed extensively yet is the -- what is the challenges of health care for older workers, especially those between 50 and 65. because that is before they are eligible for medicare, and in many small businesses -- i assume you do not provide health care in your business. ms. nordman: we do not provide health care, and any check goes to pay for their health care and probably two of her paychecks each week go to pay for her health care. sen. mccaskill: and i am aware -- you mentioned in your written testimony that their pay was about $25,000 a year, $12 an hour. ms. nordman: yes, and i am a

high payer for my area. sen. mccaskill: you are a high payer for your area and your state is similar to my state in that they have not expanded medicaid under the affordable care act? ms. nordman: no, i don't think so. sen. mccaskill: your workers don't qualify for subsidies. the irony is that they are too poor to qualify for subsidies. ms. nordman: yes. sen. mccaskill: if they made a little bit more, their health insurance would go dramatically down, because they would be entitled to subsidies under the act. because your state, like missouri, has refused the federal dollars that were identified, that would make a big difference -- ms. nordman: and it would make a big difference. sen. mccaskill: for these older workers, who are working hard. it is not as if they are sitting at home. they are not the typical vision people have of a medicaid recipient. these are people who are working and providing great value to your company. ms. nordman: yes, they are. sen. mccaskill: and what about pre-existing conditions?

i noticed in your testimony that two of your workers had cancer. ms. nordman: two of my workers have had cancer, and it is an issue for them. sen. mccaskill: so if we didn't have the ability to not discriminate against pre-existing conditions, that would be even more difficult for them in terms of their ability to get insurance? ms. nordman: it would be very difficult for them. sen. mccaskill: ms. hannon, or dr. rix, i'm assuming the ability to change jobs and retrain at an older age has been dictated up until very recently many times by the fact that you didn't want to leave your job if you have health care because if you had the nerve to be sick before, you couldn't go get insurance somewhere else because you had a pre-existing condition. i am assuming there is more portability now for older workers that want to follow a dream or want to start a business or want to do something differently. ms. rix: i suspect that is the

case. however, access to health care still involves money. the continuing high cost of health care may be still preventing some people from pursuing that. sen. mccaskill: right, because they have the benefit and the job and they would have to be paying for themselves if they started their business, or perhaps went to work somewhere that was a much smaller company that was not required to provide any benefit at all. ms. rix: especially if they weren't paid very much -- ms. hannon: i think that is very much true. it has the illusion of creating portability for people. in reality, it might not be as much as we hope it could be. i know myself that it has become a more expensive for me with a new situation. sen. mccaskill: because you are a single business within llc?

ms. hannon: right. sen. mccaskill: thank you very much. sen. collins: senator warren. sen. warren: thank you, madam chair. one of the biggest economic challenges facing the older workers is the increased risk of the coming disabled and unable to work, particularly because the likelihood of disability increase sharply increases with age. from age 40 to 50, the workers chance of becoming disabled doubled, and from age 50 to 60 doubles once again. social security disability insurance is the only way that millions of these workers stay out of poverty when they get hurt. now, people sometimes think of disability programs as separate from retirement-age social security, but both programs are about helping seniors. fully 70% of social security disability insurance beneficiaries are in their 50's and in their 60's. dr. rix, as a former senior policy advisor to the aarp, you are an expert on the economic

hardships facing older workers. can you explain how the social security disability system works? ms. rix: it works very much like the social security retired workers program. it is an income or earnings protection program that protects workers from loss of earning in the face of severe disability, and that is disability that is estimated to last at least a year or result in death. it is not a program for malingerers. the criteria for eligibility for fsdi are very strict and many individuals who apply for disability benefits never received them. sen. warren: and just like regular social security, disability insurance is something people earn from working. is that right? ms. rix: yes.

sen. warren: so why is the program so important to the financial security of older workers? ms. rix: the disability program? i think for the very reasons that you expressed, older workers -- and i do want to emphasize that disability can occur at any age and most older workers are not disabled. but as you mentioned, they are more likely to become disabled with age, and that modest benefit that they receive from the fsdi program is often all or a very significant portion of the income the household receives. and that is because they are generally unable to work or are very limited in what they can do and so their earnings are very low as well. sen. warren: i understand the modest benefits -- $1165 a month, and they keep about 6.6 million disabled americans from falling into poverty. sometimes the retirement fund

runs low, and sometimes the disability fund runs low. we have these two funds in social security. usually this is not a big deal. the government regularly transfers money back and forth between the two social security programs, retirement and disability. we have done it 11 times before in both directions that it has moved. but next year is different. the disability fund this time will need a transfer, but the very first thing the house republicans did when they came that in january, literally on the first day of the new congress, was to pass a new rule to prevent a routine transfer to the disability fund. now, let's be clear, this is an invented social security crisis, taking the disability system hostage to dismantle social security inch by inch. if they got their way, the house republicans would force a disabled americans, most of them seniors, to face a 20% cut in

their social security checks next year. dr. rix, house republicans argued that we need to gut social security disability programs in order to save it. do you disagree? ms. rix: i do disagree. the social security disability system needs reform, but it does not need gutting. it is too important to today's disabled americans, regardless of age. i, for one, would resist any attempt to gut the program if i were in a position to do so. sen. warren: thank you very much. when we talk about working seniors and what it means to be a working senior, i want to be clear about this. it doesn't fool anyone. it is an attack on seniors and it is time to stop playing games with the economic stability of millions of seniors who depend on social security to live with dignity. thank you, dr. rix. thank you, madam chairman.

sen. collins: senator casey, perhaps you can help us get back on topic. sen. casey: thank you very much for the panel testimony. i didn't hear all of it but i wanted to highlight the fact that i don't know the exact average for the age of u.s. senators, but we are above 55, i think. we listen carefully to recommendations for today. i think senator donnelly is 24 but -- so he brings it down but we all getting close to that age of not there already. i wanted to start with mr. godwin. in your testimony you on, among other things, intergenerational services, and you have some expertise in this. one number that stood out for me in addition to what dr. rix and

her testimony talked about, the participation rate, or labor force participation rate of older workers going from about 18% in 1985, increasing by 70% to an number like 32% in 2014. so what huge increase in the labor force participation rate. one thing i wasn't aware of until the hearing was that 2.7 million grandparents are responsible for their grandchildren, and the challenges that come with that, in any event, but especially when the grandparent is working and responsible for their grandchildren. i know that is not the only bird in the my face, but in those -- that is not the only burden they may face, but in those circumstances where there is both the challenge of getting a job after a certain age but also having an additional burden, can

you give us some advice or some suggestions as to the best ways that companies can alleviate some of that burden? mr. godwin: well, i think we find at bon secours that are benefits apply equally well to young mothers as to those who have grandchildren. we see some are raising the grandchildren with the home in them for some reason are unable to care for the grandchild and we have on-site childcare at a number of our facilities and we fit that in 20, 25 years ago when it was for working mothers primarily, but now that plays very well for us with employees and their grandchildren in the same centers. when you couple that with the work schedules we have, it means the grandparent can have a flexible schedule for getting children on and off the bus for dealing with children who are ill and have to have visits with physicians and so forth.

but it is the same mindset for us, the age of the employee is, frankly, irrelevant to that benefit. sen. casey: one of the realizations that animate or undergirds this discussion is what older workers can bring to a workforce, not simply the deep reservoir of experience and skill, but often both wit and wisdom at the same time. what we try to do at hearings like this, in addition to learning and hearing suggestions about the current state of the challenge or problem, or opportunity, are the things we can do legislatively to move it forward. sometimes there isn't. sometimes there is no legislative remedy or strategy. but i guess in the remaining time i have we can go, starting with you, dr. rix, and moving to my right, just one topline suggestion that you hope we

would work on either by way of strengthening or changing the policy or introducing some new legislative or policy change. ms. rix: well, there are a number of things -- i mentioned in my oral testimony that additional resources for training and retraining older workers would be at the top of my list. but there are a number of other, perhaps some less dramatic and maybe less impactful recommendations, and one would be to expand the age determination and implement act jurisdictional threshold to businesses with 15 or more employees rather than the current 20-plus. that would protect more older workers. requiring employers to provide paid family leave programs should make it easier for middle-aged and older workers,

with caregiving responsibilities, among others, to combine those responsibilities with paid work. eliminating the impediment to retirement programs might additionally allow workers to obtain the work schedules that many of them tell us they are interested in. you might -- why don't you take a look at, rather than my going through them right now, look at those recognitions in the testimony? if i could say one other thing, though, i do think that most of the burden rests squarely on the shoulders of employers, and it is up to them to provide the job opportunities to older workers. while the legislative initiatives might help someone if employers don't want or need older workers, then i am not sure there is much that policy can do to change that.

sen. casey: because we're out of time, i will ask the remaining witnesses to submit something for the record. thank you very much. sen. collins: senator casey, if you do want to have the rest of the witnesses respond, i would be happy to have them do so. sen. casey: is this lightning round or -- [laughter] as long as the chairman will allow you to answer that, how much time you have. ms. nordman: as the employer, i agree. it is our responsibility. it is our responsibility to not discriminate on any level, and provide a workforce that is friendly and productive. i do agree, it is on us to provide jobs for older workers. sen. casey: thank you. ms. hannon: a couple of quick highlights -- a more flexible workforce, arrangements, because workers want autonomy and they want to be able to work from home. it doesn't cost more to retrofit your office. if you can do that, commitment

to the community college system. if there is any way we could build on what they are offering today, that is great. there was a wonderful consortium recently in a new york city with universities around the country trying to figure out how can we deal with this segment of our population that needs education, which we have ignored for years? it is not the young people, it is the old folks. we need programs for them. finally, the idea making financing easier for senior entrepreneurs to have access to that. a lot of people in this age group do want to start their own business and it is hard to get loans for. mr. godwin: as senator kaine knows, we have a high percentage of veterans in virginia. it benefits the older populations as well. sen. collins: thank you. senator kaine. sen. kaine: welcome from our hometown.

i came to the hearing really thinking about the work needs of older workers and what i found myself thinking in your testimony, this question of flexibility for workers -- mr. godwin, your testimony is about your particular industry. it is not just for older workers. in the health care field it was dominated by women workers, the schedules that were appropriately flexed for family needs. you guys may have been culturally a pioneer of some of the flexible work arrangements, and yet, that really does seem to be a broader trend for older workers. my dad sold his manufacturing business and decided he wanted to be a volunteer for a local catholic charities organization and volunteer one or two days a week, and they said "we want to hire you." "i don't want to be hired, i want more flexibility." they struck a deal with flexibility every week in terms of how many days he works.

my dad is 80 years old but his arrangement is similar to my middle son, who is an artist and works in a restaurant just enough hours to make enough money to do his art, which is what he really wants to do. he says everybody who works at the restaurant is just like him, they are all artists and art earning enough to make an income to support their artistic passion. it strikes me that we are moving into a new age of work with a traditional 40-hour work week , the 9-to-5 is less and less case, whether for seniors or others. senator warner, my colleague from virginia, give a great speech where he said if you see a young person, don't ask him where do you work. ask what are you working on? i applaud you at bon secours for being a pioneer on the flexibility side. how hard is that for you as the

human relations professional? you guys are open 24/7, 365. you have a lot of slots to fill. if we can put the word out to more employees that flexibility is a great way to find workers. flexibility is a highly prized thing. if you want flexibility, you can find an employer who can give it. as a human relations professional, what challenges does that those to your organization? mr. godwin: i would challenge the lawmakers to look at -- flexibility isn't just about scheduling. it is about telecommuting, it is about the nature of the work and how you redesign the workspace. flexibility is a lot more than just scheduling. the challenge for us over is to keep reinventing ourselves. we don't rest on our laurels and think that whatever we come up with now will fit how things will be five years from now could we are constantly studying, we are constantly

looking at other employers, learning from panels like this , and from a lot of the awards we apply for -- employer awards, because there was a lot to be learned there as well. you cannot just do it like you are doing it right now. you have to continually change. sen. kaine: the fact that bon secours has been so awarded since 2005 by aarp and others as a great place for older workers is a real tribute to that culture, and i applaud you for that. but yeah, i think the hearing is getting at the notion that not just for older workers, but for a lot of folks, just the world of work is changing and the way that people used to go to work for one organization and stay with the organization their entire life. you don't see that happening much anymore, either. there is flexibility in who you work with your entire career and this is getting at it. dr. rix, i couldn't resist, in the questions about social security and disability, which is not my intent, but you say we do need to reform it but we do not want to gut social security to reform social security

disability, but we do have to grapple with the notion of social security disability and the reforms so that people who are disabled and in need it know they can count on it. i want to know your thoughts on reform because we do have to tackle it. ms. rix: i would really prefer to differ to my colleagues who are far more expert on the disability insurance programs then i am. it is a complicated system, there have been proposals for years and years, and i will leave it to the true -- sen. kaine: i would love to talk to the folks in the organization about it -- there is a tendency to talk about reform that the bells go off, you are trying to gut the program. we have been willing, congress, to make adjustments and tweaks to keep it actuarially sound, so we can have it there for us and

it can be there for the next generation. i don't want to be the first generation of congress that is unwilling to make changes to make sure it is there for the next. i think there is need for reforms and if your organization has ideas about that, i would be quite interested in it. with that, thank you, madam chair. sen. collins: thank you, very much, senators and we enjoy hearing your exchange with your constituents. one of the takeaways that i have from this hearing is that older workers often are more dependable, bring certain skills, allow employers to avoid retraining and turnover that may occur with the younger workforce, but that flexibility is very important to them. i think it's very interesting that ms. nordman's testimony is

that she has a worker who comes in very early in the day to start working, and mr. godwin also talked about flexible hours and making sure that grandchildren could come to the day care center. and it seems to me that another lesson from this hearing is that we need to tailor more of our programs to make sure that people have the skills that are for the jobs that exist, that there is often a mismatch between job-training and the jobs that actually are out there. i was interested to learn of the occupational handbook that ms. hannon mentioned, and dr. rix also talked about the needed to better align the training and education for the workforce, for older workers, or any workers,

with the jobs that are actually out there. so i think this has been a very interesting exploration of this issue. one of the goals of our committee is to explore the issue of retirement security. in our state of maine, the state that ms. nordman and i live in, one out of three retired individuals live only on social security. and the average social security benefit is less than $16,000 a year. so the kind of jobs that ms. nordman's providing in an area of the state that is very rural and does not have a lot of employers is so essential to the financial security of those workers that you are employing.

and indeed, i would wager that it is the difference between comfortable standard of living and property for many of them -- and poverty for many of them, because if they are living on just the social security, they are going to have a very difficult time. i just want to express my personal appreciation for your willingness to leave the more affluent urban areas of our state and come to rural maine, buy a business, keep it alive, grow it, and employ older workers. you are making the kind of difference that a good employer can make. and in the end, it does come down to employers being able to do what you are doing, what mr. godwin is doing, to accommodate workers. and in return you get a wonderfully loyal, devoted, and hard-working workforce, as both

of you have explained. i appreciate our two technical experts for being here today and sharing your expertise with the committee, as we continue to explore this issue. i think this is an issue that has not received the attention that it deserves, and i think we are facing a tsunami of retirees who will find that they are going to outlive their savings, that they have not prepared for their retirement. and working longer or working part-time or returning to work is a very important part of financial security for older americans, and that is a message that i hope our committee is helping to disseminate.

so i want to thank you all very much for being here today. i want to see if our ranking member has any closing comments that she would like to make. sen. mccaskill: no, and i just want to clarify my comments about the challenges for workers age 50 to 65. i understand, ms. nordman, you are doing something very unusual in this country, trying to revitalize manufacturing in rural communities. i grew up for part of my childhood in a town in missouri where we had a facility that was manufacturing jeans, and it is, of course, long gone. and many other facilities like that across missouri that provided manufacturing opportunities. i get the challenges and i get that when you are doing and the fact that you have got 10 and are looking for two more, that shows that you are smart and are doing the right thing and you are expanding your workers,

because obviously, you have got demand and you are producing something people want to buy. congratulations on that, and to all of you, thank you very much. sen. collins: thank you so much for being here today, thank you for your extraordinary participation always in putting together this hearing. i want to note that senator sasse was here. i want to thank all of our witnesses for their contributions. the hearing record will remain open for additional testimony and questions until friday, july 10, we are giving the holiday week to have a little bit of additional time and i want to thank the committee staff for their hard work. this concludes our hearing.

marks the 10th anniversary of hurricane katrina. 2006ht at 8:00, c-span's tour of hurricane damage at st. bernard parish in louisiana. we had nothing but cement and rubble left. not only your house, but your whole community. your friends, family, it is all gone. now it is a year later. and still, your family and friends you do not see any more. you do not forget that feeling. you will never forget it for the rest of your life. >> follow it at 9:00 followed by a town hall meeting in new orleans moderated by mayor ray nagin. >> i'm calling on you, state level, that her, and other levels.

you to represent me on the local level. i don't know where else to go. i don't know what else to do. >> thursday night at 8:00, more from the atlantic conference in new orleans with craig fugate and dean mckay and family. at 9:00 we will show you president obama's trip to the region and remarks on the recovery 10 years after hurricane katrina. hurricane katrina 10th anniversary coverage all this week on c-span. >> today, a look at how involving young people in constructive democratic reduceds can do occur radicalization. that is on c-span2.

>> earlier this summer, the senate special committee on aging held a hearing on diabetes research and funding efforts. andarchers from medical -- diabetes patients and medical experts. it is starting today at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. ♪ i'm thrilled and exciting to be here. i want to think c-span for covering this national book festival. we have a beautiful sunny day and i hope the camera shows how huge the crowds are. >> one thing to remember about exceptional presidents can be said that they are the exception. thank you all for coming today. this is a wonderful event. they say that heaven is a library. case, evan has got outside today and we are in heaven at the national book festival. you must say to yourself, i

am a youth leader for today. >> that was an article trying to show that we had a red blue ma p. when you interviewed people, it was a little divide. scientists were in town. the idea that the country itself is as polarized as washington is wrong. i do not know a single political scientist who believes that. >> all people who realize whatever they have done in life is something that should be recorded and passed onto the next generation. that is the way that we learn. we learn by trying to understand the past. all of us have a past. guam, andk about

you focused on the hands. why did you do that? >> that is a great question that goes to the heart of all the questions we have been talking about. it is to the point. we realize there was no way we could tell the whole story. there was no way we could be short of an encyclopedia or having a story read like the telephone book. of course, the telephone book is not a story. the think all of opportunities are open for women now. when i was in law school, i 1960 seven, there were 13 women in my class of 500. today law schools are 50-50. understanding what he did was that he never liked people who put profit above the public good. his view was that parks and wilderness areas belong to the american people for generations unborn and they needed to be handed on as pleases to awaken the spirit. >> i made a career out of my

love for books. to help spread that love i helped found the texas book festival and the national book festival. i neverlove reading, thought that i would write a book, certainly not one about myself. >> the goal was in some ways a to go to thency oldest people in our families and to get the stories before it is too late. i've had a father and daughter in los angeles that i remember that came together. after hearing the talk, the daughter said to the father, i'm taking you to the coffee shop now and you're going to tell me the story. >> i think when history looks back, at the 30 plus million people, with the health beurance, that is going to quite a change. martin luther king said

i think that was a bending toward justice. you know what johnson would have said? the important thing is to pass the bill. once you do, it is easier to go back and fix it. >> the narrative is to bring back the dead. that is what i tried to do. with those who are familiar and those were less familiar. >> i don't think i can afford 10 mirrors -- years on millard fillmore or franklin pierce. [laughter] >> i'm bringing all my guys in the room at the same time and i'm going to write about leadership. that is what i care about. [applause] >> thank you. >>