mr. goss, thanks for being here. i want to go back to what the chairman started with and a question about the question in the "huffington post" with senator schumer, senator warren and senator whitehouse. it was interesting the way they stated it. more or less that it was curious. there was curiously incorporated a number of assumptions playing up the potential insolvency of the program. there's nothing mr. blahouse has done that this is politically motivated, even though the president nominated him, that causes a problem? are you in agreement with that, that he is not a problem? you haven't seen anything he's done as curious that could have influenced the outcomes? >> i've been fortunate enough to work with the trustees all the way back to our very first two trustees. it's been a pleasure in working with all of them. we understand that they come from different -- >> so he's not a problem. you don't find anything curious about his behavior? >> it's really not our place to evaluate whether somebody is a positive or ne

chairman, i'm glad that mr. goss is here, look forward to his testimony and make sure we're all working to make social security sound and secure for the next generations of americans who can rely on it as well. i yield back. >> thank you. as is customary, any member is welcome to submit a statement for the hearing record. and before we move to testimony today i want to limit our witness to please limit your statement to five minutes. however. without objection all the written testimony will be made a part of the hearing record. we have one witness today seated at the table, is steven goss, chief actuary social security administrati administration. please proceed. >> thank you very much, chairman janis, mr. becerra, members of the committee for the opportunity to come talk to you about this, the 76th consecutive annual report from the board of trustees about the finances of this program. closer. sorry. okay. the statements by the chairman and the ranking member have already done a great job talking about what this pro

chairman, and thank you, mr. goss, for your presence here today. i think it's important to note that the longer we wait to make changes, the more difficult it will get. but just to clarify, you just said that social security is not fully funded. and yet we heard earlier, and there was a graph up there that suggests that there's a surplus. i mean, that to me does not level. would you characterize that as a surplus? >> well, it's an accumulated surplus we've had up to this point. we do have $2.8 trillion available now. i hesitate to sort of try an analogy, but if we want to put our child through college for four years and we have enough money to pay for the first year and not the latter three, then we do have a nice piece of money here, that would cover one year. >> would you call that a surplus? given the suggestion of obligation for a four-year degree. >> it's certainly a surplus in the sense that in that case, and certainly in this case, where we have since the inessenti essein program, we have collected more tax revenue than we have paid out to d

chairman, i'm glad that mr. gosshere, look forward to his testimony and make sure we're all working to make social security sound and secure for the next generations of americans who can rely on it as well. i yield back. >> thank you. as is customary, any member is welcome to submit a statement for the hearing record. and before we move to testimony today i want to limit our witness to please limit your statement to five minutes. however. without objection all the written testimony will be made a part of the hearing record. we have one witness today seated at the table, is steven goss, chief actuary social security administrati administration. please proceed. >> thank you very much, chairman janis, mr. becerra, members of the committee for the opportunity to come talk to you about this, the 76th consecutive annual report from the board of trustees about the finances of this program. closer. sorry. okay. the statements by the chairman and the ranking member have already done a great job talking about what this program

. >> mr. goss, you mentioned before about raising the age, 67 in 2022. what does raising the age by an additional year do to expanding it from what it is now to insolvency at 2034? >> for 2034, it would really do very little, because we would only talking about affecting people who attain age 62 after the year 2022, to affect them by having some lower level of benefit or asking them to wait another couple of months or a year to start receiving their benefits. the cumulative effect would be small, which speaks to the notion that we really need a market basket of different possible changes put together. >> mr. goss, we certainly look forward to working with you in a bipartisan way. we know the longer we wait, the fewer options we have. we have to talk about solvency. too many people are relying on social security for their retirement. thank you. >>> i want to thank all the members here. social security faces serious challenges and serious solutions, not empty words and plans that don't add up. i look forward to working with all my colleagues and to you too

. >> mr. goss grove, do you agree with that, basically? >> i would agree with that. maybe think as mr. mcgwire was answering your question, the product cycle of some of the products entering the market in our area, l.e.d. lamps as an example, is in many cases less than a year. so if you miss one of these hurd els elss i've referred to, you've missed a product cycle. that's a very big deal. and for a small or medium-sized company of which there's many making l.e.d.s, that could be fate al. >> well, i have a lot of other questions but my time has already expired. mr. rush, you're recognized for five minutes. >> i want to thank again the panelists for your interesting testimony so far. there's a question that i have, and there is an argument that while the efficiency standards have been very valuable at reducing energy costs and consumption, many of these standards have already reached their maximum efficacy, and we cannot squeeze any more juice from the grapes in a certain manner of speaking. do you agree with the statement that many of these appliances are as efficient