    [Senate Hearing 118-97]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                           S. Hrg. 118-97

                            ECONOMIC CHALLENGES AND
                               OPPORTUNITIES FOR
                                OLDER AMERICANS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                           SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                             INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

                                   __________

                                AUGUST 22, 2023

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 118-07

             Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    53-321 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2023

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                  ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania, Chairman

    KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York      MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
    ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts      MARCO RUBIO, Florida
    MARK KELLY, Arizona                  RICK SCOTT, Florida
    RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             J.D. VANCE, Ohio
    JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania         PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
                                  ----------
                   Elizabeth Letter, Majority Staff Director
                    Matthew Sommer, Minority Staff Director

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------

                                                                       Page

    Opening Statement of Senator Mike Braun, Ranking Member..........     1

                               PANEL OF WITNESSES

    Toby Deaton, Vice President, Indiana Fraternal Order of Police,
      Chief Deputy Sheriff, Scott County, Indiana....................     4
    Tom McKinney, President and Owner, McKinney Farms, Inc., Kempton,
      Indiana........................................................     7
    Wesley Snyder, Multi-Brand Franchise Owner, Fishers, Indiana.....    10
    Valerie A. Jones, Assistant to the Philanthropist, St. Vincent de
      Paul, Indianapolis, Indiana....................................    12

                                    APPENDIX
                          Prepared Witness Statements

    Toby Deaton, Vice President, Indiana Fraternal Order of Police,
      Chief Deputy Sheriff, Scott County, Indiana....................    29
    Tom McKinney, President and Owner, McKinney Farms, Inc., Kempton,
      Indiana........................................................    32
    Wesley Snyder, Multi-Brand Franchise Owner, Fishers, Indiana.....    34
    Valerie A. Jones, Assistant to the Philanthropist, St. Vincent de
      Paul, Indianapolis, Indiana....................................    44

                            ECONOMIC CHALLENGES AND
                               OPPORTUNITIES FOR
                                OLDER AMERICANS

                                  ----------

                                                    Tuesday, August 22, 2023

                                            U.S. Senate
                                     Special Committee on Aging
                                                       Washington, D.C.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in the
    Indiana War Memorial Auditorium, 55 East Michigan Street,
    Indianapolis, Indiana, Hon. Mike Braun, Ranking Member of the
    Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senator Braun

                     OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR
                       MIKE BRAUN, RANKING MEMBER

        Senator Braun. This hearing is called to order. Welcome to
    the hearing. I am the Ranking Member of the Aging Committee. I
    want to tell you a little story about how I got onto it. It was
    shortly after I got elected, and Senator Tim Scott, who is
    running for President, busy, I think, out in Iowa right now,
    called me, and it is a committee that you cannot legislate
    through, but I thought, no legislation, you are recruiting
    someone to be on it, and you are talking to a freshman Senator.
    Well, let me think about it.
        When he told me what you can do with it, it has been,
    actually, the Committee that is probably been most interesting
    because we can pick any topic. Generally, it has got to be
    related to aging, and we all age, so I have really enjoyed it.
        Now the Ranking Member, Senator Casey from Pennsylvania, is
    the Chairman, and we've talked about all kinds of issues. Then,
    that discussion can lead to legislation, and we always get a
    varied opinion on the subject matter.
        Older Americans play such a critical role throughout the
    economy. Business and law enforcement, on the family farms, and
    even now some are considering maybe coming out of retirement,
    so it has gotten to be a different dynamic out there.
        A report from a committee found earlier this year that 43
    percent of Americans retired--and I mentioned it just a moment
    ago--are thinking about coming out of retirement, and that is
    probably not the plan that everybody was looking to happen. We
    worked so hard to get there, and then when you have to consider
    that it is just a dynamic, I think most would rather see being
    a little different.
        Prices have been rising. A lot of times when you try to
    enterprise through government it is how you pay for it. The
    printing press, remember, is in the basement with the Fed, and
    a lot of what was done, especially post-COVID, did not have a
    real pay-for. I have been one of the few voices in D.C. I am on
    the Budget Committee, and it is like maybe talking to the side
    of my barn back home sometimes. We have got to get better at
    that. That kind of spending may feel good in the short run, but
    we know it is not a long-term plan because look at the results,
    so many Americans thinking about coming out of retirement.
        Police officers often retire from careers, and I want to
    bring this subject up, and it concerns WEP and GPO, that can
    cut their Social Security by nearly 60 percent, just because
    they have a separate earned pension. There is a bill in D.C.
    currently that I have been looking at, and due to that inherent
    inequity I am going to get on that bill as a sponsor, and if we
    can find a bona fide pay-for, which I have been able to do
    through my team on more legislation than almost any Republican
    Senator on issues like education, health care, agriculture, I
    think this is something that makes sense, and I am going to
    work hard when I get back to where we get an honest pay-for and
    we do not borrow the money to do it.
        At the same time rising interest rates are squeezing any
    retirement funds. In terms of expenses, you may get a little
    better return on your investment portfolio, but then if you
    need to borrow any money, and it is also part and parcel of how
    we are having to react to tame inflation, it gets very
    complicated.
        Our office weighed in on ESG--environment, social, and
    governance--and I do not care what you say you can do with an
    investment approach, the most important part should be the
    return on investment, the numbers, and if you can do both at
    the same time, that is fine. It should be ancillary, not
    primary.
        When older Americans are productive, socially connected,
    gainfully employed, are secure in their retirements, we are all
    better off. We are all going to be there someday. The good news
    is there are still economic opportunities for older Americans.
    Many are reinventing their retirements, deciding to stay active
    and split time between flexible work, leisure, and family
    activities. Older Americans help employers and communities and
    benefit in that process.
        Like an 82-year-old grandma who went back to work as a
    baker in Georgia. She was recruited while shopping. For
    employers facing labor shortages, older Americans can still
    fill those gaps.
        A recent report showed that older workers will make up a
    quarter of the workforce by 2031, and if we want to turn that
    around we are going to have to do something about how, from the
    bottom up, we reinvigorate the economy to where we can set more
    aside for retirement and still be gainfully employed along the
    way before you get there, and my thinking is for 40 or 50 years
    we have been moving toward a stronger presence from our Federal
    Government. It would be different if we were knocking it out of
    the park, and currently, tragically, not only for older
    Americans but younger Americans, we are running the biggest
    business in the world, borrowing nearly $2 trillion a year.
        Think about the Greatest Generation. They grew up in the
    Depression, fought the World War, came back, paid off that
    highest debt that we had ever been encumbered by, and built the
    interstate highway system. Where has that gone? We need to get
    back to it. If we do, and we can, I think the solutions will be
    mostly crafted where you do have to live within your means,
    where you do not have the printing press in the basement, or
    the credit card gets renewed regardless of your behavior.
        Our goal should be collectively, through all levels of
    government, to untap that potential, supporting dignified work
    and retirements, not holding back, being entrepreneurial, at
    least don't keep doing the same thing that has taken us to a
    place where I think there is going to be reconciliation the
    hard way, not to where we proactively fix it.
        With that I am going to introduce all the witnesses that
    have been so gracious to come here today. We will start with
    Toby Deaton. Toby Deaton is Vice President of the Indiana FOP
    and Chief Deputy Sheriff for Scott County. He is a graduate of
    IU and a dedicated law enforcement officer. He has championed
    better pensions and more support for the families of officers
    killed in the line of duty. He also has extensive experience
    with Social Security's impact on law enforcement officers.
    Thank you for testifying today.
        Tom McKinney. We have known one another for some time. I
    was involved in agriculture before I got into government. You
    are the President and Owner of McKinney Farms, along with law
    enforcement, two of the more difficult jobs out there. After
    attending Purdue, you chose to return to the family farm--I was
    glad I did that when I came back to my hometown. I think there
    is a lot to be gained from doing it--where he worked to grow
    the operation. Tom's calling is to help feed our Nation and the
    world. A Tipton County native, Tom has been married to his wife
    Karen for 42 years and has three children and three
    grandchildren. Thank you for coming in today.
        Wes Snyder. Wes is a multi-unit and multi-brand franchise
    owner across six states. He owns eight FASTSIGNS locations,
    including in Indianapolis, as well as Pirtek, College Hunks
    Hauling Junk and Moving--that is an interesting one--My Salon
    Suite franchise locations. Sounds like a serial entrepreneur.
    That is a good place to come from. Wes graduated from Purdue in
    1995, with a degree in accounting, got married and moved to
    Indy, and has been there ever since. He has two daughters and a
    son-in-law. Thanks for coming here today.
        Last but not least, Valerie Jones. Thank you for being
    here. Valerie is an Assistant to the Philanthropist for St.
    Vincent de Paul in Indianapolis. She works with software to
    manage and organize donor files, keeping information on track,
    and ensuring that it is properly set up. She is joined today by
    Chris Green, Program Manager of Goodwill of Central and
    Southern Indiana and its Senior Community Service Employment
    Program, in which Ms. Jones is also a participant. Thank you
    for being here today.
        Well, for the rest of the time I am going to be putting
    some questions out to you, and I think we will start with you,
    Toby.
        I am very concerned about the long-term fiscal health of
    Social Security. I said earlier it is roughly nine years, and
    we have been paying into that fund, employers and employees,
    since the Depression, and actually, we have known this day is
    coming for a long time. It is vital that we hold up our end of
    the bargain for millions of Americans who expect Social
    Security to be there for them, including law enforcement. I am
    starting to think of WEP and GPO reducing benefits by up to 60
    percent.
        What kinds of sacrifices are Hoosiers that are police
    officers, who have already sacrificed so much for the good of
    the community, making because of WEP and GPO the way it is
    currently constituted.
        Mr. Deaton. First, good afternoon, Senator. Thank you for
    taking the time to discuss this important issue.
        We have many officers that are absolutely in a crisis, and
    I want to use one example right off the bat. As an individual
    that served for nearly 40 years, he lost his wife unexpectedly,
    because of the GPO he was forced to sell his home. Basically,
    if you receive a pension from another government side of work
    you will not receive Social Security benefit, or at least a
    very substantial one, and this problem is affecting a great
    deal, between recruiting police officers to the current
    allowing our folks that have served with dignity to continue on
    in their later years.
        Senator Braun. I am going to ask a question first and then
    go to your testimony, because that, to me, these are the most
    important questions we have got, and then it will have the
    context of where your testimony is going to come from, so go
    ahead and do that next.
        Mr. Deaton. My testimony?
        Senator Braun. Yes.
        Mr. Deaton. Okay.

           STATEMENT OF TOBY DEATON, VICE PRESIDENT, INDIANA

                FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, CHIEF DEPUTY

                     SHERIFF, SCOTT COUNTY, INDIANA

        Mr. Deaton. Good afternoon, sir. On behalf of over 370,000
    FOP members nationwide and nearly 17,000 in Indiana, I would
    like to thank you for discussing this vital issue and the
    negative impact of the Windfall Elimination Provision, or WEP,
    and the Government Pension Offset, or GPO, has on our public
    safety officer retirees. To be clear, this is our number one
    legislative priority, and several groups are in attendance to
    support fixing this problem. These include the Indiana Troopers
    Association, and the International Association of Fire
    Fighters. It is an especially important issue for our Nation's
    public safety officers.
        For this reason Senator, today I am asking you to co-
    sponsor S. 597, the ``Social Security Fairness Act.'' The
    Senate bill currently has 44 co-sponsors. The House companion
    member, H.R. 82, has 289 co-sponsors, including Representatives
    Frank Mrvan, Jim Banks, Rudy Yakym, and Andre Carson, so you
    can see it is a bipartisan bill.
        The FOP contends that this provision has a negative impact
    on law enforcement and other public safety officials for
    several reasons. First, law enforcement officers retire earlier
    than many employees. Owing this to the physical demands of the
    job, a law enforcement officer is likely to retire between the
    ages of 45 and 60.
        Second, after 20 or 25 years on the job, many law
    enforcement officers are likely to begin second careers and
    hold jobs that do pay into the Social Security system. Even
    more officers are likely to ``moonlight,'' that is, hold second
    or even third jobs throughout their law enforcement career in
    order to augment their income.
        This creates an unjust situation that too many of our
    members find themselves in. They are entitled to a state or
    local retirement benefit because they worked 20 or more years
    keeping their streets and neighborhoods safe. They also worked
    at these other jobs where they did pay into Social Security,
    entitling them to the benefit as well.
        However, because of the WEP, if their second career
    resulted in less than 20 years of substantial earnings, upon
    reaching the age at which they could be eligible to collect
    Social Security they will discover that they lose 60 percent of
    the benefit for which they were already taxed.
        Actuarially speaking, I doubt many officers will live long
    enough to ``break even''--that is, collect the money they paid
    into the system--let alone receive any type of ``windfall.''
    These men and women earned their state or local retirement
    benefit as public employees, and they paid Social Security
    taxes while employed in the private sector. How is this a
    windfall?
        Fairness, justice, and equality have always been important
    words in this country. They are extremely important to my
    organization. In fact, they were put in the FOP logo that I
    wear around 108 years ago, so many people are passionate about
    these issues because it is about fairness and inequality. As a
    police officer, we know being financially wealthy is not an
    option, but we never thought we would be penalized and treated
    differently and financially harmed for serving our communities.
        Let me be clear about this. What we are asking for is
    simply what we have earned and nothing more. I have never met
    anyone that after understanding this issue believes that this
    is fair. In fact, most believe this goes against the
    fundamental way of American life.
        It should be noted that we do pay into our pension systems
    as well, and many have negotiated this as part of a total
    compensation package, only to discover that they are later
    penalized.
        Police officers love the communities we serve, but because
    the pay is so low most of us do work other jobs as well. In
    fact, as knowledge about the impact the WEP and GPO have on the
    ability of officers to retire, it is hurting our recruiting
    efforts. Our young people do not want to go into a career they
    will be penalized due to secondary employment.
        As a Nation, we are experiencing a massive recruitment and
    retention crisis in law enforcement. We need to be doing
    everything we can in order to make the profession of law
    enforcement attractive to our young people. Repealing the WEP
    and GPO will make many of our retirement and pension systems
    appealing to the next generation.
        Our members want Social Security to last, and while the WEP
    is vital to our membership it is a small fraction of the
    overall total Social Security conversation. The WEP affects
    about 2.1 million people and roughly 18,000 Indiana residents.
    The recent CBO estimated the cost of the WEP at $88 billion
    over 10 years and the GPO at $107 billion during that same
    time. While certainly a great deal of money, it is again what
    we paid into the system. It is nothing more. It is what we
    paid.
        I contend if we are trying to maintain Social Security on
    the backs of public servants then we have a much larger problem
    as a society. We believe that this topic should be discussed on
    its own merit and not part of the total Social Security
    conversation.
        The fact that some retired police officers are now having
    to face purchasing medication or food is a travesty and should
    be fixed immediately. Several of our members retired when they
    thought they could sustain on the pension. We are all aware
    that prices and inflation have weakened the dollar, and some do
    not have a cost-of-living adjustment on the pension. The extra
    money they earned from Social Security could allow them the
    dignity they have earned.
        The years on the job often give retired police officers
    physical issues, but the mental horrors are just now beginning
    to be discussed in society. When you add on the financial
    strain this causes, many are left feeling hopeless.
        I would like to compare this with other occupations that
    have a 401K. Many people change companies or even careers over
    a lifetime, and the 401K that they have travels with them with
    no penalty. Companies have contributed to the 401K with money
    that is never penalized. To be clear, we are not advocating for
    that but pointing out the difference that public servants are
    not treated fairly.
        I would like to compare that again that the wage base limit
    for 2022 was $147,000, and for 2023 was adjusted to $160,200,
    so instead of raising this we are putting the burden on those
    that have served our communities, often at a wage far below the
    private sector. Our members are only asking for what they have
    earned. They have earned this, and the communities are
    suffering more now than ever.
        We could use many examples and stories but for time
    constraints and not wishing to expose publicly names, I will
    use examples. However, these are real life situations for
    people in Indiana.
        _Example one: A police officer in a small northern Indiana
    town should draw $1,514 a month but brings home $956.
        _Example two: Is a mid-sized city in southern Indiana. He
    was injured while on duty and had to go out on a medical
    disability. He had an entire other career other than law
    enforcement. He should earn over $2,300 a month, but now draws
    around $1,800 a month. He did not plan to go out on a
    disability, and he now is struggling with physical and
    financial issues, and you mentioned those folks coming back to
    work. This individual is trying to find work and is back
    working now, despite his disability.
        _Example three: Is a name I am going to mention. He is in
    the audience. It is our FOP President, Bill Owensby. He retired
    from Indianapolis Police Department, and like most he worked a
    second job. He has earned $1,800 a month, but more than likely
    was only going to draw about $1,200. He is still working his
    numbers out. That is a pretty significant amount that he is
    going to be penalized over his entire lifetime for serving in
    the community.
        I mentioned earlier that everyone believes this is wrong,
    and I would like to offer evidence of that. Last year we had
    305 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives to fix this
    issue. Getting over 300 people to agree on anything in
    Washington can almost be classified as a miracle, Senator. We
    urge you to take up this legislation and help fix this
    travesty.
        Thank you for your time.
        Senator Braun. As I said in my opening statement, I will
    get on that bill and try to find a pay-for for it and get it
    across the finish line.
        Mr. Deaton. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Braun. Tom, I am going to ask you this question
    because these are the ones we compiled as being most important
    and then follow-up with your opening statement.
        The Biden Administration's environmental, social, and
    governance, ESG, rule allows fiduciaries to invest according to
    some political agenda instead of solely adhering to financial
    factors. President Biden issued his first veto to reject my
    bipartisan bill to challenge that rule. You have also helped us
    understand how ESG can impact agriculture. What do you think
    the most significant impact on agriculture would be if you are
    pushing an agenda as opposed to the best return on investment?
        Mr. McKinney. Thank you for having me here, Senator. My
    kneejerk reaction is an undertow that does not make the
    newspapers, but part of my testimony will be concerning the
    emissions controls on our tractors. The over-the-road semitruck
    drivers get high enough heat temperature to get rid of it, but
    the fire trucks, police cruisers, tractors that idle, our semi
    tractors, 40 percent of all service calls from the John Deere
    dealers across the State, as well as the Case IH dealers--that
    is four big dealers--are on emissions problems.
        In talking to some of the fire truck drivers, they do not
    get enough heat in their engines and so they are always under
    maintenance repair, not always but required to maybe have an
    extra vehicle.
        A very small school corporation in Howard County, the
    technician that works on their buses, they have to own one to
    two extra school buses so that they can keep them going because
    school buses start and stop, start and stop. They do not get
    the heat up enough to make the DEF fluid. DEF fluid is diesel
    exhaust fluid that has been simply pure urea that is injected
    into the exhaust stream and burns up the particulate in the air
    coming out is better than the air going in, but it is just
    very, very expensive to use. That is one example.
        Senator Braun. Thank you. Go ahead with your opening
    statement.

            STATEMENT OF TOM MCKINNEY, PRESIDENT AND OWNER,
                 MCKINNEY FARMS, INC., KEMPTON, INDIANA

        Mr. McKinney. Senator Braun, staff, guests, thanks for
    inviting me to this hearing and listening session.
        As we have a discussion on challenges as well as
    opportunities for older Americans, I will tend to migrate
    toward agriculture and mostly production agriculture
    experiences.
        One of the greatest obstacles is health care, especially
    when one spouse has graduated to Medicare status and the other
    has not. This concern is heard in many group settings and heard
    frequently in Social Security Office waiting rooms when
    citizens chat among themselves ahead of an appointment. Church
    groups, organized meetings at the local Farm Bureau, and other
    public gatherings are other examples of where this subject
    arises as well.
        On a personal note, since our farm is not large enough for
    a group health plan, we purchase from the Affordable Care Act
    alternatives which is very expensive, and then we supplement
    that with a membership in a Christin Health Ministry policy.
        A very positive note on the Christian Health policy is we
    are a member with an incentive to live healthy, exercise, and
    eat healthy. There is nothing more powerful than a personal
    incentive to make a situation better for yourselves as well as
    others in the group. It just works. It invites competition as
    well, which is a good thing.
        With respect to opportunities for our rural elderly, on a
    positive note, in attempt to remain objective, production
    agriculture does offer a unique way for retired or elderly
    citizens to stay involved and earn a supplemental income.
    Seasonal needs on the farm, such as grain cart driver, seed
    tender for the spring planter with a pickup truck, or driving
    semis are all superb ways for elderly or retiring farmers to
    stay active.
        A few short years ago we rotated two firefighters and
    police officers on their days off to have one full-time
    employee. It worked fabulously. This is a win/win scenario.
        Another challenge that has affected all of us in
    agriculture falls along the ESG topic. While the title
    ``Environmental, Social and Governance'' seems to be like a
    benign title, it has far-reaching and costly effects. On our
    farm and others like ours, we have moved to a strip tillage
    system for corn and a nearly complete no-till system for
    soybeans. We do seed cover crops with a vertical till, minimum
    disturbance tool, simply incorporates the seed into the soil a
    little better. We have eliminated as many as three additional
    trips across the acreage and have prevented carbon expulsions
    into the atmosphere. We have also reduced our nitrogen and
    fertilizer as a result. This is all a good thing and not
    required by the government yet. Economics has driven this.
        A case where government mandate has been expensive to all
    of us as producers and taxpayers is the emissions mandate of
    farm equipment. Both Case IH dealers and John Deere dealers,
    representing approximately 70 to 80 percent of all sales across
    Indiana, share with me that about 40 percent of all service
    calls are for emissions. Three years ago, that was 70 percent.
    Their words, not mine.
        Personally, in 2019, which was a late planting and wet
    year, we added a third seed planter to our lineup to get seeds
    planted, albeit late. The tractor on that planter was only two
    years old with low hours. It did have emissions required
    material on it. We spent, and ultimately lost, three days
    working on emissions issues. We had three different technicians
    trying to get the tractor to run.
        The end result was we got rained out again and had to
    collect Preventative Planting Insurance claims on 500-plus
    acres. Although we did pay our premiums to Federal crop
    insurance, it was no fun and goes against every fiber of a
    farmer's being to not plant. In the three lost days we could
    have easily planted way over 500 acres, but the government-
    mandated emissions made it impossible. Several tens of
    thousands of dollars were paid out from the USDA Insurance
    funds as a result.
        Friends and neighbors share stories about ambulances or
    fire trucks requiring excessive funds, school buses, just to
    keep their equipment running so emergency runs can be made. The
    chatter behind the scenes is the idea that emergency equipment
    should be exempt so they can at least get to the job, the scene
    of an accident or the scene of a crime. Is agriculture any
    different?
        If electric tractors and combines are forced upon us, I see
    a disaster in the making. I say this not because I am opposed
    to new technology or energy, because we have our own, 1/3-meg
    solar farm that covers all of our electricity needs for a half
    of million bushel grain handling, drying, and processing
    facilities, as well as all shop and storage facilities. I
    personally invested a strong six-figure cost into building it.
    It works great, with no complaints.
        Let's look at some hydrogen engines, which is the same core
    engines that are already in the tractors and semi's but just
    made with a little different fuel on the top. Electric combines
    and tractors will not work. This is because we operate nearly
    eighteen to twenty hours, sometimes twenty-four hours per day,
    and we cannot stop for eight to twelve hours to charge
    batteries. There is no way to charge the equipment, and the
    same with semi tractors.
        Electric vehicles make perfectly good sense, especially in
    an urban setting. One size does not fit all in this world, so
    let's not make it do so. Our operation could easily, and
    probably will have a couple of EV pickup trucks in the future,
    especially for my father, who drives around and observes
    everything, but it is not for my production equipment. It is a
    cost that is too costly and too high for my returns, and before
    I end I want to thank you for your service to our country and
    whoever is in the audience with you. You guys are the backbone.
        Senator Braun. Thank you, Tom.
        Wes, as an employer, older Americans are unretiring, mostly
    because of inflation, and I think true worry about what lies
    ahead. What are your experiences as a multifaceted employer on
    workers unretiring? What do you think the reasons are once they
    come back into the workforce? How do you view them reentering?
    Plus, minus, just give me your overview there, and then follow-
    up with your opening statement.
        Mr. Snyder. Thank you. My workforce ranges in ages anywhere
    from teenagers to workers over 60 years old, although probably
    25 percent of my workforce is over the age of 50. We have
    experienced many retired workers coming back, and I think it is
    all the reasons you initially talked about. With inflation
    their dollars are not going as far as what they had in the
    past.
        In many cases we have found that older employees are very
    good mentors. They are great with our younger team members.
    However, we still need more employees coming out post-COVID. It
    is still hard to attract and retain good employees. The fact
    that some retirees are coming back in is a definite plus for
    us.
        Senator Braun. Very good. Go ahead.

                STATEMENT OF WESLEY SNYDER, MULTI-BRAND
                   FRANCHISE OWNER, FISHERS, INDIANA

        Mr. Snyder. Good afternoon, Ranking Member Braun. Again, my
    name is Wes Snyder. I am a franchise business owner of
    FASTSIGNS, Pirtek, and My Salon Suites. I mostly own and
    operate FASTSIGNS locations here in my home State of Indiana,
    as well as Arizona, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
    Florida. I appreciate the invitation to appear before this
    Committee to share my story of small business ownership and
    discuss the views of my fellow local business owners everywhere
    as it relates to challenges of today's labor market.
        Senator, I would like to take a moment to express my
    gratitude for all you have done to support the franchise
    business community in Indiana. You have been our go-to leader
    in Congress for standing up to Washington, D.C., policies that
    would hinder our ability to serve our businesses, employees,
    and our local community. We appreciate you for taking a stand
    against overregulation, and in particular for your leadership
    against the nominations of David Weil to serve as the
    Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, and most recently
    the still-pending nomination of Julie Su to serve as the Labor
    Secretary at the Department of Labor. On behalf of the
    franchise community, thank you for standing up for our business
    model when so many other lawmakers and advocates are actively
    trying to make running our businesses more difficult.
        I began my franchising journey in 1998, when I opened my
    first FASTSIGNS location here in Indianapolis. Today I am a
    proud location of eight locations across six states. Like many,
    I have found franchising a pathway to build a new life that I
    could pass down to our children.
        I have experienced firsthand the remarkable impact that
    franchise businesses can have on local economies and
    communities, including their ability to create jobs, develop a
    skilled workforce, and foster economic growth. I have been in
    franchising for over 25 years, and created a community of our
    own, employing more than 200 team members that have been a part
    of our system for several years, exceeding average employee
    retention in large part due to the company culture we have
    created amongst the team. I use the word ``team'' instead of
    ``employees'' or ``workers'' because that is what we are, and
    the team that supports my business is uniquely suited for the
    communities in which we operate.
        I appreciate this hearing to address the economic
    challenges and opportunities for older Americans. As a multi-
    brand franchise owner, our team members span generations, from
    teenagers to team members aged 60 and older. We are proud of
    our growth through franchising and the broader role of
    franchising in the economic recovery.
        The COVID-19 pandemic battered small businesses in historic
    ways. Being part of a franchise system helped me navigate the
    pandemic immensely. In franchising we say you go into business
    for yourself but not by yourself. In a time of need, other
    franchisees of our brands would stay connected regularly to
    share best practices and brainstorm ideas on how to best
    approach government-assisted programs like EIDL and PPP loans.
        In addition to the peer-to-peer communications, we have
    significant support from our franchisors. The FASTSIGNS brand
    hosted weekly calls to assist with operations, informs us about
    government-assisted programs, and other resources available to
    help us navigate the crisis.
        While we are on a path to recovery from the devastating
    effects of the pandemic, we still have a long way to go. As a
    small business owner still recovering from the pandemic, my
    main focus right now is rebuilding our team and navigating
    policy uncertainties that may have real-world, bottom-line
    impacts to our balance sheet.
        Now the biggest threat facing franchise small businesses
    like mine during the economic recovery are legislative and
    regulatory actions. This month, the NLRB is planning to issue a
    final rule on a joint employer standard that would reverse its
    course back to the harmful 2015 version. Moreover, it risks
    wiping away the equity that I have spent my life and career
    building in my business, and ultimately makes me a middle
    manager of any brand.
        In fact, forthcoming research from Oxford Economics based
    on a July 2023 survey of franchisees shows that franchise
    owners are bracing for more harm from the new NLRB joint
    employer rule as it injects uncertainty into the franchisor-
    franchisee relationship and threatens standard enforcement
    across franchise systems.
        One of the findings in the report is that 74 percent of
    franchisees expressed a high level of concerns at the prospect
    of increased franchisor control of their franchises, and 55
    percent gave a high level of concerns with decreased franchisor
    support and involvement in their franchises. Both outcomes are
    bad for franchisees.
        This Oxford report shows that franchising generally has the
    right balance in the franchisor-franchisee relationship and the
    joint employer policy out of the NLRB is just unnecessary and
    very harmful to the franchise businesses like mine.
        Further compounding the strain of the franchise business
    model by legislative and regulatory interference is Julie Su's
    nomination to serve as the Secretary of Labor. On May 8th of
    this year I been an op-ed in the Phoenix Business Journal,
    noting that if confirmed Julie Su would turn the American dream
    of business ownership into the American nightmare. During her
    time as Deputy Secretary of Labor, Su was a key figure in
    supporting California's FAST Act, a law that will undercut
    franchise owners by giving unaccountable government appointees
    the authority to dictate business decisions on issues like
    wages and working conditions.
        Without a doubt, these seismic shifts in the employment
    policy and governance would hurt small businesses and provide
    fewer opportunities, particularly for women, minorities, and
    other underrepresented communities.
        Franchise businesses possess a unique ability to address
    the workforce challenges faced by our Nation. It is vital that
    Congress considers policies that support and encourage the
    growth of the franchise businesses while carefully assessing
    the potential implications of harmful legislation and
    regulatory action.
        Ranking Member Braun, thank you again for all you have done
    for Main Street businesses here in Indiana and for the
    invitation to speak on behalf of small business owners
    everywhere. I look forward to answering any questions you might
    have.
        Senator Braun. Thank you, Wes.
        Valerie, you have been working at St. Vincent de Paul, and
    you come there as a senior citizen. Give me your take on how
    folks like you and others that have chosen to work at this
    stage of the game, how that compares maybe to what you see in
    terms of younger people that you might confront, their point of
    view, the work ethic, and all of that, because I think some of
    what is drawing many out of retirement would be because the
    jobs are there, and you just assume maybe younger people would
    do it. Would you mind weighing in on that, and then after that
    do your opening statement.
        Ms. Jones. Okay. Senator Braun, being a senior citizen
    going back to work, St. Vincent de Paul welcomed me with open
    arms, and they have since said to me that they are glad they
    made that decision.
        Work ethics for the younger ones have changed. I do not
    know when that happened, but they do not take it as seriously
    as my generation. They want what they want right now, and they
    do not necessarily want to work long-term for it. That is the
    biggest difference I have noticed.
        They tend to act on what I think is impulse. For instance,
    as an example, we had a young person that they hired, and she
    got a toothache so she thought she should go home, where
    someone in my generation would have asked, ``Can I go to the
    store and get a pain killer and come back and work?''
        We, as older citizens, the younger people need us. We need
    to be examples for them. We need to share our experiences,
    because if we do not, we are going to lose them.
        Senator Braun. Thank you. Go ahead and do your opening
    statement.

              STATEMENT OF VALERIE A. JONES, ASSISTANT TO

                THE PHILANTHROPIST, ST. VINCENT DE PAUL,

                         INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

        Ms. Jones. Thank you again, Senator Braun, for hosting this
    panel.
        I am here to share my journey of my experiences going back
    to work as a senior citizen. Being a Baby Boomer, from that
    generation, we had different rules to grow up by. We were
    taught that you finished high school, you go to college and
    finish college, get a good career, get married, have children,
    and retire at 65. As Senator Braun and all of us have pointed
    out, that is not the case.
        I started looking around, and there are more older people
    going back to work, and I never thought I would have to be in
    that position, but I found myself in that position.
        I have had a lot of careers. When I was in college, I said
    I would have five careers before I retired, and I made it. This
    is my fifth career. That being said, when I finished college I
    went to work for the Internal Revenue Service for a couple of
    years. My degree was in elementary education, so I taught
    reading, English, and adult education. It was there that I
    found out that seniors were getting prepared to have to go back
    to work.
        After I had my children I found myself having to go back
    home, which many women had to do, and still have to do today
    because kids come first. However, in 1994, I became disabled,
    and I did not see that coming, so that went on, that
    disability. Trying to live on SSDI was very difficult because I
    was used to making much more money. It seemed like I was
    budgeting month-to-month, a different budget every month, and
    money was just not there. It was just not enough. I had to
    choose, do I buy food and groceries today and not buy my
    medication for my disability, or what exactly do I do?
        That went on until 2017, and in 2017, I was introduced to
    SCSEP, which stands for Senator Community Service Employment
    Program. What that did is it changed my life. I did not realize
    how useless I felt or how depressed I had become, because I
    like to work. I like challenges. I like learning new things. I
    like experiences, and that was not happening at home on
    disability.
        SCSEP changed my life. Going through that free training
    program I was reinvented. I was reenergized. I got my self-
    respect back. Baby Boomers take pride in working. We are
    dependable and we are loyal, and employers are finding that out
    because a lot of our bosses are much younger than we are, so
    that see that, hey, wow, this will work, and I think that goes
    to how our country is made. We are a great country.
        Seniors today have many challenges, even going back to
    work, because we are older, of course, we have health issues,
    most of us, of course, and we do not have many benefits because
    we are kind of at the bottom of the totem pole at the jobs that
    we have.
        My situation is not unique. There are many seniors that are
    in my position. Going back to work is necessary today,
    unfortunately, because of the things we have talked about--
    inflation. The job market is suffering because there are not
    enough people going to apply for jobs, so like you said,
    Senator, that did open doors for older Americans to go back to
    work, but employers like us. They need us. Our younger
    generation needs us because we set the example to have good
    work ethics, to take care of your families, and to live the
    best life that you can.
        I would like to thank you, Senator, for inviting me and
    talking about this because seniors, we need the free programs
    like SCSEP to give us the training. I learned some new skills,
    I enhanced older skills, and that made me very valuable to St.
    Vincent de Paul. I do kind of a little bit of everything, and I
    can do that, so please, please consider the program, Senator,
    because we are not castaways, we are not throwaways. We are
    people that have values, that want to work, that can work, and
    want to be a part of our community, and I believe with
    everything, being a Baby Boomer, America is still a land of
    opportunity.
        Senator Braun. Thank you.
        Ms. Jones. Thank you.
        Senator Braun. For the rest of the hearing we are going to
    circle around with questions. I will have another set of them.
    I have got a few that I have written down, and then before we
    wrap it up and I give my closing statement if there is
    something you want to say, where it is not a question, giving
    you the incentive to do it, speak up, so that will be kind of
    your closing statements before I close out.
        Toby, we will get back to you. When I look at law
    enforcement and the difficulty that it has had to navigate
    through in terms of recruitment, some of the ways certain
    jurisdictions look at law enforcement, you hear crazy talk like
    defunding police and just a lot that would say why would
    somebody want to come into it.
        Why don't you talk a little bit about how the WEP and GPO
    aggravates that and then what else you think needs to change to
    kind of counter that sentiment.
        Mr. Deaton. Well certainly the violence and the continued
    attacks on law enforcement has had a massive effect on
    recruiting. Last week I was at the National FOP Conference and
    every state, this was a major topic. I will give one example,
    California was down 1,800 deputies in a very large sheriff's
    office there.
        I want to make it more personal. I want to talk about my
    own department, sir. I currently have three openings. We are a
    small agency.
        Senator Braun. How many work in the agency altogether? You
    have got three openings.
        Mr. Deaton. I have 21 is what we have.
        Senator Braun. Fifteen percent or so. That is a fairly high
    number, and have you had trouble filling it over time?
        Mr. Deaton. Trying to hire right now, I have eight
    applicants to fill three positions, and this is before the
    testing starts. By the time we do the physical agility and
    written test I will be lucky to have three applicants left, let
    alone the background investigation, the interviews, that sort
    of thing.
        The problem that I really want to discuss with this, and it
    goes into a lot of other areas, I contend that whenever we put
    less-qualified people in these positions it is going to
    exacerbate the problems that we have had in law enforcement
    across this country, any type of negative encounters, and we
    want to change that desperately.
        I still believe this is a very noble profession, but
    unfortunately right now it is very hard to recruit and it is
    very hard to get people to go into this profession, given the
    sentiment, given the problems that we have, and then couple
    that with understanding you are going to work your entire life
    and then you are going to be penalized for not only the second
    but the third job that you have had, by up to 60 percent. It is
    a big problem, and repealing this would be a huge help in
    recruiting.
        Senator Braun. Thank you.
        Tom, the average age of a farmer--is this correct, 57 years
    old?
        Mr. Snyder. Yes.
        Senator Braun. We were just talking. Valerie mentioned
    earlier that the ideal retirement would be 65, and we know that
    we are living longer so maybe that cannot be what we always
    thought it was going to be, but for that job, it seems it only
    filled generationally, whether you have that next generation
    interested in it, and it is probably the thing that is most
    important in our lives--food, and maybe shelter.
        What does the future of farming look like when you have got
    the average age being so far out there, and it is seemingly
    hard to get that new farmer, even if they come outside of
    farming, it is so expensive to get started. How do you see that
    play out?
        Mr. McKinney. That is a two-fold, Senator Braun. First of
    all, there are opportunities because there are operations like
    ours that are looking for a young man or woman or couple that
    want to farm but have no opportunity to do so because we are
    willing to help them get started.
        One of the greatest problems, and it was clear underneath
    the radar, is when the discussion was happening a few months
    ago about taking away stepped-up basis when a parent dies. That
    would be an unmitigated disaster for our entire nation because
    you do not reinvent the American farmer. You cannot teach them
    like you can a CEO of Amazon or a store manager or a bank
    manager or a bank president. You cannot teach that all over
    again.
        If my grandkids wanted to farm, I do not know if they would
    be able to because they have missed a generation. Now do not
    get me wrong. My kids are doing very, very well. They are doing
    what they should be doing because they have to do it to be
    happy, but there is probably not an opportunity for my
    grandkids to do it because there would not be anybody there to
    teach them, but if we take away stepped-up basis to where every
    farm is taxed based on fair market value instead of the
    stepped-up basis, you can forget the family farm. No question
    about it, and so I am glad that kind of fell by the wayside,
    thanks a lot to the National Wheat Growers Association, believe
    it or not, because that would be the worst thing of all.
        There are some things coming out of the EU, they are in
    Brussels, to do away with glyphosate herbicide. You have heard
    of Roundup? First of all, that came out of the Ninth Circuit
    Court in San Francisco, is why it is in trouble, but if you do
    away with those contact herbicides, they do not get into the
    water stream, they are simply a contact herbicide that go away
    with the sunshine, and that is what we need to be able to start
    using more cover crops, which do hold water. More and more
    people are using cover crops, especially this State. We are one
    of the top in the Nation in using cover crops to hold soil, to
    hold back weeds. I will not get into a bunch of examples.
        The main thing is USDA really does a really good job, and
    there is not much changeover between an R and D and
    administration. There just is not because we all have the same
    common interests, but for the most part, do not start meddling
    in agriculture. We get the crop in, we get the crop out, but if
    we are required to start using electric combines and electric
    tractors, forget it. We cannot do it.
        Now I am not opposed to new technologies, but as a member
    of the Energy Committee for Indian Farm Bureau we are going to
    be talking to the Cummins folks down here in Columbus, Indiana,
    and looking at their hydrogen engines because the waste product
    for that is water.
        Senator Braun. Listening to your testimony I heard you talk
    about health care costs. Health care costs for all of us, some
    of the highest in the country right here in our own State with
    some of the poorest outcomes. I was so fatigued of hearing how
    lucky I was that my health insurance costs are only going up
    five to ten percent each year. It got to be so repetitive and
    so hard to counter by raising deductibles, changing
    underwriters every three years, I said, ``Enough is enough.''
        I took it on when we had about 300 employees and I could
    not dismiss it anymore, and turned my employees into health
    care consumers at that time, buy in to avoiding the system with
    taking care of your plant and equipment, gave them every
    wellness tool, created an incentive for them to have skin in
    the game on minor health care, and then got some of the best
    protection when you get critically ill or have a bad accident.
        I had the benefit of being large enough to self-insure. The
    insurance companies never told us about that until I said I was
    basically not going to renew my plan.
        What have you been able to do, as a farmer? I know Farm
    Bureau has stepped up where you can associate through their
    buying power.
        Mr. McKinney. I am not as familiar with the Indiana Farm
    Bureau health plan as I should be, basically because I am happy
    where I am at and with what we have done, because we are a
    small operation we are able to give health care reimbursement.
    Our employees can choose the plan of their choice, and we can
    reimburse the cost of that insurance plan, and we can also
    offer, out of our own pocket, supplemental dental, and eye
    protection, things like that. We just do that out of our own
    costs, and it is much cheaper than trying to buy an expensive
    mandated plan of some sort.
        Senator Braun. Very good. I do not think that is going
    away, and we need to do a better job of that here in Indiana.
        Wes, joint employer rule. I heard more from franchisors and
    franchisees on a system. Why, if there is nothing broken, would
    you try to fix it? Often in government that is a relevant
    question, regardless of what the subject is, so if you would,
    explain what that means. I led a bicameral letter with 67 of my
    colleagues, including Tim Scott, Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, who
    came in when I did back in 2018, objecting to the then-proposed
    rule which would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs and over
    $30 billion in economic activity.
        Where the rubber meets the road, as a franchisor,
    franchisee, tell us what that means if, in fact, they dig in
    deeper there.
        Mr. Snyder. Right, so the joint employer rule, at the crux
    of it is, the government would like to say, okay, that the
    franchisee and the franchisor share those employees. The NLRB's
    proposed changes to the joint employer rule will take away the
    equity and the independence of franchise small business owner
    and would put their success and livelihoods, including mine, in
    jeopardy. Franchisors will naturally move to hire numerous
    attorneys to oversee employment issues, claims across its
    network of independently owned franchise businesses, that the
    franchisor has no control.
        Ultimately, the additional cost to the franchisor would
    translate to additional cost to independent owners like myself,
    and that would make the franchise business model untenable.
    Coupled with the rising cost of labor, this rule would make it
    more difficult to fill positions of unskilled labor, skilled
    labor, and both.
        Brand new research from the Oxford Economics that I spoke
    about earlier shows that franchisees are bracing for more harm
    from the new NLRB rule. Seventy percent of franchisees expect
    increased litigation costs. Sixty-six percent of franchisee
    respondents expected a new standard to raise barriers to entry
    into franchising.
        One of the things that I really enjoy doing now is all the
    different franchise locations that we have, I partnered with
    local owners inside of those businesses, acting equity partners
    that I give equity to, give them a chance to earn more equity
    and buy those businesses over time. One of my greatest things
    that I enjoy doing is building leaders and building
    entrepreneurs of the next generation, and that joint employer
    rule would not allow us to do that.
        Senator Braun. Thank you, because I am guessing a
    franchisee, I do not know how many of small businesses start
    that way but it is a fairly large percentage, no different from
    my wife's business that started in downtown Jasper, she has
    been running for 45 years, and that is, to me, the ultimate
    kind of blue-collar job because you are doing most of the work
    and you are responsible for making sure all the bills are paid
    for the entity itself, so we have got to make sure that when it
    comes to franchisees, small business owners, National
    Federation of Independent Business is an organization that is
    always looking out for that--that we do not forget that that is
    how you become a medium-sized and large business, and if you
    ever squelch that, you know, we are getting into territory that
    I think is so far off base and I am glad for explaining that
    today. Thank you.
        Mr. Snyder. Thank you.
        Senator Braun. Valerie, you have described what it is like
    coming back into the workforce, and it sounds like you have
    embraced it, and you have given us good reasons why maybe that
    wisdom from being older comes into play. You have compared it
    with maybe some of the assumptions and some of the things that
    the younger generation thinks should just automatically be
    there.
        I want to have you tell us, in your own life, inflation has
    never been as bad as it is now. I would have to go back to when
    I first started in the early 1980's, and for anyone who does
    not remember that a home mortgage was a bargain in the late
    1970's at 10 percent, 10 percent, and if you were unlucky
    enough to not get your home mortgaged before, I think it was
    Paul Volcker had to wring inflation out of his system, it was
    close to 18 percent in the early 1980's, fall of 1981, and it
    took four to five years to get rid of that through keeping
    interest rates high, and that is how tough that issue is when
    you let that little nasty out of the box, so in your own life,
    in your own budget, where has inflation been most negatively
    impactful in your life?
        Ms. Jones. That is a very good question. Most people do not
    believe I am 71, so I have seen a lot of changes with
    inflation.
        Like you said, at one time it was very easy to buy a home.
    Most seniors today have lost their homes because of inflation.
    They cannot pay the property taxes. Social Security just does
    not get it, if that is their only source of income. They have
    having to help raise their grandkids a lot of times, so that
    means more food, so it is very difficult today.
        I have watched, it is like, in a sense, America changed in
    a way, because I was taught one way but I was actually forced
    to live another way. You know, more money for this. When I was
    working childcare--I do not know if I mentioned, my daughter is
    mentally challenged, so I had her in addition to my son to
    raise. I was divorced at the time, so it was very, very
    difficult. I had to really search around for a cheap caregiver
    for my children, if that makes any sense, because I could not
    afford some of the rates that people were asking.
        Then clothing went up. When kids are in school and you have
    especially a boy, they grow fast, and every month you buy new
    shoes, it looks like, so it was very costly.
        I feel for the generation today because they do not have a
    lot. The younger people do not have a lot to pull from,
    unfortunately, because of how the economy has changed, because
    of how people's attitudes about the economy and working have
    changed. Even attitudes about raising a family have changed.
        I believe we, as seniors, have to move in and pull it back
    together. I feel like seniors are the glue that has held
    everything together, and if you discard us or forget about us,
    I do not know. I think we would be in real big trouble.
        Senator Braun. Amen. Thank you.
        We have got a little under a half an hour left, and usually
    this does not happen in a hearing out in D.C., but we do not
    cover everything that you might be interested in talking about,
    so I am going to give you the latitude to use three to five
    minutes to bring up another topic you want to talk about. If I
    hear something that I need to get a little more detail on--like
    I know, Tom, I am going to ask you, and this will be a simple
    one, how much acreage does one-third megawatt takes up. You can
    save that for when it comes around to you.
        Toby, go ahead, and if there is something that we needed to
    cover, now is the time to do it.
        Mr. Deaton. Well certainly, obviously, we talk about
    funding when it comes to grants, I represent a small agency in
    Indiana, and we currently have a grant. It involves sexual
    abuse of minor children. We are going to do away with that
    grant because we are spending more time doing the paperwork on
    the grant than what we are able to actually do the grant.
        Senator Braun. A Federal grant or a State grant?
        Mr. Deaton. Both.
        Senator Braun. Both are kind of complicated.
        Mr. Deaton. Yes.
        Senator Braun. That is not good.
        Mr. Deaton. Well, from my perspective it is certainly not.
    Law enforcement officers want to be working doing law
    enforcement stuff, and too often, unfortunately, we are having
    to fill out paperwork, accountability, and while certainly
    every dollar we spend is vital because it is a very short
    dollar, I guess my question to you is, is there anything that
    you can do? I realize getting anything passed in Washington is
    a miracle. Is there anything you can do to help law enforcement
    funding, particularly make it to the small agencies? Most in
    Indiana are small agencies.
        Senator Braun. Easy question to that is my background was
    finance, and then I was an entrepreneur, and then I decided not
    to take the normal route and come back to my hometown, and then
    got involved in a hardscrabble business. The same kind of
    dynamic applies to almost any entity. The one I am a part of
    now, being on the Budget Committee, we do know budgets.
        I was an appropriator, which is the most coveted committee
    to be on, and when I found out the head appropriators on each
    side of the aisle did not want any input from the members of
    their own Senate Committee, we could not even get the top line
    in terms of what we were going to spend until you hear about
    these omnibus bills, the government shutting down.
        That is why I think that when it comes to funding, probably
    it is going to be harder to get, because if you are going more
    and more in debt, you are asking your kids and grandkids to pay
    for it.
        I would say that we need to probably focus on a cash-flow
    that is strong in our own State, and most of the checks are
    written from a state government to law enforcement, and
    probably need to work on it there, and when it comes to
    anything that is going to incentivize people to come into, like
    I said earlier, a job about as difficult as being a farmer, and
    you two could argue between the two of yourselves on what might
    be tougher, that is how we fix it, so in the meantime, just
    like WEP/GPO, we have never had so much money sloshing around
    in our Federal Government. A lot of it is rat holed or put into
    some places where it is even hard for a Senator to see it, but
    in anything that has a fiscal, and that would have, we have
    been able to find it, because if the policy is important
    enough, the money is there, siting in unused funds. I am
    worried about the mid and long term, when you are running a
    place that is not managing its own budgets in the way it should
    because it does not do them.
        More funding is what everybody wants from D.C. I think
    until it starts actually cash-flowing, that is probably a
    business partner that I would be a little wary of and figure
    out how you might be able to fix it in ways that are more
    dependable.
        Mr. Deaton. Certainly, we always are looking for grants and
    looking for ways to spend dollars a little more fiscally
    conservative, because they go far away. You mentioned what is
    tougher--law enforcement or farming.
        Senator Braun. I would suggest get the grants from places
    that will have them available, dependably, and that is from
    entities that cash-flow and do not borrow to do it.
        Mr. Deaton. Absolutely. I was going to make one last point.
    You said what was tougher, a farmer or a police officer. I
    baled hay for my grandfather----
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Braun. There we go. At least we have got that on
    record, okay.
        Tom, go ahead. Anything we missed, and then how much
    acreage does one-third megawatt generate?
        Mr. McKinney. One-third megawatt is 12 of the big arrays.
    If you have been by the airport, those are the small arrays.
    These are the big arrays. It takes about one acre, and it is
    basically an old hog lot that Grandpa and Dad used to have when
    hogs were outside, and we just converted that to a solar farm.
        For what it is worth, Duke Energy loves me because I am on
    the very end of a Duke line, because Frankfort Power and Light
    is two miles away, Boone County REMC comes at the other end,
    and the only time I suck power off the grid is in October, on
    grain fans, so the rest of the time that solar farm is cranking
    power out on a line for the end of that line. Now they will
    never say so. Great relationship, but solar just plain works. A
    lot of you consider it, and the efficiency is going to
    increase.
        Remember this term: perovskite. You can make it
    synthetically. There is an associate professor at Purdue that
    teaches each semester's class how to do it, and that, along
    with silica, will increase the efficiency of a solar panel nine
    to fifteen percent, and let's just say twelve as an average,
    and that is a fact.
        That is a great way of just putting a little bit in your
    own facility. I think the laws are going to change to help
    facilitate that, but back to what Valerie said, I am with you.
    I used to de-tassel seed corn for 35 years, and we would have
    anywhere from 200 to 600 junior high-aged kids every July. We
    were in the cornfields at 5:30 in the morning, not 5:45, 5:30.
    I do not think I could get 10 percent of those kids to come out
    and do that anymore. I do not want to beat up on Gen Z.
        If there is a message that could be sent, and I think you
    probably already do this, Senator Braun, is that the next
    generation does not need to be made easier. They need to have
    the same hard experiences that maybe we did, especially
    Valerie.
        Senator Braun. The Greatest Generation, that grew up in the
    Depression, fought a World War, highest debt we ever had, paid
    it off, built the interstate highways.
        Mr. McKinney. Exactly right. That is the best example there
    ever is, but we need to stop making things so easy. I am not
    going to argue with maybe if they are going to need to stay on
    their parents' insurance policy until a little longer. Okay,
    fine, but my gosh, to give everybody everything. You are giving
    them fish rather than teaching them to fish, and that is an
    unmitigated disaster for our country if we do not teach work
    ethic, because that has always been our advantage. We have had
    it in spades over Europe and other places.
        Senator Braun. Many businesses that I talk to that have had
    the kids do not want to be on the farm because you get so much
    more done, productivity, and a lot of kids just do not want to
    do that. Some of their best workers came from the farm because
    of the work ethic there when they grew up.
        Mr. McKinney. Exactly. My daughter works for an H.R. firm
    out of Chicago, and she will hire anybody at any land grant
    university. If it has 4-H or FFA on the application they are
    immediately hired and find a place for them.
        When Mitch Daniels was interviewing for the Governor job in
    this State, he stayed with farm families and he could not
    believe that some of the 10-and 12-year-old 4-Hers were up at
    5:30, 6:00 a.m. to go feed their steers or let the sows out and
    eat.
        Senator Braun. One final question. Do you use an alarm
    clock, or not?
        Mr. McKinney. No.
        Senator Braun. Very good.
        Mr. McKinney. It is automatic, 6:00 a.m.
        Senator Braun. That is a blessing.
        Wes, go ahead. What do we need to discuss that we did not
    cover?
        Mr. Snyder. You know, I do not know if there is anything
    additional. I just want to say again, thank you so much for
    this opportunity, and thank you so much for being such an
    advocate for small business. As I was sitting here just
    thinking about this, I have got 12 former employees that are
    now business owners on their own, in different places
    throughout the country, and being able to live the American
    dream because of the franchise community, the franchise model,
    and thank you so much for protecting that model and continuing
    to do that.
        Senator Braun. You are very welcome.
        Valerie?
        Ms. Jones. I guess I would like to just kind of enhance a
    little bit about employment, free employment programs for the
    elderly. We now know it is a fact. We are going back to work. I
    have talked to younger people and they do not even expect to
    retire. They are wondering, will I last that long?
        I think medicine makes so many advancements that cause us
    to live longer. I can remember when I was growing up the
    average around death, around me and my community, was like 51.
    My mother even died at 52.
        We have got to do something about that. We have got to get
    people ready. I agree with you. We should not make it easy for
    our kids. My son hates me to this day because he did not have
    it easy, but he also thanks me, because he says, ``Mama, I am
    stronger. I can stand on my two feet. You taught me to think.''
        We need that. Our country, in some ways, has gotten too
    soft. We have lost some of our backbone, and if we do not
    regain that, that strength, we are going to flop, but also, on
    the other end, young people have other different issues, like
    crime is higher, violence is off the chart. I would be very
    nervous if my kids were in school today because kids carrying
    weapons into schools--that was unheard of.
        Also safety even for seniors has gotten pretty significant.
    In fact, I was attached three weeks ago going into my apartment
    building, and I live in a senior citizen apartment building,
    but this young man thought I had money, and he knocked me down,
    purse stepping, and hit me in the back of the head with a piece
    of wood or something. I had never thought about that I would be
    unsafe going into my home.
        I take my hat off to law enforcement. I want to. I
    appreciate you. In fact, I appreciate all of you, because we
    are working together. We see the issues and we want to take
    care of them, and that is a plus, so thank you very much.
        Senator Braun. You are very welcome, and the panel's
    discussion, I think, has been enlightening to me. I do a lot of
    these. I am on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, and it
    is interesting to think of what that covers, and a lot of times
    what we do here on the Aging Committee, since you cannot
    legislate through it, you can take a different Committee and do
    something with it.
        I think about Bernie Sanders is the Chair of the Health,
    Education, Labor, and Pensions, and not too long ago there was
    an issue, and this had to do with the railroads, and, of
    course, Bernie always likes to do things in a certain way, and
    he put an amendment on the floor that was not going to pass,
    but it addressed an issue, and that was because rail workers
    did not have real sick days, and a lot of it evolved because a
    train has to show up on time, and you had to kind of bargain
    for a sick day.
        I thought about that. I even checked in my own company to
    make sure what we were doing, and, of course, Bernie wanted
    seven out of the gate, and that was way more than almost any
    business would have, average business, but we went to vote on
    it, and I had some of my Republican cohorts say, ``You might
    regret that vote.''
        Well, I said, ``I do not think so. I am going to vote for
    it. It is not going to pass anyway.'' It is like most things in
    Congress, is it going to send a message? You do not necessarily
    have to legislate to get something done.
        Well, three weeks later, the suggestion was, I thought,
    closer to four days, and I do not even know if I made that
    public, but then found out nearly half to two-thirds of the
    railroads settled with their employees for four real sick days,
    so it does not mean that you cannot come up with a solution,
    and even in Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, imagine the
    territory that covers, and you can get things done.
        In my view, if you do it only through the Federal
    Government you are asking for a lot of the red tape, a lot of
    the complications, a lot of the things we have talked about
    here, so when you want to craft real solutions, maybe look more
    to your communities, your local and state governments, because
    it will be paid for.
        It would be like asking, at your Thanksgiving dinner, you
    want to put an addition on the home, and ``Hey, kids. We do not
    have the money but we would like to borrow it from you, and it
    is going to be expensive enough, maybe the grandkids will have
    to sign the note.'' We cannot do that, and that might sound
    like a crazy analogy, but that is kind of what we have been
    doing.
        I am glad that we have discussions like this one here. We
    will continue to do it. You have brought out, Toby, the
    inherent inequity in WEP and GPO, and I will, honestly, go back
    there and try to find a pay-for to get that across the finish
    line, and we will keep you posted on that.
        A strong economy benefits everyone, and this country was
    based upon equal opportunity, everyone having a chance to make
    it in a way that maybe if you choose not to, you do not have to
    work that late into your senior years. We are blessed with
    technology and a health care system that it costs us a lot but
    enables us to live longer.
        The challenges in government are how do you have your cake
    and eat it too. Most of the time that does not happen, but we
    can do better than what we are currently doing, and when it
    comes to the Aging Committee, the topics we have been talking
    about today, there are solutions to it. This has been a
    productive hearing, and for the time that I have been in the
    Senate, four and half years, it may sound like the Hatfields
    and McCoys, but really there are places where you can find
    stuff that makes so much common sense that you get to it, and
    even not paying for it by borrowing from our kids and
    grandkids.
        The legislation that has gone through our office, almost
    without exception, finds a pay-for. No one wants to raise
    taxes. That is tough politically, and we do not need to. We
    have got more revenue coming into the Federal Government in the
    history of the country. We need to spend it more wisely. You
    need to have good conversations like this on how to do it.
        That is the optimism I share on how we have a better
    country, not only to where it reforms itself out in D.C., but
    to where we continue things where it really works, on Main
    Street, in our states, in our businesses, and in our families.
        That will conclude our hearing today. Thank you all for
    being here, witnesses and attending.
        [Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
    =======================================================================

                                    APPENDIX

    =======================================================================

                          Prepared Witness Statements

    =======================================================================
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]