[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]