mr. speaker , i yield myself such time as i may consume .  let me just again say to the gentleman from south carolina who just spoke , what we are asking for here is an opportunity to offer what we think is best .  we disagree with you .  we disagree with your approach .  not only do we disagree with your approach , the aarp disagrees with your approach .  aarp , december 12 , 2005 .  dear representative : aarp is writing to express its opposition to a number of critical elements of h.r. 2830 , the pension protection act of 2005 , scheduled for house consideration this week .  we share the goal of enacting new pension funding rules that will require employers to fully fund their pension plans and provide new revenue for the pension benefit guaranty corporation .  these changes are long overdue and should be enacted into law as soon as possible .  however , we can not support legislation that would clarify the legal status of cash balance pension plans without providing protections for older , long-service workers involved in cash balance plan conversions and without including a prohibition on all discriminatory age based `` wearaway. '' we are also deeply concerned that this bill would , for the first time , permit defined contribution pension plans to provide investment advice subject to inherent financial conflicts .  1 .  cash balance pension plans aarp believes that cash balance plans have a role to play in the private pension system if -- and only if -- they are designed and adopted in a manner that protects the millions of older workers who have given up wages in exchange for traditional defined benefit pensions .  cash balance pension plan conversions change the rules in the middle of the game , and older , longer-service workers are at considerable risk .  they generally lose out on larger late career benefits , have less time to accumulate benefits under the new cash balance formula , and are less able to leave their current job if benefits are cut because they typically have fewer job prospects .  h.r. 2830 does not protect older and longer-service workers that are involved in cash balance pension plan conversions .  the bill represents a step back from the administration 's legislative proposal , which would eliminate wearaway ( both normal and early retirement ) and provide transition rules to protect some benefits for current workers .  the recently passed senate bill includes similar protections .  the current legislation clearly fails to recognize the need for transition rules to protect promised benefits and fails to protect the most vulnerable older , longer service workers .  h.r. 2830 would not only lower the bar for transition protections for older workers set in the administration proposal , but would lower it substantially below the `` best practices '' followed by companies involved in conversions over the past few years .  many employers -- recognizing the harm to older workers -- have adopted transition rules , such as the choice to remain under the old plan formula , or have `` grandfathered '' older , longer service workers under the traditional plan .  as recent reports by both the general accounting office and aarp confirm , most employers have adopted transition practices designed to protect the benefits that older and longer serving employees have earned .  any legislation should ensure these protections for older workers , not undercut them .  2 .  investment advice aarp shares the committee 's goal of increasing access to investment advice for individual account plan participants , but we oppose the elimination of the conflict-of-interest protection .  the approach advanced in this bill would , for the first time , permit plans to provide advice subject to inherent financial conflicts .  this is inconsistent with the employee retirement income security act 's ( erisa ) longstanding protections for plan participants .  while we agree that individualized advice can be helpful , such advice must be subject to erisa 's fiduciary rules , be based on sound investment principles , and be protected from conflicts of interest .  h.r. 2830 would turn back the clock and replace erisa 's prohibition on conflicts of interest with a weak disclosure model -- an inappropriate and unnecessary step given today 's marketplace .  over half of existing plans already provide investment advice to their employees through financial institutions and firms that do not have a financial conflict .  in fact , most large financial service providers have already developed alliances with independent advisors to make such advice available .  rather than permit advice subject to financial conflict , congress should encourage more employers to provide independent advice by addressing the key barrier -- employer liability .  potential employer liability is by far the most important reason that advice is not offered .  congress should clarify that the employer would not be liable for specific investment advice so long as the employer undertook due diligence in selecting and monitoring the independent advice provider .  it is in the best interest of both the plan and participants to enhance the independent advice market , and we urge congress to adopt this approach .  aarp urges you to stand with us in opposition to these critical provisions in h.r. 2830 in order to provide protections for older workers that are necessary , reasonable and fair , and to ensure that employers provide quality investment advice without the potential for conflict .  if there are additional questions or you need further information , please feel free to call me or have your staff contact frank toohey at ( 202 ) 434-3760 .  