SENIOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT ACT OF 2009 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, 

AND HOMELAND SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

H.R. 3040 

MAY 25, 2010 

Serial No. 111–137 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

SENIOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT ACT OF 2009 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

56–638 PDF 2010

SENIOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT ACT OF 2009 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, 

AND HOMELAND SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

H.R. 3040 

MAY 25, 2010 

Serial No. 111–137 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan, Chairman 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., 

Georgia 

PEDRO PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico 

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois 

JUDY CHU, California 

TED DEUTCH, Florida 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

DANIEL MAFFEI, New York 

JARED POLIS, Colorado 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TED POE, Texas 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah 

TOM ROONEY, Florida 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

PERRY APELBAUM, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SEAN MCLAUGHLIN, Minority Chief of Staff and General Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY

ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia, Chairman 

PEDRO PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois 

TED DEUTCH, Florida 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

TOM ROONEY, Florida 

BOBBY VASSAR, Chief Counsel 

CAROLINE LYNCH, Minority Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MAY 25, 2010 

Page 

THE BILL 

H.R. 3040, the ‘‘Senior Financial Empowerment Act of 2009’’ ............................ 13 

OPENING STATEMENT 

The Honorable Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of Virginia, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, 

and Homeland Security ....................................................................................... 22 

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Tammy Baldwin, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Wisconsin 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 1 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 4 

The Honorable Howard Coble, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of North Carolina 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 11 

Mr. W. Lee Hammond, President, AARP, Washington, DC 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 30 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 32 

Mr. Robert B. Blancato, National Coordinator, Elder Justice Coalition, Washington, DC 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 37 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 39 

Ms. Latifa S. Ring, Elder Abuse Victims Advocates, Houston, TX 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 42 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 45 

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Prepared Statement of the Honorable Louie Gohmert, a Representative in 

Congress from the State of Texas, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee 

on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security ................................................... 25 

APPENDIX 

Material Submitted for the Hearing Record .......................................................... 69 

OFFICIAL HEARING RECORD 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD BUT NOT REPRINTED

Study entitled ‘‘Broken Trust: Elders, Family, and Finances,’’ by the MetLife Mature 

Market Institute, the National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, and 

the Center for Gerontology at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 

March 2009; submitted by Robert B. Blancato, National Coordinator, Elder Justice Coalition, Washington, DC. The study is not reprinted in this hearing but is 

available at the Subcommittee and can also be accessed at: 

http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/mmi-study-brokentrust-elders-family-finances.pdf 

(1) 

SENIOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT ACT 

OF 2009 

TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2010 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM,

AND HOMELAND SECURITY

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in room 

2237, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Robert C. 

‘‘Bobby’’ Scott (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Scott, Quigley, Gohmert, Poe, and 

Goodlatte. 

Staff present: Ron LeGrand, Majority Counsel; Kimani Little, Minority Counsel; and Kelsey Whitlock, Minority Staff Assistant. 

Mr. SCOTT. I am going to begin with my opening statement. We 

have just had votes called, and once we leave for votes it will probably be the better part of a half hour before we can get back. And 

the Ranking Member is apparently on the way. 

The Subcommittee will now come to order, and I am pleased to 

welcome you to today’s hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime, 

Terrorism, and Homeland Security. 

And I think it may make sense for me to give my opening statement when we come back. Let me go without objection to our two 

witnesses that are here so they won’t have to come back. 

We recognize the gentlelady from Wisconsin representing the 

Second District of Wisconsin, home town is Madison, serves on two 

Subcommittees on Energy and Commerce and also sits on the Judiciary Committee, and our colleague from North Carolina, Mr. 

Coble, who is a Member of this Committee and also serves on the 

Transportation Committee. 

And so we begin with Ms. Baldwin. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE TAMMY BALDWIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

Ms. BALDWIN. Thank you Chairman Scott and Members of the 

Subcommittee for allowing me the opportunity to testify today on 

the Senior Financial Empowerment Act of 2009. And I think it is 

appropriate that we are convened to consider and discuss this legislation during the month of May, which is Elder Abuse Awareness 

Month. 

2 

And I want to thank my colleague from North Carolina, Mr. 

Coble, for his leadership on this issue. It has been a pleasure working with you to advance this legislation. And I also want to extend 

my thanks to your panel of expert witnesses who will follow this 

Member panel. 

My own experiences on this issue began as the primary caregiver 

for my grandmother. That experience opened my eyes to some troubling exploitative tactics targeted to America’s seniors. Growing up 

in Wisconsin, I was raised by my maternal grandparents. 

Though I went away for college, I returned to my hometown, 

Madison, after graduation to be there for my grandmother, who by 

that time was widowed. She had sacrificed so much to raise me, 

and eventually, I became her primary caregiver. 

Around the time she turned 90 years old, she asked me for a little help her sort through her mail and balancing her checkbook. 

And at first, I was struck by the sheer volume of solicitations she 

was getting. 

I was also shocked by how many sort of fly-by-night or ‘‘look 

alike’’ charities were writing her on a monthly basis. Their pleas 

for donations looked and sounded legit, but I had my suspicions, 

and I began digging a little deeper. 

I was also disturbed by the amount of money my grandmother 

had been giving to these entities. She believed that those able to 

do so, ought to be as generous as possible to those in need, but she 

had no way of determining the legitimacy of the entities that were 

contacting her on a regular basis. 

That experience opened my eyes to the very real exploitation of 

seniors like my grandmother, through mail, telephone and Internet 

fraud. Millions of Americans have become victim of similar financial exploitation each year. And it is not just the isolated and lonely 

who may fall prey to these sort of practices. 

One only need read the newspaper in my home district in Wisconsin to confirm that this issue is widespread. Over the years, 

there have been ongoing reports about notch baby schemes, where 

Social Security beneficiaries born between 1917 and 1921 are asked 

to send money to organizations that promise to change Federal 

laws to increase their benefits. 

These organizations go so far as to ask seniors if they would like 

their Federal money in a lump sum or paid in monthly installments. Just last month in Madison, the Capital Times reported 

that an 84-year-old Madison woman was duped out of nearly 

$3,000 after a phone scammer convinced her that her granddaughter’s boyfriend was in a Canadian jail and needed bail 

money. 

Madison police officers reported that this woman received a 

phone call from a man who called her grandma and told her he was 

in a Canadian jail after being picked up for drunk driving. 

To convince the elderly woman, ‘‘Officer Jacob Harris’’ joined the 

telephone conversation and convinced her of the need for bail 

money for her granddaughter’s boyfriend. This elderly woman 

wired the money and fell victim to a disturbingly common scam. 

I also read that not days after President Obama signed the historic health reform bill into law, fraudsters were figuring out how 

to scam seniors. A cable TV advertisement exhorted viewers to call 

3 

an 800 number so they wouldn’t miss a limited enrollment period 

to obtain coverage. 

And there have been reports of scammers going door-to-door as 

salespeople peddling Obamacare insurance policies. Now, we all 

know that there is no limited enrollment period for any coverage 

in the health care reform bill and that no such thing as a new Federal insurance policy named after the President exists. 

Though we have all read or heard these anecdotal stories, it is 

difficult to estimate the prevalence of financial exploitation cases 

due to severe underreporting. According to a 2009 report by 

MetLife Mature Market Institute, for every report of abuse there 

are an estimated four or more that go unreported. 

We do know some facts though. The same study found that the 

annual financial loss by victims of senior financial abuse is estimated to be at least $2.6 billion. In 2007, postal inspectors investigated almost 3,000 mail fraud cases in the U.S. and arrested 

more than 1,200 mail fraud suspects. 

Further, the FBI has confirmed that criminals are modifying 

their targeting techniques to include online scams such as phishing 

and e-mail spamming. Given the prevalence of financial fraud targeting seniors, Mr. Coble and I introduced the Senior Financial 

Empowerment Act with a very precise goal in mind, empowering 

seniors and ending all abuse, neglect, and exploitation of America’s 

elders. 

The bill builds on good work already being done at the Federal 

Trade Commission and the Department of Justice and seeks to empower these agencies to support local and state efforts to combat 

financial fraud and empower our seniors. 

We seek to accomplish this in three specific ways. First, by creating a centralized service for consumer education on mail, telemarketing and Internet fraud targeting seniors, second, the bill authorizes the A.G. to award competitive grants to carry out locallyfocused mail, telemarketing and Internet fraud prevention and education programs for seniors. 

And finally, it declares that the week in the month of May, Elder 

Abuse Awareness Month should be designated as National Senior 

Fraud Awareness Week, and it encourages the President to issue 

a proclamation supporting increased public awareness. 

Mr. Chairman, as I wrap up my testimony, I want to again commend you for your longstanding commitment to America’s seniors. 

When I saw my grandmother through the last years of her life, I 

made a pledge to help make sure older Americans have the tools 

that they need to protect themselves from those who would prey on 

them. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, my sincerest 

thanks to you for helping us see this through. I believe this bill before us represents one of the best examples of what a bipartisan, 

collaborative Committee process should look like. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Baldwin follows:] 

4 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TAMMY BALDWIN, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN


TB-1.eps
5 


TB-2.eps
6 


TB-3.eps
7 


TB-4.eps
8 


TB-5.eps
9 


TB-6.eps
10 

Mr. SCOTT. The gentleman from North Carolina? 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE HOWARD COBLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH 

CAROLINA 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now, Mr. Chairman given 

to you, and I would like to ask unanimous consent that my statement be made a part of the record. 

Mr. SCOTT. Without objection. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Coble follows:] 

11 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HOWARD COBLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. SCOTT. Good. Thank you. At this point we will recess the 

Committee and return as soon as the vote is over. It will probably 

be at least 15 to 20 minutes. Recess. 

[Recess.] 


Coble.eps
12 

Mr. SCOTT. The Subcommittee will now come to order. We are 

pleased to welcome you to today’s hearing before the Subcommittee 

on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security on H.R. 3040, the 

‘‘Senior Financial Empowerment Act of 2010.’’ 

[The bill, H.R. 3040, follows:] 

13 


HR3040-1.eps
14 


HR3040-2.eps
15 


HR3040-3.eps
16 


HR3040-4.eps
17 


HR3040-5.eps
18 


HR3040-6.eps
19 


HR3040-7.eps
20 


HR3040-8.eps
21 


HR3040-9.eps
22 

Mr. SCOTT. Today we will hear testimony about the importance 

of this bill and the issues pertaining to what is becoming the crime 

of the 21st century, elder financial abuse. Now, on June 29, Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Howard Coble introduced H.R. 

3040, which was referred to the Judiciary Committee, and we have 

heard from both of our colleagues. 

The bill was introduced primarily to address the need to educate 

and inform the public of the predatory practices of unscrupulous individuals who prey upon the vulnerabilities of our elders. Ours is 

an aging society. 

At one time the elderly population was small, and now it is significant and growing. Where adults age 60 or over represented 6 

percent of the U.S. population in 1990, it now represents over 17 

percent. The number will continue to climb as the baby boom generation ages. 

This older segment of our population owns the largest portion of 

the wealth in the United States. They control at least 70 percent 

of the net worth of the Nation’s households and very often do not 

realize that the value of their homes and other assets have appreciated significantly. Because of this elders are often becoming very 

enticing targets for those who would seek to defraud them of assets 

that they have set aside for future security, their life savings. 

It has been difficult to estimate the prevalence of elder fraud. 

Cases are under reported, and the definition of elder and senior 

varies from state to state. Although we currently lack national reporting mechanisms to tracking the financial exploitation of elders, 

there is no doubt that we have got a real problem in this country. 

According to a 1998 study by the National Center on Elder 

Abuse, financial abuse accounted for approximately 12 percent of 

all elder abuse through reported nationally in 1993 and 1994, 30 

percent of substantiated elder abuse reports submitted to the adult 

protective services in 1996 after the exclusion of reports of self-neglect. 

Now many experts believe that the level of elder exploitation 

may well exceed that that has been reported to authorities and documented researchers. 

That is because many of those who fall victim of financial exploitation including mail, telemarketing, Internet fraud each year are 

seniors who fail to report, either because of the embarrassment or 

fear of being deemed incapable of handling their personal affairs. 

With the present state of the economy, older Americans are at 

greater risk than ever of having their financial security threatened 

and disrupted. Fraud perpetrated against seniors is a crime that 

can have even more significant impact on its victims because they 

are often incapable of recovering from financial losses. 

Too often they simply don’t have the years left to recover and rebuild financially. Many are too old or too frail to re-enter the workplace. For every dollar lost to theft or abuse, there are still unrelated costs associated with stress and health care and the intervention of social services. 

It goes beyond people losing dollars for everyday living. It involves millions of dollars in increased costs to Medicare and Medicaid. Based on research in MetLife’s Mature Market study, senior 

23 

financial fraud and abuse robs America’s seniors of more than $2.6 

billion every year. 

One estimate projects the number of victims in the range from 

a low of 100,000 to a high of a million a year. Now, this is a matter 

of urgency. Elder financial abuse and fraud will become more commonplace as a consequence of the changing demographics of the 

United States. 

Fraud complaints by older persons are increasing annually along 

with the overall number of complaints filed. In 2007, of consumers 

reporting their age, persons 50 years of age filed almost 50,000 of 

the 130,000 complaints. In 2009, that number rose to almost 

150,000 out of 450,000 complaints. 

Action on H.R. 3040 is urgently needed as another tool in our arsenal of weapons to combat this serious offense. And I also have 

grave concerns about the growing problem of identity theft. 

According to the Federal Trade Commission’s Consumer Centennial database, identity theft is the number one consumer complaint 

involving the use of another’s personal identity information such as 

a bank account or credit card or other government documents such 

as a driver’s license for someone’s personal or financial gain. 

Identity theft affects as many as 9 million Americans annually. 

And this bill when enacted to law will be part of the continuing effort to educate seniors about the need to protect their personal information. The consequences of identity theft can be severe. 

The victim’s good name is tarnished. Financial loss can be substantial. Time, effort and money are often needed to recover, and 

if the victim is an older person in the 70’s or 80’s, the effects can 

be especially devastating, and the time can be even more crucial. 

That we have got to have greater enforcement of the laws prohibiting identity theft, and that means the FBI can’t opt out of pursuing an investigation simply because the monetary loss is too little. This is an act that requires premeditation and deliberate intent 

to cause personal harm with no regard of the victim. 

The penalties for these crimes already provide sufficient jail 

time, but penalties must also include stiff fines to make this act financially painful for the perpetrators. But penalties are meaningless if the crimes are not prosecuted. And we frequently hear that 

one problem is that the crimes are not even investigated. 

So if the FBI’s ability to investigate and prosecute these crimes 

is hampered by budgetary constraints, then that is something we 

need to hear about from the FBI, but the decisive enforcement and 

prosecution is needed and long overdue. 

In today’s hearing we have already heard from Representatives 

Baldwin and Coble who testified about the Senior Financial Empowerment Act, which they have introduced to specifically curb the 

rapidly growing problem of victimization of senior citizens via telemarketing, mail and Internet, through public awareness, education 

and prevention. 

This witness the panel will hear from shortly will discuss why 

this legislation is needed and how its passage will not only facilitate the creation of mechanisms for reporting fraud, but will also 

further the effort to provide greater protection for both seniors and 

the general public as a result of increased public awareness. 

24 

Now it is my privilege to recognize the Ranking Member of the 

Subcommittee, my colleague from Texas, Judge Gohmert. 

Mr. GOHMERT. Thank you, Chairman Scott, and appreciate the 

witnesses being here. And obviously, you have been delayed substantially because of the votes and the way they fell. And so I have 

a statement here, it is in writing, and I would ask that it be submitted into the record. I may do so? 

Mr. SCOTT. Without objection. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gohmert follows:] 

25 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE LOUIE GOHMERT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY


Gohmert-1.eps
26 


Gohmert-2.eps
27 


Gohmert-3.eps
28 

Mr. GOHMERT. And otherwise just—I mean, I am a co-sponsor of 

this legislation, and I appreciate so much Ms. Baldwin’s sensitivity 

in putting this legislation together. It is a huge problem in America, and seniors become more and more vulnerable. And it seems 

as we have entered a time when people’s minds do not always last 

as long as their bodies. 


Gohmert-4.eps
29 

It is as my friend, the Chairman, Chairman Scott said, ‘‘It is 

going to just keep growing.’’ So we appreciate your being here. We 

appreciate hearing what you have to say. Thank you, Chairman. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. On this panel of witnesses we will begin 

with W. Lee Hammond of Salisbury, Maryland. He is recently 

elected by AARP’s board of directors to serve as president for the 

2010 to 2012 biennium. 

Since his election to the board in 2002, he has served on and 

chaired several AARP committees including audit and finance, 

membership committee and national nominating committee. He is 

a retired educator, began his 30-year career in education in Maryland as a classroom teacher. 

He served as a school administrator for 25 years and has had 

leadership roles in several professional associations. In addition to 

his service with AARP, he also serves as a member of the Maryland Interagency Committee on Aging Services and is vice-chair of 

the board of MAC, Inc., a nonprofit area agency on aging, serving 

four Maryland counties. 

Before becoming an AARP board member, he served as president 

of the Maryland Retired Teachers Association and as AARP Maryland state president. His earlier volunteer service included a 2-year 

member of the Maryland Commission on Aging. 

Our second witness will be Bob Blancato, who is president of 

Matz, Blancato & Associates, a full-service firm integrating strategic consulting, government affairs, advocacy services and association and coalition management. 

He is the national coordinator of the Elder Justice Coalition, a 

bipartisan, 581-member organization. From 2000 to 2006, he 

served as president of the National Committee for the Preservation 

of Elder Abuse and remains on its executive committee. 

He currently serves as executive director of the National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services, a program he spent 17 years 

on the staff of the House Committee on Aging. He served as executive director of the 1995 White House Conference on Aging and on 

the policy committee for the 2005 conference. 

Most recently, he was appointed chairman of the Commonwealth 

Council on Aging in Virginia by Governor Kaine. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Georgetown University and a Master’s of 

public administration from American University. 

He is also on the adjunct faculty of the Erickson School of the 

University of Maryland Baltimore County and has also taught at 

George Washington University graduate school of political management and the graduate school of social work at the University of 

Maryland in Baltimore. 

Our third witness was going to be introduced by our colleague 

from Texas, Mr. Poe, who was with us earlier, but had to leave. 

Latifa Ring is a grassroots elder rights advocate from Houston, 

Texas, founder of the Elder Abuse and Guardianship Victims 

Taskforce for Change, which submitted to leaders in Washington, 

a proposal to address elder abuse, financial exploitation of elderly 

and guardianship system abuse. 

She has also recently founded the Elder Abuse Victims Advocates. She was born and raised as an orphan in North Africa and 

came to the United States in 1974. 

30 

She has spent the last 30 years working with the computer technology industry and is now an independent consultant when she 

isn’t working on elder abuse issues. 

She is passionate, yet she has a passion to deal with elder care 

issues which stems from her own experience over the past 5 years 

caring for an elderly missionary woman who was raised as an orphan in North Africa and who was a victim of abuse and neglect 

in a private home in Delaware. 

She is a member of the Elder Justice Coalition and has been a 

member of the National Guardianship Association and is presently 

a member of various online communities that address elder issues. 

She is a graduate from Truman State University as a premed 

student with a degree in biology. Ms. Ring is accompanied by Mr. 

Mark Glasser, who apparently will not make a statement, but is 

available for questions. 

We will begin with Mr. Hammond. 

TESTIMONY OF W. LEE HAMMOND, PRESIDENT, AARP, 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. HAMMOND. Good afternoon, Chairman Scott, Congressman 

Gohmert. I am Lee Hammond, the AARP president. On behalf of 

millions of AARP members, we thank you for convening this hearing on protecting the financial security of seniors. 

Financial abuse of older Americans is a serious concern and 

AARP is committed to educating our members about financial 

abuse so they can avoid it. Through our education and outreach financial security team we inform retirees and those near retirement 

about how to spot misleading representations about financial investments. 

Through our ‘‘No Free Lunch’’ campaign we provide members 

with checklists on what to listen for if they wish to attend investment seminars. Members can report any concerns about the presentation to AARP and to their state regulators. 

Moreover, we have long been advocates for robust regulation of 

financial products to protect the hard-earned retirement nest eggs 

of millions of Americans. To that end, we have been strong supporters of financial regulatory reform and in particular, have 

worked hard to ensure that brokers are subject to the same fiduciary duty that must be met by investment advisors. 

H.R. 3040 is another step that encourages a united, bipartisan 

commitment to protecting older adults from financial abuse by various deceptive techniques that undermine their financial security. 

Although, financial abuse has been described as the fastest growing form of elder abuse, too few studies have been conducted on its 

incidence and prevalence to provide the accurate picture of the 

number of victims. 

Moreover, protecting older people from financial abuse is stymied 

by insufficient resources devoted to investigating and especially enforcing laws designed to prevent such crimes. Many victims are reluctant to report financial abuse. 

Many may not know how or where to report such exploitation 

and to what extent the right law enforcement agency receives a 

complaint. It may not have the resources to adequately protect individuals or prevent fraud against others. 

31 

Telemarketing fraud is a major concern for older people who are 

particularly vulnerable to certain types of telemarketing fraud including magazine scams, prizes and sweepstakes scams, and 

phishing. 

To date, consumers have registered 48.4 million phone numbers 

on the Do Not Call registry, and according to the Federal Trade 

Commission, most telemarketers have been diligent in their efforts 

to scrub their lists to meet the registry’s requirements. 

Encouraging more people to register will help avoid telemarketing fraud and will help enforcement efforts to prevent fraudulent practices. 

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has found that an 

estimated 5 million senior citizens become victims of financial 

abuse and fraud each year. 

They attribute this high rate to the fact that older investors hold 

a relatively high amount of wealth and to the fact that one-third 

of all U.S. investors are between the ages of 50 and 64. 

Contrary to popular belief, the financial industry regulatory authority finds that the most frequent victim of investment fraud is 

a college educated male, age 55 to 65, who is an active investor and 

does not use an advisor. 

An analysis of consumer complaints from the database maintained by the FTC indicates that in 2008, identity theft was the 

number one complaint category in the database of over 1 million 

complaints. 

These complaints totaled $1.8 billion in financial losses with 84 

percent of consumers reporting median monetary losses of $440 per 

consumer. Consumers over the age of 50 accounted for 30 percent 

of all complaints to the database and 26 percent of all identity theft 

complaints. 

According to the 2008 data, more than three out of five consumers who complained indicated that they were contacted by the 

fraudulent company by e-mail or through the Internet. With the 

growth in social networking, use of the Internet is anticipated to 

be a growing method of perpetrating financial fraud. 

H.R. 3040 is a cost effective, targeted approach to prevent financial exploitation and promote economic security and financial education among those approaching retirement. The Senior Financial 

Empowerment Act would make improvements that strengthen and 

coordinate the efforts of nonprofits and government entities to educate older Americans about abusive mail, Internet and telemarketer schemes. 

H.R. 3040 promotes the ability of older Americans to live independently and maintain their financial security through provisions 

that would centralize a monitoring service for consumer educational mail, telemarketing and Internet fraud targeting seniors 

in the Federal Trade Commission, authorize the Attorney General 

to make local grants to prevent mail, telemarketing and Internet 

fraud and establish a senior fraud awareness week in May of each 

year to expand education and public awareness. 

Again, we commend the Subcommittee for holding this important 

hearing today to focus more attention on the critical problem of financial elder abuse. 

32 

We hope that this hearing is just the beginning, and we urge this 

Committee to take action to address this growing national problem, 

including authorizing more resources for enforcement. And I am 

happy to take any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hammond follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF W. LEE HAMMOND


WLH-1.eps
33 


WLH-2.eps
34 


WLH-3.eps
35 


WLH-4.eps
36 


WLH-5.eps
37 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. I failed to remind people about the timing 

device before you, but I think most of the witnesses aware that it 

starts green, goes yellow with 1 minute left and turns red when the 

time is expired. 

Mr. Blancato? 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT B. BLANCATO, NATIONAL COORDINATOR, ELDER JUSTICE COALITION, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. BLANCATO. Thank you, Chairman Scott, Judge Gohmert. It 

is an honor to once again appear before you in my capacity as National Coordinator of the Elder Justice Coalition, a nonpartisan, 

640-member organization working to promote elder justice in the 

United States. 

Let me begin Mr. Chairman, by commending your leadership on 

behalf of elder justice. In the last Congress this same Subcommittee held a hearing on the Elder Abuse Victims Act and soon 

thereafter reported it out of the Committee and the House both in 

2008 and 2009, passed this crucial legislation. 

We remain hopeful that the Senate, beginning with the Judiciary 

Committee will also pass this bill this year. Your leadership and 

dedication to this issue of elder abuse prevention is most commendable. 

It is a pleasure today to testify in support of H.R. 3040, sponsored by another distinct champion of elder justice, Representative 

Baldwin. 

In addition to her leadership on this Committee for this legislation, she was one of the leaders in the House that helped passed 

the Elder Justice Act, which was part of the health care reform legislation signed into law this past March. 

Passage of H.R. 3040 is necessary in order to improve our capacity to prevent seniors from falling prey to another form of elder 

abuse, financial exploitation which involves mail, telemarketing 

and Internet fraud. A review of the findings section of this bill is 

sobering. Several points are worth emphasizing. 

The first, and most obvious, that you all see in your districts and 

states is the population is aging right before our eyes. We know the 

numbers today, 34 million people over 65, but come next year, the 

first wave of boomers will turn 65 and by the time they all do we 

will have a doubling of our elderly population. 

It also references the Senate Special Committee on Aging estimates that there could be as many as 5 million cases of elder abuse 

each year in this Nation. Financial abuse for the past several years 

has been one of the most fastest rising forms of elder abuse. 

The MetLife Mature Market Study referenced, and I would ask 

that it be inserted in the record for the education benefit of the 

Subcommittee, in addition to the $2.6 billion finding, identified 

Internet scams that were particularly prevalent going forward, including social networks, e-mail, medications, assisted devices and 

medical equipment, make-up and anti-aging remedies and property 

and information solicitations all done through the Internet. 

Another Justice Department study released earlier indicated that 

with respect to Internet fraud data, the study shows that those 60 

and over lost more money per incident of financial abuse than any 

other age group. 

38 

Sad reality is that that the wonders of modern technology can be 

offset by their use in the horror of elder financial abuse. The New 

York Times, in an article on May 20, entitled ‘‘Keeping Online 

Criminals at Bay’’ noted, ‘‘The Web is a fountain of information, a 

busy marketplace, a thriving social scene and a den of criminal activity.’’ 

The Baldwin bill is comprehensive and proactive in its approach 

to the growing problem as it affects seniors. It will help stop abusive mail, telemarketing and Internet fraud targeting seniors. 

It will join with the Elder Justice Act in helping to raise public 

awareness of the impact of these crimes on the lives of seniors and 

the need to educate individuals, families and caregivers on how to 

detect, report and combat financial elder abuse. 

We do need to involve the Federal Trade Commission more in 

this prevention work. The Baldwin bill would have them be the 

centralized service providing consumer education on mail, telemarketing and Internet fraud targeting seniors. 

Here we must use technology as a tool of help by having, as the 

bill calls for, a centralized Web site to serve as a resource for seniors on financial fraud and abuse prevention. 

We support the creation of a new grant program to state and 

local organizations to do locally focused public awareness prevention campaigns. In many instances, there are communities already 

doing this kind of service, and these grants could help make them 

stronger and become more national models. 

And designating a week in May to coincide with Older Americans 

Month and Elder Abuse Awareness Month would be helpful to the 

overall public awareness raising efforts. 

For example, some law enforcement training that was done recently at a forum on upstate New York included such important 

tips such as if a salesman won’t meet with you if your family is 

present, that is a red flag. 

When a postcard claiming that you are a big sweepstakes winner 

lands in your mailbox, do your research, do your due diligence because just because you see an ad in the newspaper or on television 

or hear something on the radio does not mean that it is legitimate. 

So the reality is financial abuse and exploitation of seniors is as 

close as a family member or as far away as an international phone 

call from a scam artist. 

No matter the perpetrator, the elderly victim is never the same. 

They are, in many cases, never able to recoup what they lose financially. Add the psychological harm and it is an especially cruel form 

of victimization. 

And if there is any doubt that this is only a national problem, 

there are local and state headlines everyday in news articles that 

come to us that we read about such as ‘‘Sweepstakes’ Cafes Thrive, 

Despite Police Misgivings,’’ ‘‘Nigerian Scam Still Nets Victims,’’ 

‘‘South Bay Elderly Warned on Financial Scams,’’ and you can run 

through a gamut of articles of this kind. 

And even in today’s Washington Post, an article about a man 

pleading guilty to a swindling of $108,000 from a couple in Montgomery County. 

So I will end at this point Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate your 

leadership again on behalf of elder justice issues. 

39 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Blancato follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT B. BLANCATO


RBB-1.eps
40 


RBB-2.eps
41 


RBB-3.eps
42 

Mr. SCOTT. Ms. Ring? 

TESTIMONY OF LATIFA S. RING, ELDER ABUSE VICTIMS 

ADVOCATES, HOUSTON, TX 

Ms. RING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Gohmert, opportunity to address the Committee on this critical issue. I am excited to see legislation addressing financial exploitation of the elderly. 

I thank you also on behalf of over 1,000 people that have signed 

a petition that is attached to my written testimony asking us to 

work to end abuse and exploitation of the elderly. 

Financial exploitation and fraud against the elderly is an epidemic, and it has gone largely unaddressed over the last 20 years. 

It has escalated into what some call the crime of the 21st century. 

Often elderly victims do not report these crimes for fear of being 

declared mentally incompetent, for fear of losing their lives to predators of fraud who know this fear and exploit it. 

The Senior Financial Empowerment Act can go far in encouraging seniors to come forward to report these crimes. Many elderly 

people are alleged to be incompetent just because they are old and 

need a helping hand. 

Ageism is a prejudice in our society more deeply rooted than racism. Simple financial mistakes that you and I make are dismissed 

as casual, but in an elderly person, making that same mistake can 

be treated as an irrefutable indicator of clinical decline. 

This prejudice alone is stressing many elderly people into unnecessary guardianships where they are stripped of all of their civil 

rights and often all of their property. 

We must ensure that as we work to combat fraud against the elderly that we also have a system in place to protect those who 

come forward that will be alleged to be incapacitated when they report that fraud. 

As it stands today, many of them will fall into guardianships 

that will deepen their misery, increase their fear, strip them of all 

of their civil rights, deny them their constitutional rights to due 

process and further expose them to fraud and financial exploitation 

that is far worse than the original crime that they reported. 

Guardianships and conservatorships in America should be protecting the incapacitated people, but they are not doing so. Instead, 

guardianships are being used as an instrument to rob them of all 

of their property using long, drawn out litigation tactics and billing 

schemes for services that rarely benefit the ward. 

To understand this fear, you must understand what happens to 

the elderly person who has been declared incapacitated, and we 

must address this fear if H.R. 3040 is going to be successful in 

helping citizens feel comfortable coming forward and reporting 

fraud. 

This pernicious crime of financial exploitation against the elderly 

that is occurring under the guise of protection occurs with impunity. It occurs because judges routinely rubber stamp the excessive 

fee applications, sometimes just to clear the docket. 

But sometimes just because we know Medicaid is out there and 

they are more concerned about making sure that the attorneys and 

guardians get paid knowing that the taxpayers will step up to the 

43 

plate with Federal and state tax dollars and ensure that the elderly 

person doesn’t starve to death. 

My written testimony includes a petition signed by close to 1,000 

people asking for help to address this issue. Many of them have 

told their own stories of how a system designed to protect the elderly has in fact impacted them and their loved ones. Please take 

a minute to look at the petition, and see what private citizens in 

your state are saying. 

My passion to work for reform stems from my own efforts to help 

an elderly woman who raised me as an orphan in North Africa, 

who was a victim of abuse in Delaware. 

When I went to Adult Protective Services, they sent me into the guardianship system that cost her all of her $200,000 estate in less 

than 9 months. It cost me over $70,000. I traveled from Texas to 

Delaware for 5 years, struggling through this system. 

In the end, I did become her guardian when her money was gone 

and was actually sued for the attorney fees even though, as a 

guardian, I never should have been. I could not afford to fight anymore. I took a home equity loan on my house, lost my job, and 

today I take care of Mary who is 95 years old. She lives in Texas. 

She has been supported by the taxpayers for the last 31⁄2 years. It should never cost anyone $200,000 to get help when they are a 

victim of abuse, and it should never cost the Good Samaritan 

$70,000 to come to their aid. 

My friend Mark here is the son of Lillian Glasser. She had an estate valued over $25 million. Twenty seven attorneys were billing 

in that case and getting paid for their fees. One hearing took 34 

days and another took 20. The cost to date to her estate nears $10 

million. 

My friend Kim here is from Pennsylvania where her husband 

Richard is under an all out assault and by two guardianships in 

Florida, one against his mother and one against his sister. The 

lawyers are making a killing on all sides while he is under an all 

out assault by a cabal of attorneys and guardians. 

Bonnie is here today from Florida. She works with CourtWatch. 

Her mother was in temporary emergency guardianship, and before 

she was ever adjudicated, she lost $400,000 in only 4 months. 

The guardian put her into hospice with a false diagnosis. She 

was put onto morphine and passed away shortly thereafter. Of 

course the elderly fear this system of protection. 

H.R. 3040 is an important bill. We need the elderly to come forth 

and report fraud. We need to stop fraud. But the perpetrators of 

fraud know this fear. They will exploit that fear until we do something to ensure that when our elderly and vulnerable citizens come 

forward and report fraud against them and are found to be vulnerable incapacitated. 

That we have a fair system that will, in fact, protect them and 

not further exploit them and destroy not only their lives but the 

lives of their families. Then how can we ask them to come forward? 

The stripping of civil and constitutionally guaranteed rights and 

the waste of state and Federal tax dollars, Social Security then 

should be concern enough for you to get involved. 

As Congressman Claude Pepper said in 1989, ‘‘Guardianship is 

in many ways the most severe form of deprivation of civil rights 

44 

that can be imposed on a citizen of the United States.’’ An individual under guardianship is typically stripped of his personal 

rights such as the right to vote, the right to marry and the right 

to handle money. 

These people end up in a system where they can lose everything, 

all of their liberties, and end up with less liberties than a citizen 

on death row. 

That is—I am just about done. Attached to my testimony I have 

included two papers on guardianship, one by my organization and 

one by an organization named HALT. There we have gone into a 

lot of more details on what the problems are and what we think 

some of the recommendations could be. 

The Senior Financial Empowerment Act can go far toward addressing financial exploitation of the elderly and stopping perpetrators of mail, Internet and telemarketing fraud. But it can go further. 

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Gohmert and Members of this Committee, if this bill goes to markup I ask you please to consider adding language to address abuse in the guardianship system and to 

put in safeguards to protect the vulnerable elderly, who will come 

forward as a result of this bill and report that they have been victims of fraud. 

If we do not act today, tomorrow we will pay for our inaction 

when any one of us in this room could be old and become a victim 

of crime. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ring follows:] 

45 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LATIFA S. RING


Ring-1.eps
46 


Ring-2.eps
47 


Ring-3.eps
48 


Ring-4.eps
49 


Ring-5.eps
50 


Ring-6.eps
51 


Ring-7.eps
52 


Ring-8.eps
53 


Ring-9.eps
54 


Ring-10.eps
55 


Ring-11.eps
56 


Ring-12.eps
57 


Ring-13.eps
58 

*The information referred to, a Metlife Mature Market Study, is not printed in this hearing 

but is on file with the Subcommittee. It can also be accessed at the following link: 

http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/mmi-study-broken-trustelders-family-finances.pdf 

**Due to its voluminous size, the material referred to is not printed in this hearing but is 

on file with the Subcommittee. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. Mr. Blancato asked for a report to be entered into the record and without objection that will be entered into 

the record.* 

And Ms. Ring asked for the petitions and her whole report to be 

in the record. That, too, will be entered without objection.** 


Ring-14.eps
59 

I will now begin questions under the 5-minute rule. Ms. Ring, 

you mentioned guardianships, and you had some suggestions on 

fixing it. Obviously when you have got attorneys involved the 

meter starts running and people start losing money. What do you 

suggest as alternatives? 

Ms. RING. Well, first I think we need to do a complete study of 

the problem. Some of the recommendations that we have made is 

when you go into probate after somebody is deceased I understand 

there are some limits on how much can be billed to an estate for 

legal fees. 

And since guardianship is sometimes also known as living probate maybe we could come up with something like that to limit the 

amount of fees that could be charged to an estate. 

Furthermore, there is one really important issue here that I 

think is important. Often the large amount of sums that are billed 

for legal fees in guardianships are spent on wild goose chases after 

alleged allegations of criminal conduct that could be under the Victims’ Rights Act pursued through the criminal justice system. 

And I think that if there are allegations of criminal conduct 

being made that somebody stole money, that that victim, just because they are incapacitated, they still should have the right to 

have that allegation investigated through the criminal justice system where they don’t have to foot the bill and pay the price for that 

investigation. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. Hammond, how often are elder abuse financial crimes not reported? 

Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Chairman, I think probably more are not reported than are reported for a number of reasons. It is an embarrassment to the elderly to feel that they have been scammed. 

They don’t want to admit that. They are concerned, as was mentioned before, that they may be found incapable of making their 

own decisions. 

We have found in many cases that the efforts that we have made 

to educate our members have been effective and that they are actually using some of the methods that we have been working with 

over the years in teaching them how to recognize fraud and abuse, 

both telephonic and now through the Internet. 

But it is increasingly difficult, especially with the Internet abuse, 

and our members are becoming more and more users of the Internet, exponentially they are increasing over the last 2, 3 years. 

So they are getting into this area where they really don’t have 

much expertise and are very vulnerable to the kinds of things that 

we see on the Internet. 

So they don’t want to report. They don’t want to feel like they 

are incapable of handling their own affairs. And in many cases it 

is a plain embarrassment for them to actually acknowledge that 

they have lost money. 

Mr. SCOTT. Once it is reported, how often are the crimes actually 

investigated and prosecuted? 

Mr. HAMMOND. Unfortunately not nearly as often as we would 

like. 

Mr. SCOTT. I mean, do they ever get—— 

Mr. HAMMOND. As to—— 

60 

Mr. SCOTT [continuing]. Do most of them, I mean, is anything 

other than just take the information down? And is there any investigation into it? 

Mr. HAMMOND. There are in some cases investigations. I can 

speak at the State of Maryland that I am familiar with, we work 

with the attorney general’s office in the State of Maryland to help 

train financial institutions, the tellers in banks and so forth, to recognize this kind of fraud and abuse as it appears to them. 

And then unfortunately that is passed on in Maryland to the social services agencies, which have their own budgetary constraints 

and problems. And a few get investigated. 

Mr. SCOTT. And not the criminal justice, Mr. Blancato? 

Mr. BLANCATO. Well, there are instances in different parts of the 

country where they have specialized units within district attorney’s 

offices and local prosecuting offices, like San Diego, California, for 

example, has had a dedicated person as an elder abuse prosecutor 

investigating cases. His name is Paul Greenwood. 

And, you know, where they have been able to target resources for 

that purpose they have a very good track record of prosecuting 

these cases and enhancing public awareness about it. 

But I think that the larger question is adult protective services 

is a primary front line source of investigations of elder abuse cases. 

And one of the main features of the Elder Justice Act, which is 

now law, was to give a dedicated funding source so that they could 

actually go out and do the kind of work necessary to investigate, 

detect and help report these cases so that they can be reduced. 

But there needs to be more resources dedicated or reallocated depending on the nature of things, for elder abuse prosecutions because there is more work being done in this area, and I think we 

are in a position now that more local governments could do this 

and be effective at it. 

Mr. HAMMOND. And Mr. Chairman, I would like to add that this 

is the case in Maryland where there is a person who is dedicated 

but is a person, one person. 

Mr. SCOTT. And many of these crimes can be solved but it takes 

a lot of legwork, a lot of investigation. What usually happens is if 

you report a credit card stolen, and there were some charges on it 

is they just cut off the card, restore the credit rather than going 

through and trying to catch the guy. 

I reported a card stolen once, and while I was going through 

step-by-step the charges that were made that I remembered making and, you know, crossing off the ones that I didn’t make, I was 

asked am I at a gas station? I said, ‘‘No, I am at home.’’ Well, your 

card is being used right now. 

Well, you know, for low kind of things like that it looks like they 

just let the thing run until they can catch them in the act. I mean 

as they go get a big screen television and go to pick up to pick up 

the TV, well, maybe in between the police can be there so with the 

pickup he will be picked up. 

And it seems to me that with a lot more resources we could solve 

a lot of these crimes. I mean, most of them can be solved. Some 

of the people actually use the card and have stuff mailed to the 

house. 

61 

These things can be solved but it takes money and the last identity theft bill we put a little money, not enough, into the bill for, 

as you have suggested, dedicated FBI investigation. 

But that is one of the things that is frustrating to me that these 

things just aren’t even investigated. And so the people perpetrating 

the crimes know that these are low risk crimes. 

Mr. BLANCATO. Mr. Chairman, one other point I would make on 

that, that case in New York, that Brooke Astor case, I think was 

an interesting example of where you put dedicated prosecutors on 

the case and they pursue—even though it is a family matter there 

were large sums of money involved. 

And they did a tremendous public education job every day they 

went to court and pursued that case against what the grandson 

sued the father, charging the father with elder financial abuse 

against the grandmother. 

But it was a very important case because of the way the prosecutors handled that case and brought that issue to the forefront in 

New York. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes? 

Ms. RING. I am sorry, one more thing about—you had asked 

about how to cut attorney fees, legal costs of pursuing these 

crimes? And I think a lot of them, I am not a lawyer, okay, or an 

expert, but from looking at 250 cases and talking to hundreds of 

victims, it seems to me the name of the game is find an opportunity just to bill and bill and bill and bill. 

People bill to have a 2-hour conference call to find out if Aunt 

Mary can go to lunch with sister Susie on Friday and Bobby Jo. 

I mean it is ridiculous, and so because you and I, everyday citizens, 

when somebody is pursuing a $100 or a $1,000 check we can say 

uncle. We are not pursuing this through the civil justice system. 

We are going to go call the police. The incapacitated person can’t 

say uncle or can’t say stop. Their voice is taken from them. So it 

is just a never ending meter. It just runs and runs and runs until 

the person passes away, and there is no one stopping it. 

And you can just basically bill for whatever so I think I want to 

mention that because a lot of this litigation with these enormous 

amounts of money are unnecessary, and they don’t benefit the 

wards. 

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Glasser? 

Mr. GLASSER. I would like to address the issue of guardianship 

in terms of the Federal aspects. Guardianship is an abrogation of 

constitutional rights. And that is where the Federal come in. We 

have all kinds of protections but there is no protection about this 

abrogation. 

It is a difficult job for you folks, but one of the biggest vehicles 

is emergency guardianship. Without burdening the Federal system 

to find a simple protection, we have a PACER online system. 

If we could restrict the states in terms of limiting what lawyers 

could go in the process and having a detailed Federal form that 

would go into any state emergency guardianship and have it within 

48 hours posted on the Federal PACER system with all communication and all communication and all transcripts and possibly 

some other Federal registries of who files emergency guardianship 

and finances and fines for lying. 

62 

That wouldn’t stop it all but it can be done simply and expeditiously. There are professionals who use the system. The fact that 

somebody reports something and then they go into guardianship 

isn’t an accident. There is targeting, and the easiest way to target 

is emergency guardianship. 

That we should limit the amount of judges that can do it, and 

we should have it that the state, that the county and the court, if 

there is a Federal review of what is filed that the state has to pay 

to proceed, and that would help limit emergency guardianships to 

if they are necessary. Thank you. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Gentleman from Texas? 

Mr. GOHMERT. Thank you, Chairman Scott. Well, it does pose a 

difficult question when you are talking about guardianships because you are normally talking about a state law vehicle. And I 

don’t know that we want to federalize, you know, such a state and 

local procedure. It might scare me to have decisions made on a national scale instead of a judge that is locally with the people involved. 

But it seems like there are abuses, at least a couple of different 

ways in areas you are talking about. One in which there is a family 

member that tries to take advantage of a senior and may even 

push them into a guardianship that shouldn’t be taking place. 

On the other hand, there are some incredibly smooth criminals, 

who make an amazing living by finding seniors, getting between 

the family and that senior, convincing them that they are the ones 

that will help them against the family that doesn’t really care and 

ending up bleeding the estate in that manner. 

But that is one of the reasons I appreciated so much Ms. Baldwin 

pursuing this. Some of these people, I mean this is an interstate 

issue in so many cases. They go from state to state, taking advantage of seniors, making sure that they are somewhere where they 

wouldn’t be recognized from what they had done to seniors before. 

And it would seem that we would be well served to make sure 

that there is a Federal database that people can go to and make 

sure whether this is somebody who has done this before, where 

they can’t keep hopping state to state and depriving seniors and 

families of what should be theirs. 

But I had an interesting family situation not long ago where a 

senior family member was contacted by a gentleman and was told 

that—and this person was confused as to whether she had overpaid 

her taxes or underpaid her taxes. But somebody from the government had to come by and visit at her house after 5. 

And so there were other family members there to make sure 

what the situation was. It turns out he pulled up in his Lexus, but 

he was there to sell AARP Medigap. And that his line was, once 

there were family there, that she was paying too much for her 

Medigap insurance, and she ought to be buying it from AARP, and 

that would save her a ton of money. 

And so many seniors are not aware of—since there was so much 

debate about preexisting conditions, the AARP was able to get an 

exemption for their Medigap so that the preexisting condition may 

not be addressed. Let us see, there is still a waiting period that 

AARP was able to get under the new health care bill. 

63 

Also of course others that sell Medigap insurance are limited in 

the amount they can claim as business expense in the way of payment to executives at $500,000 but obviously AARP got an exemption there so they can claim the full amount for whatever is paid 

the executives. 

Mr. Rand makes—at one energy and commerce hearing, he said he made around $800,000, so he would be able to—or AARP would 

be able to claim that full amount. 

So anyway, Mr. Hammond, I know you are a position with the 

board and not an executive with AARP, but I think it would do 

seniors a great deal of good if AARP discloses completely the difference between what they were able to get in the way of exemptions through the health care bill to seniors, as opposed to what everyone else will have to do. The exemption they were able to get 

for their executives compared to other sellers of Medigap, and I 

welcome your comments. 

Mr. HAMMOND. Well, at this point, Mr. Gohmert, I really don’t 

have a comment because I am not aware of any exemptions that 

we have gotten. So I will be glad to look into that and will get back 

to you with that answer. In the meantime, I would like—— 

Mr. GOHMERT. Given your background, I know that you will. 

Mr. HAMMOND.—I would like to know who the salesman was, 

who they talked to so that we can check that information out. 

Mr. GOHMERT. All right. 

Mr. HAMMOND. Thank you. 

Mr. GOHMERT. And I don’t want to announce that publicly because of respect—— 

Mr. HAMMOND. I will see you after. 

Mr. GOHMERT [continuing]. Privacy, but I have no problem letting you know who that is, getting that information for you. But 

because of your position and the positions you have held in the 

past, I have no doubt you will make inquiry. 

And I feel like they will be a lot of people surprised that the special treatment AARP was able to get in return for their endorsement of the health care bill. But I see my time has run out but 

the problems are so varied and the seniors so vulnerable, and it is 

so widespread across state lines. 

It is going to take a lot of work from a lot of different entities, 

including working with the states. Maybe with a model law that 

they can pursue with regard to types of guardianship to help prevent, because obviously as health care has gotten so good in keeping bodies alive and not quite as good in keeping the minds as 

alert, it is a bigger problem than it has ever been, seniors being 

taken advantage of. 

And it is heartbreaking to watch it happen, which I have seen 

in family situations and hope we will be able to do some good here. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Gentleman from Texas, Mr. Poe? 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this 

hearing. I want to thank all of you for being here, especially Ms. 

Ring coming up here and bringing your victims posse with you up 

here today and who are in the audience and all of the information 

that you gave us in this notebook. 

64 

I know that this is a book in work because there are thousands 

of more stories besides the 1,000 cases you have in here. It seems 

to me that we as a society, we have to be especially sensitive to 

the most vulnerable among us. 

And it has always been the children and the elderly. They are 

the most vulnerable to predators, snake oil salesmen, thieves, bandits, criminals and all of the scams we all have heard about. 

And I think we are doing a better job of taking care of children, 

especially with violent crime. But all of us are going to be seniors. 

We are going to be taking care of seniors, maybe both. And it 

seems to me that we just let them kind of, you know, fade into the 

sunset. That is my opinion. 

The thieves know that they can in many cases just outlive the 

victim and that is why they offer them prey. But I think also our 

society allows them to be easy prey because as you have said, Ms. 

Ring, when a senior, an elderly person is scammed, sometimes they 

don’t want to report the crime because all of a sudden then some 

judge appoints a guardian over them and then they don’t have any 

decision power. 

And many times, it appears that due process does not occur on 

that decision. Go before a judge, some family member says they are 

not competent to make a decision, might need the guardian. And 

then the estate pays for everything, but the elderly person becomes 

the victim of not just loss of money but loss of dignity, loss of everything. 

Ms. RING. Everything. 

Mr. POE. And the scam artists know that, so that is why they 

prey on them. I am not sure what we can do but you being here 

raises the awareness of this problem because we are all going to 

be elderly, at least we hope we are. 

And we hope, you know, to be able to take care of our loved ones 

as well without somebody coming in and trying to, you know, rip 

them off, whether it is criminals or lawyers or the courts or anybody else, legitimate salesmen. What do you think we could do now 

in the Federal level, Ms. Ring? 

Ms. RING. Well, first off I think that guardianship is also a national issue because of the civil rights issues, Federal issue. And 

also Federal dollars are at stake. These guardians are taking the 

Social Security dollars. 

They are taking the Federal matching Medicaid dollars that they 

end up—spent the last 5 years taking care of my foster mother. 

Some of that money is coming from the Federal Government. 

I have a couple of suggestions. It may be considered radical, but 

they are my suggestions. One is I think that there are thousands 

and thousands of people out there that nobody knows where they 

are, who they are. You go to the courts and well, we are not sure 

who is in guardianship. Where are they? 

I mean it might sound farfetched, but you could turn this into 

almost a sophisticated form of identity theft. You become that person, essentially they don’t have rights. They can’t say anything. 

You spend their money. You don’t even know where they are. 

And for years and years and years everybody sat around and 

said we have got to monitor, we have got to monitor, we have got 

to monitor. Well, let us start monitoring. Now I am a technologist, 

65 

so my suggestion is a bit of a technological solution here but I 

think we might be able to help these states do a little monitoring. 

We could have what is called the Office of the National Guardian, not to run guardianships but to have a database. And when 

somebody goes into guardianship, since you are going to take away 

their Federal and constitutional rights, I think let us put them in 

a database. Find out who their guardian is and maybe make a 

record of what their inventory was the day they went in. 

And then let us tell these guardians out there to go ahead and 

on a quarterly basis—we have a vested interest. There are Federal 

dollars at risk and if they are not at risk right now, they are going 

to be right around the corner when this person goes broke. So we 

want to know quarterly or every 6 months, you know, what your 

inventory looks like. 

We are not asking for details. Now, the beauty of this solution 

is that it can help the states because the little database like this 

can be very cheap put it together. They can do online like they do 

SSI. 

I am an SSI designated payee. It doesn’t cost me much to do my 

annual accounting. So they put this in, and what this database can 

do is it can do little red flag reports and a little bit of trending 

analysis. 

And you can kind of see what is coming down the pipe with all 

these baby boomers. Plus on top of that, the states that can’t seem 

to figure out, you know, where these people are that lost all these 

rights, we could help them have access to this system where the 

state could get the automated tools that they don’t have today. 

This is just one of my ideas. It is in my report. I am sure it takes 

a lot more thought than that but I will bet you when the thing 

starts kicking out that guardian number X in state number X, 

county such and such has 2,000 wards that he is taking care of, 

you know, with however much, you know, that, you know, red flags 

might go out here. And I think that we can also help to ensure protection. That is just one of my suggestions. 

The other one is I think we have to take the money out, because 

if you follow the money, the crime defines itself. It should—a person becoming incompetent should not become a money-making 

business for anybody. We should be able to lend a helping hand 

and be good Samaritans and help the fellow next door. 

And another thing we have to do is we need to make it affordable 

for people like me and people like you to help your mom or your 

dad. They are telling me I have to be a—I have to hire a lawyer 

now after I am already broke and already lost everything. My mom 

lost everything, my foster mom. I am trying to take care of her, but 

I have to hire a lawyer to be represented to go and file my accounting. 

We have got to make it easier to give a helping hand. And we 

make it easier to give a helping hand, you take all the bureaucracy 

and money out of this, people will help each other. They are not 

all bad out there, you know. Those are just some of my thoughts, 

sorry. I know I rambled there. 

Mr. POE. I knew I would only get one question, Mr. Chairman. 

So I will yield back my time. 

Mr. SCOTT. Do you have other questions? 

66 

Mr. POE. Well I do have—thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hammond, I just had a couple of questions. You have a $1.3 

billion budget at AARP, is that correct? How much of that money 

percentage-wise is spent on elder abuse information being disseminated to your members? 

Mr. HAMMOND. I don’t have that exact number but I can certainly get it for you. 

Mr. POE. It is not very much, is it? 

Mr. HAMMOND. I really don’t know, sir. 

Mr. POE. Let me ask you this, AARP is also in the insurance selling business—— 

Mr. HAMMOND. That is not quite correct, sir. 

Mr. POE. Well, we both know that you sell insurance, supplemental insurance. 

Mr. HAMMOND. Pardon me, Congressman, we do not sell any insurance. 

Mr. POE. You broker selling of insurance? 

Mr. HAMMOND. We do not broker selling of insurance. 

Mr. POE. So when people sign up with AARP to get insurance, 

who are they buying it from? 

Mr. HAMMOND. They do not sign up with AARP. They sign up 

with our insurance providers. We endorse insurance because of the 

value it gives our members. 

Mr. POE. Okay. To me that just seems like that is a way of hiding the truth that you provide supplemental insurance. But it is 

not really in your name, it is in their name. Now don’t you think 

that is a conflict of interest to have AARP advocating on behalf of 

the elderly, who we all just love and want to take care of. 

And all of a sudden they are getting endorsed insurance solicitations through the mail through AARP endorsed, although they are 

not AARP insurance companies. Does that seem like a conflict of 

interest to you? 

Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir. 

Mr. POE. Can you see how it would seem like a conflict of interest to some senior citizen, like my parents, who are both 85 years 

old, and they think you sell insurance. 

Mr. HAMMOND. And we try very hard to disabuse them of that 

thought because we do not sell insurance, sir. 

Mr. POE. All right, you endorse insurance companies—— 

Mr. HAMMOND. That is correct. 

Mr. POE [continuing]. You solicit insurance through your mailing 

list. 

Mr. HAMMOND. Excuse me—— 

Mr. POE. It just seems—just a minute, I am talking. 

Mr. HAMMOND. Go right ahead. 

Mr. POE. It just seems to me it is a conflict of interest. And if 

you really want to just take care of the elderly, you just take care 

of elderly and be an advocate for the elderly down here at this 

rather than being an advocate for health care reform. How much 

did you all spend on lobbying for health care? 

Mr. HAMMOND. I have no idea, sir. I can get you the information, 

but I thought we were—— 

Mr. POE. Okay. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will yield back. 

67 

Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Hammond? 

Mr. HAMMOND. I was under the impression today that we were 

here testifying to help the elderly on this bill. 

Mr. POE. We are, and if you divest yourself of your insurance, 

maybe that will help the elderly, that was my point. But you disagree with me on that is that true? 

Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir, I do. 

Mr. POE. Okay. 

Mr. SCOTT. Ms. Ring, you mentioned the importance of doing 

something like guardianship. Some states have what is called durable powers of attorney, I know Virginia does. Would that not solve 

a lot of the problems if people would sign those before they get ill? 

Ms. RING. Well, you raise a valid point because now there are a 

lot of durable power of attorneys out there are that are pretty 

much thrown like confetti to the wind in the guardianship courts. 

They ignore them, and I will give you one example. A woman in 

Massachusetts—I am sorry, a women, her niece lives in Massachusetts, and it is in my petition here. 

I talked to her husband. She wanted to do everything right. She 

was afraid she was going to go into guardianship. So she signed I 

want my niece to be my power of attorney. I want her to be my 

guardian. I am going to do my will. 

Everything like lined up in a nice little book in her house. The 

family stayed in touch. About, I think it was last Memorial Day she 

got put into guardianship in the state of Florida. They had the 

book right there in the courtroom, who she wanted her guardian 

to be, who she wanted her power of attorney to be. They never even 

called the niece. 

They did an emergency hearing, put the lady in guardianship. 

And put a paid guardian in place, okay, I am not going to use the 

work professional, I am just going to say paid guardian because 

they don’t act real professional some of them. 

So this is what is going on. I meant to mention that earlier, the 

advance directives of senior citizens are being ignored, absolutely. 

Mr. SCOTT. But the state law differs from state to state. Some 

states there is—are there any states that do not have durable powers of attorney? I know the law in Virginia used to be that once 

you became incompetent that the power of attorney terminated at 

that point. 

We now have in Virginia the ability to sign a power of attorney 

if you specifically say that the power extends into incompetence 

that it will—you can be incompetent, and your person or the power 

of attorney can continue to act on your behalf, without the guardianship and all this other stuff. I suspect some states don’t have 

that. 

Ms. RING. Most of them have something like that, and they also 

have the ability to designate a pre-need guardian that says if I ever 

need a guardian here is who I want. 

I do actually have a suggestion for that and again you guys are 

the experts, so I will defer to you. But I know one time in our lives 

when the Federal Government has our undivided attention. 

And that is when you sign up for your Medicare benefits. And 

if you know who you want your guardian to be at that time, this 

68 

is just a thought, okay? And you know who you want your power 

of attorney, and we are going to play this game in the court where 

they are going to say well, Johnny is a bad guy, and he can’t be 

in this and that. 

You know, maybe since that is the person who is going to handle 

your Social Security benefits if you get incapacitated, give people 

the option to mention it then. This is the thought, you know. 

And that will cut all this chase of playing around about who said, 

he said, she said because the person is competent at that time. 

They don’t have to. It is an option. That was just a thought. But 

I think that we have got to start honoring people’s will. 

And another thing that is very important is an alleged incapacitated person has every single right that President Obama has, 

right, because they are not incompetent yet, and yet all of their due 

process rights are being denied. 

Their 14th Amendment right, their rights to their liberty and 

their properties are being deprived of them without due process of 

the law. They do not have attorneys representing them. They just 

take them, put them in guardianship. You don’t get an attorney. 

And you don’t even get notified that you are supposed to have 

an attorney, where the criminal at least gets his Miranda rights 

read to him. These people don’t have attorneys representing them. 

Mr. SCOTT. Well in Virginia, I think you have to get some kind 

of notice. 

Mr. Hammond, does AARP have a position on this issue? 

Mr. HAMMOND. On the guardianship issue? 

Mr. SCOTT. Right. 

Mr. HAMMOND. I am sorry, on guardianship issues? Yes, sir. We 

have, and I will be glad to leave this with you if you like. 

Mr. SCOTT. If we could get that because it is obviously based on 

the testimony we have heard, it is obviously an area along with 

identity theft that we are going to have to look into. 

Mr. HAMMOND. I have some information here that I will be glad 

to leave. 

Mr. SCOTT. Okay. Thank you. And other questions or comments? 

Well, I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony today, 

and there may be additional written questions, which we will forward to you and ask if you answer as promptly as you can to make 

sure that the answers are made part of the record. 

Without objection, the information that has previously been referenced will be made part of the record. 

Anything else? Gentleman from North Carolina has his—Mr. 

Coble, will have his statement entered into the record. And without 

objection, the hearing record remain open for 1 week for submission of additional materials. 

And without objection, the Subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:52 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(69) 

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

70 


Conyers-1.eps
71 

f 


Conyers-2.eps
72 

f 


A.eps
73 

f 


B.eps
74 


C1-1.eps
75 


C1-2.eps
76 


C1-3.eps
77 


C1-4.eps
78 

f 


C1-5.eps
79 


C2-1.eps
80 


C2-2.eps
81 


C2-3.eps
82 


C2-4.eps
83 


C2-5.eps
84 


C2-6.eps
85 


C2-7.eps
86 


C2-8.eps
87 


C2-9.eps
88 


C2-10.eps
89 


C2-11.eps
90 


C2-12.eps
91 


C2-13.eps
92 


C2-14.eps
93 


C2-15.eps
94 


C2-16.eps
95 


C2-17.eps
96 

f 


C2-18.eps
97 


D-1.eps
98 


D-2.eps
99 


D-3.eps
100 


D-4.eps
101 


D-5.eps
102 


D-6.eps
103 


D-7.eps
104 


D-8.eps
105 


D-9.eps
106 


D-10.eps
107 


D-11.eps
108 


D-12.eps
109 


D-13.eps
110 


D-14.eps
111 


D-15.eps
112 


D-16.eps
113 


D-17.eps
114 


D-18.eps
115 


D-19.eps
116 


D-20.eps
117 


D-21.eps
118 


D-22.eps
119 


D-23.eps
120 


D-24.eps
121 


D-25.eps
122 


D-26.eps
123 


D-27.eps
124 


D-28.eps
125 


D-29.eps
126 


D-30.eps
127 

f 


D-31.eps
128 


E-1.eps
129 


E-2.eps
130 


E-3.eps
131 

f 


E-4.eps
132 

RESPONSE TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM THOMAS C. NELSON, 

CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AARP 


AARP-1.eps
133 


AARP-2.eps
134 


AARP-3.eps
135 


AARP-4.eps
136 


AARP-5.eps
137 


AARP-6.eps
138 

f 


AARP-7.eps
139 

RESPONSE TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM LATIFA S. RING, 

ELDER ABUSE VICTIMS ADVOCATES, HOUSTON, TX 


LSRQ&A1-1.eps
140 


LSRQ&A1-2.eps
141 


LSRQ&A1-3.eps
142 


LSRQ&A2-1.eps
143 


LSRQ&A2-2.eps
144 


LSRQ&A2-3.eps
145 


LSRQ&A2-4.eps
146 


LSRQ&A2-5.eps
147 


LSRQ&A2-6.eps
148 


LSRQ&A2-7.eps
149 


LSRQ&A2-8.eps
150 


LSRQ&A2-9.eps
151 


LSRQ&A2-10.eps
152 


LSRQ&A2-11.eps
153 


LSRQ&A2-12.eps
154 


LSRQ&A2-13.eps
155 


LSRQ&A2-14.eps
156 


LSRQ&A2-15.eps
157 


LSRQ&A2-16.eps
158 


LSRQ&A2-17.eps
159 


LSRQ&A2-18.eps
160 


LSRQ&A2-19.eps
161 


LSRQ&A2-20.eps
162 


LSRQ&A2-21.eps
163 


LSRQ&A2-22.eps
164 


LSRQ&A2-23.eps
165 


LSRQ&A2-24.eps
166 


LSRQ&A2-25.eps
167 


LSRQ&A2-26.eps
168 


LSRQ&A2-27.eps
169 


LSRQ&A2-28.eps
170 


LSRQ&A2-29.eps
171 


LSRQ&A2-30.eps
172 


LSRQ&A2-31.eps
173 


LSRQ&A2-32.eps
174 


LSRQ&A2-33.eps
175 


LSRQ&A2-34.eps
176 


LSRQ&A2-35.eps
177 


LSRQ&A2-36.eps
178 


LSRQ&A2-37.eps
179 


LSRQ&A2-38.eps
180 


LSRQ&A2-39.eps
181 


LSRQ&A2-40.eps
182 


LSRQ&A2-41.eps
183 


LSRQ&A2-42.eps
184 


LSRQ&A2-43.eps
185 


LSRQ&A2-44.eps
186 


LSRQ&A2-45.eps
187 


LSRQ&A2-46.eps
188 


LSRQ&A2-47.eps
189 


LSRQ&A2-48.eps
190 


LSRQ&A2-49.eps
191 


LSRQ&A2-50.eps
192 


LSRQ&A2-51.eps
193 


LSRQ&A2-52.eps
194 


LSRQ&A2-53.eps
195 


LSRQ&A2-54.eps
196 


LSRQ&A2-55.eps
197 


LSRQ&A2-56.eps
198 


LSRQ&A2-57.eps
199 


LSRQ&A2-58.eps
200 


LSRQ&A2-59.eps
201 


LSRQ&A2-60.eps
202 


LSRQ&A2-61.eps
203 


LSRQ&A2-62.eps
204 


LSRQ&A2-63.eps
205 


LSRQ&A2-64.eps
206 


LSRQ&A2-65.eps
207 


LSRQ&A2-66.eps
208 


LSRQ&A2-67.eps
209 


LSRQ&A2-68.eps
210 


LSRQ&A2-69.eps
211 


LSRQ&A2-70.eps
212 


LSRQ&A2-71.eps
213 


LSRQ&A2-72.eps
214 


LSRQ&A2-73.eps
215 


LSRQ&A2-74.eps
216 


LSRQ&A2-75.eps
217 


LSRQ&A2-76.eps
218 


LSRQ&A2-77.eps
219 


LSRQ&A2-78.eps
220 


LSRQ&A2-79.eps
221 


LSRQ&A2-80.eps
222 


LSRQ&A2-81.eps
223 


LSRQ&A2-82.eps
224 


LSRQ&A2-83.eps
225 


LSRQ&A2-84.eps
226 


LSRQ&A2-85.eps
227 


LSRQ&A2-86.eps
228 


LSRQ&A2-87.eps
229 


LSRQ&A2-88.eps
230 


LSRQ&A2-89.eps
231 


LSRQ&A2-90.eps
232 


LSRQ&A2-91.eps
233 


LSRQ&A2-92.eps
234 


LSRQ&A2-93.eps
235 


LSRQ&A2-94.eps
236 


LSRQ&A2-95.eps
237 


LSRQ&A2-96.eps
238 


LSRQ&A2-97.eps
239 


LSRQ&A2-98.eps
240 


LSRQ&A2-99.eps
241 


LSRQ&A2-100.eps
242 


LSRQ&A2-101.eps
243 


LSRQ&A2-102.eps
244 


LSRQ&A2-103.eps
245 


LSRQ&A2-104.eps
246 


LSRQ&A2-105.eps
247 


LSRQ&A2-106.eps
248 


LSRQ&A2-107.eps
249 


LSRQ&A2-108.eps
250 


LSRQ&A2-109.eps
251 


LSRQ&A2-110.eps
252 


LSRQ&A2-111.eps
253 


LSRQ&A2-112.eps
254 


LSRQ&A2-113.eps
255 


LSRQ&A3-1.eps
256 


LSRQ&A3-2.eps
257 


LSRQ&A3-3.eps
258 


LSRQ&A3-4.eps
259 


LSRQ&A4-1.eps
260 


LSRQ&A4-2.eps
261 


LSRQ&A4-3.eps
262 


LSRQ&A4-4.eps
263 


LSRQ&A4-5.eps
264 


LSRQ&A4-6.eps
265 


LSRQ&A4-7.eps
266 


LSRQ&A4-8.eps
267 


LSRQ&A4-9.eps
268 


LSRQ&A5-1.eps
269 


LSRQ&A5-2.eps
270 


LSRQ&A5-3.eps
271 


LSRQ&A5-4.eps
272 


LSRQ&A5-5.eps
273 


LSRQ&A5-6.eps
274 


LSRQ&A5-7.eps
275 


LSRQ&A5-8.eps
276 


LSRQ&A5-9.eps
277 


LSRQ&A5-10.eps
278 


LSRQ&A5-11.eps
279 


LSRQ&A5-12.eps
280 


LSRQ&A5-13.eps
281 


LSRQ&A5-14.eps
282 


LSRQ&A5-15.eps
283 


LSRQ&A5-16.eps
284 


LSRQ&A5-17.eps
285 


LSRQ&A5-18.eps
286 


LSRQ&A5-19.eps
287 


LSRQ&A5-20.eps
288 


LSRQ&A5-21.eps
289 


LSRQ&A5-22.eps
290 


LSRQ&A5-23.eps
291 


LSRQ&A5-24.eps
292 


LSRQ&A5-25.eps
293 


LSRQ&A5-26.eps
294 


LSRQ&A5-27.eps
295 


LSRQ&A5-28.eps
296 


LSRQ&A5-29.eps
297 


LSRQ&A5-30.eps
298 


LSRQ&A5-31.eps
299 


LSRQ&A5-32.eps
300 


LSRQ&A5-33.eps
301 


LSRQ&A5-34.eps
302 


LSRQ&A5-35.eps
303 


LSRQ&A5-36.eps
304 


LSRQ&A5-37.eps
305 


LSRQ&A6-1.eps
306 


LSRQ&A6-2.eps
307 


LSRQ&A6-3.eps
308 


LSRQ&A6-4.eps
309 


LSRQ&A6-5.eps
310 


LSRQ&A6-6.eps
311 


LSRQ&A6-7.eps
312 


LSRQ&A6-8.eps
313 


LSRQ&A6-9.eps
314 


LSRQ&A6-10.eps
315 


LSRQ&A6-11.eps
316 


LSRQ&A6-12.eps
317 


LSRQ&A6-13.eps
318 


LSRQ&A6-14.eps
319 


LSRQ&A6-15.eps
320 


LSRQ&A6-16.eps
321 


LSRQ&A6-17.eps
322 


LSRQ&A6-18.eps
323 


LSRQ&A6-19.eps
324 


LSRQ&A6-20.eps
325 


LSRQ&A6-21.eps
326 


LSRQ&A6-22.eps
327 


LSRQ&A6-23.eps
328 


LSRQ&A6-24.eps
329 


LSRQ&A6-25.eps
330 


LSRQ&A6-26.eps
331 


LSRQ&A6-27.eps
332 


LSRQ&A6-28.eps
333 


LSRQ&A6-29.eps
334 


LSRQ&A6-30.eps
335 


LSRQ&A6-31.eps
336 


LSRQ&A6-32.eps
337 


LSRQ&A6-33.eps
338 


LSRQ&A6-34.eps
339 


LSRQ&A6-35.eps
340 


LSRQ&A6-36.eps
341 


LSRQ&A6-37.eps
342 


LSRQ&A6-38.eps
343 


LSRQ&A6-39.eps
344 


LSRQ&A6-40.eps
345 


LSRQ&A6-41.eps
346 


LSRQ&A6-42.eps
347 


LSRQ&A6-43.eps
348 


LSRQ&A6-44.eps
349 


LSRQ&A6-45.eps
350 


LSRQ&A6-46.eps
351 


LSRQ&A6-47.eps
352 


LSRQ&A6-48.eps
353 


LSRQ&A6-49.eps
354 


LSRQ&A6-50.eps
355 

Æ 


LSRQ&A6-51.eps