December 2007 Archives

Articles on the  proposed SBA Ruling are being printed in media across the country.   Check out this article and WIPP comments in the Washington Post.

   The Rand Study, which the SBA used to issue regulations on PL106-554, the legislation passed in 2000, is flawed in several respects (and it admits it throughout the study) according to Denise Farris, Farris Law Firm out of Stilwell, KS.   Denise is an attorney who represents several clients in the federal contracting area.

1.   The study identifies an incorrect constitutional standard of review for women business programs by stating that the standard is "strict scrutiny".   In fact, the correct standard for gender-based programs is a level called "intermediate scrutiny".   The relevance is that under an intermediate level of scrutiny, women business owner programs are more easily justified and require less proof to sustain the program.  

2.  The Study utilizes two widely disparate systems of "availability" - the first element of proving discrimination.   The Rand Study first analyzed availability through CCR registrations (those women business owners who have self-certified through the federal government certification system) vs. total women business owners per the U.S. Census.   Many women business owners choose not to register through CCR, so the CCR measure of availability is a much more limited universe than the total number of businesses in our country. 

3.  The Study erroneously used old SBA size standards and is thus again excluding a larger universe of companies that would qualify as "small" under the correct standards.

4.   The Study relied upon old NAICS industry codes and specifically admits that its figures may thus be unreliable.

5.  The Study concludes that based on the total number of "contract dollars" awarded to the total number of women business owners registered in the CCR, there is disparity only in a limited number of industries.   Therefore, the Study concludes that a large dollar volume is being awarded to very few in a large number of industries.  On the other hand, the Study concluded that when you measure the total number of contracts awarded versus the total universe of women business owners, there was an 87% disparity or underutilization in federal contracting.    This leads us to wonder which analytical method is more accurate?   Of course, the SBA chose to accept the first analysis (no disparity) to justify limited federal assistance to women owned businesses to get a fair share of government procurement dollars.

In case your interested on the credentials of Denise Farris - among her credentials, she:

1.  publishes articles readily (since 1989 on the Croson, Adarand I, II and III cases, and monitors the Supreme Court decisions and state decisions;

2.  She serves as the first female representative on KC Missouri's Fairness in Construction Board;

3.  Leally repreents the City of KC MO in creating contract forms to track true availability and utilization of M/WBEs on contract specific basis;

4.  Regular speaker and nationally published on affirmative action in government contracts for the American Bar Association Forum on the Construction Industry.

Readers: this is just one of many examples of emails received from WIPP members over the past few days, expressing not only outrage, but also on the flawed methodology.

   Today the U.S. Small Business Administration submitted a proposed rule addressing legislation, PL 106-554, that was passed by Congress in 2000.   This law was created to allow federal contracting officers to award up to 5% of all contracts to women-owned businesses. 

   The rule, if enacted, would drastically limit the number of governmental contracts awarded to women entrepreneurs by requiring them to show under-representation in thousands of industries, and direct discrimination by a government agency to qualify for protected status.

    In their wisdom, the new rule, as proposed, would only extend protected status in 4 categories out of over 2,300 business categories:   kitchen cabin manufacturing, engraving, other motor vehicles and intelligence.

   They are good!   They have almost 100% ensured that none of us will qualify.   Why didn't they just say "no"?Why insult our intelligence?

   The proposed rule was  released right smack in the middle of the holidays.   Did they think we wouldn't find out?   Do they believe we wouldn't care any more - after 7 long years of waiting for their response?   

    How cowardly of them.

   Does the administration believe that a group that represents more than half of the small businesses in America does not vote?

  Does the administration believe that more than half a million WIPP members, including 45 small business organizations, will let this slip quietly by?

   Let's see who flinches first!

It is mind-boggling that the H.R. 380, the Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act of 2007, is still up for debate when there is clear evidence that it is a public safety hazard! H.R. 380 would change current FDA certification of prescription drugs by allowing manufacturers in countries such as Australia, Canada, Japan and members of the European Union, to document that the prescription drugs are safe. The FDA would no longer inspect each foreign manufacturing facility and their processes.

What does that mean for the safety of our drug supply?! 

According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Task Force on Drug Importation Report, attempts to expand legalized importation of prescription drugs will likely result in increased risk. Evidence shows that weaknesses in the oversight of drug regulation will create more opportunities for counterfeit and substandard drugs to enter and be dispersed in the U.S. If you feel as strongly about this as I do, please take a moment to contact your Congressman and ask him to vote no on H.R. 380.

I recently had the opportunity to participate in a discussion about TELEMEDICINE; a partnership between the medical community and the telecom industry, a collaboration that improves healthcare and substantially grows telecom commerce.

What is it exactly? Telemedicine combines clinical medicine with the telecom industry. How? Through the sharing of medical information via telephone or the internet for the purpose of consulting, transmitting medical records or even performing remote procedures.

A recent study by the Center for Information Technology Leadership found that a national rollout of telehealth systems in emergency departments, correctional institutions, nursing homes and physician offices could save $4.28 billion annually.

Congress is taking notice!  The Senate recently put forth a proposal to help expand reimbursement for telemedicine in Medicare. And the FCC just announced $417 million to help rural health-care groups build high-speed Internet networks to connect isolated clinics to sophisticated medical resources in urban areas.

Telemedicine is an amazing growth opportunity for the telecom industry; new grant programs and new technology are being created and implemented all the time! Stay tuned for more developments.....

I just read the blog on the Internet Tax Moratorium and had to let you know this. I recently had my final meeting with the owner and GM of a potential new client regarding a proposal that I had pending. The entire meeting went well and I could tell it looked good for me to get the business.

At the meeting we talked about what public relations they would want. First, the owner asked me if I do crisis communications. Do I do crisis communications?

Of course! I have worked on the Waco Cult Crisis, a plane crash at Los Angeles airport, the Rwanda Civil War for a humanitarian aid agency, with corporate executives who were fired, with a gymnastics school that suffered a devastating fire, and with a controversial highway construction project.

Then he asked if I could help with website updates. Of course--that's another thing we do. But I must admit, the clincher was when he said, "We have a public relations firm on retainer in Phoenix (state capital) to do government relations for us.

Do you know anything about government relations work?" I told him about attending WIPP's annual conference and how that day we were responding to WIPP's call to write our legislators about the internet tax issue. How I was involved with the health care issue (he had proudly told me that all of his company's employees have health care benefits).

He was so impressed that their company could expand their government relations to federal initiatives as well. An internet tax would greatly affect his business, as many of the tour bookings are done on line, and he did not know about the expiration of the internet tax bill.

Before I walked out the door, he told me to get a letter of agreement to them and expect to start work next week.

What I learned from this is to put my government relations work up front and center with my public relations work. I am not a trained lobbyist, but I know how to guide someone through the system--and how to stay involved by writing letters!

Greetings from Arizona. That is my home, at least in-between trips. My name is Mary Schnack and I have a public relations consulting agency. I do communication workshops around the world, focusing on public relations, communications planning, media training, branding, etc. I work closely with WIPP and have done media training for their membership for several years.

 I am a National Founding Partner for WIIPP and am on the Executive Advisory Board.  I recently resigned as co-chair of the WIPP Communications Council as I had had that position for over three years and it was time for new people to come in with their fresh ideas and energy. My other affiliations include Chair of the International Forum of the National Association of Women Business Owners, Lifetime Charter Member of Boardroom Bound, WBE-certified by NWBOC, and Arizona Regional Director for Women's Leadership Exchange.  I am the 2004 receipient of the SBA's Women Business Advocate of the Year award for the State of Arizona and Region  IX.

Now enough about me. Why am I blogging? I will focusing on the close relationship between media outreach, advocacy and growing your business. I will be addressing those issues in this blog. I look forward to your feedback and, of course, your questions.

Today the Senate failed to muster the 60 votes necessary to pass an AMT patch, which unless extended, will affect 21 million taxpayers and by 2010, according to the IRS, 35 million taxpayers will be affected.  Enacted in 1969 when it was discovered that 155 individuals whose adjusted gross income exceeded $200,000 and paid no federal income tax, the tax has never been never indexed to inflation.  Since 75-85 percent of small business owners file as individuals (sole proprietors or S Corps), the AMT is a small business issue. 

If you watched the Senate debate, it was the same old finger pointing- Republicans accusing the Democrats of big tax raisers and Democrats accusing the Republicans of ignoring the needs of the middle class.  Since the norm in the Senate is now an "automatic filibuster" which requires 60 votes instead of a simple majority, the term gridlock takes on a whole new meaning.  The Democrats only have a one seat majority, so getting 60 votes for anything is almost impossible.  It appears we have gridlock once again on an issue important to small business.  Unless Congress eases the congestion, 21 million taxpayers will hear the honking of horns but no movement.