Micro-Business resources and financing

If you are a micro-business (5 or fewer employees) and you need some training, technical assistance or financing, you need to be at the South Carolina Micro-Business Conference
June 11, 2013  -  9:00am to 4:00pm – at the Columbia Conference Center  in Columbia.

If your organization provides these same services and resources to micro-businesses, you definitely need to be at this June 11^th conference.
 

Register Now

This conference is designed to foster collaborative statewide efforts that:  1) Increases entrepreneurs’ access to resources  2) Empower micro-enterprise service providers & 3) Promotes South Carolina’s economic growth

Micro-businesses and providers of services will have an opportunity to network, learn, collaborate. 

The keynote speaker will be Connie Evans, President and CEO of the Association for Enterprise Opportunity (AEO), the national nonprofit organization and business trade association representing the U.S. micro-business development industry.

This is Ms. Evans second visit to Columbia to promote economic development through micro-business development. 

Conference includes continental breakfast & luncheon.

 

Register Now

One BAD Apple

The recent news that Apple has played the tax laws of Ireland versus the U.S. to effectively avoid paying any corporate tax on tens of billions of income might be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back regarding finding a solution to offshore tax haven abuse. 

All the rest of us are essentially subsidizing all the government services that Apple is using.  Our roads and bridges, courts, public education, even our military defense.

So exactly how do we force multinational corporations to pay their fair share of U.S. taxes even if we can’t get other countries to join us in this effort?

Harold Meyerson addresses this issue in an opinion editorial in The Washington Post.  Here are some excerpts.

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

The Washington Post
May 28, 3013

Apple’s U.S. revenue should be taxed

By Harold Meyerson,

The open secret of many global corporations’ success — and occasionally, downfall — is to fall between the cracks. Apple, which is based in Cupertino, Calif., created an Irish subsidiary with no employees, into which it funneled roughly $30 billion between 2009 and 2012 on which neither Ireland nor the United States levied taxes.…

The legal evasion of corporate taxes by shifting income to low-tax climes isn’t only a U.S. problem. Low-tax trolling is on the agenda of the Group of Eight leaders’ meeting next month. But absent a global sovereign, there will always be countries with tax rates lower than their neighbors’ and companies seeking to take advantage of that disparity. Reducing the nominal tax rate on corporate profits in the United States to 25 percent, or 15 percent, from the current 35 percent won’t deter some future Apple from shifting profits to some future Ireland if the tax rate there is zero.

So, what to do? …taxing corporations on their revenue rather than their profits. If Apple gets 60 percent of its revenue from sales in the United States, Apple should pay U.S. taxes on that revenue. Let France collect taxes from Apple on its sales in France, China on its sales in China and so forth. Taking production and the location of corporate headquarters out of the equation would end the noxious practices of placing factories where the taxes are lowest and creating dummy subsidiaries to funnel profits through low-tax countries. Companies would still roam the globe in search of the cheapest labor, though a better Congress might one day seek to reward businesses for keeping and generating high-value-added jobs in the United States.…

Ultimately, what’s needed are global standards for taxes, labor and regulation. Until they exist, let’s do what we can to stop game-playing that benefits only the rich.

Christie declares climate change an “esoteric theory” and blames scientists

This morning NBC’s Matt Lauer asked New Jersey Governor Chris Christie if he was concerned that the Governor’s positive relationship with President Obama would hurt his political future.  Christie said that he wasn’t worried. 

Then Christie immediately pivoted from being a voice of bipartisanship and threw red meat to the GOP primary voters in 2016. 

Christie called climate change an “esoteric theory” when Lauer asked him about rising sea levels associated with climate change contributing to Hurricane Sandy’s devastation to the New Jersey shore.

“I haven’t been shown any definitive proof yet that that's what caused it,” said Christie.

Christie defends his climate change denial by pointing out that the scientist use words like “probably” and “maybe”. 

“I’m not going to buy things out of whole cloth, Matt, I’m just not going to especially when they (scientists) won’t definitively say anything and it’s their business,” Christie concluded.

Christie actually has a point.  Climate scientists have been too timid in the words they use.  And it is this professional reluctance to use more definitive language that gives legitimacy to this climate-change-denial talking point.

The importance of solving this terminology issue can’t be understated.  Every day that we give deniers like Christie the slightest legitimate reason to reject what 99% of scientists believe about climate change the longer it will take us to make the big changes needed to avoid the certain cataclysmic consequences.

 

Business Leaders Support Safe Chemicals Efforts by Senators Lautenberg and Vitter

Economic Growth in Tandem with Health and Environmental Protections

WASHINGTON, May 22, 2013 — Today, Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and David Vitter (R-LA) announced a bipartisan compromise bill, the Chemical Safety Improvement Act, to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act. The following statement is from David Levine, Cofounder and CEO of the American Sustainable Business Council.

 

The American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) applauds the bipartisan leadership of Senators Lautenberg and Vitter for addressing the need to fix our broken system of protection from toxic chemicals.  We are especially encouraged that this effort acknowledges our core belief that economic growth and protections for health and the environment are not at odds. We can and must provide safe, environmentally benign alternatives to hazardous chemicals and do so at a lower cost. This is what consumers want, and it is what is driving change in the industry.

While this version of the Chemical Safety Improvement Act  is a step forward, work still needs to be done on the bill to strengthen the incentives for investment in green chemistry. ASBC is concerned that a component that specifically supported Green Chemistry and Engineering research and development, included in an earlier version of the bill, has been omitted in this version. Incentives are crucial to spur the innovation necessary to create safer chemicals, which in turn will grow business and create jobs. 

ASBC’s independent polling shows that small business owners across the board support reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The poll of small business owners – 47% Republican, 27% Democratic and 23% independent – found that 92% support regulations to protect air and water from toxic chemicals and nearly three out of four support requirements for chemical manufacturers to show that their chemicals are safe and disclose toxic chemicals.

 

We look forward to working with Senators Lautenberg and Vitter to maximize the opportunity through this legislation to invest in cleaner, safer and innovative technologies and grow our economy as we protect the communities and employees of our businesses. 

                                                                                   ###

Senators Lautenberg and Vitter Reach Groundbreaking Agreement to Reform Nation's Chemical Laws

Bipartisan Legislation Would Protect Americans From Risks Posed by Exposure to Chemicals

Lautenberg Press Office, 202-224-3224
Wednesday, May 22, 2013

 WASHINGTON, D.C.­Today, U.S. Senators Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and David Vitter (R-LA) announced a groundbreaking, bipartisan agreement to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and ensure the safety of everyday consumer products to better protect American families.  Their legislation would significantly update and improve TSCA, which has proven ineffective and is criticized by both the public health community and industry. The Lautenberg-Vitter legislation would, for the first time, ensure that all chemicals are screened for safety to protect public health and the environment, while also creating an environment where manufacturers can continue to innovate, grow, and create jobs.  

The Lautenberg-Vitter “Chemical Safety Improvement Act of 2013” is co-sponsored by U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Charles Schumer (D-NY), James Inhofe (R-OK), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and John Hoeven (R-ND).

“This bipartisan agreement is an historic step toward meaningful reform that protects American families and consumers.  Every parent wants to know that the chemicals used in everyday products have been proven safe, but our current chemical laws fail to give parents that peace of mind,” said Senator Lautenberg, who first introduced legislation to reform TSCA in 2005.  “Our bipartisan bill would fix the flaws with current law and ensure that chemicals are screened for safety.”

“Our bill strikes the right balance between strengthening consumer confidence in the safety of chemicals, while also promoting innovation and the growth of an important sector of our economy,” said Senator Vitter, Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee. “Chemical manufacturing is a big part of Louisiana’s economy and across the country, and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act establishes a program that should provide confidence to the public and consumers, by giving the EPA the tools it needs to make critical determinations while providing a more transparent process.  The benefit of such a system is that industry should also have more confidence that the federal system works to facilitate innovation and grow our economy.”

“For far too long, American families have been exposed to chemicals that have never been tested for safety,” said Senator Gillibrand. “This bill will finally allow the EPA to test those chemicals that pose the greatest hazard to our children and pregnant women, and it will give the companies that manufacture the chemicals certainty that what they are selling is certified safe across all 50 States.”

“After almost twenty-five years, Republicans and Democrats have come together on an important and significant environmental reform measure,” said Senator Crapo, Ranking Member of the EPW Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health. “The Chemical Safety Improvement Act works to improve the safety of American consumers and ensure that risks from chemical substances are adequately understood and managed, while recognizing the enormous benefit the chemical industry brings to the economy.”

“I am proud to be part of this bipartisan group that came together to solve a critical problem, and I hope it serves as a model for future agreements,” said Senator Manchin. “This bill proves that bipartisan compromise can still work in Washington when people are committed to coming together to find commonsense solutions. Our agreement shows that protecting our health and environment does not have to impede our economic growth.” 

The legislation also has the support of public health advocates and chemical industry representatives.

“This bill is both a policy and political breakthrough.  it gives EPA vital new tools to identify chemicals of both high and low concern, and to reduce exposure to those that pose risks.  And while this bill represents a hard-fought compromise, it opens, at last, a bipartisan path forward to fix our badly outmoded system to ensure the safety of chemicals in everyday use,” said Richard Denison, Senior Scientist, Environmental Defense Fund. 

“From life-saving medicines, to energy efficient build materials, chemistry is responsible for countless innovations that have transformed society. America’s chemical industry is a critical source of economic growth and good-paying jobs across the country.  Achieving sound, balanced TSCA reform that enhances public confidence in the safety of chemicals and enables America to remain the world’s leading innovator is our top priority,” said Cal Dooley, President and CEO of the American Chemistry Council.  “This bipartisan compromise legislation will put safety first, while also promoting innovation, economic growth and job creation – goals that are critical to our industry, to our nearly 800,000 employees and to the many other industries that rely on the products of chemistry.”

In contrast to existing law, the Lautenberg-Vitter “Chemical Safety Improvement Act of 2013” would:

• Require Safety Evaluations for All Chemicals: All active chemicals in commerce must be evaluated for safety and labeled as either “high” or “low” priority chemical based on potential risk to human health and the environment.  For high priority chemicals, EPA must conduct further safety evaluations. 
• Protect Public Health from Unsafe Chemicals: If a chemical is found to be unsafe, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the necessary authority to take action.  This can range from labeling requirements to the full phase-out or ban of a chemical.  
•  Prioritize Chemicals for Review: The Environmental Protection Agency will have to transparently assess risk, determine safety, and apply any needed measures to manage risks.
• Screen New Chemicals for Safety: New chemicals entering the market must be screened for safety and the EPA is given the authority to prohibit unsafe chemicals from entering the market. 
• Secure Necessary Health and Safety Information: The legislation allows EPA to secure necessary health and safety information from chemical manufacturers, while directing EPA to rely first on existing information to avoid duplicative testing. 
• Promote Innovation and Safer Chemistry: This legislation provides clear paths to getting new chemistry on the market and protects trade secrets and intellectual property from disclosure. 
• Protect Children and Pregnant Women: The legislation requires EPA to evaluate the risks posed to particularly vulnerable populations, such as children and pregnant women, when evaluating the safety of a chemical­a provision not included in existing law.
• Give States and Municipalities a Say:  States and local governments will have the opportunity to provide input on prioritization, safety assessment and the safety determination processes, requiring timely response from EPA, and the bill establishes a waiver process to allow state regulations or laws to remain in effect when circumstances warrant it.      

Under current law, the EPA can call for safety testing only after evidence surfaces demonstrating a chemical may be dangerous.  As a result, EPA has only been able to require testing for roughly 200 of the more than 84,000 chemicals currently registered in the United States, and has been able to ban only five dangerous substances since TSCA was first enacted in 1976.  These shortfalls led the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to identify TSCA as a “high risk” area of the law in 2009. 

Comprehensive reform of chemical regulations is important to consumers and job creating businesses that need the ability to compete in the global marketplace. Chemicals are used to produce 96 percent of all manufactured goods consumers rely on every day and over 25 percent of the U.S. GDP is derived from industries that rely on chemicals.

Google Joins Apple Avoiding Taxes With Stateless Income

Bloomberg 

By Jesse Drucker - May 22, 2013

U.S. Senate scrutiny of Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s tax strategies turned the spotlight on a unit with $30 billion in profit since 2009 that’s incorporated in Ireland, controlled by a board in California, and doesn’t pay taxes in either place.

Apple officials acknowledged yesterday at a congressional hearing that the entity -- a key subsidiary in Apple’s offshore tax strategy -- is managed and controlled in the U.S., yet it still isn’t paying U.S. federal income taxes.

The shifting of profits by multinational companies is costing the U.S. and Europe at least $100 billion per year in lost tax revenue, according to Kimberly Clausing, an economics professor at Reed University in Portland, Oregon.

“Over the decades, Congress and governments around the world have allowed a system to develop which allows multinational companies to earn income tax-free by using contracts to shift the income, on paper, to companies in low-and zero-tax countries,” said Michael Durst, a retired international tax attorney based in Washington. The result “is eroding public confidence in the fairness of tax systems in the United States and around the world.”

Similar practices by an assortment of companies -- from Google Inc. (GOOG), owner of the world’s most popular Internet search engine, to Forest Laboratories Inc. (FRX), the maker of antidepressant drug Lexapro -- are drawing increased scrutiny from regulators in the U.S. and around the world, particularly as European nations face a backlash against austerity measures.

Tax Avoidance

Corporate tax avoidance is now being targeted on several fronts. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a think tank funded by governments around the world, is scheduled to release an “action plan” in July to deal with tax revenue lost to profit shifting. The plan came in response to a request by the Group of 20 nations.

The European Commission also is targeting key rules that enable corporate profit shifting.

In the U.S., President Barack Obama’s Treasury Department in April released a list of global tax loopholes to close, many of which it has targeted unsuccessfully in the past.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations found that Apple avoided paying income taxes on $74 billion of profit during the past four years in part by moving patent rights to a web of offshore subsidiaries that pay virtually no income taxes.

Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook yesterday maintained the company had done nothing wrong and said it pays “all the taxes we owe -- every single dollar.” The Cupertino, California-based company is also not alone in moving profits to such offshore units.

‘Double Irish’

Google, for example, has used a pair of tax shelters known by tax attorneys as the “Double Irish” and “Dutch Sandwich” that move foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda to avoid about $2 billion in income taxes a year, according to the company’s filings in the U.S.

Like Apple, Mountain View, California-based Google shifts profits into an Irish subsidiary that doesn’t pay taxes in Ireland. In Google’s case, it says the unit is managed in Bermuda, which has no corporate income tax.

Google has been questioned by the U.K. Parliament twice since November over its tax affairs and is in a more than $1 billion dispute with French tax authorities.

Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO) has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in profits through a Dutch bookkeeper’s suburban home office en route to subsidiaries in Mauritius and Switzerland. Like Apple, Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo has deposited profits in an Irish subsidiary that claims not to be a tax resident in Ireland, but instead in the Cayman Islands, filings show.

Forest Labs, Cisco

Forest Laboratories, based in New York, has used a virtually identical strategy to that of Google, claiming most of its profits are offshore, even as its sales are almost entirely in the U.S. It has also used an Irish unit that claims to be headquartered in Bermuda, and therefore not on the hook for Irish income taxes.

Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO), based in San Jose, California, has avoided paying billions of dollars in income taxes by attributing about half its worldwide profits in recent years to a tiny unit at the foot of the Swiss Alps.

Cisco spokeswoman Kristin Carvell had no comment for this article. Yahoo spokeswoman Sara Gorman, Google spokeswoman Samantha Smith and Forest Laboratories Vice President Frank Murdolo didn’t return calls for comment.

The Irish Finance Ministry yesterday said there’s “no possibility” of special tax rate deals for companies, in an e-mailed response to questions on Apple’s tax treatment of profits of Irish affiliates.

‘Check-the-Box’

The companies have also depended on a U.S. tax regulation known as “check the box” -- cited by the Senate investigators in the Apple case -- that makes offshore transactions effectively invisible to the IRS.

Senate investigators drilled down into a crucial component of Apple’s strategy that Edward Kleinbard, a former corporate tax attorney and professor at the University of Southern California Law School, said may make the company vulnerable to taxation in the U.S. In the panel’s report, the top Irish subsidiary receiving offshore profits was found to have held almost all its board meetings in California, with its sole Irish board member rarely attending.

“Apple says their Irish subsidiaries’ ‘mind and management’ lies outside Ireland, but the real question is, do those subsidiaries have any mind of their own at all?” Kleinbard said. “If they are not really competent to make independent decisions to take on risks and make contracts on their own behalf, then the structure collapses of its own weight, and the income properly should be taxed to the United States.”

Report: 62 percent of Poll Respondents in Deep South Support Expansion of the Medicaid Program

Majority of Whites as Well as African-Americans Support Medicaid Expansion

In Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina, Even 47 Percent of Self-Identified Conservatives Support Medicaid Expansion

Washington, D.C.—A poll released today reveals that expanding the Medicaid program as called for in the Affordable Care Act has the solid support—a 62 percent favorable response—of a broad mix of residents in the five southern states of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina.

The poll, conducted in March and April by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, found that Medicaid expansion is supported by 78 percent of self-proclaimed liberals, 70 percent of politically-moderate respondents, and nearly half, 47 percent, of the respondents who termed themselves conservative.

Analyzing poll respondents by race, the Joint Center found strong support across racial lines, although African-Americans positive responses (85 percent) clearly outweighed that of non-Hispanic whites (53 percent).

While the poll shows that the Affordable Care Act still faces challenges in acceptance, two of the other key provisions of the law intended to expand health coverage—health insurance premium tax credits and the creation of statewide insurance marketplaces—also drew strong support across the South, with a majority of conservatives joining others in voicing approval.

The poll results showed:

• Respondents in all five states responded favorably (62 percent) to the idea of expanding Medicaid for low-income uninsured adults, as did residents of each individual state—Alabama (64 percent), Georgia (61 percent), Louisiana (63 percent), Mississippi (59 percent) and South Carolina (65 percent).
• Approximately 85 percent of African-Americans supported the expansion, while about 53 percent of non-Hispanic white residents in the five states favored the expanded coverage. 
• Both male and female respondents favored the expansion, with women (65.5 percent) stronger in their support than men (58 percent).
• Support varied less among age groups, although younger respondents, ages 18-24 (66 percent) and 25-44 (64.5 percent), favored Medicaid expansion a bit more than older residents, ages 35-64 (62 percent) and 65 and older (60 percent).
• Medicaid expansion drew strong support from residents of the five states who described themselves as “liberal” (78 percent) and “moderate” (69 percent), while just under half  of the those calling themselves “conservative” (47 percent) favored the expansion.
• Party affiliation sharpened the differences in support for Medicaid expansion, with strong support coming from Democrats (87 percent) and Independents (57 percent), but with many fewer supports among Republicans (38 percent).

“The results of this report should paint a clear picture for southern governors that refusing to implement the Medicaid expansion places them out of step with the needs and wishes of their constituents,” Ron Pollack, Executive Director of Families USA said today.

“These governors need to acknowledge what a growing list of other governors—Democrats and Republicans—have recognized, namely, that the Medicaid expansion is a win-win-win for the people of their states,” Pollack said. “It will reduce the number of people who can’t afford health care; it will increase the number of jobs throughout the state; and it will strengthen the state’s economy.”

“This survey clearly shows that governors and state legislators in the South who are resisting the Medicaid expansion are out-of-step with their constituents,” said Brian D. Smedley, Ph.D., Vice President and Director of the Joint Center's Health Policy Institute. “A strong majority of respondents in our poll understand that not only will broader Medicaid coverage save lives and end unnecessary suffering, it will also stimulate job growth and the economy in these states. We encourage elected officials to take a good look at the benefits of the ACA's Medicaid expansion provisions and make decisions based on the evidence.”

The full polling report, “The Deep South and Medicaid Expansion: The View from Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina,” is available at
www.jointcenter.org/research/the-deep-south-and-medicaid-expansion

Click here for a Families USA data snapshot which summarizes the key findings of the Joint Center's polling report. 

The IRS and Syria...investigative reporting must reads

Yesterday’s New York Times had excellent investigative stories about two of today’s major news stories. 

First, Nicholas Confessore, David Kocieniewski and Michael Luo give you the real inside story on how the IRS managed, or more accurately mismanaged, operations in its Exempt Organizations Division in Cincinnati that has resulted in all the partisan turmoil in Washington. 

Second, Thomas Friedman, who we usually just read on the opinion pages, tells how the intersection of climate change and the deregulation of agriculture land in Syria laid the foundation of Syria’s revolution.

      (A)fter Assad took over in 2000 he opened up the regulated agricultural sector in Syria
      for big farmers, many of them government cronies, to buy up land and drill as much water
      as they wanted, eventually severely diminishing the water table. This began driving small
      farmers off the land into towns, where they had to scrounge for work.

      Then, between 2006 and 2011, some 60 percent of Syria’s land mass was ravaged by
      the drought and, with the water table already too low and river irrigation shrunken, it
      wiped out the livelihoods of 800,000 Syrian farmers and herders, the United Nations
      reported. “Half the population in Syria between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers left the
      land” for urban areas during the last decade, said Aita. And with Assad doing nothing to
      help the drought refugees, a lot of very simple farmers and their kids got politicized.

These two stories represent the best in investigative reporting.  Not only do they contribute to our understanding of important issues but they demonstrate how critical it is that we have print reporters to do this kind of hard, time-consuming investigative work.

And we say we love our children

You probably wonder why the rate of childhood diseases like autism are at all-time highs.  Same thing for cases of Attention Deficit Disorder.   The answer might be right on store shelves.

The Washington Toxics Coalition and Safer States report that children’s products are loaded with toxic chemicals like mercury, arsenic and cadmium.  Over 5000 of these products are just waiting for you to purchase and take home to poison your kids.

Having a child’s birthday party?  Why not make them wear party hats from Hallmark containing cancer-causing arsenic.  Those cute dolls from Walmart have a little something extra for your child—the hormone-disrupting bisphenol A.

The researchers didn’t have to do a lot of testing to find the 41 toxic chemicals used in these children’s products.  The manufacturers were required by a Washington state law to report any toxic chemicals used in their products for kids. 

Other states are trying to pass the same kind of law so at least the states or researchers can connect the dots for consumers. 

What kind of country are we that doesn’t make manufacturers of any consumer product, let alone products for our children, disclose if they are using toxic chemicals and then make them stop it.  When the voters and small business owners are asked if they want more government protection from toxic chemicals, the answer is overwhelmingly YES.

But yet our federal and almost all state governments refuses to act.

We say we love our kids and buy them lots of stuff…stuff that is making them sick. 

We adults are the ones who are sick for allowing this to go on.

Read the full press release on this issue below.

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

Children’s Product Makers Report Over 5000 Products Contain Toxic Chemicals Of Concern To Kids’ Health

May 01, 2013

Seattle, WA –Over 5000 children’s products contain toxic chemicals linked to cancer, hormone disruption, and reproductive problems according to reports filed with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology).  An analysis of the reports by the Washington Toxics Coalition and Safer States found that makers of kids’ products reported using a total of 41 chemicals identified by Ecology as a concern for children’s health, including toxic metals such as cadmium, mercury, and antimony, and organic compounds such as phthalates.  Major manufacturers who reported using the chemicals in their products include Walmart, Gap, Gymboree, Hallmark, and H & M.

Examples of product categories reported to contain toxic chemicals include:

• Hallmark party hats containing cancer-causing arsenic.
• Graco car seats containing the toxic flame retardant TBBPA (tetrabromobisphenol A)
• Claire’s cosmetics containing cancer-causing formaldehyde.
• Walmart dolls containing hormone-disrupting bisphenol A.

“The data shows store shelves remain full of toxic chemicals that we know are a concern for children’s health,” said Erika Schreder, science director for the Washington Toxics Coalition. “These reports are critical for understanding the presence of toxic chemicals in our homes and the marketplace.”

The chemical reports are required under Washington State’s Children’s Safe Products Act of 2008, which requires major companies making children’s products to report the presence of toxic chemicals in their products. The reports cover certain children’s products sold in Washington State from June 1, 2012 to March 1, 2013.

Major findings from the reports include: 

• More than 5,000 products have been reported to date as containing a chemical on Washington State’s list of 66 Chemicals of High Concern to Children.
• Products reported so far include children’s clothing and footwear, personal care products, baby products, toys, car seats, and arts and craft supplies.
• Toxic metals such as mercury, cadmium, cobalt, antimony, and molybdenum were reported, with cobalt being the metal most often reported.  
• Manufacturers reported using phthalates in clothing, toys, bedding, and baby products. 
• Other chemicals reported include solvents like ethylene glycol and methyl ethyl ketone, and a compound used in silicone known as octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane.

“Too many products contain chemicals that do not belong in items we give our kids. To truly protect children, manufacturers need to identify safer ways to make their products and stop using harmful chemicals,” said Schreder.

A Washington state bill that would have required manufacturers to stop using toxic flame retardants in children’s products and to identify safer ways to make their products failed to pass the legislature before the end of the regular session on April 28th.  The Toxic-Free Kids and Families Act (HB 1294) was opposed by a coalition led by the American Chemistry Council, Walmart, and the Association of Washington Business.

Walmart, a major opponent of the Toxic-Free Kids and Families Act, reported a total of 459 instances of products containing chemicals including arsenic, cadmium, phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA), and mercury.

“It is particularly disturbing to see the large numbers of products reported by Walmart at the same time the company has been working to defeat Washington’s bill that would address some of the most problematic uses,” said Schreder. “Companies like Walmart need to show they’re serious about children’s health by getting toxic chemicals out of their products and supporting common-sense legislation.”

Washington State is the first state to have a comprehensive chemical reporting program.  It is considered a model for other states.

“The Washington experience shows these reporting programs can work without being too burdensome on business,” said Sarah Doll, Director of Safer States. “At least seven additional states are considering implementing similar programs on the extent of chemical use in children’s products in their state. Critical in these proposals are requirements that companies begin looking at safer ways to make their products and an eventual phase-out of the use of harmful chemicals.”  

A full analysis of Washington State’s chemical use reports are available at http://www.watoxics.org/chemicalsrevealed

A searchable database of chemical use reports filed with the Washington State Department of Ecology is available at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/cspa/search.html

The Washington Toxics Coalition is nonprofit organization that works to protect public health and the environment from toxic chemicals in Washington state. www.watoxics.org, www.facebook.com/watoxics or @WA_Toxics

Safer States (The State Alliance for Federal Reform (SAFER) of Chemical Policy) is a coalition of state-based organizations championing solutions to protect public health and communities from toxic chemicals. www.saferstates.org, www.facebook.com/saferstates or @SaferStates

NFIB's big business funding revealed again

Last July I had an opinion editorial in The Hill’s Congressional Blog entitled, “Big money behind misinformation on healthcare law”.  It talked about the revelations of big donor money flowing to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) to fight against the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). 

According to a Public Campaign analysis of IRS 990 filings from the NFIB and NFIB Small Business Legal Center for 2009-2011, the NFIB organizations have had dramatic increases in contributions since the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010. But the new-found wealth is not from dues of the average NFIB member. The IRS filings show that the NFIB organizations received $10 million from just 10 contributors in 2010-2011. In the previous year the largest individual contribution was just $21,000. News reports have identified the conservative and superpac Crossroads GPS as one of the NFIB contributors in 2010 giving $3.7 million.

The fact that the NFIB is just a front group for big business and partisan interests, a small business pretender organization I have called it, is well documented.  Yet much of the media amazingly still rushes to the NFIB for its position on small business issues. 

Hopefully the latest news about where the NFIB gets it funding will finally make the press wake up about this faux small-business organization.

The National Journal reported yesterday that the NFIB’s efforts to stop a new tax on health insurance companies that will help pay for implementation of Obamacare is being funded by the big insurance industry group America’s Health Insurance Plans to the tune of $850,000.

It took a lot of comparing tax filings by Chris Frates of the Journal to uncover the secret deal.

The back-channel spending shows how insurers were able to fund a key—and much more politically popular—ally in their fight against the premium tax. After all, helping small businesses is a political no-brainer while aiding big insurers is a political nonstarter.

Here is the bottom line.  The NFIB does not represent the interests of small businesses.  It represents the interests of its major funders….big corporations.

Senate video worth watching

Momentum is building in the U.S. Senate for change in the filibuster rules. 

If you remember at the start of the current session Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refused to allow a vote on significantly changing the filibuster rules.  The Senate has become dysfunctional with nothing really getting done due to the abuse of the present rules that allow the minority to control the Senate.  It is so easy to block any movement on bills and even nominations that the country’s important issues are not being addressed effectively.

This frustration boiled over recently at a Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works that met to consider the nomination of Gina McCarthy for EPA Administrator.  All the Republican members of the Committee boycotted the meeting so that no action could be taken. 

Watch the fireworks for yourself at the link below.  Advance to the 27 minute and 40 second mark when the meeting begins.  It is well worth watching and when you are done call Senator Reid’s office at 1-866-736-7343 and demand the Senate reform its filibuster rules.

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Choose&Hearing_id=670b95e6-ae45-33e6-edac-c256181b8e10

 

Mark Sanford...slaying an already tamed deficit

Congratulations to Mark Sanford for his victory Tuesday in South Carolina’s First Congressional District. 

Sanford’s campaign message was pretty simple.  Elect him and he would totally focus on reigning in federal spending in order to cut the budget deficit.

Well, in a strange ironic coincidence The Washington Post ran a story on the same day Sanford was elected with this lead, “After four years of trillion-dollar deficits, the red ink is receding rapidly in Washington.”

Federal spending is down and revenue is up. 

According to The Washington Post story, “Defense spending has been declining rapidly with the end of the war in Iraq and the ongoing drawdown of forces in Afghanistan. A surprising — and apparently durable — slowdown in health-care costs has sharply reduced projected spending on Medicare and Medicaid. And the falling jobless rate and improving economy have helped push federal tax collections up 16 percent over last year, according to figures out Tuesday.”

Throw in sequester cuts, Social Security tax cuts going away and households with more than $450,000 income paying just a little more in taxes and you get the reduced red ink.  In fact the federal government is expected to actually make a small payment to reduce the national debt in June.

Now none of this will stop Mr. Sanford from pushing for the type of failed austerity measures that have crippled the European economies.  But this good budget news should make those in Washington pay less attention to his deficit-hawk voice in Congress.   And that is a good thing for a country that needs to invest in infrastructure, education, healthcare and other areas to rebuild a stronger economy that will create more tax revenue to get us closer to a balanced budget.

Success in the U.S. Senate

Below is a message from the Alliance for Main Street Fairness that has helped lead the fight in Congress to pass the Marketplace Fairness Act that will allow a state to require online stores to collect sales tax on purchases from that state. 

The Senate in an overwhelming bipartisan vote yesterday passed the bill.  This is a victory for brick-and-mortar stores that already collect state sales tax putting them at a competitive disadvantage to the online stores.

Senator Lindsay Graham supported our small businesses with his vote but unfortunately Senator Tim Scott voted against this bill.

Now the legislation goes to the U.S. House. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear South Carolina,

We did it!

The Senate just passed the standalone Marketplace Fairness Act by a binding vote of 69-27. Next stop: the House of Representatives.

Read more about this exciting e-fairness development in our latest blog post.

This vote represents a huge victory for all of us who want to see the sales tax loophole closed—and we couldn’t have done it without your help.

But while we now have Senate passage behind us, we are only halfway home. We need to motivate the House to pass this important bill so it can be sent to the President to be signed into law.

Thank you again for making this victory in the Senate possible. Let’s continue working together to enact the Marketplace Fairness Act this year!

Best,

The Alliance for Main Street Fairness

Inglis still pushing for business solution to climate change

Former South Carolina Congressman Bob Inglis continues to lead the effort to promote a responsible business model for addressing climate change that is the biggest threat to our state’s future tourism economy.  He might have lost his re-election some years ago partially because of his willingness to tell the truth about climate change, but he has a positive attitude about it. 

“Losing an election is not the worst thing that can happen to you. Losing your soul is considerably worse,” says Inglis. 

Read the two stories below.

The Hill
May 5, 2013

Carbon tax backers quietly forge ahead

By Ben Geman - 05/05/13 06:00 AM ET

Activists are quietly forging ahead with their campaign for carbon taxes despite long odds on Capitol Hill.

Bob Inglis, a former GOP House member from South Carolina, is part of a very loose collection of policy wonks and advocates fighting to change the politics of taxing emissions.

“It’s a longer-term play here,” Inglis said.

Inglis, who launched the “Energy and Enterprise Initiative” at George Mason University last year, sees several forces converging that will enable a carbon tax to surface in a broader fiscal policy deal.

It would happen, he said, by “immaculate conception,” but not until 2015 or 2016.

Read more

Politico May 6, 2013

Bob Inglis going the distance on carbon emissions tax By: Darren Goode

Former Rep. Bob Inglis knows that his devotion to a carbon tax might have cost him his job. But the South Carolina Republican has no regrets as he dedicates his post-congressional career as well to the battle to persuade fellow conservatives to embrace a revenue-neutral carbon tax. “And really, I am the worst commercial for this, because I got my head blown off trying to do it,” he told POLITICO, sitting at a coffee shop a short walk from the Capitol. But he added, “Losing an election is not the worst thing that can happen to you. Losing your soul is considerably worse.” The controversial tax proposal has long won the backing of many economists, who say it is the simplest and purest means of reducing emissions blamed for contributing to climate change. And while it has also won tentative backing from oil giants like Shell and ExxonMobil, it’s been pilloried by many oil-state politicians and conservatives, who say it would raise energy costs and hurt fossil fuel industries.

Read more