Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Fourth of July

Everybody have a happy and safe Fourth of July holiday.  Then let's get back to work.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Big money behind misinformation on healthcare law


June 29, 2012

By Frank Knapp, Jr., president and CEO, South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce
I received a call from a gentleman, Ralph, this morning asking about my statement to the press yesterday regarding the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare. He wanted to know why I thought the law was good for small businesses because he had heard so much about how it was going to be harmful.

I’m sure that Ralph had also read the statement by the South Carolina state director of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) following the Supreme Court ruling in which he insists that now that Obamacare has been ruled constitutional there will be an “onslaught of taxes and mandates” on small businesses that will result in “job losses and closed businesses.”

It turns out that Ralph is retired living along South Carolina’s coast but he has a brother in Pennsylvania who owns a small business with less than 10 employees. I learned that his brother does offer health insurance to his employees. So it was natural for Ralph to be concerned for his brother’s business.
I don’t blame Ralph for being concerned. For over two years the NFIB has been misleading the small business community and public on this issue. The organization spent about $4 million in fighting Obamacare in the Supreme Court arguing that the law was unconstitutional. Now with that line of attack gone, all the NFIB has left is continuing to lie about what the law does.

So I explained to Ralph that businesses with fewer than 50 employees, which account for 97 percent of all businesses, do not have to offer health insurance to workers and will not be penalized if they don’t. Therefore there can be no job losses or closing of the doors for these small businesses due to Obamacare.
I also explained that there are no other taxes imposed on these small businesses but there are health insurance tax credits available to millions of small businesses like his brother’s who offer healthcare to their employees. “Do you think your brother could use some tax credits,” I asked Ralph. “I’m sure he can,” was the response.

I asked Ralph to have his brother call me so I could help him on the tax credit issue. I also thanked him for calling and told him that I wish I could have a civil conversation with everyone who has concerns about Obamacare. It has been my experience since the law passed in 2010 that when I have the opportunity to have such conversations with individuals or small groups, the fears fall away.
But the real question is why do supporters of the reform have to continue to correct the misinformation being spread by organizations like the NFIB which are suppose to represent small businesses. Why did the NFIB work so hard and spend so much money trying to kill a law that has already benefitted hundreds of thousands of small businesses that have received the tax credits and will help in other ways to make health insurance more affordable when the law fully goes into effect in 2014.

The answer is money.
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.

It is clear that the NFIB is acting on behalf of its partisan big contributors and not their members such as Mike Roach. Mr. Roach is one of the small business owners receiving the tax credits. He owns Paloma Clothing in Portland, Ore, and is a NFIB member for 36 years. In March Mr. Roach told the United Press International that “tearing down the law won’t help us; it would hurt….repealing the Affordable Care Act would send us back to the Dark Ages of health insurance.”
So while the Supreme Court Ruling is the end of this story as to the constitutionality of Obamacare, it is not the end of the political story and certainly not the end of the NFIB lies that are intended to scare people like Ralph and his brother. That is what the NFIB is being paid to do.

Knapp is the president & CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce. He is also the vice chair of the American Sustainable Business Council.



Thursday, June 28, 2012

Obamacare ruled to be constitutional


Today marks an extraordinary day for American small businesses. The positive measures under the Affordable Care Act that began in 2010 will continue to benefit our small businesses, the engine of America’s economy.
The new law has already helped hundreds of thousands of small businesses, many of which are based here in South Carolina, through healthcare tax credits. 2014 will bring an insurance marketplace that will create more competition among insurance companies to drive down premiums. Fewer people without insurance will curtail cost shifting that results in those with health insurance paying higher premiums. When the ACA is fully implemented, small businesses will finally be paying the same rates as big corporations.

Today is a great day for small businesses in the United States.
The only concern with the Supreme Court ruling is that each state now has the option of not expanding Medicaid to 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Small business will benefit from the expansion because to do so will reduce the number of employees needing to be covered by a company’s healthcare plan and thus reducing the cost to the business. But that fight is for tomorrow. 

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

SC Small Business Chamber President to Testify in Washington Today


Frank Knapp, Jr., president and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce will testify in Washington, DC at the House Committee for Small Business today at 1 p.m. The hearing is entitled,  Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance: Is EPA Failing Small Business?

Mr. Knapp will be representing both the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce and the American Sustainable Business Council of which he is vice chair.

The hearing will examine whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is complying with the Regulatory Flexibility (RFA). The RFA requires federal agencies to assess the economic impact of their regulations on small businesses, small non-profits, and small governmental jurisdictions and if the impact is significant consider alternatives that are less burdensome. The Committee will focus on specific RFA compliance issues in the context of several EPA regulations.

Also testifying are:

¨ Keith W. Holman, Legal and Policy Counsel, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Environment, Technology and Regulatory Affairs Division, Washington, DC
¨ Jeff Brediger, Director of Utilities, Orrville Utilities, Orrville, OH
Testifying on behalf of the American Public Power Association
¨ David Merrick, President, Merrick Design and Build Inc, Kensington, MD
Testifying on behalf of the National Association of the Remodeling Industry

Below are the prepared comments of Mr. Knapp for this hearing:

Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Velasquez, and members of the Committee, I am Frank Knapp, Jr., president, CEO and co-founder of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce and Vice Chair of the American Sustainable Business Council.  Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today.
The South Carolina Small Business Chamber is a statewide advocacy organization of 5000 plus members that promotes a more small-business friendly state and federal government.  
The American Sustainable Business Council founded in 2009 and its members now represent over 150,000 businesses and more than 300,000 entrepreneurs, owners, executives, investors and business professionals across the country. These diverse business organizations cover the gamut of local and state chambers of commerce, microenterprise, social enterprise, green and sustainable business groups, local living economy groups, women business leaders, economic development organizations and investor and business incubators.
I had the opportunity to read the testimony of Mr. Holman, representing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Mr. Merrick, representing the National Association of the Remodeling Industry, prior to preparing my comments.  I commend them for the civility of their remarks and their focus on the Regulatory Flexibility Act as it pertains to the Environmental Protection Agency. 
Both gentlemen recognized the importance of the Regulatory Flexibility Act for insuring that regulations are reviewed to determine if they are too burdensome for small businesses and if the goal of regulations can be achieved in alternative methods.  They pointed out some instances where the business community and the EPA didn’t agree.  But they also point out successful RFA stories. 
In 2004 my South Carolina organization worked with our South Carolina Chamber and NFIB to pass our Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act modeled after the federal law.  Last August the then chairman of the South Carolina Small Business Regulatory Review Committee told me that over the previous seven years his committee had reviewed about 300 proposed regulations and identified only ten that raised their concern.  His Committee worked with the state agency promulgating these new regulations and satisfactorily resolved the issues.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act has created an effective process to protect small businesses even if the process itself needs some attention from time to time. 
Mr. Holman correctly identifies one area where the EPA’s compliance with the RFA can be improved—more resources for the rulemaking process.   While there are voices we hear in Washington critical of the EPA and calls for cutting back or freezing the regulatory process, the reality is that it can work better for small businesses and the public if the EPA was better funded.
With more resources the EPA can do a better job of meeting the requirements of the RFA to the benefit of small business.  However more resources for the EPA would not only allow the agency to be more efficient and effective in complying with the RFA, it would also enable the organization to do a better job of protecting the public’s and environment’s health while unleashing entrepreneurial innovations and creating jobs.
Every responsible new rule that protects the health of our citizens and workers opens a door to newer and better products.  Our nation is loaded with these small business entrepreneurs just waiting to solve a problem when the demand is created. 
The Toxic Substance Control Act is so outdated and the EPA’s resources so strained that there are literally over 80,000 chemicals in the agency’s inventory but  it has been able to require testing for only about 200.  Just yesterday the state of California took the lead on investigating the health hazards of toxic flame retardant chemicals used in furniture and mattresses while not providing protection from fires.  The EPA should be examining this national health hazard but it doesn’t have the resources. 
Can the materials we sleep and sit on be non-toxic and still resist fire?  Absolutely.  Ask Barry Cik, owner of Naturepedic in Cleveland, Ohio.  Naturepedic manufactures baby and crib mattresses that provide proper support, meet government flammability requirements, provide waterproofing, seamless designs and other hygienic features all without the use of harmful chemicals or allergenic materials.  But instead of helping this innovative industry take off and making bedding healthier for families, we protect the use of carcinogenic chemicals of the past by not properly empowering the EPA with the needed legislative support and resources.
Then there is Bioamber, a bio-based chemical manufacturer. The renewable chemical industry with all its new jobs is on the launch pad.  But while it is developing technology and struggling to be profitable, it is laboring in the shadow of the old guard chemical giants churning out chemicals that avoid the inspection of an under-resourced EPA.  Reforming the Toxic Substance Control Act to produce stronger and clearer regulations on hazardous chemicals will result in hundreds of new Bioambers to grow a sustainable economy.
The public and small business owners want good regulations.  A recent national poll of small business owners conducted for the American Sustainable Business Council found that 80 percent support disclosure and regulations of toxic materials, 79 percent support ensuring clean air and water and 61 percent support moving the country towards energy efficiency and clean energy.
It is in this area that support for the EPA is vital not only to protect our health from toxic emissions and the high costs to our economy that results, but also to protect our existing small businesses from the negative effects of carbon emissions resulting in rising sea levels and more severe weather events, a very crucial issue for all and certainly our coastal areas in South Carolina.  Effective EPA regulations will drive a new energy economy that will create millions of new jobs, reduce energy costs and make our country truly energy independent.   That is the kind of economic impact that a properly supported and resourced EPA can have that will benefit all small businesses, not just the ones impacted by the RFA. 
Here is the question asked in the title of this hearing—“Is EPA Failing Small Businesses?”  The EPA’s compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act isn’t failing small businesses but it could do a better job of working with small businesses if, as Mr. Holman points out, it had more resources. 
Now is the moment to support the EPA to enable it to really live up to its potential to help our small businesses and our economy in promulgating fair and transparent regulations on toxic chemicals and air and water pollution.  In the same poll I mentioned above it found that 86 percent of small businesses see regulations as a necessary part of a modern market-based economy. The American Sustainable Business Council believes that we don’t have to choose between regulations to protect our health and environment and creating jobs to grow our economy. That is the old way of doing business. 

Our future prosperity is clearly tied to developing a sustainable economy through business innovation.  Businesses can take care of our people and environment and make a profit all at the same time.  And a properly supported and resourced EPA can help us get to this sustainable economy faster.

###

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Small businesses do not want Obamacare killed


So Thursday is the big day.  The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of the individual mandate of Obamacare. 
The critics of the healthcare reform have alleged that small business owners want the law totally repealed.  Below is a legitimate poll that disagrees.

Half of Small Business Owners Want Healthcare Law Upheld; Only One-Third Want it Overturned

Opinion polling released today shows 50 percent of small businesses believe the Supreme Court should uphold the Affordable Care Act, either as is or with only minor changes; poll finds strong support for key provisions in the law

June 14, 2012

Half of small business owners want the healthcare reform law upheld—either as is or with minor changes—while only one-third want the Supreme Court to overturn it, according to opinion polling released today by Small Business Majority. However, after learning more about the law, a clear majority (56 percent) want it kept intact with, at most, only minor changes.

The Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision any day in the case against the Affordable Care Act, filed by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) and state attorneys general. The polling of 800 small business owners in eight states (Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Texas and Virginia) found that once small business owners learn more about the law, their support for keeping it intact—either as is or with minor changes—rises to 56 percent, while opposition falls to just 28 percent.

“Contrary to popular belief, small business owners do not want the high court to throw out the Affordable Care Act,” said John Arensmeyer, Founder & CEO of Small Business Majority. “They see this law as helping everyone have coverage and bringing down healthcare costs—something that has been one of their top concerns for years. We hope Supreme Court justices understand how important this law is to small businesses who need relief from high healthcare costs.”

Key provisions of the law also have strong small business support, including one of the most crucial components for small businesses—the health insurance exchanges. The Affordable Care Act calls for exchanges—online marketplaces where small businesses can pool their buying power when purchasing coverage—to be up and running in every state by 2014. Sixty-six percent of owners say they would use their state exchange or consider using it to provide their employees with health benefits. The majority of entrepreneurs find potential features of the exchange very appealing, including employee choice (76 percent), the exchange educating employees about plans (74 percent), and the exchange providing plans that offer prevention and wellness programs (77 percent). Additionally, a strong majority (66 percent) of small businesses support their state applying for federal funds to set one up.

“Small businesses have been at the center of this lawsuit, and everything I hear is that they want it overturned. That’s not true for me, and it obviously isn’t true for the majority of my fellow entrepreneurs,” said Mark Hodesh, owner of Downtown Home and Garden in Ann Arbor, Mich. “I sincerely hope our Supreme Court justices listen to what real small businesses are saying about this law, not what a select few are saying for us, and that they uphold it. Going back to the status quo would be unthinkable.”

Other key findings from the poll:

  • 55 percent of small businesses who support upholding the law believe it should be kept because we need to make sure everyone has health coverage; more than one-third say it’s because it will make it easier to purchase insurance
  • 72 percent support the medical loss ratio requirement, where insurers are required to spend at least 80 percent of premiums on healthcare claims and quality improvement efforts
  • 65 percent support “rate review,” where state regulators are allowed to review and approve or reject insurers’ increases they deem excessive
  • 78 percent support prohibiting insurers from denying coverage based on preexisting conditions
  • 69 percent support preventing insurance companies from basing insurance rates on health status; 73 percent support preventing insurers from charging women higher rates than men
  • 69 percent favor allowing young people up to age 26 to stay on their parents’ plans
  • 55 percent of small business owners provide insurance to at least some of their employees, but of those who don’t offer it, 70 percent say it’s because they can’t afford it
  • Of small businesses who do offer benefits, respondents said the two most compelling reasons to offer were that they had a responsibility to offer (47 percent) and because it helps retain good employees (47 percent)
  • Of the small businesses who qualify for a tax credit under the law, but were not taking advantage of it, nearly half (46 percent) said they weren’t using it because they were not aware it existed
  • Nearly half of all small businesses (49 percent) said they’d be more likely to offer insurance if they qualified for a tax credit and the same percentage said they’d be more likely to purchase insurance through an exchange if they could receive a tax credit
  • 51 percent of small businesses are interested in establishing a workplace wellness program

Monday, June 25, 2012

A Time for Bold Action to Build a Sustainable Economy

The Huffington Post   
6/24/2012

By Lisa P. Jackson--chief administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
      David Levine--co-founder and CEO of the American Sustainable Business Council

For many years, we have been told that we have to choose between growing the economy and protecting the environment -- especially as we worked to recover from the sharp downturn of 2008. But this old way of thinking has been turned on its head in the 21st century, when our prosperity is clearly linked to environmental health and green innovation. Government entities like the EPA and industry leaders like the American Sustainable Business Council are showing that clean air, a safe water supply, and healthy places to live are key ingredients to economic growth. Today -- and in the years to come -- our economy is going to grow precisely because we are taking care of our environment, and the leading job creators are going to be companies that specialize in sustainability and the green economy.

This is a time for economic growth that taps the unmatched capacity for innovation and ingenuity in American businesses, and mobilizes entrepreneurs to foster an economy that's built to last. The 2012 State of Green Business Report found that "environmental sustainability efforts continue to grow," thanks to companies that are utilizing smart, cutting-edge business practices that benefit people and the planet, all while making a healthy profit.

The American Sustainable Business Council and its members now represent over 150,000 businesses across the country. They and many other businesses in all sectors are integrating energy efficiency, emissions reductions, safer chemicals, water conservation and other sustainability measures into their business decisions. Each day, we see more exciting new technologies that make cleaner, safer and more affordable products for consumers, while boosting profits for businesses, and attracting increasing interest from investors with $3.3 trillion privately invested worldwide since 2007.

Building a sustainable economy can also put U.S. businesses at the forefront of a growing, global market. By conservative estimates, in 2010 U.S. environmental technology firms generated $312 billion in revenue and supported 1.7 million American jobs -- including 61,000 small businesses. Worldwide, environmental technology is an $800 billion industry. And in the coming years, experts foresee significant 7 percent growth as developing countries begin to more seriously address environmental and social concerns for the long term.

To seize those opportunities, we will be highlighting American ingenuity, innovation and industry at Rio+20 in Brazil this week. The federal government and private sector sustainability leaders are connecting experts -- from business, finance, education, health and more -- with people and organizations eager to build cleaner and greener world economies.

The EPA and our federal government representatives will be working with international and private sector partners to help catalyze local investments in sustainable development. By sharing our expertise and building partnerships, we can make progress on everything from clean water to deforestation to greenhouse gas reduction.

At the same time, American businesses at Rio+20 are seeking opportunities to reach new markets around the world, and ways to sell products that will increase efficiency, save money, and promote economic growth at home and abroad. We have an opportunity to make our technology and products part of sustainable solutions all over the world.

Developing a green economy will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, make our communities healthier, and ensure that our Main Street businesses are more resilient. An economy that not only manages negative social and environmental impacts but encourages "triple bottom line" results -- for people, the planet and profits -- is an economy that's poised to succeed. We will reduce the risks of costly health problems like asthma, cancer and learning disabilities. Healthy, vibrant communities will attract new homebuyers and tourists. And innovative American companies will continue to bring solutions to consumers around the world.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-p-jackson/sustainable-economy_b_1622219.html

Friday, June 22, 2012

Obamacare delivers for South Carolina citizens and businesses once again

One important part of Obamacare passed in 2010 was a thing called the medical loss ratio.  Essentially it says that if at least 80% of the health insurance premiums collected by an insurance company do not go to paying for medical services then the policyholder is due a refund. 

As the story below indicates, South Carolinians can expect $19.6 million in premium refunds from their health inurance company.  Thanks to SCBIZNews.com for reporting this story. It appears that no one else did (except for me on my radio show yesterday).

But don’t be looking for your refund on overpayments of premiums if the National Federation of Independent Business succeeds in having the Supreme Court declare all of the healthcare reform bill unconstitutional.  If that happens next week, the insurance companies will just keep your money.

$19.6M in health insurance refunds due to S.C. consumers

The bulk of the refunds, about $15.3 million, will be going to 105,043 individual policyholders for an average of $227, the federal Department of Health and Human Services said. Another $4.3 million will go to small businesses that have group health plans.

By Chuck Crumbo
ccrumbo@scbiznews.com
Published June 21, 2012

About $19.6 million worth of refunds on health insurance premiums will be paid to S.C. individual policyholders and companies that provide the benefit, the federal Department of Health and Human Services announced today.
The refunds are being issued to meet the spending threshold established by the health care law, the agency said. Called the medical loss ratio, the threshold requires health insurers to spend at least 80% of premium dollars collected from individual policyholders and small businesses of two to 50 employees on health care, rather than business expenses. Carriers who write policies for large employers — those with 51 or more workers — must spend 85% of premiums on health care. In all cases, the insurance companies will be required to refund consumers.

In South Carolina, refunds will total $19,630,152 and will benefit 251,632 consumers, according to the agency. The average refund will be $131.
The bulk of the refunds, about $15.3 million, will be going to 105,043 individual policyholders for an average of $227, the agency said.

Another $4.3 million will be refunded to small businesses that have group health plans. The average refund for the group, which totals 145,401 employees, is $53.
Another $54,594 will go to large employers, the agency said. The group has 1,188 enrollees and the average refund will be $85, the agency said.

Fewer companies are in the large group market because most large employers are self-insured.
The refunds are to be mailed by Aug. 1, officials said.

An executive of BlueCross BlueShield of South Carolina, which has about 45% of the state’s share of health policies — individual and group — did not offer an overall total of refunds for consumers, but said refunds would average about $200.
Actual refund amounts will depend on terms of the plans and the length of time someone has been enrolled in the plan, said Jim Deyling, president of BlueCross BlueShield of South Carolina.

Humana, which is ranked among the state’s top five health insurance carriers, did not have a dollar amount on its rebates.
“I can tell you the company is preparing to issue rebates to policyholders (generally employer groups or members enrolled in individual Humana medical plans), where appropriate, by the Aug. 1 deadline,” said spokeswoman Nancy Hanewinckel.

For those enrolled in group plans, the refunds will be sent to the employer, Deyling said. It will be up to the employer to decide what to do with the money.
BlueCross BlueShield of S.C. serves about 10,000 firms in the small group market that will be eligible for the refund. None of the company’s large group clients will receive a refund because their medical costs exceeded 80% of premiums collected.

BlueCross BlueShield of S.C. has about 60,000 individual policyholders, he added.
According to the federal agency, the employer can:

  • Send a check for the full amount to the employee.
  • Provide a lump-sum reimbursement to the same account that was used to pay the premium if it was paid by credit or debit card.
  • Offer a direct reduction in future premiums.
Before people run out and spend their rebates, Deyling said the issue could be moot if the U.S. Supreme Court throws out the health care law.

“If the federal law is struck down in total it’s as if the law didn’t exist,” Deyling said, noting that the court is expected to rule soon on the law. BlueCross BlueShield of S.C. then would have to decide what to do with the refund money.
“If they strike down the law then the rebates are null and void,” Deyling said. “What we are planning on doing is to take hard look at what we would do with regards to rebate. We could take the rebates and decide to reinvest them. Eventually, what’s going to drive our thinking on what action we can take is what’s in the best interest of all of our customers.”

For now, the company is “operating under the assumption that the law stays in place,” Deyling said.