Triple the impact of your holiday dollar$

With the holiday season fast approaching and customers getting ready to open up their wallets, this is really the time to remember your SC locally-owned small businesses.

Please join us in our “BuySC” nonprofit action campaign. Surveys continue to show that communities with programs encouraging buying from locally-owned businesses improve the sales for those businesses during the holidays. When customer awareness of these programs is high, they seek out locally-owned businesses for their shopping and purchases. It’s just that simple.

And not only do the locally-owned retailers benefit, their communities benefit in a very tangible way.

®© Cinda Baxter, 2009. All rights reserved. Used here with permission.

All studies indicate that your spending dollar has THREE TIMES the economic impact on your local economy when you buy from a locally-owned business than if that same dollar is spent at a big box store or national chain with out-of-state ownership.

You hold the key to growing your local economy and it is right in your wallet.

The nonprofit SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce isn't alone -- there are a number of "shop local" campaigns out there, from Lowcountry Local First and the SCDA's Certified SC Grown program to The 3/50 Project, which inspired our new Buy SC "Local Has It" quarterly action campaign.

TRIPLE THE BANG FOR YOUR BUCK in leading us out of these recessionary times without spending any more money during this holiday season and all year. Just make your purchases from a SC locally-owned small business.

If you need help, we’re building our BuySC.org website directory for consumers to find locally-owned small businesses. These business owners believe in the power of keeping our money in local economies.






If you believe and want to TRIPLE the impact of your money to help, start now. Shop with SC locally-owned businesses and watch your local economy grow.

Walmart on steroids

If you, like everyone else, are tired of all the negative political ads, take solace in the fact that they’ll be gone next Wednesday.

But unfortunately, what will stay with us is an outright attack on our democracy. Our “government of the people, by the people and for the people,” thanks to the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, might now be better called “government of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation.”

And by “corporation,” I’m not talking small businesses. I'm talking about giant special interest, multinational companies that brought us these beauties:

Image: NyeGateway.com

• The Gulf oil disaster
• The financial crisis that led to the recession
• Skyrocketing health insurance premiums
• Jobs exported overseas
• Bloated military budgets to fight unnecessary wars

These corporations have been given the green light to spend all the money (actually their customers' money) they want to influence our elections, while not letting the voters know who is paying for the ads—most of which are negative—or being accountable for the truthfulness of the messages.

Total spending -- by candidates, political parties and special interests -- has topped $3.2 billion and is likely to hit $4 billion when reports detailing last-minute donations and spending are tallied, according to a study released Wednesday by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. That would obliterate the record $2.85 billion spent in 2006, the last midterm elections. Read more….

For the small business owner who might think that these giant multinational companies have their best interest at heart, you’ve been suckered into voting against your future.

Think Walmart on steroids.

####

Want to do something about it?

1. Vote this Tuesday, November 2
2. Join us for our next BuySC Micro-Conference, Wed., Nov. 10 (details below)
3. Shop local on Nov. 20, 2010, Happy Hardware Day!

The SC Small Business Chamber presents the next installment of our BuySC Micro-Conference series:

Keith Spiro: 5 Steps to Business Freedom
 

When: November 10th, 2010
Where: 701 Whaley, Olympia Room (2nd floor), 701 Whaley Street, Columbia, SC 29201

Time: 6pm - 8pm

Price: Free for paying SCSBCC members / $5 Basic Members /$10 for non-members.  Click here to register and buy your tickets now. 

Want to save $5? Become a BuySC member at the "free" level and your ticket is half price. Why? Because we're a non-profit, and we want to unite SC's small business community.

Copy this digital poster to use on your Facebook, blog, website, wherever!

Our locally-owned, independent hardware stores need us more than ever. Let's support them!

How SCE&G Rate Hike Was Cut Nearly in Half

The Saluda Dam

On Wednesday, the S.C. Public Service Commission (PSC) approved an electric rate hike for SCE&G that was 48.75% less than the company’s request.

The 4.88% increase instead of a 9.52% hike was good news for all SCE&G customers, including small businesses. The increase will take place over 3 years instead of the proposed 12 months.

Intervention Matters
This was my 5th time intervening in an SCE&G rate hearing and the 5th time seeing significant cuts from original rate hike filings (43% in 2002, 49.4% in 2004, 20% in 2005 for natural gas, 35% in 2007). SCE&G has had other rate increases to cover the increased cost of fuel but those are pass-throughs so the company does not profit.

Catching the Same Breaks as the Big Guns
The S.C. Office of Regulatory Staff (ORS) has been a valuable asset to the Small Business Chamber in our efforts to keep utility bills as low as possible. They were particularly instrumental in the negotiations for this case in helping with my request to defer $3 million of the rate hike for small businesses from the first year of the increase to the second year in hopes for a better economy. SCE&G had intended to offer larger utility customers this break.

Small business customers of SCE&G will now see only a 1.35% (instead of 2.23%) increase in the first year, 2.52% the second year and 1.01% the third year.

At my request, SCE&G has also stated its intention to look more favorably on small businesses in future proposed adjustments—to make our rate more equitable compared to other classifications. The new rates moved us in that direction, although we’re not there yet.

Different Factors at Play -- This Time Around
But while we have seen reductions in rate hike requests as large as this one, the contributing factors were a little different.

In my radio interview with Dukes Scott, Executive Director of ORS, he pointed out the very diverse group of official parties to the case opposing the rate hike was important.

Large industrial, big retail, small business, conservationists, non-profits, and private citizens all were at the negotiating table—a richer mix than usual.

Wide Variety at Hearings Sealed the Deal
Then there were the very important public hearings. In addition to the Small Business Chamber, non-parties to the SCE&G case—including AARP-SC, S.C. Appleseed Legal Justice Center and S.C. Fair Share—sent e-mail blasts to their members encouraging attendance at hearings. Scott particularly cited AARP’s efforts in turning out large crowds at the hearings.

“I know that the testimony from the consumers at the night hearings was so important to us for getting a further reduction than I think we could have gotten without them,” Scott told me.

Workers’ Comp Rates to Drop Big

Where was that headline 11 days ago? 

On June 10^th, the S.C. Department of Insurance put out a media advisory saying that its Director, Scott Richardson, had approved an overall 9.8% decrease in worker’s compensation insurance rates (technically the cut was to something called “Loss Costs in the Voluntary Market” but I don’t want you to quit reading).

A 9.8% cut!!!!!!  In his economy this is great news for small business but I don’t know that any of our daily newspapers reported the story.

In 2005, a 32.9% hike in workers’ comp insurance was proposed, and in 2007, a 27.7% increase was put on the table.  Several South Carolina dailies reported these stories primarily because the big business organizations pushed the news as proof that reform was needed and claimant attorneys were driving up premiums.

“Blame the lawyers, not obscene insurance company profits,” they said.

But when it came time to fight these rate hikes in court, the big business organizations were nowhere to be found. 

Only The S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce and the State Consumer Advocate went before a judge to successfully fight the proposals.  Turned out that lawyers weren’t responsible for increased costs at all – and the judge dramatically reduced the proposed rate hikes to 18.7% (http://www.scsbc.org/view_press.asp?id=199) and 9.8% (http://www.scsbc.org/view_press.asp?id=256)  respectively.

So why did no reporter in the state pick up this very important, good news story about our businesses possibly saving big on future workers’ comp premiums?

Two reasons. 

First, there are far fewer reporters at our daily papers, as I pointed out in Monday’s blog.  This is especially true for pure business reporters.  The remaining ones simply don’t have the time to find and report every important story.  And, I hate to say this, but there might be no business reporter in South Carolina that knows enough about workers’ comp insurance to even understand how rates are determined.   I only found out about this 9.8% cut from Mike Whiteley of Workcompcentral.com in Texas.

Second, big business unfortunately sets the tone for what is a business story in this state and they had no interest in pushing this good news.  A cut in insurance rates doesn’t fit their tort reform story line.   “Only by cutting lawyers’ compensation can we ever reduce insurance premiums,” they scream year after year.   Ooops.

The reality is that while some reform in the civil justice system might be needed, it isn’t the lazy, ineffective kind of simply capping damage awards and lawyer compensation.  But that’s a story for another day.

Today’s message is this:

1. There are not enough hard news reporters at our dailies, and
2. There’s an undeserved big business special interest influence on reporters.

Both are keeping you from really being informed – and that’s not good news. 

The Mainstream Media's Epic Fail: Alvin Greene and the 2010 Primary

"I think the ultimate story that…should come out here is this is a major failure on the part of the media."  - Dan Cook, Editor, Free Times, Columbia SC, in radio interview on U Need 2 Know, WOIC (1230 AM,) June 17, 2010. 

Dan nailed it.  He was talking about the real story behind the Democratic U.S. Senate primary victory of Alvin Greene.  

Very few in the print media covered the contest the way that a U.S. Senate race deserves, until of course, it was too late to inform the electorate about the qualifications of Mr. Greene and his opponent Vic Rawl.  (My focus is on the print media because I hold them to a much higher standard for reporting the news.  Most electronic news is just ripping and reading what the print media has already reported or very shallow coverage dictated by the medium itself.  Bloggers might be the only exception.)

And depending on the results of the GOP Gubernatorial runoff, Dan’s comment might apply there also. 


Candidate Nikki Haley’s entire, long campaign has been about total transparency of a legislator’s voting record and income so that the public will know who they are really representing in the General Assembly. 


She garnered 49% of the Republican primary vote on that platform.

  "I knew her to be a connected person who had access to a lot of folks and information, and in my business, that sort of information is critical to get ahead." 
- Bob Ferrell, Wilbur Smith


Now only five days before the runoff she has been exposed as playing the same good ol’boy money games she has been sanctimoniously carping about.  Several years ago the Columbia engineering firm Wilbur Smith contracted with Representative Haley for one purpose only—information.  "I knew her to be a connected person who had access to a lot of folks and information, and in my business, that sort of information is critical to get ahead,” said Bob Ferrell of Wilbur Smith. (CNN’s “Political Ticker” Blog, 6/18/10)

Representative Haley wasn’t privy to this valuable information because of her family’s clothing business or her husband’s military service or her volunteer work for her church (whichever) or PTA.  The information she had was due solely to her serving in the South Carolina General Assembly.  Period.

Huffmon, courtesy ETV

John O’Connor, a print reporter with The State, finally broke the initial story on Representative Haley that has been hiding in plain view if anyone would have had the time to look for it earlier when it might have mattered to primary voters.

Scott Huffmon, political science professor at Winthrop University, agrees.  “This could have helped tarnish Nikki’s image three months ago, but not at this point.” 

I’m not criticizing our state’s print reporters.  There simply aren’t enough of them.   


Every daily in this state – heck, across the country – has cut their hard news staff to save money. 


Brent Nelsen, unsuccessful GOP primary candidate for S.C. Superintendant of Education, spotted this problem in his contest.  

“The media need to play a more active role in sorting through candidates," notes Nelsen. "The state’s financially strapped newspapers have cut back the number of reporters writing articles and opinion columns on politics.”

Most of the hard news reporters remaining hardly have time to look behind a press release to really understand the complexities of an issue.  Being able to do real investigative reporting is probably what most aspire to, but there is no time when your editor keeps handing you more and more story assignments to turn around by press time that day.

“The media need to play a more active role in sorting through candidates." - Brent Nelsen

Our reporters have simply been beat down, grateful to still have a job and looking for that one break that can help them escape a collapsing industry.

The consequences of all this are more than just Alvin Greene and Nikki Haley; the public is missing important stories on government and business every day.  In fact, I’ll share with you one of those stories in my next blog post here at UnConflicted.

Governor's Small Biz Veto Overridden

First, the good news:

The House in action, Courtesy SCETV

Overridden!

The House voted Wednesday to override Governor Sanford’s Veto #14 of the Small Business Development Center’s budget and the Senate followed suit today.

The small businesses of this state greatly appreciate the House and Senate votes and send special thanks to Rep. Dwight Loftis and Rep. Anton Gunn. More about them later.

Low Profile, Major Significance
The media has so far overlooked the House vote on Veto 14 and instead has focused on the higher profile overrides that allowed funding for DHEC, technical colleges, the State Museum and others. But all of us who worked very hard to save the SBDC budget need to understand the importance of that vote because it was the first veto override the House permanently agreed to.

House Floor Play-by-Play

As the House began taking up the budget vetoes Wednesday morning, there were a lot of nervous and glum faces in the lobby, mine included. As the House voted on the electronic board, it quickly became clear that red—the color on the board indicating a vote to sustain a veto—was going to dwarf green—the color to override. Only one veto was overridden out of the first 13 but even that one was quickly reversed.

I was not optimistic.

Every sports fan knows that when your team is being routed, something needs to happen to break the momentum of the game. Most often the easiest thing to do is call a timeout and refocus the attitude of the players.

Skelton's Word of Caution
With the House clearly in the mood to sustain Sanford’s vetoes (see The State newspaper's blog updates from Tuesday), Representative B.R. Skelton (R-Pickens) took the podium just before Veto 11 and urged his fellow members to consider the consequences of their votes. He cautioned the body that the next several votes involved critical elements of economic development for the state.

Smith (D)

Following Mr. Skelton to the podium was Representative James Smith (D-Richland) who chastised the House for sustaining vetoes dealing with education, healthcare and clean rivers funding yet overriding a veto for money going to consultants (the House immediately reconsidered that vote and the board quickly switched to red). Mr. Smith joined Mr. Skelton in calling for more thoughtful voting.

Several more votes lit up the board to sustain and then it was time for #14. Good fortune struck. The mood was still red but the House’s attention was diverted to deal with a non-budget bill.

Veto 14 was now up for a vote.

Loftis (R)

Loftis Goes for the Green
Representative Dwight Loftis (R-Greenville) took to the podium. Mr. Loftis has been a supporter of small business, and earlier I had asked if he would have my letter arguing for keeping the funds for the SBDC placed on each member’s desk.

He not only agreed to do that but also said that he would speak in favor of an override vote. And that he did, eloquently stating the case for maintaining the budget for the only state agency providing direct and tangible services to our small businesses and entrepreneurs.

Gunn (D)

Gunning for the Override
Following Mr. Loftis to the podium was an old friend and advocate for small business, Representative Anton Gunn (D-Richland). He too cited the benefits of the SBDC telling of his own family’s use of their services.

The red spell had been broken, and the message of support for our small businesses and economic development took hold. Green lit up the board 102 times to only 15 reds—an amazing turnaround (just look at blogger Brad Warthen's exchange with House Majority leader Kenny Bingham on June 13, 2010.)

A Shift in Momentum
Sure, the House sustained many more vetoes (see FitsNews) after that crucial vote. But the momentum had been altered. It was OK to push green when merited. Lighting did not strike. No electric shock came with pressing the button. Even GOP Gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley voted green with us.

It was clear that not every Sanford veto was justified. The Governor had made errors in judgment and the House not only had the power, it had the responsibility for the good of the State to say so. And it did.

Thanks to all who contacted their House and Senate members asking for an override of Veto #14. All the efforts paid off.

And thanks to the members of the Legislature for doing the right thing.