Phrases that might have no meaning to your grandchildren: having a “fat wallet,” offering “a penny for your thoughts,” and the notion of “stacking paper.” The question “can you change a dollar?” one day not too far off may be more of a philosophical one.
Credit and debit cards have slowly been overtaking cash for many purchases for decades. And now, new technology has broadened the ways people can pay without having to carry paper money and coins (and pay ATM fees), potentially hastening the decline of cash.
If, or when, greenbacks will be obsolete remains uncertain. But the change is speeding up, and lawmakers are starting to push back against early adopters of what looks to be a coming societal shift.
The laws so far are mostly local and aimed at merchants. Some major cities, including San Francisco and Philadelphia, have prohibited stores from going cashless. Others, including New York, and Washington D.C., are considering it.
New Jersey recently passed a law requiring merchants to accept cash. The Garden State joined Massachusetts, which has had such a law for years. And Congress now has two bills that would require brick-and-mortar stores to accept good, old-fashioned bills and coins.
The argument is primarily about equity – not everyone has access to credit and online tools, and a cashless society could leave some farther behind.
In that regard the U.S. is far behind. Elsewhere, the move has already been made.
From China’s enormous cities to Africa’s rural villages to Sweden, where cash makes up only about 1 percent of the value of purchases, other places have been moving away from physical currency for years. In Chinese cities, restaurant servers ask patrons which app they’ll use, not whether they’ll pay with an app.
“Almost everyone in major Chinese cities is using a smartphone to pay for just about everything,” the New York Times noted two years ago.
But in the United States we are, you might say, still mostly nickel and diming each other.
With one new notable exception, the American moves toward virtual monetary exchange have been minimal: a few small coffee chains here, a taqueria there. It’s one Starbucks location in Seattle, a few fast-casual restaurants in hipster parts of big cities, some no-attendant parking garages.
One chain that did go mostly cashless (except in Massachusetts) is salad purveyor Sweetgreen. The company said making customers pay with a card or app prevents robberies – no cash, no robbers. Cash also presented an efficiency problem. Food handlers can’t touch dirty cash, and donning gloves takes time, so you need separate cashiers.
But while adoption has been slow, with changing technology, and more people becoming comfortable using mobile apps, the idea is picking up steam.
One huge new industry – ridesharing - is starting to make the no-cash economy normal. Uber and Lyft riders can’t pay with cash, familiarizing millions of people, especially the young, with a new norm. And one of the country’s biggest retailers, Amazon, already likely the largest cash-free seller because of its online merchandising, has also now opened a few “Amazon Go” grocery stores. There, customers using its app can simply walk out of the store with merchandise and have the cost automatically deducted from their account.
Now Facebook, which counts about a third of the world’s population as users, said recently it will partner with financial tech firms, including PayPal and MasterCard, to launch a new digital currency called Libra, aimed at further helping people pay in new ways.
Many of those merchants trying to go cashless say, like Sweetgreen, it’s because it benefits the merchant.
“We spend a lot of time counting and recounting cash,” Phil Van Overeem of Doomie’s NextMex restaurant in Los Angeles says in a video created by credit card company Visa. “If time is money, cash is expensive.”
Others say they’re ditching cash because their customers don’t use it anyway.
But with the idea of going cashless starting to gain a bit of momentum in the U.S., has come a grassroots no-cash backlash.
Critics say eliminating the ability to pay with bills and coins discriminates against those who don’t have a bank account, can’t get a credit card, or don’t have a mobile phone or account for paying with apps.
“A lot of these people are the working poor who go to work every day, earn low wages, get their checks cashed at a check-cashing place, and need that cash to go buy groceries and food,” New Jersey Assemblyman Paul Moriarty (D), who pushed for New Jersey’s new law, told WHYY Radio. The law took effect the day Gov. Phil Murphy (D) signed it in March.
Or as D.C. councilmember David Grosso, who is trying to require cash acceptance there, said when introducing his bill, “These are customers who could otherwise afford the simple luxury of a glazed treat from District Doughnut in Union Market, though they may not have the ability to obtain a credit card.”
Some may be left out of a new cashless world more than others. The young often don’t have bank accounts, the old sometimes don’t have smart phones and aren’t comfortable with the new technology. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation reported in 2017 that more than 10 percent of African-Americans and Hispanics in the United States, and about 6.5 percent of all households, don’t have bank accounts.
“What if you’re homeless, what if you’re undocumented?” asks New York City Councilman Ritchie Torres in a Facebook video in which he talks about his effort to ban cashless retailers there.
The country’s traditional means of exchange, he says, is already open to all.
“If you open a dollar bill, it reads ‘This note is legal tender for all debts, public or private,’” Torres says. “The language couldn’t be clearer.”
San Francisco makes the point in the text of its ordinance, called the “Legal Rights for Legal Tender Ordinance,” saying the measure is needed because “the City strives to empower all of its residents to participate in San Francisco’s economic life.”
While the backlash has been patchwork so far, this year two members of Congress introduced federal legislation seeking to require brick-and-mortar stores to take cash. One is called “The Cash Should Always Be Honored Act,” the other is “The Payment Choice Act.”
The backlash also is being seen in some countries much further along in phasing out cash. In Sweden, the first country to use banknotes back in the 17th Century, officials say the country may be entirely cash-free by 2023, and they worry it will get there without plans for what to do if the power grid goes down, for example.
In the U.S., while some small merchants may say cash has problems, D.C.’s Councilman Grosso sees a profit motive behind the flight from currency. He says payment companies are pushing the cashless movement because they make money on transaction fees.
“This has been a nationwide trend, backed in some instances by credit card companies like Visa, which have provided short-term funding to businesses that agree to stop accepting cash from their customers,” Grosso said when he introduced this year’s legislation.
The National Retail Federation generally opposes the laws requiring cash, as a matter of choice for merchants. And in a country where cash is still so widely accepted, they seem an unnecessary burden, says federation Vice President J. Craig Shearman.
“We really believe these proposals are a solution in search of a problem,” Shearman told State Net Capitol Journal. He said cash is still used in 30 percent of retail purchases and more than half the time for small purchases. Cashless stores just aren’t widespread, he said. But also, it’s a business choice.
“Retailers should have a right to choose which payments to accept,” Shearman said. “States and local governments and Congress should allow merchants and their customers to use what works best.”
It also may be worth noting that merchants have already reacted in some cases to the backlash against going cashless - without the force of law. That’s what happened at Sweetgreen, which after criticism decided to go back to taking cash by the end of this year.
“We have realized that while being cashless has advantages, today it is not the right solution to fulfill our mission,” company officials wrote in a blog post. “To accomplish our mission, everyone in the community needs to have access to real food.”
-- By SNCJ Correspondent Dave Royse
There is a difference between brand identity and corporate identity but finding the latter may prove to be more difficult than reading the name on a label. While the average consumer in a retail store may not know—or indeed have a desire to know—who owns each product in their shopping cart, there are legitimate reasons why the matter of corporate ownership may become important.
Whether by a series of opportune mergers and acquisitions, the planned purchase of an entire supply chain, or through strategic efforts to saturate a given category, the portfolio of brands a parent company may own can be confusing—if not nearly impossible—to track down.
This can create a challenge for researchers trying to match brands to corporations or a local sales manager to their global c-suite leaders. Consider the difficulty an academic researcher might have evaluating potential conflicts of interest whenever any given funding source could have financial interest in dozens of varying industries. In other cases, one industry behemoth may have acquired most—if not all—of the supply chain. How might a small- or mid-sized competitor evaluate that and engage with potential suppliers without the risk of supporting their primary competition?
Navigating the web of corporate ownership and affiliation can be complex, but there are certain paths to take to find clarity.
Activities that bring varying brands under new parent company ownership often attract some level of media attention—even smaller acquisitions tend to get listed in local business publications. For much larger companies, however, M&A activity is likely to be covered heavily in local, national and industry-specific news.
Determining the parent company of a certain product or organization can often require looking beyond the current news cycle. A parent company may have made headlines for acquiring a brand a decade ago, but that brand could still operate the same today with little or no mention of its parent entity.
Duracell—the worldwide battery company with headquarters in the United States and Switzerland—is an example of how this happens. While the brand itself has existed continuously since the 1920s, there have been many changes in its ownership that might be hard to track, especially when only evaluating today’s reporting on the company.
The current owner of Duracell, Berkshire Hathaway, Inc., is a clear example of the diverse holdings a single company today may own. Beyond batteries, the company operates in industries as varied as insurance, building materials, food condiments and media outlets. While stories from the time of its acquisition of Duracell provide context to better understand the details of the Berkshire Hathaway transaction, even stories published in highly specific battery-industry trade journals don’t mention the brand’s ownership today.
Belgian beverage company Anheuser-Busch InBev has practically stacked the shelves in their favor when it comes to global beer consumption. While beer brand loyalists may feel a competitive rivalry between what they consider domestic or imported, craft or classic, many of these beer brands—as diverse as Budweiser, Corona and Stella Artois—originate from this same parent company.
In fact, owning seemingly competing products in the same category isn’t all that uncommon. U.S.-based Proctor and Gamble owns two diaper brands, at least four fabric detergents, multiple shampoos and several competing detergents and cleaners… among many others. This is an “illusion of choice” that often goes unnoticed by consumers.
For researchers, the challenge comes from finding quality source materials that bypass branding in favor of data.
Researching corporate ownership may feel a lot like genealogy and following the trail of corporate affiliation can certainly branch out like a family tree. One brand’s parent company can have another parent company that is held by yet another organization on top of that. This can go on for many “generations,” and can potentially complicate research. Especially as partially owned companies, sister companies and joint partnerships come into play, bypassing information geared toward consumers and looking at more direct industry filings can prevent research from being derailed by chaos.
The information exists, but finding it can be difficult. Public financial records, regulatory disclosures, press releases and investor reports all disclose information that—when analyzed together—can help determine corporate affiliations. Additionally, researching executive and board staffing can provide hints to corporate affiliations as well. While many legal entities can exist in the chain of corporate ownership, because they have unified operations, they will often have the same people in positions like chief executive or chairperson.
Using research tools that bring these information sources together can help make the corporate ownership research process less manual than mapping out an entire corporate tree and scouring company biographies and announcements.
Is your corporate compliance program up to scratch? That question will be top of mind for global organizations as they analyze recent guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on evaluating the effectiveness of compliance programs. The detailed guidance explains the features of robust compliance programs, highlighting factors from the importance of Board-level engagement to third-party due diligence.
A strong compliance program is good for business. It demonstrates ethical operations and helps manage financial, strategic, operational and reputational risk. One of the most tangible benefits, however, is the role compliance plays in meeting regulatory obligations.
This DOJ guidance is designed for prosecutors investigating cases brought under legislation such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Under the related Corporate Enforcement Policy, companies demonstrating an effective program at the time of the infringement, or one that has been established since, may be offered leniency in the form of reduced fines or lower monitoring requirements.
The cross-border reach of the FCPA and growing trend of collaboration between international enforcement agencies means businesses worldwide need to know what “effective” looks like to prioritize a culture of ethical operations and minimize penalties for misconduct.
Three “fundamental questions” to evaluate compliance program effectiveness
The DOJ guidance focuses on what it terms “three fundamental questions” that indicate a compliance program is functioning as a strong ongoing control over the risk of corporate corruption:
Is the corporation’s compliance program well-designed?
The program must accurately reflect the risks associated with the business. Policies and procedures must be comprehensive and consistently applied. Employees should receive training using relevant examples with access to a confidential system for reporting abuses. Misconduct reports must be investigated by a competent, well-resourced team. Crucially, the guidance states that “a well-designed program should apply risk-based due diligence to its third-party relationships…and comprehensive due diligence of any acquisition targets.”
Is the program being applied earnestly and in good faith?
Commitment to compliance must start with the Board, supported by senior and middle management. Appropriate resources and well-qualified personnel should be devoted to managing compliance and they should have the authority to act with autonomy. Incentives and deterrents should be in place to encourage compliance and ethical behaviour.
Does the program work?
The guidance recognizes that the existence of misconduct does not mean that a program was ineffective. Investigators will explore how the misconduct was detected, what analysis of root cause has taken place and what action has been carried out. Evidence of audit, testing, investigations and accountability are taken into account.
Third-party risk management
The DOJ guidance is very clear that an effective compliance program extends beyond the corporate perimeter.
Global businesses do not operate in a vacuum, but in an ecosystem of thousands of interconnected customers, partners and suppliers across multiple geographies. Each has potential to introduce risk to an organization and the company has explicit responsibility to identify, monitor and control that risk. This third-party risk management is a challenging aspect of anti-corruption compliance as it involves entities beyond the organization’s direct control. The FCPA blog notes that “Almost one in two enforcement actions concluded since the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention came into force in 1999 was the result of bribery through sales agents, intermediaries, distributors or brokers.”
The DOJ guidance emphasizes that the organization must understand the qualifications and associations of third-party suppliers and agents, particularly as these relate to foreign officials. There must be a clear business rationale for engaging with the third party and robust visibility of relationships and associations.
There are a variety of tools that can be used to achieve this ranging from subjective—supplier questionnaires and interviews—to objective—using independent intelligence platforms to access global data about the organisation and screening prospective partners against watchlists and politically exposed persons (PEPs) lists. A strong compliance team needs to employ internal and external sources to verify third-party claims and uncover any links or weaknesses that could pose a risk.
It is also important to recognize that third-party risk is constantly evolving. Compliance teams must establish a system of continuous monitoring that raises red flags as new risks are identified.
With complex supply chains and partner numbers in the thousands, this is a significant piece of work and organizations need to be efficient in allocating resources to the task. By taking advantage of automated risk monitoring where possible, the burden on compliance teams can be reduced and time unlocked for higher-value activities.
Setting the compliance bar high
The DOJ guidance provides excellent clarification on what is expected of today’s global corporations, leaving little doubt that compliance must be a watchword that starts with the Board and extends out through the partner and supply chain ecosystem. Implementing an effective corporate compliance program that covers third-party risk is a challenging undertaking, but with appropriate resources and tools, organizations can reap commercial benefits while reducing regulatory exposure.
Next Steps
The boss walks into your office and says, “I want to see this story on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.” They are talking about the new project or service your company has spent the last year developing. It’s the most promising launch the organization has seen in a while—and the company wants to announce its availability with a major media relations campaign that will set front pages on fire with excitement.
It’s a scene familiar to communications pros… and one that rightfully fills them with dread. While the common saying “advertisements are paid for, media is prayed for” isn’t exactly true, the notion that there is an element of earned media outside of your control couldn’t be more correct. You can have the perfect plan, most thorough media research using the best tools along with a killer outreach strategy and still fall short.
This is why expectation setting is an absolutely critical step at the beginning of any media relations effort. Before the first pitch is ever made, there must be accurate level setting with all stakeholders; Clients, executives, department heads and/or subject matter experts should all know that no one can control the news cycle… and that no matter how exciting the company announcement may be there are no guarantees in securing media placements.
But as any media relations pro knows, this can be easier said than done. While they may have the best of intentions, overly zealous stakeholders may have a hard time understanding the intricacies and uncertainty of earning media placements. To help, we’ve compiled some best practices to ensure everyone is starting with the same expectations.
Identify and Eliminate In-House Bias
For people who have spent the last year or more developing a product now ready to launch or fine-tuning a first-of-its-kind service that will disrupt an industry, that’s their world. To them, announcing the culmination of their efforts is the most important thing at that moment in time.
While this internal bias often manifests itself in enthusiasm—and that’s a good thing—it can also create an echo chamber in which it can be incorrectly assumed that the biggest news within an organization will be equally important for those on the outside.
Part of expectation setting includes focusing internal passion into a realistic plan.
The responsibility to help colleagues understand how a company’s announcement fits into the broader media environment falls on communications professionals. You have to be the voice of reason that is willing to challenge the “herd mentality” and provide the perspective of the outside world. It isn’t always an easy task, but doing it at the start of a media relations plan prevents a confrontation later in the process.
Promote Good News Judgement
A good sense of what is and isn’t newsworthy is a vital skill for those working in communications roles who intend to reach out to the media. It’s a skill that is crafted and perfected over time, but colleagues that you may be working with haven’t had the opportunity to perfect their news judgment. Part of expectation setting involves imparting some of that wisdom to them.
But thinking like a journalist requires more than a sixth sense. Judging what’s newsworthy (and what’s not!) requires evidence to back up instinct. Solid media research will definitively uncover the kinds of story angles, supporting materials, sources and announcements that stand the best chance of earning media coverage.
Taking this step can show the team how incredibly high the bar is, especially for national or global news coverage. You’re not just reaching customers or potential customers—the news must be relevant to the majority of a given outlet’s audience. In practice, this often means it must have the potential to impact the economy, enact a widespread change in consumer habits or provide some unique and insightful perspective on an ongoing global or national conversation.
Here’s an example: Rising student debt is currently a major conversation the world over, and companies that have started to offer benefits packages that help to payback student loans have earned major media coverage for their efforts. Normally, the minutiae of employee benefits might be deemed too “boring” for mainstream media, yet, because it inserts itself into a national conversation, it becomes a much more newsworthy topic.
Provide Valuable Alternatives
We’ve established that not every media plan can realistically earn primetime news coverage, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t an opportunity for other types of earned media. It’s the role of media relations professionals to help internal stakeholders see the bigger picture—and demonstrate the value—of earning media coverage in unfamiliar media outlets.
For example, consider quality over quantity. If your company announcement impacts only a specific population, or is targeted to a niche industry, a segment on CNN may not actually be the most strategic route. Local news outlets, business journals and trade publications often attract a targeted audience. While these media placements may not be reaching as many people as a splashy national media outlet, the quality will be much higher.
Communicate with your team to show them the value of pursuing these opportunities. In addition to a higher likelihood of securing coverage, these are valuable placements in terms of reach and influence. Metrics like reach, influence and MozRanking provide a quantitative analysis of an outlet’s value.
Most importantly, have these discussions up front. Be frank without being pessimistic and ensure consensus on how to measure success. Don’t promise any specific coverage and share timely updates. This open communication will set the foundation for a collaborative media plan in which all parties are part of the process.
One of Britain’s most famous art institutions has reversed a sponsorship deal after it was revealed that the sponsor’s owner had backed a ban on teaching LGBT issues. As art organizations, universities and non-profits become more reliant on sponsorship rather than government funding, they need to strengthen their due diligence procedures to mitigate reputational, financial and strategic risks.
A sponsorship U-turn
Last month, Britain’s biggest art prize excitedly announced that it had secured a sponsorship deal for a new exhibition with Stagecoach South East. It seemed a no-brainer for the prestigious Turner Prize to accept a large sum from a transport firm with no legal or financial red flags. Yet within twenty-four hours, it said the sponsorship deal would not go ahead after campaigners protested that the chairman of Stagecoach had backed a ban on teaching LGBT issues. It was pointed out that Sir Brian Souter backed a campaign to keep a law banning teachers discussing gay rights in schools 19 years ago.
This is a risk faced by more and more arts organizations. Public funding of the arts in the U.S., UK and many European countries has fallen in recent years, so these institutions are looking more to corporations and philanthropic individuals to support their work. But this brings greater due diligence requirements, and many organizations are simply not ready. The organizers of the Turner Prize, for example, admitted they did not know about Sir Brian’s views on gay rights when they signed the deal.
It is no longer good enough for these institutions to check the credentials of a company looking to sponsor them in a ‘box-ticking’ way. Indeed, the Turner statement pointed out that “the relevant legal and financial due diligence was observed.” Arts organizations must also ensure the personal values of a sponsor’s management and ownership are compatible with their own charitable objectives. This requires a detailed search of previous media coverage of the company, its ownership and management and, crucially, their social media accounts.
Universities risking their reputations
Another sector that should pay attention to the Turner Prize’s difficulties is universities because in the U.S. and parts of Europe they are also becoming increasingly reliant on philanthropy. Some of the biggest universities and arts institutions in the U.S., UK and France are currently facing significant media scrutiny for accepting gifts from the Sackler family, whose company Purdue Pharmaceuticals has been blamed for allegedly fueling the deadly opioid crisis in the U.S.
A recent article in the Washington Post called out the Sacklers’ beneficiaries, including Harvard, Cambridge, the Louvre and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in its headline: “Why haven’t major institutions cut ties with the Sackler family?” Some of these institutions pointed out that the Sacklers have not been legally convicted of the alleged actions, and that the institutions have already spent the money they received from the family. But this decision to hold firm could cost them in other ways as they seek to attract young people to study or visit. That’s because surveys show that millennials want to work and study somewhere that shares their ethical values.
Globalization brings added risks
The globalization of philanthropy adds another layer of complexity to the due diligence requirements of arts institutions and universities. Twenty years ago, most of their donors were local companies and individuals, but today institutions receive major gifts from donors in China, Russia and other countries which require extra due diligence checks.
For example, British universities including Oxford and King’s College London and the Photo London Art Fair recently faced demands from politicians and media to sever their ties to the Sultan of Brunei after his regime introduced a law which could make gay sex and adultery punishable by stoning to death.
As a result of the ease of making global transactions, the art world in particular has come to be used for money laundering. For a wealthy individual looking to turn their ill-gotten gains into legitimate assets, spending £20 million on a painting in a reputable gallery in London or New York is seen as a way to wash money gained from corruption and crime. Auction houses and galleries must take AML regulations into account in their compliance procedures.
What can organizations do?
Consider taking the following steps to mitigate the rising risks involved in accepting donations:
Arts organizations, universities and non-profits often rely on modest budgets, so they might be reluctant to increase their spending on compliance. But as recent headlines show, the reputational, financial, legal and strategic impact of lax risk management can be even more costly.
Take Action:
When multiple people or organizations bring their unique strengths together the results are often greater than what either could have achieved alone. The very best business partnerships have catapulted careers and fueled business growth. Partnership between brands can help reach new audiences, and professional partnerships form a relationship that pushes both sides to achieve more.
That’s not to say forming a partnership is without risk. While we can celebrate the best partnerships among us, there are countless examples of joint ventures that just didn’t turn out so well. Knowing this, it’s important to consider partnerships carefully before making them official. This means doing your research before signing on the dotted line. You may not be able to predict the future, but you can look to the past to see if partnership is doomed from the start. When you start researching, here are certain red flags that merit deeper consideration.
Entering into a partnership is a lot like marriage. In no small part, you’re forging your destinies and tying your reputation to theirs. Their successes become the new team’s successes, but their troubles might quickly become your nightmare.
Discovering that a partner has a complicated legal history—especially if this wasn’t previously disclosed—is a sign to tap the brakes before progressing a partnership forward. A long series of lawsuits, significant past judgements, liens, bankruptcies and criminal histories could all potentially point to a history of unethical behavior, poor judgement or blatant disregard for the law. At the very least, this sort of finding merits a conversation with a potential partner before you link your business to their past.
It’s not uncommon for successful business leaders to have multiple interests. Even corporate entities can be invested in a diverse mix of ventures outside of their primary industry. Executives often serve on many outside boards of directors. A partner with many interests isn’t a bad thing, so long as it doesn’t pose a conflict with your joint goals.
Conflicts of interest create situations where bias can cloud business judgement. Even if competing interests somehow didn’t affect a potential partner’s judgment, the appearance of a conflict can be just as bad. Those on the outside can see this as reason to lose faith or question their motives. This creates a cloud that can dampen any potential success a partnership might yield
Carefully research where a potential partner’s interests may compete with the goals you’ve laid out, and, when conflicts exist, move forward with complete transparency.
When it comes to partnerships, when they look bad, you look bad. Intentional or not, going into business with another person or group constitutes a tacit endorsement that can bolster or hinder your reputation.
Reputation impacts all parts of your business. A bad reputation can cause customers, employees, vendors and future partners to turn away. That’s why it’s so important that you don’t let your hard-earned reputation be tarnished by an ill-vetted partner.
The list of reputational risk factors is as diverse as it is ever-changing. A history of negative media coverage, poor corporate citizenship and a past negative or offensive social media comments can all resurface at any moment, creating the chance for a public relations crisis. Don’t wait to be caught off guard: research potential reputational risks well before making a partnership official.
Any good partnership will rely on open and honest communication, and research is the first step toward establishing the trust that makes it happen. In the early stages this type of research can, at best, validate optimism for a new joint-venture. At worst, it can save you from a potential disaster in the future. Either way, entering into a partnership without research is a risk not worth taking.
If politics appears at times to be a race to see who can be the most absurd, that’s because it often is. Case in point this week comes from Mississippi, where GOP gubernatorial candidate Rep. Robert Foster refused to allow a reporter from Mississippi Today ride along with his campaign. The two other contenders, former state Supreme Court Justice Bill Waller and current Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves, were fine with reporter Larrison Campbell tagging along with them, but Foster gave it a hard no because Campbell is – gasp! – a woman, and Foster is a’skeered that folks will think the two of them are carryin’ on! In a bit of Talibanesque logic, he said he would only agree if she was chaperoned...uh, accompanied...by a male reporter. So if Foster wins, we’ll presume no women need apply to work in his administration.
-- By RICH EHISEN
We ‘Mercans are nothing if not competitive. The latest example comes from Morgantown, Kentucky, where the Beech Tree News reports Mayor Billy Phelps gathered enough folks together to set the world record for the world’s biggest...wait for it...paper ball fight! Yes, the highlight of this year’s Green River Catfish Festival was 653 folks coming together to throw wadded up pieces of paper at one another. And while that might sound ridiculous to some, it absolutely blows away the previous record of 283 people set by a Canadian city a few years back. And if you don’t believe me, see it for yourself right here.
You have to admire the chutzpa of Wisconsin Sen. Chris Kapenga. As the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports, in order to get his vote on the recent state budget bill, his GOP colleagues had to insert an amendment to allow carmaker Tesla to sell their vehicles directly to consumers, something the powerful auto dealer lobby opposes the way dogs generally oppose cats. And why would an otherwise good Republican lawmaker like Kapenga demand such a thing? Could it be that he operates a business that sells salvaged Tesla cars and Tesla parts? Of course not, he says. The bill wouldn’t do anything to help his bottom line at all. Uh huh. No matter, as Gov. Tony Evers vetoed the amendment. Which we’re pretty sure was the Senate GOP leadership’s plan all along.
Drivers in Detroit have been singing along to Aretha Franklin tunes since the 1960s, but now they can honor the late, great Queen of Soul without massacring one of her classic songs in the process. As the Detroit Metro Times reports, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed a bill last week that designates a section of Motor City the “Aretha Franklin Memorial Highway.” It is always sad that we have to wait for someone to pass to honor their legacy – even one as towering and as lasting as the greatest female soul singer that has ever lived – but better late than never.
The US Conference of Mayors unanimously adopts a resolution proposed by BALTIMORE officials to not pay ransom demands to hackers following ransomware infections in their cities. The group noted that 22 municipalities have been hit with ransomware attacks in 2019 alone (ZDNET).
The ASPEN City Council adopts a resolution imposing a six-month waiting period on e-scooter and e-bike companies seeking operation in the COLORADO city. The transportation companies are already required to obtain a city license (ASPEN TIMES).
ATLANTA Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms signs legislation that bans smoking and vaping in restaurants, bars, workplaces, hotel rooms, the airport and other public places in the city. It takes effect on Jan. 2, 2020 (WBS-TV [ATLANTA]).
The CALIFORNIA Senate approves AB 392, which would limit the ability of law enforcement officers to use lethal force to only when officers or the public face an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. It moves to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who has said he will sign it (SACRAMENTO BEE).
HAWAII Gov. David Ige (D) allows HB 1383, a bill that decriminalizes possession of small amounts of marijuana, to become law without his signature. The law removes jail time as a penalty for possession of three ounces or less but does impose a $130 fine (VOX).
CONNECTICUT Gov. Ned Lamont (D) signs HB 7125, which among several things requires that health insurers not place more stringent limits on mental health and substance use disorder benefits than for medical and surgical benefits (CONNECTICUT GOVERNOR’S OFFICE).
WISCONSIN Gov. Tony Evers (D) signs SB 26, which establishes a clear appeal process that would enable a patient to bypass so-called “step therapy,” where insurance companies can force a patient to try cheaper treatment options before more expensive ones a doctor originally prescribed (FOX6NOW [MILWAUKEE]).
NEW JERSEY Gov. Phil Murphy (D) signs SB 716, which creates a rebuttable presumption for first responders suffering from diseases that have been known to be caused by chemicals, pathogens and other hazardous materials. The measure reverses a previous requirement that first responders prove that exposure to a chemical or substance while on the job caused their illness (BUSINESS INSURANCE).
The CALIFORNIA Assembly Business and Professions Committee kills SB 275, a Senate-approved bill that would have updated the state’s definition of sexual misconduct for health professionals. Committee Chair Assemblymember Evan Low (D) said the bill needed a “more holistic” approach (CALMATTERS [SACRAMENTO]).
CALIFORNIA Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signs AB 1054, legislation that, among several things, will require utility companies to undertake billions of dollars in wildfire prevention mitigations. The measure also extends a current fee on electricity to help create a $21 billion fund to compensate victims of future fires and ties future executive compensation to safety performance (CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE, LEXISNEXIS STATE NET).
The CALIFORNIA Assembly gives final approval to AB 1000, a bill that would require higher education institutions to review and update written procedures and protocols related to sexual assault and harassment each academic year in collaboration with sexual assault counselors and representatives of students, faculty, and staff. It moves to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) for consideration (LEXISNEXIS STATE NET).
NORTH CAROLINA Gov. Roy Cooper (D) signs HB 924, a bill that requires public high school students to pass an economics and personal finance class as a graduation requirement (NEWS & OBSERVER [RALEIGH]).
WISCONSIN Gov. Tony Evers Signs SB 152, which imposes regulations on e-scooters in the Badger State. Under the new law, e-scooters must weigh less than 100 pounds and abide by a 15 mile-per-hour speed limit. Local governments could prohibit e-scooter use on sidewalks or streets with speed limits above 25 miles per hour and restrict public rentals (FOX6NOW [MILWAUKEE]).
RHODE ISLAND Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) signs HB 5677, legislation that defines natural hair braiding and exempts braiders from the state’s requirement for hairdressers and cosmeticians to be licensed. The law goes into effect immediately (U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT).
CALIFORNIA Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signs AB 205, which updates the Golden State’s legal definition of beer to include varieties fermented with fruit, honey, spices or other foods (CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE).
The CALIFORNIA Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment and Retirement approves AB 5, which would establish a firm process for establishing whether a worker is an employee or a contractor (For more on this issue, see “California Bill Highlights Workers Misclassification Debate” in the June 28th SNCJ). The measure moves to the Senate Committee on Appropriations (LEXISNEXIS STATE NET).
Two dozen governors – including three Republicans – signed a letter to President Donald Trump last week urging his administration not to move forward on a plan to roll back auto emissions standards nationwide. The letter comes on the heels of a coalition of 17 automakers also urging Trump to back off on the plan, saying it would create an “untenable” split market and harm their bottom lines. Several states – including CALIFORNIA, the nation’s largest automobile market – and Canada have said they plan to continue enforcing the stricter standards currently in place. (NEW YORK TIMES, REUTERS, BOSTON GLOBE)
MASSACHUSETTS Gov. Charlie Baker (R) proposed legislation last week to enhance the safety of consumers using ridesharing services in the Bay State. Baker’s proposal would increase the sharing of anonymous data between transportation network companies and state regulators to improve traffic and infrastructure planning and make it illegal for an unapproved driver to use the account of a driver who has a valid license and background check. (CBS NEWS, STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVCE [BOSTON])
The COLORADO Secretary of State’s office gave a group seeking to recall Gov. Jared Polis (D) approval to begin circulating petitions aimed at getting a recall vote placed before voters this fall. Signature gatherers now have 60 days, until the end of business on Sept. 6, to submit 631,266 valid signatures from registered voters in order to get the recall on the November ballot. (DENVER POST)
OKLAHOMA Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) sent a letter to 35 Sooner State Native American tribes advising them current gaming compacts do not automatically renew and urging them to begin renegotiating those deals now. But that was news to Matthew Morgan, chairman of the Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association, who said the compacts will automatically renew for 15-year terms at the start of next year. (OKLAHOMAN [OKLAHOMA CITY])
NEW JERSEY Gov. Phil Murphy (D) issued Executive Order 74, which directs the state Department of Human Services and the Department of Labor and Workforce Development to advance immigrant and refugee integration initiatives, including the design of an Office of New Americans. The EO also establishes an Interagency Workgroup on New American Integration to create opportunities for coordination and implementation of strategies and actions to advance immigrant and refugee integration. (BURLINGTON COUNTY TIMES, NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR’S OFFICE)
Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) has committed $86 million from the sale of General Electric’s Boston headquarters to an effort to create more affordable Bay State housing.
Baker’s plan would commit $60 million toward the creation of approximately 500 new homes accessible to moderate-income, first-time home buyers. The remaining $26 million would go to develop 260 new workforce rental units.
“Since taking office, our administration has invested more than $1 billion into affordable housing, building and preserving tens of thousands of units for residents and families across the Commonwealth,” Baker said in a statement. “We are proud to add an additional $86 million of funding targeted towards middle-income families, and we will keep advocating for the passage of the Housing Choice legislation to boost the production of much-needed units.”
Baker’s effort comes while he is still working to convince lawmakers to take up his proposal to make it easier for cities and towns to waive local zoning restrictions for the creation of additional housing. He was able to make the new allocation without legislative approval because the money originally came from bond sales used to fund the redevelopment of the GE site.
State housing officials say most of the funding will be allocated to housing development in Boston’s urban core and in other “gateway” cities. (STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE [BOSTON], MASSLIVE)
Saying “There is no rationale why women should not get paid what men get paid,” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) signed a pair of bills last Wednesday designed to strengthen the Empire State’s wage equity laws.
Cuomo signed the measures at a parade for the Unites States Women’s National Team (USWNT), which won its record fourth FIFA Women’s World Cup soccer tournament earlier this month.
“You should get paid the same amount whatever the job is,” he said in a statement. “These are women’s soccer players. They play the same game that the men’s soccer players play. By the way, they play it better. They play it with better results. If there is any economic rationale, the men should get paid less than the women.”
The first measure Cuomo signed, SB 5248, codifies that members of legally protected classes, such as women and racial minority groups, receive the same pay as non-protected class employees for equal or “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility.”
Cuomo also signed SB 6549, which bars employers from asking potential employees about their salary history. The law expands on an executive order Cuomo issued last year that barred state entities from asking about salary history, a practice thought to be a major factor in suppressing the salaries of women and minorities. (NEW YORK GOVERNOR’S OFFICE, CNN)
NEW YORK Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (R) signed a bill last week that will allow the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and the Joint Committee on Taxation to access the President Trump’s New York state tax returns for any “specified and legitimate legislative purpose.” It was unclear whether the Trump administration would take legal action against the new law or if the congressional committees would make use of it, with some congressional Democrats fearing that could hinder their efforts to obtain the president’s federal returns. (NEW YORK TIMES)
GEORGIA election officials will no longer be able to throw out absentee ballots because of minor errors like a missing birth year or address, as a result of an election bill (HB 316) passed by the state’s General Assembly in March, resolving a pair of federal lawsuits. Election officials rejected almost 7,000 absentee ballots in November due to such infractions. (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION)
GEORGIA’s Court of Appeals ruled that documents maintained by the General Assembly and its offices are not subject to the state’s Open Records Act. The Institute for Justice, the libertarian public-interest law group challenging the legislature’s exemption from the open records law, said it would appeal the decision to the state’s Supreme Court. (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION)
NEVADA’s state Democratic Party will allow voters to choose their preferred presidential candidate by phone in the West’s first nominating contest next year. Voters registered by Nov. 30 will have to sign up for the tele-caucus between Jan. 1 and Jan. 15 and then call in with their selections on Feb. 16 or Feb. 17. (NEVADA INDEPENDENT [LAS VEGAS])
-- Compiled by KOREY CLARK
Last week Alaska legislators gathered at the state Capitol in Juneau for their second special session of the year. They also gathered at a middle school in Wasilla for the same reason.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) called for the July 8 session in the hope that lawmakers would finally decide whether or not to allow a full $3,000-per-resident dividend payout from the Alaska Permanent Fund this year, after they failed to resolve that issue in either the regular session or a special session that wrapped up in June. Dunleavy also set the location for the second special session in Wasilla, home to his conservative base.
The 21 Republican lawmakers who showed up at Wasilla Middle School on the 8th - most of whom shared Dunleavy’s support for a full payout - said it was their constitutional duty to convene the session where the governor specified. The 37 lawmakers who convened in Juneau, however, said the governor had the authority to set the time and agenda for the session, but it was up to them to decide where to meet.
Lacking a quorum, there was little the Wasilla group could do. The Juneau contingent was able to get some work done, which included introducing legislation to make a $1,600 dividend payment from the Permanent Fund and replacing Senate Majority Leader Mia Costello (R), who had gone to Wasilla. But there still weren’t enough lawmakers in the Capitol to override Dunleavy’s $444 million in vetoes to the state budget.
Each group blamed the other for that failure.
Senate Minority Leader Tom Begich (D) said before the override vote that if the lawmakers in Wasilla “choose to neglect their responsibility and don’t come to Juneau, they’re going to be responsible for sustaining the governor’s veto,” adding, “I think that’s their intent.”
Sen. Costello, meanwhile, said: “You could actually argue that those in Juneau want the vetoes to stand because they’d be here where we could actually take action.” (ANCHORAGE DAILY NEWS)
HAWAII Gov. David Ige (D) vetoed a bill (SB 1292) that would have required websites like Airbnb to collect and remit taxes on behalf of vacation rental “hosts.” The governor said he was concerned about legitimizing illegal vacation rental operations, and he wanted to coordinate with counties like Honolulu that have approved new regulations cracking down on illegal rentals. (ASSOCIATED PRESS, LEXISNEXIS STATE NET)
WISCONSIN Gov. Tony Evers (D) used his veto pen 78 times on the state budget passed by the state’s GOP-controlled Legislature, in one case managing to allocate $87 million more for K-12 education than lawmakers approved. The action was reminiscent of the so-called “Frankenstein veto” former Gov. Jim Doyle (D) used to provide $330 more in education funding than approved in the budget passed by lawmakers in 2005. (WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL [MADISON])
ALASKA’s Republican-controlled Legislature failed to override Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s (R) veto of $444 million from the state’s operating budget. A three-fourths supermajority vote of the Legislature is needed for an override, but about a third of the state’s lawmakers were absent from the Capitol in Juneau, opting to meet in Wasilla instead (see “Special Session Schism in AK” in Politics & Leadership). (ANCHORAGE DAILY NEWS)
KENTUCKY will likely hold a pension-related special session on July 19, according to House Majority Leader John “Bam” Carney (R). The aim of the session will be to provide relief for quasi-governmental groups facing skyrocketing pension costs starting this month. (LOUSVILLE COURIER JOURNAL)
VIRGINIA, which just became the new home for Amazon’s $5 billion second headquarters, claimed the No. 1 spot in CNBC’s America’s Top States for Business study for the fourth time, having previously done so in 2007, 2009 and 2011. The annual survey, first conducted in 2007, ranks all 50 states on business competitiveness using over 60 metrics in 10 categories, including cost of doing business, economy, quality of life and workforce. (CNBC)
--Compiled by KOREY CLARK
Earthquakes and wildfires are probably the environmental hazards Californians worry about most. But by the end of the century, another threat may be keeping residents awake at night: rising sea levels.
Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey recently conducted a study that modeled the combined effect of sea-level rise and storms. The researchers considered various scenarios involving sea-level increases within the realm of possibility by the year 2100 and weather conditions ranging from an average day to a 100-year storm.
In the worst-case scenario, a 2-meter (6.6 foot) sea-level rise and a 100-year storm, $150 billion in coastal property could be flooded. A financial loss of that magnitude - equal to about 6 percent of California’s GDP - would make such an event far more costly than the state’s 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake ($10 billion in damage) and the 2017 wildfire season ($18 billion in losses and fire suppression expenses) and place it on par with Hurricane Katrina ($127 billion).
But with a 2-meter increase in sea level, even a typical annual storm could place 483,000 residents and $119 billion in property at risk.
“For those annual storms to expose $50 billion to more than $100 billion of property by end of century, that’s just a massive number, said Patrick Barnard, research director for the USGS Climate Impacts and Coastal Processes Team and the study’s lead author. “That’s something that could happen every single year, not just maybe once a mortgage or once a lifetime.” (LOS ANGELES TIMES)
California became the first state to provide healthcare coverage to adult undocumented residents when Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed legislation last week making those between the ages of 19 and 25 eligible for the state’s Medicaid program. (Children under 18 have been eligible for taxpayer-funded healthcare regardless of their immigration status since 2016.)
The roughly 100,000 additional Medi-Cal enrollees will cost the state about $100 million a year. But that sum will largely be offset by the imposition of a state individual health insurance mandate to replace the one in the Affordable Care Act that was eliminated as part of the Republican-engineered federal tax overhaul in 2017.
The state is also using the additional revenue from the state mandate - requiring residents to insure themselves and their dependents or incur a state tax penalty - to help hold down premiums in the state’s individual insurance marketplace. Those premiums are forecast to go up an average of less than 1 percent next year, the lowest increase since the state established its marketplace. (USA TODAY, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO)
Local governments in at least four states have passed ordinances in 2018 or 2019 restricting the use of surveillance technology by government entities, according to the American Civil Liberties Union’s Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS) webpage and LexisNexis State Net’s local ordinance database. The National Conference of State Legislatures and State Net’s legislative tracking system also identified at least nine states that have considered measures restricting government use of surveillance technologies.
Source: American Civil Liberties Union, National Conference of State Legislatures, LexisNexis State Net