Our biggest issue is not the requirements to use chemistry that helps reduce ozone — which has a dramatic impact on a company’s productivity/profitability.  It’s the regulatory hoops which must be jumped so the regulating community can “document” that the “rules” were followed.   It’s one of the major frustrations between the regulated community and the regulators.  If it’s not documented, it didn’t happen.  Yet, if one makes the rules so onerous — businesses are less willing to comply.  It’s a fine balancing act.  It’s also an argument at the heart of the recent litigation between Texas and the EPA.  Ah, such a tangled weave.

For us insurance geeks, the article made it painfully obvious that large employers get to play in a different sandbox than the rest of us.  If these large employers can get together to determine “how they manage benefits and purchasing only the most needed health options to keep workers healthy and out of doctor offices,” which in turn will help them reduce their premiums – why can’t small businesses do the same?  The answer is yes we could (as an single Association or several associations), but the carriers really don’t want to deal with small business in that manner – and existing state and federal laws almost make it impossible.  The end result will be that large companies will be able to find ways to mitigate any cost increases in health care while small business will continue to see the double digit increases which have plagued us for the past decade – and the foreseeable future.

The recent legislation (Affordable Health Care) does NOT address the issue of costs for small business.  In fact when one really looks at the net effect, employers will find it much more economical to pay the penalties of not offering health insurance and forcing their employees to pay for their own insurance from the “pools.”  Given that mandated coverages will be “richer” than what many small employers presently offer, many are going to be rudely shocked at the personal costs of “Obamacare.” Many individuals have been led to believe that the legislation will make health care easier to obtain and much more affordable. This may be true for some individuals, but the folks in small business and their employees (who were supposedly the target of this legislation) may pay a very steep price.   I will close by quoting an old, and probably over used, axiom – “There is no free lunch.”

The first is the “green” blogger who condemns all print.  This individual lambastes print as evil, but truly doesn’t do their homework.  This type of editorializing concerns me because more and more individuals deal in sound bites (bytes?) and thus don’t think beyond what they just read or heard.  Case in point is this site where the author shares this tidbit, “Nearly all the industries have their shares in polluting the environment but out of all the industries, the printing industry is the major cause to pollute the environment.”

Another recent discovery is the USPS’ “Small To Medium Enterprise Solution” project which will launch next spring on a trial basis in Austin.  Kudos to the USPS for trying to find ways to make direct mail easier to use, but this model is not one that is going to excite the vast majority of small to medium printers in the U.S. who are already fighting UPS, FedEx, and Staples for market share.

I’ll be the first to admit that there is no simple solution to this complete change in our competitive landscape – and there is not putting the genie back in the bottle.  Ownership and management must realize that selling is no longer just a process of discovering who is buying and providing them with a price.  It has become much more complex.  The selling cycle is going to become longer and the tools which we use to “sell” print are also much more complicated.  The old sales models are not going to work, and there are plenty of other industries out there with good models to copy.

It seems that everyone is gearing up for November.  The Republicans are sharpening their knives over the NY Mosque issue.  The Dems are touting how Health Care is going to benefit everyone.  And the economy is still moving sideways.

On the health care front — here’s a “duh” moment for you reported in a recent Bloomburg Business Week online article, “Workers will pay more for their health care next year as U.S. companies prepare for provisions of the overhaul signed into law by President Barack Obama.”   This factoid was based on a survey of 72 companies employing more than 3.5 million.  46% plan to raise the maximum level of out-of-pocket costs (deductibles) to their employees.  The overall increase these companies expect?  Approximately 9 percent.  Needless to say proponents of the “Affordable Health Care” Act were not too thrilled, “Employers may be using the health-care law as cover for changes they already planned to make to their benefits,” said Igor Volsky, a health-care researcher at the Washington-based Center for American Progress, which supported the overhaul. “Costs are always increasing but they’re going to blame what they’re going to blame,” Volsky said yesterday before the survey’s results were released.  Too bad Mr. Volsky doesn’t run a small business.  He would then truly realize the challenges of providing health care insurance for individuals.

On Wednesday, I attended a Greater Dallas Postal Customer Council meeting featuring Susan Plonkey, USPS’ VP Sales.  She did a commendable job of explaining the challenges of the USPS and what they are trying to accomplish with proposed rate increases.  The convoluted regulations and legislation which USPS operates under leads one to believe that what is being attempted is beyond the ability of the USPS to control.  And that creates some very real challenges for the print and mail industry.  What I truly found of interest was Ms. Plonkey outlining a beta project the USPS is undertaking in Austin, Texas.

Per Plonkey, the USPS is making a concerted effort to educate small and mid-size businesses on the value of direct mail.  Yet, when that business owner says, “sign me up,” to the USPS representative, there is no solution.  Thus the USPS is planning to create a online “clearinghouse” in which the end user/small business person can access to find a direct mail provider.  The clearinghouse will be managed by a third party which will “vet” the firms and then creates a bidding process for the work. 

Hmmmm.  Sounds like we’ve been here before.  This was news to me; so, I’m doing a bit of research with our Austin printer/mailers and try to see what they think of this process.

On another note, it seems that the folks in Kansas (Department of Education) are bent on killing off the journalism/print/creative programs in high schools.  The decision is based on data provided by the government indicating that jobs for sterotypers, typesetters and commercial artists no longer exists or are in decline.  Well, that’s a surprise.  Yes, there may no longer be a career path (used to call it vocational education) for multilith operators, but there are still opportunities for young people who have a solid foundation in using premedia software and a solid understanding of print.  By the way, this issue is not just a Kansas problem.  Although it all has do with funding issues, it’s always interesting to see how the educational community loves to constantly find “new” ways to be creative.

Tell next time . . .

Good news?  There’s plenty of opportunity for the print industry in Texas!

Although it remains to be seen how all of this will play out, given what’s going on in Arizona with its immigration laws, we’re in for an interesting ride of state vs. federal rights.  Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were arguing these same issues over 225 years ago.  The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Most of us sincerely feel this legislation will make road kill of many small businesses and their employees.  Providing employees affordable health care is an important issue for firms and this legislation will probably not deliver upon that promise.  An interesting article by the New York Times on this issue was posted this morning.  Regardless, as of yesterday, the water’s have gotten murkier.  A federal judge approved the State of Virginia’s lawsuit regarding the constitutionality of the legislation.  Let the games begin!

When you get right down to it, the fight is between Texas’ approach to streamline the regulatory process (that’s a real oxymoron) and what the EPA wants to see.  It’s not about companies controlling their pollution.  It’s about the process being used to document — yet, if one listens to the media, you would think that Texas is allowing companies to pollute will-nilly.  

If you ask most manufacturers, they say they’re willing to make the changes to reduce pollution, but the paperwork demands are draconian (and these guys are talking about the Texas regulators).  On the other hand the regulators take the position, that if you don’t document how will you prove that you’re not polluting/complying.

It’s an interesting argument, but I feel that the EPA’s approach at present is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  Why not find creative ways (as Texas has done) to start companies down the road of compliance?  Rather than fighting about making the public comment longer (one of the EPA’s major complaints), how about finding ways to help companies reduce pollution?  Tax breaks?  Assistance?   Naw, that just makes too much sense.

Elizabeth Warren, who leads the congressional panel overseeing the Troubled Asset Relief Program, said U.S. taxpayer bailouts helped Wall Street and not small banks.  TARP “worked really well for the Wall Street banks, but it didn’t work well for the rest of the banks in the system,” she recently said on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop with Betty Liu.”

I hate to say it, but I think that our financial system is out of sync.

Meanwhile, the folks who make this country great, our blue collar workers and small business men and women are getting the short end of the stick.   Our politicians are not willing to find creative ways to help businesses and people, get off the sidelines.  There’s talk of more money for education, job creation, and small business lending.  Why not just stop writing laws for a while and let the system move forward.  Get creative with finding ways to support small and medium size businesses to get the money they need to start producing and hiring — and don’t expect it to happen overnight!  Too many folks in our country don’t understand that business (and consumers) won’t start hiring/spending until they know what’s going to happen over the next 12-18 months.  As long as the Administration and Congress keep talking about more laws and more deficit spending, more the reason folks will stop, wait and see.  Not a good way to kick-start an economy.