This post has been moved to the No Design Legislation blog at http://nodesignlegislation.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/asid-backpeddling-as-fast-as-they-can/
Posts Tagged ‘legislation’
ASID – Backpeddling as Fast as They Can
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged Allied member, anti-competitve, anti-consumer, asid, building code, certification, codes, credentials, damage control, Florida, health, IBC, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, interior designer, International Building Code, legislation, legislative strategy, license, licensing, member, membership, Minnesota, nanny state, NCIDQ, opposition, practice act, registered design professional, registration, regulation, safety, Tennessee, Texas, title act, welfare on March 10, 2009| 1 Comment »
Practice Act Hearing in Maryland March 17
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged Alabama, anti-competitive, asid, cartel, certification, DC, Delaware, grandfathering, HB 1168, hearing, House Economic Matters Committee, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, interior designer, legislation, license, licensing, Maryland, NCIDQ, opposition, practice act, registration, regulation, sunset review, Virginia, Washington on March 5, 2009|
This post has been deleted.
Proof needed to DEREGULATE Florida’s Anti-Competitive Law – by March 5
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged anti-competitive, asid, certification, credentials, Crist, deregulation, Florida, Gaetz, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, interior designer, legislation, license, licensing, NCIDQ, opposition, practice act, registration, regulation, Senate Select Committee on Florida's Economy on March 4, 2009| Leave a Comment »
http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs060/1102107213116/archive/1102484179858.html
|
Wake up and smell the coffee… SB 337 will hurt your ability to compete!
Posted in Interior Design Protection Council (IDPC), Legislation Opposition, tagged Alabama, asid, certification, credentials, Indiana, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, interior designer, legislation, license, licensing, NCIDQ, opposition, practice act, registered, registration, state registered on March 3, 2009| Leave a Comment »
No Documented Cases of Unlicensed Designers Creating Safety Hazards
Posted in Institute for Justice, Legislation Opposition, tagged asid, Austin, certification, Clark Neily, codes, credentials, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, Interior Design Protection Council, interior design regulation, interior designer, Joel Mozersky, legislation, license, licensing, Marilyn Roberts, NCIDQ, opposition, registration, regulation, TAID, Texas, Texas Association for Interior Design on February 20, 2009| 1 Comment »
Thousands of designers in Texas rally against possible legislation that would prohibit unlicensed designers from doing commercial projects, and would put at least half of the state’s 10,000 designers out of business.
And Marilyn Roberts, ASID, the president of the Texas Association for Interior Design, which along with ASID is responsible for promoting anticompetitive legislation in Texas, also admitted that there is “no documented case she knows of in Texas where an unlicensed interior designer created a safety hazard“.
Read the full story and watch the video here: http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/Interior_designers_rally_for_rights?disqus_reply=6433417#comment-6433417.
URGENT – Immediate Action Needed In Indiana Against SB337!
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged asid, certification, credentials, IN, Indiana, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, legislation, license, licensing, NCIDQ, opposition, practice act, registration, regulation, SB 337, Senate on February 20, 2009| Leave a Comment »
|
||
|
Florida deregulation will restore your right to practice!
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged accessories retailer, anti-competitive, antiques dealer, art dealer, asid, builder, carpet dealer, cartel, celebrity designer, certification, Clive Christian, consumer protection, credentials, deregulate, deregulation, disciplinary action, drafting services, engineer, fabric vendor, First Amendment, FL, flooring company, Florida, Florida's economy, florist, furniture dealer, Hirsch Bednar, Hirsch Bedner, IDAF, Interior Design, interior design law, interior design legislation, interior design regulation, interior designer, Juan Montoya, Kelly Wearstler, kitchen design, legislation, license, licensing, lighting company, lobbyist, NCIDQ, occupational licensing, opposition, paint store, Phillip Sides, real estate developer, real estate stager, realty company, registration, regulation, remodeler, restaurant equipment dealer, stager, upholstery workroom, wall covering supplier on February 20, 2009| 2 Comments »
|
Interior Design Protection Council | 91 Reserve Place | Concord | NH | 03301 |
New Alabama Practice Act Will Put Most Designers Out of Business – Protect Your Right to Practice!
Posted in Legislation Opposition, tagged ADAD, AL, Alabama, Alabama Interior Design Consumer Protection Act, Alabama State Board of Registration for Interior Designers, consumer protection, credentials, decorator, IJ, Institute for Justice, interior decorator, Interior Design, interior design legislation, kitchen design, legislation, license, licensing, NCIDQ, NKBA, opposition, practice act, unconstitutional on February 18, 2009| 2 Comments »
Here’s a link to the archived version of this post, since it’s gotten cut off here, and I don’t know how to fix it.
Please visit the NoDesignLegislation blog at http://nodesignlegislation.wordpress.com for more information on interior design legislation.
|
Interior Design Protection Council | 91 Reserve Place | Concord | NH | 03301 |
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1952 – Release Date: 02/13/09 18:29:00
Unlicensed Designer to Decorate the White House – Response to Interiors & Sources and ASID
Posted in California Designers Against Legislation (CADAL), Legislation Opposition, ncidq certification licensing, tagged asid, certification, credentials, Interiors & Sources, legislation, license, licensing, Michael Alin, Michael S. Smith, NCIDQ, Obama, opposition, registration, regulation, Weixler Peterson Luzi, White House on January 27, 2009| 10 Comments »
Oh no, an unlicensed designer is going to decorate the White House – heaven forbid! Quick, get out the sandbags; the Obamas aren’t going to be safe in their own home, and neither will the public!
Or at least that’s what ASID’s Michael Alin would apparently like President and Mrs. Obama and the rest of the country to believe.
Feh.
As everyone already knows, the extremely talented and world famous California designer Michael S. Smith has been tapped by the Obamas as their designer for their private White House quarters. He couldn’t possibly be a better choice, as ample other posts in the blogosphere have already detailed and dissected (see Patricia Gray, The Peak of Chic, and Cote de Texas, among many others). Gifted, personable, with a versatile of-the-moment style that’s incredibly well-suited to a young, modern family in the US, Smith’s selection fits well with everything we know about our new First Family to date, and will creatively meld a contemporary aesthetic and lifestyle with the traditions of the White House in an utterly fresh, uniquely American way.
What’s particularly interesting, however, is that, as best as I have been able to determine, Smith is not only not licensed in the District of Columbia (one of only 4 jurisdictions in the US that requires licensure for interior designers to practice our trade), but is probably not even eligible, according to current ASID and NCIDQ standards, as I was unable to uncover any evidence that he possesses a degree in interior design. Despite this, he is clearly acceptable to the Obamas – and to all of the security people surrounding the more powerful person in the country.
As well he should be, because Smith is bloody brilliant – and is the embodiment of all of the reasons that the ASID argument that only licensed/certified/ASID and NCIDQ-credentialed designers know what they’re doing is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now, in reality, the White House is technically on Federal land, not District land, and so licensure would not be required in any case, but ASID is still obviously upset about the Obamas hiring someone who is unlicensed anywhere – and clearly not a member of ASID, according to a search of their website. You can readily see this from the fatuous letter Interiors & Sources published from Michael Alin of ASID in their most recent issue, exhorting the Obamas to consider the health and safety of their family and visitors first and foremost – as if their safety has not already been more than amply assured by legions of security and safety experts.
If these professionals, charged with keeping the First Family safe, don’t feel there’s a safety risk in allowing the Obamas to select a designer without the “formal” ASID-dictated credentials that Alin and his minions tout, then surely the hundreds of millions of other citizens of our country who want freedom of choice in selecting a designer for their own homes and offices are not at any greater risk without legislation to “protect” them.
Funny how ASID is always screaming bloody murder about unlicensed designers specifically endangering the public all over the Web and email, and interfering in many designers’ lives and livelihoods – but they didn’t even directly bring up the question of Smith’s credentials or licensing status up in this letter. Could it be that they realize how utterly ridiculous it would make them look if they were to blather on about how Smith isn’t licensed – to the President of the United States, who just selected him? And how overtly critical of Obama’s judgment that would obviously make them seem? What is Alin seriously expecting? That the Obamas will read his letter, and then suddenly decide, uh oh, they’d better find another designer from within the ASID ranks, because the almighty ASID (which is unknown to most people) has hinted not at all subtly that the President and his wife are not adequately protecting their family because of their current selection?
Designer Walter B. Peterson of Philadelphia-based Weixler Peterson Luzi Interiors responds to the editors in more detail about how ridiculous this argument is, and how the Obamas’ selection demonstrates how utterly unnecessary interior design legislation is:
————————————————————————————————————————-
Mr. Robert Nieminen, Editor
Mr. Jamie Nicpon, Managing Editor
INTERIORS & SOURCES Magazine
615 Fifth Street, SE
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401
Dear Sirs:
Michael Alin’s “Letter to President Obama” published in Interiors & Sources is presumptuous and embarrassing. Doubtless his advice is unsolicited, as the President’s and First Lady’s selection of the noted interior designer Michael S. Smith already satisfied their requirements in this area. Additionally, Mr. Alin’s expressed concern for the First Family’s environment – “modified to be safer and healthier” – rings hollow. One would be hard pressed to imagine any other head of state whose every environment, including the newest limousines he rides in, is any safer or healthier than that of the President, and any consideration of making the White House safer, healthier or more accessible would be handled by a team of government architects, conservators and the Secret Service, not an interior designer. But it is Mr. Alin’s suggestion that they consider the “health, safety and welfare” of their children before engaging an interior designer that is most offensive. Like all good parents, the Obamas have been taking such considerations into account since before their two lovely daughters were even born. Moving into the White House is the safest and healthiest move any family could make on this planet regardless of whom they hire to design it, and for Mr. Alin to imply otherwise is patently absurd.
Lastly, the fact that Michael S. Smith is not licensed to practice interior design in Washington, D.C. seems not to have altered the First Family’s decision to hire him, nor does it seem to upset the district’s legal authorities, who on any other resident’s unlicensed designer would doubtless impose punitive fines and possibly imprisonment. Given the round-the-clock concern for the President’s and First Family’s safety, the appointment of Michael S. Smith to design their most private living quarters sends a clear message to every legislature and court in the nation that interior design licensing is a bogus act, completely unnecessary to protect the public’s health and life safety, and therefore nothing more than an attempt by a tiny minority of ASID’s interior designers to create an exclusive monopoly in the marketplace of creative ideas and design.
Sincerely,
Walter B. Peterson
WEIXLER PETERSON LUZI
Exceptional Interiors ~ Extraordinary Living
232 South Fourth Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
T: 215-592-9570 – F: 215-592-4782 – C: 215-880-3955
www.wplinc.com
ASID MEMBERS RESIGN IN PROTEST OF ASID LICENSING EFFORTS
Posted in California Designers Against Legislation (CADAL), Interior Design Protection Council (IDPC), Legislation Opposition, ncidq certification licensing, tagged Alabama, Arizona, asid, California, certification, Colorado, Connecticut, credentials, Florida, Illinois, Interior Design, Interior Design Freedom Coalition, interior design law, interior design legislation, Interior Design Magazine, Interior Design Protection Council, interior designer, Kitchen and Bath Design, legislation, Legislation Opposition, legislative agenda, license, licensing, Maryland, Missouri, NCIDQ, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, protecting your right to practice, registered, registration, resign, resignation, right to practice, Texas, Virginia, Washington on December 24, 2008| 1 Comment »
We just received a copy of the letter below sent to ASID Headquarters. Thanks to the Interior Design Freedom Coalition http://www.interiordesignfreedom.org/blog.html for posting it.
Please see the links on this blog in the Interior Design Legislation Opposition section to the Interior Design Protection Council and the Interior Design Freedom Coalition for more information on licensing efforts and how to protect your real right to practice in your state, and how ASID efforts will put thousands of designers out of business.
=======================================================================================================
ASID RESIGNATIONS
-GROUP ONE-
December 19, 2008
Michael Alin, Executive Director
The American Society of Interior Designers
608 Massachusetts Ave., NE
Washington, D.C., 20002
Dear Mr. Alin:
Over the last several years, we have watched as ASID has recklessly spent our dues and MANDATORY legislative assessments on a failed policy falsely proclaiming to “raise the level of the profession” and to cull what you have decided are the “real designers” from those not following the path you dictate. The legislation you support has requirements so restrictive that most designers would not be able to comply and will therefore be denied the right to practice.
Over and over… we have watched as ASID’s president, members and board repeatedly mislead their own ASID colleagues about the EFFECT of legislation on our right to practice, while currying support from the very designers who would be put out of business by your legislative actions. And we have listened as Allied Members were described as the “Cash Cows” of the organization – too stupid to understand that we were being used to fund our own demise.
Over and over… we have watched as ASID betrayed its own ethics to push its own agenda – an ego-driven agenda that has the potential to destroy more than half of its own membership.
Over and over… we have listened as ASID members said sweetly, “We’re not trying to put you out of business.” [Subtext: as long as you forego your practice to go back to school for at least 2 years, do a supervised internship with an NCIDQ certified designer – if you can find one who also happens to be hiring – and intern from two to five years while being paid virtually nothing; then if you have any money left, pay about $2000 to take step workshops, purchase study materials, and take and pass the NCIDQ test (which is rarely passed on the first attempt), and then prove to the satisfaction of your own competitors that you actually are a designer, and comply with any regulations they happen to write.] But nobody’s trying to put you out of business; after all, there’s grandfathering. And from what we’ve seen of the way “grandfathering” is often written into the legislation, that’s just as bogus a claim as the rest of the pro-legislation argument.
Legislators have told us that representatives (either ASID and/or IIDA members) have misrepresented the content, objectives and design support for their legislation while governors of four states have clearly understood it to be anticompetitive and protective.
In states where practice acts have been enacted, designers have suffered terribly – persecuted for what they have done successfully for years, sustaining huge fines and legal fees for miniscule “infractions” and in some cases, bankrupted and driven out of the state in order to earn a living.
Florida designers bear witness to the travesty of your actions, and we hear more and more from them every day. The disgraceful behavior of Florida ASID members who deliberately work to expose and report their own members, as well as others, and help to put them out of business tells us what we need to know about ASID as an organization and about how legislation really works to
destroy designers’ rights to practice. And Florida is not the only state where this happens or has happened: try Alabama, Texas, New Mexico, Connecticut and others.
There are estimated to be between 200,000 and 400,000 interior designers in practice in the U.S. today. ASID claims membership of only about 20,000 practicing designers, the majority of
whom don’t even care about “raising the level of the profession”. Many are not even aware of your legislative agenda. They just want to practice design successfully as they always have.
We have personally spoken to Allied designers all across the country, and have found the vast majority to be opposed to your actions. As we’ve said before: the only designers who benefit from your tactics are the so-called professional designers who have passed the NCIDQ – and those are few and far between.
You do not represent independent designers as you have claimed, hence the title independent. They don’t want ASID’s interference in their right to practice, and have told us that they resent ASID’s efforts to dictate policy in which they have no say. Even ASID members are not welcome to disagree with your policies as the invitation to the Arkansas conference clearly shows, where attendees were carefully vetted to make sure that there would be no discordant voices.
ASID HAS NO RIGHT AND NO MANDATE TO DICTATE TO HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DESIGNERS ALL ACROSS THIS COUNTY WHO WILL BE ALLOWED TO PRACTICE AND WHO WILL NOT. YOUR LEGISLATION IS BEING DEFEATED BECAUSE DESIGNERS DO NOT SUPPORT YOUR OBJECTIVES.
It is clear to us that ASID no longer advocates for all of its members. This is illustrated in the make-up of the board which is ponderously commercial, in the membership of your pro-legislation coalitions across the country, where the majority are often commercial designers and in your undue influence in the schools, where students are pushed toward architectural/commercial design and where residential design gets short shrift. Students have told us that ASID has misled them, pushing them into commercial/architectural design on the premise that jobs at the commercial or architectural firms would be awaiting them when they graduate, and that ASID would help them get those jobs.
Even before the economic downturn, commercial jobs were very hard to come by – by ASID’s own statistics, only 15% of the market – and the few students who manage to land those jobs do so without ASID’s promised-but too often undelivered assistance. Many students, unable to secure those jobs have wound up selling commercial furniture and other commercial products. And most residential designers cannot hire them, as designers who have, have told us that they can draft, but cannot do other things that are crucial to residential design.
ASID’s preferential conduct is also apparent in the way Allied Members are treated on the national website’s “Find a Designer” page, where potential clients searching for referrals are offered a choice of “Show Professionals Only” (listed as the default) vs. “Show All Practitioners” which they have to search for [note: this appears to just have been changed]. This is insulting and clearly shows a bias toward “professional” members, which is especially unjustifiable considering that many so-called “Professional” designers have never passed the NCIDQ test and have just been allowed in. Allied Members pay the majority of dues and mandatory legislation fees, are no less professional in their work, and do not deserve a lesser marketing effort than any other members.
Additionally, by promoting its single-entry method as the one true path to design, ASID has created a rift between practicing designers and those who take ASID’s EEE path, with the younger designers evincing rudely worded disrespect for their more experienced elders – a situation which is not conducive to job creation.
Interior Design is a creative field. Yet ASID is determined to legislate creativity out of it by restricting the many paths of entry into the field that have nurtured that creativity and vision for years, producing brilliant designers – down to one path that is engineered to produce – engineers.
In a failing economy such as this, ASID should be using all its resources to support and market designers, not to destroy them through legislation. And make no mistake, we completely understand your actions and your intent.
We are ashamed and deeply disappointed by this organization. We can no longer support a Society that deliberately destroys its own membership and endangers the future of design and designers in its unending desire for power and dominance. And because of your exclusive policies, we know there is no hope of changing the trajectory of your actions.
ASID had a slogan: PROTECTING YOUR RIGHT TO PRACTICE. You are, in fact, subverting your own raison d’etre by deliberately trying to destroy our right to practice. And that is unethical, unconscionable and unacceptable.
And so we are resigning.
Jacqueline Bazaar, #1533586, Pennsylvania
Margaret H. Benson, #1504190, Texas
Gayle Beyer, #1519494, Colorado
Loraine Brown, #1250453, Georgia
Christine Colman, #1534167, Washington
Ellen Fernandez, #1239917, Maryland
Diane Foreman, #61436, Oregon
Debbie Gersh, #1485135, Texas
Noreen Dunn Gottfried, #1502827, Pennsylvania
Carol Gumpert, 1550669, California
Karen K. Hartley, #75601, Georgia
Nancy Hartsing, #1559067, Arizona
Henrietta Heisler, #1859365, Pennsylvania
Elizabeth Kauermann, #97269, Pennsylvania
Nancy Phillips Leroy, #1231856, Pennsylvania
Christie Meehan, #1201627, Pennsylvania
Tonya Morrison, 1487732, Pennsylvania
Jayne Rosen, #78935, Pennsylvania
Rebecca Ruediger, #1250458, Missouri
Carly Sax, #1500172, Illinois
Anne-Marie H. Schimenti, #1504255, Florida
June Shea, #1486996, Virginia
Nadia T. Tanita, #1542001, Hawaii
Terri Temple, #18099, Connecticut
Mary Sue B. Wiedmer, #1215131, Pennsylvania
Resigned earlier this year for the above reasons:
Janice Onsa, Pennsylvania, former Allied Member
Diane Plesset, Oregon CMKBD, CID #5818, C.A.P.S., former ASID
cc: Bruce J. Brigham, President
Board of Directors:
Bruce Goff
Charrisse Johnston
Doug Hartsell
Lisa Henry
Mary G. Knopf
Rachelle Schoessler Lynn
Stephanie Clemons
Sybil J.B. Van Dijs
According to a survey by Interior Design Magazine as quoted in the New York Times, January 29, 1987