Pennsylvania “Designing Freedom” Lobby Day

Pennsylvania design community:

IT’S TIME FOR YOU TO PROTECT YOUR OWN PRACTICE!

The Interior Design Legislation Coalition of Pennsylvania (IDLCPA) is once again planning a Lobby Day at the state capitol in Harrisburg on October 5th to try and re-ignite interest in their restrictive, anti-competitive practice act.

But guess what?  SO ARE WE!

IDPC, in conjunction with Liberty for PA Designers and the National Kitchen and Bath Association, and other allied organizations will also be at the capitol on October 5th for:

DESIGNING FREEDOM LOBBY DAY

Click on link below for flyer with time and details:

http://www.idpcinfo.org/PA_Designing_Freedom_Lobby_Day_2009.pdf

It is extremely important that your legislators see that the design community does not want or need to be regulated.  And we cannot do it without YOU 

• Help us stop IDLCPA from hijacking the interior design profession. 
• Help us stop the destruction of our profession — your profession.
• Help us ensure that the design community maintains their First Amendment right to free commercial speech and Constitutional right to occupational freedom.

 With your support, we CAN stop IDLCPA’s monopoly attempt. 

 Best regards,

Patti Morrow

Executive Director, IDPC

Patti Morrow enlists help of another staging association

 

New organization joins pro-freedom crusade

  

Another new organization has officially joined IDPC in our mission to protect the rights and livelihoods of ALL in the interior design community. 

 

The Academy of Staging and Redesign 
 
Barbara Jennings, director of the Academy of Staging and Redesign and the International Staging and Redesign Center is the  author of 13 books for the staging and redesign industry.  They also have a Certification Program for stagers and one for redesigners.

 

WELCOME ACADEMY OF STAGING AND REDESIGN!

Patti Morrow responds to AIP denial of heavy-handed influence

Thank you, Ms. Spewock, for your response (comment #10 posted with original article below) to the article “Coercion at a CIDA College”, clarifying that the Art Institute of Pittsburgh has not taken a position to support the latest proposed practice act in Pennsylvania and your commitment to informing students how to research so that they will be equipped to make informed decisions about important issues impacting their futures.  On that we agree. 

However, it is clear that Ms. Musulin went far beyond inviting students to research this issue, and clearly did not adhere to your policy that “all extra-credit options are presented with equal consideration.”  Her extra credit assignment (click on this link to read:  http://www.idpcinfo.org/AIP_Extra_Credit.pdf ) only offers the 20 additional points to those students who undertake lobbying in support of legislation.  In fact, the assignment is actually entitled “IDLCPA SUPPORT.” (emphasis added).  Nowhere on this assignment is there an opportunity to “research and evaluate opposing views” and according to the student in question, when Ms. Musulin was approached and asked for that opportunity, it was denied.  It is absolutely unethical to use this kind of intimidation and heavy-handed influence to push her personal political agenda! 

I understand that subsequent to the publishing of our article, the concerned student has received an assignment to receive extra credit points.  Kindly provide the nature of the assignment, and whether or not the rest of the class also received an “equal opportunity” to do this assignment.  If this assignment was given only to the concerned student in a surreptitious manner, it would certainly give the appearance of impropriety – that of bribing his silence, which I’m sure you would not condone.  Unfortunately, under-the-radar techniques are the hallmark of the pro-regulation camp, and as the overseer of vulnerable students, you would obviously want to shield them from such tactics.

In addition, it is one thing for impressionable students to hear the facts about licensing (provided both sides are presented); it is totally another thing for them to be force-fed baseless propaganda.  The introductory section on the assignment in question contains the following inappropriate and blatantly false statements:

• The bill now has a number and needs to move quickly through the House.  It is inappropriate to imply to students that a fair legislative procedure involves “shoving” a bill through the process.  Declaring it has to “move quickly” implies a deceptive practice whereby the other side will not have equal access to a fair hearing or due process.  Is that how we want our students to be first introduced to the legislature?  I think not.
•  Only a registered design professional” may implement the IBC code.  This statement is absolutely false.  Again, students should hear the facts, not counterfeit propaganda.  Since Ms. Musulin is a board member of IDLCPA, she should certainly be aware that IDPC has written extensively on this issue, providing the actual language of the IBC, which contradicts Ms. Musulin’s and IDLCPA’s statements.  If Ms. Musulin wishes to cling to false information, that is her right, but allowing misinformation to be presented as fact certainly does not “present students with a clear understanding of the issue” in compliance with AIP’s mission. Click here for accurate information about the IBC: http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs060/1102107213116/archive/1102303468639.html

Diametrically opposed to your statement of AIP’s position, Ms. Musulin DOES “wish to influence its students toward a particular “side” of the issue.” Manipulating her students and using them as pawns to accomplish her political objective is shameful and the national design community is outraged.   This information was sent out to approximately 30,000 designers throughout the country, which after the pass-through might well have exceeded 100,000 designers.  I’ve already received numerous emails from across the country about this situation and the AIP.  This is a serious matter, Ms. Spewock, that needs to be addressed head-on, and not with glossy platitudes about freedom of thought which don’t comport to the facts.  Ms. Musulin should be held accountable for her actions.

We appreciate your commitment to provide an excellent and fair learning environment at AIP and look forward to hearing that (1) this important issue has been resolved, and (2) it will not recur in the future. 

If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me.  I would welcome the opportunity to have a dialogue on this issue.

Patti Morrow

Executive Director, IDPC

Patti Morrow: “Students should NOT be “forced” to support licensing!”

Coercion at a CIDA College

A recent development at the Art Institute of Pittsburgh (AIP), a CIDA-accredited institution, has opened a new crack in the ever-eroding façade of interior design regulation.

Lauren Musulin, an interior design instructor at AIP, recently gave her Revit (AutoDesk) class an extra credit assignment that could potentially count for as much as 20% of their final grade.  That assignment: lobby your legislator in support of passage of the licensing bill. (Read assignment here: http://www.idpcinfo.org/AIP_Extra_Credit.pdf) Musulin sits on the board of IDLCPA (Interior Design Legislation Coalition of Pennsylvania), the group behind repeated attempts to enact practice regulation in Pennsylvania.  When approached by a student who had researched the licensing issue and concluded that licensing is detrimental to the profession, Ms. Musulin responded that no extra credit would be given for any other point of view.

Sadly, intimidating impressionable students to march in lock-step with the instructor’s political, pro-regulation agenda is all too common, not to mention unethical.  In the 30-year push for licensing spearheaded by the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID), in conjunction with the National Council for Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ) and the Council for Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA) – commonly called “the Cartel” – students across the country have been indoctrinated to believe that licensing will benefit them. 

Upon graduation, however, many students are finding exactly the opposite to be true.  The criteria that they must serve a 2 to 4 year internship (a.k.a. “indentured servitude”) under another NCIDQ certified designer before they can even sit for the certification exam, has effectively kept the number of new “certified” interior designers low.  In a difficult economy, few designers are financially able to hire even a lowly-paid graduate.  And even in a thriving economy, many practicing designers are simply unwilling to train their would-be competitors.  So after spending sometimes upwards of $100,000 on their education, students in states that have enacted practice laws, are proclaiming that they’ve been thrown under the proverbial bus, and that they are unable to practice in their chosen profession.

Any institution worth the paper they print their diplomas on should allow their students unfettered access to information critical to their future, in this case, whether or not they will support or oppose the restrictive, single-entry method into the field. Institutions would be well-advised to dismiss the paternalistic assumption that students will not be able to weigh the evidence and the credibility of the various messengers and come to their own conclusions.  With such censoring, how can a student make an intelligent, informed decision without having equal access to all the facts?  Yet, groups like the Interior Design Protection Council (IDPC), a nonprofit organization holding the view that regulation is unnecessary and anti-competitive, are rarely invited or allowed to address interior design students.  “Students should NOT be coerced into supporting legislation or a political agenda that is ultimately not in their best interest,” said Patti Morrow, executive director of IDPC.

Johnny Matia, an AIP student, brought Musulin’s extra credit assignment to the attention of Kelly Spewock, the Interior Design Department Director who told him she would look into the issue and provide parity, and also agreed that IDPC would be invited to speak at their town hall meeting next semester.  Matia has vowed to open a student chapter of IDPC at AIP.  “If they have ASID, they should also have IDPC,” said Matia.  “Students need to hear both sides.”

Perhaps this is the beginning of a whole new era allowing students access to a fair and open exchange of information about the free market system this country was founded upon. 

Or perhaps it’s just wishful thinking.

Do interior design licensing laws impact real estate/home stagers?

The Collateral Effect of Interior Design Regulation on Real Estate Stagers

Patti Morrow, IDPC, June 1, 2009

Recently, we became aware of positions and statements originating from the staging profession purporting that regulation of interior designers does not affect real estate/home stagers and they should not become pro-active in protecting their freedoms.

This is not only far from true, but is a dangerous position that could potentially place real estate stagers at great risk.  Practice laws in states like Florida and Alabama have been a detriment to real estate stagers, and if similar practice acts are allowed to be enacted, stagers will continue be impacted.  Sadly, the advice which has been given to stagers recommending that they do not look into this issue lacks a clear understanding of the nuances of regulation, and it appears that the objective lies in self-promotion rather than member protection, and serves only to encourage stagers to withdraw back into complacency instead of continuing to actively engage in this important issue that has and will continue to impact staging professionals if left unchecked.

Click on this link to read entire paper (downloadable and printable):  http://www.idpcinfo.org/IDPC_Stager_Statement_060109.pdf

Florida interior designers rally to repeal unfair law

On Wednesday, May 27^th, interior designers gathered from across Florida to meet in Tallahassee for a rally in the Capitol Rotunda in support of a lawsuit filed against Florida’s interior design practice law.

The Institute for Justice (IJ) filed suit on behalf of three interior designers in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida in Tallahassee, challenging Florida’s interior design law.  “Why does Florida regulate the practice of interior design when virtually no other state does?” asked Clark Neily, senior attorney at IJ.  “It certainly has nothing to do with protecting public health, safety or welfare.  Study after study has shown that the unlicensed practice of interior design presents no genuine safety risks whatsoever.  Instead of protecting the public, interior design licensing laws are all about protecting industry members from fair competition.”

Florida is joined by only two other states, Louisiana and Nevada, in licensing the practice of interior designers, but Florida’s is by far the most aggressively enforced – labeled “the witch hunt” by the design community.  Over the last year, the Interior Design Protection Council successfully brought state and national attention to the Florida issue by publicizing the devastating effects this law has had on the lives of unlicensed interior designers, forced to call themselves “decorators” and limiting their scope of work.

“Our organization and supporters are 100% behind this lawsuit,” said Patti Morrow, executive director of the Interior Design Protection Council.  “In fact, the overwhelming majority of successful, practicing interior designers oppose this one-size-fits-all vision that creates a monopoly for a small special interest group. What has begun here today with this lawsuit will have repercussions across our nation.”

Eva Locke, one of the plaintiffs in the case said, “I have seen from my own experience, that Florida’s interior design law does nothing to protect the public. It only serves to exclude new designers from entering the profession so that a certain group is protected from competition.”  Locke continued “If I lived in New York, California, Georgia, or dozens of other states that do not regulate interior design the way Florida does, I would be free to pursue my dream without being censored and tied up in red tape the way I am in Florida.”

 “After more than 20 years, I am finally pursuing the career I’ve always wanted only to be shut out by Florida’s arbitrary and anti-competitive licensing requirements for interior designers,” commented Pat Levenson, another plaintiff. “In 47 other states I could count on the public that seeks my services to choose me if they feel I’m best for the job, without government involvement.”

Several organizations supporting the legal challenge were represented, including the Designer Society of America, the American Institute of Architects, Interiors by Decorating Den, the National Kitchen & Bath Association, the National Federation of Independent Business, as well as many independent, unaffiliated designers.  No proponents of the law – the Interior Design Associations Foundation or the American Society of Interior Designers – attended the widely publicized rally to defend the need to keep the law in place.

“This law is absolutely riddled with constitutional problems that prevent people from earning a living in the occupation of their choice and we’re going to get rid of that law by challenging in court,” said Neily.

FLORIDA INTERIOR “DESIGNERS”…the wait is over!

Click here to download rally flyer: http://www.idpcinfo.org/FL_Rally_Flyer.pdf

Florida interior designers victimized by restrictive law to get relief

Lawsuit, press conference and rally on May 27^th in Tallahassee

Concord, NH – On Wednesday, May 27^th, a public rally will be held at Waller Park in Tallahassee to coincide with a legal challenge filed against Florida’s interior design practice law.

The Institute for Justice (IJ) is filing suit in Florida on behalf of several small business entrepreneurs whose basic Constitutional rights have been violated by the most restrictive interior design law in the country.  At issue is a Florida law that restricts residential interior designers from advertising themselves as “interior designers” and prevents them from legally practicing any type of commercial design.  The law also prohibits industries such as office furniture and restaurant equipment dealers from doing furniture or equipment layouts, an essential practice needed to succeed in those fields. 

“Interior designers are already struggling with this difficult economy,” said Patti Morrow, executive director of the Interior Design Protection Council (IDPC), the national grassroots voice for independent designers.  “The last thing they need is a completely unnecessary law that places an additional burden on their ability to earn a living.”

The proponents of the law, the Interior Design Associations Foundation (IDAF) and the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID) maintain that Florida Statute 481 – and licensing in general – is needed to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, a claim that remains unsubstantiated even after the 30-year pursuit to impose interior design licensing in all 50 states.  Yet, since 2003 more than 600 unreasonable disciplinary actions have been brought against members of the Florida design community, none of which had anything to do with public safety.  When asked about the aggressive disciplinary actions and increased fines imposed by the regulatory board, Janice Young, spokesperson for IDAF responded, “We do it [penalize unlicensed design] by making the punishment more painful and significant.”   

“Florida’s restraint of trade and censorship of interior designers is blatantly unconstitutional and represents a deliberate attempt by a tiny faction within the interior design industry to (1) eliminate their competition by restricting the type of services they would be free to provide in nearly every other state, (2) silence competitors by preventing people from truthfully advertising the services they do provide, and (3) improperly burden and discriminate against interstate commerce,” said Clark Neily, senior attorney with the Institute for Justice.  “This law has come from a minority of elitist insiders within the design industry itself, not as a result of public demand or legislative determinations that such regulation is necessary for the public good.  They are clearly abusing government power to drive thousands of hard-working small businessmen and women out of business. This law cannot stand.”

Over the last year, IDPC spearheaded the effort to raise awareness of this issue in Florida, by conducting town hall meetings, lobbying the legislative and executive branches to deregulate the law, supporting amendments to FS 481, opposing changes to the Florida Building Code, exposing blatantly false statements made by IDAF, investigating conflicts of interest within the Dept. of Business and Professional Regulations, revealing the ruthlessly aggressive actions of the law firm retained to prosecute designers, and by publicizing the devastating effects on the lives of these victims. IDPC’s widespread grassroots support will mobilize to support the IJ legal challenge.

“We value the innovation, creativity and diversity as well as the multiple methods of entry that have been the cornerstone of this dynamic profession, serving the public without harm.  Florida’s once-size-fits-all licensing scheme for interior designers could not be more contrary to those values,” explained Morrow.  “Protectionism, censorship, cartel, monopoly, domination, control, special interests – you name, it’s all here, and it’s having a devastating effect on the lives of Florida designers.  It’s time to pull the curtains on the interior design cartel.”

PATTI MORROW vs. desperate Florida designers

 

Neily and Morrow take on the Florida cartel

 FRUSTRATED FLORIDA DESIGNERS RESORT TO DEFAMATION

 

Douglas Feldman, ASID, IDAF board member representing South Florida, recently spoke at a meeting in Ft. Myers in an effort to protect the Florida licensing cartel.  In bleak contrast to the two vibrant February town hall meetings conducted jointly by Patti Morrow of IDPC and Clark Neily of IJ – which were packed to standing room only – the interest generated for what is being called the “Save the Monopoly” meeting through multiple emails only managed to draw a meager dozen or so designers, some of whom attended because they actually support IDPC’s mission to deregulate Florida’s interior design law – the most restrictive in the country – spearheaded by Patti Morrow.

 

Perhaps you’ll remember Douglas… his uninformed ranting was unsuccessful in derailing the IDPC/IJ town hall meeting in Dania.  It is noteworthy to report that his boorish behavior actually brought some designers who were on the fence over to the pro-freedom movement.

 

According to an eye-witness account, no factual information was delivered at the Save the Monopoly meeting (Feldman had “deer in the headlights” reactions to unanticipated comments and/or questions) and no new call to action was given.  It appears the only purpose for the meeting was for Douglas Feldman to announce and endorse their new website and blog. 

 

Feeling a little heat in Florida, licensed designers?  Read their [barely literate] blog posting (below). Douglas – did you write this?  It’s hilarious!  Is that the best you can do?  MY BABYSISTTER HITS HARDERTHAN THAT!   Did you think this would hurt my feelings and make me go away?  Guess again, little man. 

 

Excerpts from attack blog:

 

 Patti Morrow with the IDPC is a very desperate but you have to admit a creative individual.  She had no decorating work.   Therefore she did have time on her hands.  And by getting $285,000 in upfront funding from the Institute for Justice,….one big fat check…. she got a reason to get up in the morning.

If you have seen her in person, you begin to realize how pathetic. . .please Patti…..Take a class and learn how to speak professionally.  Then Patti,….get your facts straight and stop with the out and out lies.  

The way she is telling it now, ASID might has [sic] well close up shop and sell the building in DC.  She really should be a fiction writer.  

If I were Clark Nelly[sic], the ultra conservative, very straight-laced litigator with the Institute for Justice…. I’d be just a little bit embarrassed to be on the same stage repeatedly with such an unprofessional appearance and demeanor.  Maybe there is something going on between them that is more than “justice.”

From what anyone can tell, she works out of her home basement and occasionally comes up for air from that dark hole in the ground.  This blonde airhead with pink boxing gloves DOES NOT represent anyone except herself. . . dresses straight out of J.C. Penny… And where did she get that bleach blonde locks?   Must be Airhead Blonde from Clairol.”

Note that the blog does not dispute even ONE word uttered by Patti at the town hall meetings.  That’s because you can’t disprove the TRUTH! Patti’s presentation was based solely on facts, and they cannot invalidate a single one.   

 

“If you can’t answer a man’s arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names.”

(Elbert Hubbard)

 

The negative publicity IDPC has created surrounding Florida’s anti-competitive, anti-consumer monopoly is obviously the catalyst for this pure, unadulterated act of frustration and desperation.  This tirade so full of lies, and so mindlessly venomous that any remotely decent person would be mortified to be associated with it in any way.  Oh, and did I mention… their website is anonymously registered and blog post unsigned.  It appears that no one but Feldman is willing to go out on a limb to be linked with it.  Who can blame them?

 

I’ll leave you with two last thoughts:

 

1.      Being licensed obviously does not make you a professional.  Thanks so much for proving our point.

 

2.      “It is better to keep your mouth [computer] closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.”  (Twain)

 

To Douglas and Florida licensed designers:  anytime you’d like to have a public debate over the issue of Florida’s anti-competitive and unconstitutional law, my colleague Clark Neily and I would be happy to participate. 

 

But do try to bring more intellect to the table.  Thus far, it’s been like having a duel of wits with an unarmed opponent.