Search Results

By Ann Sullivan We’ve all experienced a difficult friend or boss who tells you “do this” and then when you do it, they say “no I didn’t mean it that way.” Then you spend the next hour trying to undo the thing they told you to do in the first place. Frustrating, right? That is largely what the federal government has been telling small businesses who enter public sector contacting. The message to small businesses is “grow.” The SBA and its stakeholders pour significant resources into helping small businesses succeed. Those range from SBA District offices in every state, lending and counseling programs and support for programs like ChallengeHER that WIPP sponsors. Organizations like WIPP encourage their members to think about federal contracting as a complement to commercial business. We have spent an inordinate amount of resources promoting policies such as the women-owned small business contracting program, subcontracting and acquisition strategies designed to provide more opportunities for the government to buy from women owned firms. But then, the government says “wait don’t grow” by implementing a pretty rigid system of determining when a company is too big to be small. SBA determines its this by a system called size standards. The government determines the average size of business revenue in industry categories and sets a size that a business cannot exceed in order to take advantage of small business contracting programs. The SBA then takes the average of the last three years of your revenue, deciding whether you are small or have exceeded the size standard, bumping you into being a midsize company. Ouch. This is exactly the position WIPP chair, Lisa Firestone finds herself in. She testified at a House Small Business Committee hearing on the challenges larger small businesses face when approaching the top of their size standard. Lisa testified on behalf of WIPP, telling her story of watching her company, Managed Care Advisors go from a small boutique healthcare consulting company to the leading provider of Federal Workers’ Compensation Case Management Services. She grew a four person company to facing a daunting dilemma of growing beyond the $15 million size standard for her industry. Witnesses at the hearing, “No Man’s Land: Middle-Market Challenges for Small Business Graduates,” discussed the issue of options available to small businesses who reach the top of their size standard. Should they stay small, sell their business or venture into a midsize company that has to compete for government business with the 110 very large companies. According to Bloomberg Government’s recent report, Mid-Tier Market Report: 2018, only 325 companies have made the decision to be a midsize vendor to the federal government. This is in contrast to the 118,000 small businesses who sell to the federal government. How can this trend be reversed? The Montgomery county Chamber of Commerce, a WIPP partner in the initiative, “Pathway to Growth” proposes the following recommendations: Agency: Bring Multiple Award Contracts (MAC) requirements in line with the capabilities of midsize firms. It is essential to sustain midsize businesses participation on these MACs to diversify the types of businesses engaging in the federal market. Regulatory: Require a five-year look-back for the purpose of Small Business Administration (SBA) size determination. Due to the long contract award process and significant size of task orders, small businesses can quickly outgrow their size standard without having the time and resources to invest in firm infrastructure. This change would allow businesses a smoother transition by changing the receipt calculation by using the lowest three of these preceding five years of receipts, to determine the average. Legislative: Deduct research and development (R&D) expenses and expenditures from total revenue for size determination. This recommendation supports the government’s initiative to stimulate innovation and allows companies to pursue and develop new products and processes, without undue penalty. The execution of these proposals would set the record straight: small businesses should grow – and continue to grow. It’s time for the government to end the mixed signals.

By Ann Sullivan For all women business owners who have secured, or are seeking federal contracts, the first order of business is remembering the incredible effort it took to get the Women-Owned Small Business Procurement Program in place. WIPP and thousands of women across the country pushed for this program and as a result, today women are awarded. Since the federal government just received its FY18 money, expect spending to be fast and furious until the end of the fiscal year—September 30. Think about the strategies you have in place to respond to a myriad of requests for information and Sources Sought notices. Remember to ask agencies to consider setting aside the contract for women-owned companies and familiarize yourself with the WOSB sole source rules.Last month, the Department of Treasury held a women’s history month event organized by Lisa Jenkins, who heads the small business office and is an incredible advocate for women-owned businesses. I thought I would share my five tips for being successful in the federal marketplace I presented at the event. PS: If you do not know Lisa Jenkins, make it your business to do so. FIVE TIPS Know more than the person you are meeting with. Dig deep—read the Small Business part of the FAR and all the government contracting articles/news. you can get your hands on. Look up WIPP’s Give Me Five program and take classes that are applicable to building your knowledge base. Look up the agency’s FY18 funding and understand their focus (Give Me Five: Follow the Money Webinar). Seek to establish relationships in unconventional ways—go to events where the person you are trying to meet is speaking and get creative about getting an introduction to them through your networks. Follow them on social media. Only ask for meetings when you have all your ducks in a row and you have a specific ask. Join organizations that work with agencies and become a leader. It is not enough to join an organization at the lowest level. The real benefit comes from being a leader. Organizations feature their leaders, give them opportunities to introduce speakers and assist their leaders in connections that are helpful in the federal contracting arena. Learn how to use the SBA set-aside programs, such as the WOSB procurement program and be prepared to educate agency contracting officers on the benefits of using the program. Don’t be offended that contracting officers don’t know your program—you can be the educator. That’s a good place to be. Understand the budget process—it’s all public information. Know how your programs are funded. Look up the agency’s funding and understand their focus (Check out Give Me Five: Follow the Money Webinar). Although this can be complicated, understanding this process and using it to your advantage will give you a huge leg up on the competition.

By Ann Sullivan I don’t know if you watch the Oscars, or like me, go to a party having barely seen any of the movies. I am usually pretty bored with the thank you speeches from the winners, but this year one acceptance speech got my attention. It was the speech from the winner of Best Actress, Frances McDormand, for her role in “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.” Referencing women in the audience who “had stories to tell and projects to finance,” she said, “don’t talk to us at the parties tonight, invite us to your office in a couple of days…..and we’ll tell you all about them.” She asked the women to stand and told Meryl Streep, “if you do it they’ll all do it.” The speech caught my attention because women entrepreneurs in all industries including Hollywood share the same vexing problem – access to capital. A damning statistic, women only receive 4% of all commercial loan dollars and 2% of venture capital, shows women entrepreneurs struggle with obtaining adequate capital. Yet, over 36% of businesses are women-owned and are growing at four times the rate of businesses owned by men, so it appears there is no shortage of women seeking operating or investment capital. Asked why women get so little VC money in Fortune article, Julie Wainwright, Founder and CEO of a consignment website The RealReal, thinks it comes down to the lack of female VCs. “When you have different businesses that aren’t proven that may appeal more to a female [customer], a female investor is going to be able to evaluate that” better than a male investor could, she says. “I think in general, most VCs are trying to do their jobs, but there are a lot of unconscious biases.” A study from Harvard Business Review also points to an additional reason for this deficit — male and female entrepreneurs are asked different questions by VCs, which in turn affects the level of funding they receive. According to the study, when investors asked male entrepreneurs questions they used a promotion orientation, meaning they focused on their hopes and achievements. Alternatively, when questioning women entrepreneurs, they mostly used a prevention orientation, which focused on questions regarding responsibility, security and vigilance. Researchers found that this has a substantial impact on funding outcomes, thus helping to explain the large disparity in VC funding for women entrepreneurs. Given these barriers, why are so many women starting businesses? It seems to boil down to two reasons: they were either inspired or frustrated. Inspired because they had a good idea, built a better “mousetrap” or decided to create wealth for their families by taking the risk of entrepreneurship. Frustrated became they weren’t getting equal pay for equal work, were tired of a hostile work environment or saw no ability to advance. A case study by the National Women’s Business Council highlights both of these. The study examined reasons why women become necessity entrepreneurs and of the 9 women interviewed, 8 cited gender-specific issues, thus making entrepreneurship a necessity. The study also highlights the financial need as the driver to start businesses. “I can relate to many of these women because I’m a prime example of a necessity entrepreneur,” said Kari Warberg Block, NWBC Council Member and Founder and CEO of EarthKind®. “I was fresh out of alternatives with no job options, and I had to do something, anything, to take care of my family. I had an idea to create a safe, natural option for pest control, and 10 years later that has turned into a $20 million-dollar business.” What are some of the solutions to this vexing problem? Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet but rather a host of solutions necessary to turn this tide. For starters, investors and lenders can start asking the right questions and including women in their review process. Women who sit on the boards of these companies can monitor lending/investing in women owned companies. And on the policy front, WIPP’s Economic Blueprint suggests a host of policy changes that will help. They include understanding the data from lending institutions with respect to lending to women, freeing up a regulatory environment that discourages smaller banks from lending to small businesses and developing a track for women to become investors through government backed programs like the Small Business Investment Companies. Lastly, Congress should require a comprehensive review of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, which awards only 16% to women. Even though access to capital for women business owners requires changing cultural biases and policies, all of us can start by educating those around us. If one of us stands up, everyone will stand.

By Ann Sullivan In a landmark hearing on women’s entrepreneurship in the Senate Small Business Committee held in 2014, senators focused on access to capital, access to contracting and access to resources. Jane Campbell, now our president, worked for the committee at the time and organized the hearing. As she tells the story, WIPP asked for the biggest hearing room in the Senate, confident that women would fill the room. The Senate staff was a little skeptical so they held back some seating, worried the cameras would see empty chairs. The opposite happened—there was standing room only in a room that held 325 people. A majority of the senators on the committee showed up to give their support and the women entrepreneurs in the audience were so engaged, one senator called it a “rally.” The witness list included Shark Tank’s Barbara Corcoran, Nelly Gelan and WIPP member Lynn Sutton from Atlanta, Georgia. Fast forward three years. Last week, the same committee held another hearing on women’s entrepreneurship focusing on strengthening the entrepreneurial ecosystem for women. The witness testimony centered around barriers to capital, technology innovations and mentorship. This time, the room was not crowded and there were no star witnesses. But the messages were striking similar. Witnesses cited the same statistics in 2017 as they did in 2014 with respect to lending. It appears there has been no movement beyond 4% of all commercial loan dollars go to women-owned firms. Neither has the statistic that 2.19% of all venture capital funds went to women owned firms. The federal contracting picture is much the same. In FY14, women received 4.68% of all federal contracts, missing the 5% federal goal. In FY16, the government also failed to meet its goal, by awarding 4.79% of its contracts to women—still short of the 5% goal. However, looking at federal funding for resources to women such as Women’s Business Centers (WBCs) gives us hope. In FY14, WBCs were funded at $13 million. In FY16, that number went up to $17 million, a bright spot in an otherwise dark picture. The significant change from 2014 to 2017 has not been in the number of federal resources devoted to this “ecosystem,” rather it has been in the numbers of women starting and growing businesses. According to the American Express OPEN’s “State of Women Owned Business in 2014” report, in 2014, there were nearly 9.1 million women-owned enterprises, employing nearly 7.9 million workers and generating over $1.4 trillion in revenues. Compare that to the 2016 report, there were 11.3 million women-owned businesses in the United States, employing nearly 9 million people and generating over $1.6 trillion in revenues. The disconnect between federal resources for women entrepreneurs and the number of women generating jobs by owning businesses in three years is stark. The number of women entrepreneurs who would benefit from greater resources continues to grow while public investment is at a standstill. The private sector is no more responsive as the access to capital numbers show. Entrepreneurial-friendly public policies will help. Reducing the tax burden and compliance costs will go a long way toward making women-owned businesses profitable. In addition, beefing up the “ecosystem” of financial and business assistance through the Small Business Administration (SBA) and other federal agencies would be well worth the investment. With respect to the access to capital problem, WIPP’s 2017 Economic Blueprint contains concrete ideas on a path forward. While the federal government cannot require lenders to specifically lend to women (our lending laws prohibit discrimination of any kind), a first step should be to collect lending data on women. My hope is that I will not be writing this article with the same prognosis three years from now. A commitment to women entrepreneurs is a commitment to growing the nation’s economy. Both the private and public-sector efforts should reflect the tireless energy women entrepreneurs exude. The question for the women’s business community is: Are you better off than you were three years ago? Statistics show that women are doing their part – we want government to do its part too.

By Mark Lee On October 26, the House passed the Senate version of the FY2018 Budget Resolution. During Senate debate the previous week, House and Senate GOP leadership came to an agreement that would eliminate the need for a potentially time-consuming conference of the House and Senate resolutions. Under this agreement, the House would accept the Senate’s resolution which includes reconciliation language authorizing $1.5 trillion over 10 years for the Congressional tax-writing committees – House Ways & Means and Senate Finance – to produce tax reform legislation. Reconciliation is a legislative process that allows the Senate to pass budget-related bills with a simple majority of 50+1, instead of the 60 votes typically required. The resolution also includes a blueprint for nearly $47 trillion in federal outlays over 10 years, $35.4 trillion for defense and $11.5 trillion for domestic spending. The House version envisioned deficit-neutral tax reform, however authorized $300 billion in lost revenue over 10 years for tax reform. As part of the agreement, the House gave up its insistence on $203 billion in mandatory domestic cuts over 10 years. The Senate agreed to accept the House’s push for higher defense spending without offsets, or cost reductions, in other areas of the federal government. The passage of the resolution does not mean that Congress has passed the 12 appropriations bills that make up the federal budget for FY2018. Since October 1, the federal government has been operating on a Continuing Appropriations Resolution (CR), which expires on December 8. This budget resolution is primarily a vehicle for tax reform through reconciliation. This year, the House passed an FY2018 omnibus appropriations bill on September 14, and the original House version of the FY2018 Budget Resolution on October 5. Typically, a budget resolution is adopted before the appropriations process can begin, however Section 303(a) of the Congressional Budget Act (CBA) enables the House to begin the appropriations process if a resolution has not been adopted by May 15. The Senate has not passed its appropriations bills and some Senate Appropriations subcommittees, including the Subcommittee on Financial Services & General Government which has jurisdiction for funding the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Community Development Investment Fund (CDFI) at Treasury, have not yet held mark-ups on their bills. For FY2018, Congress has two choices: follow the path of FY2017 -- which included three CRs prior to enactment of an omnibus spending bill, or complete the appropriations process by December 8. We’re in uncharted territory when the appropriations process precedes the passage of a budget resolution. Regardless, AEO will be working overtime to ensure that the priorities of our nation’s microentrepreneurs and small businesses are not forgotten in this strange, new world.

What Washington Has in Store for Women Entrepreneurs Ann Sullivan Had I written this article a few days ago, it would have been obsolete. I would have told you that Congress was poised for a major fight over raising the debt ceiling and funding for Hurricane Harvey recovery was uncertain. Things change. In a refreshing bipartisan move, President Trump reached out to Democrats to secure a three- month deal to raise the debt ceiling, fund the government on a continuing basis and provide recovery funds for Hurricane Harvey. This deal avoids the panic in the markets over defaulting on the debt and a potential government shutdown. Why did Trump deal with the Democrats? Because the Freedom Caucus in the House was poised to fight raising the debt ceiling unless significant discretionary spending cuts were enacted. Trump needed Democratic votes to move much of anything in the House. If my math is correct, the 194 House Democrats plus 24 Republicans in the House cobbles together a majority that can pass the deal. In the Senate, Trump needed Democrats in order to pass this package, including Hurricane recovery funding to the tune of $15.25 billion for Hurricane damage. Although Hurricane funding to some extent was going to pass, the House Republicans were opposed to tying the debt ceiling to the Harvey relief bill. With respect to keeping the government funded past the September 30 deadline (the fiscal year ends), House Republicans had plans to send the Senate a comprehensive spending bill for FY18, also known as an omnibus bill. Trump, however, had other plans. As I was drafting this article, the Senate included an extension of federal flood insurance to the package and passed the Trump deal in lightning speed. Now the House needs to act before sending the bill to the President. In addition, the House Republican Study Committee consisting of more than 150 Republicans announced their opposition to the Senate bill complicating the final House vote. Important to note is that this is only a three-month deal, setting in motion another go-round in December with respect to lifting the debt ceiling and funding the government for FY18. WIPP is watching these developments with an eye toward its effect on women business owners. If you are a government contractor, your customers are following this debate closely— and so should you. Even if you are not a government contractor, paying close attention to the market’s reaction to the debate can affect your wallet and your investments. Aside from the fiscal deliberations, expect to see a focus on tax reform. Tax reform remains a top priority for the Trump Administration and the Congress this fall. President Trump has engaged Members of both parties to spur action on this important agenda item. From working with the Kogod Tax Policy Center at American University to examine the tax benefits women business owners leave on the table, to WIPP member Rebecca Boenigk’s testimony urging tax reform for pass-through entities as well as corporate entities, to op-eds from WIPP members nationwide urging action, WIPP is at the forefront of advocating for a tax code that works for women entrepreneurs. In addition, WIPP submitted comments to the Senate Finance Committee in June, which can be read here. Other legislation that might be considered is infrastructure improvements and funding, reinstatement of the DACA program that expires in six months and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which is important to federal contractors. With respect to small business legislation, expect changes to the HUBZone program and a government study on the participation of women in multiple award contracts—the impetus of which was a study released by WIPP titled, “Do Not Enter: Women Shut Out of U.S. Government’s Biggest Contracts.” This is an exciting time in Washington. The Congress is busy as is the President. We welcome major legislation that will have an impact on business owners, such as tax reform and infrastructure improvements. In addition, we have a strong advocate at the helm of the SBA, Administrator Linda McMahon, and look forward to Senate approval of Emily Murphy as Administrator of the GSA. These strong, capable women have earned our support. Last but not least, the WIPP conference is just around the corner. I hope to see all of you at the conference – we need all your voices and all your advocacy as we work to ensure women entrepreneurs are represented in the Nation’s Capital.

We Did Pretty Good Ann Sullivan Every year when the WIPP Leadership conference convenes, our policy team does an assessment of what we accomplished in the past year. Given the turbulent, go-no-go legislative year, I’m pleased and a bit surprised by our accomplishments on behalf of women entrepreneurs. · Finding a Fair Shot for Women on Federal Contract Opportunities o The Senate included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) language from a bill (S.1038) by Senators Joni Ernst (R-IA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) asking the SBA to conduct a study on Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) participation on Multiple Award Contracts (MACs). The legislation came in response to a report published by WIPP entitled, “Do Not Enter: Women Shut Out of Largest Government Contracts.” · Promoting Our Tax Reform Agenda o Prior to GOP leaders releasing their framework for tax reform this month, WIPP has been on the forefront of the issue. WIPP members have published Op-Eds across the country, Board Member Rebecca Boenigk testified before the House Committee on Ways and Means in a hearing on tax reform for small business, and WIPP submitted its tax platform to the Senate Finance Committee – asking for simplification of the code, fairness in tax rates for all entities, and repeal of the AMT and Estate taxes. All four of our asks were included in the recently released proposal. · Achieving A Major Objective o While health care is always a contentious issue in Washington, WIPP did achieve a major objective—tucked inside a major piece of legislation last December. Congress allowedHealth Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs) to be used again, which let business owners to reimburse employees for their insurance plans. If you attended the Conference this year, you were able to witness some of the recognition WIPP’s policy work is getting first hand. Senator Joni Ernst addressed our delegation and accepted an award for her work on passing S. 1038. House Ways and Means Chair Kevin Brady (R-TX) made a special appearance at our luncheon to talk about tax reform, accompanied by Representative Kristi Noem (R-ND), who is also on the Committee. High ranking staff members of the Senate and House Small Business Committees sat down with us for a leadership tax discussion. We work hard to make sure WIPP members’ voices are heard loud and clear on Capitol Hill. But at the end of the day, you have to use your voice, too. I was shocked in our advocacy training session to find when I asked for a show of hands of those who had meetings scheduled with their representatives, only a few responded in the affirmative. Meeting with your legislators in D.C. or back home is critical to our efforts – they want to hear from you. Let’s keep the momentum going. WIPP has had some extraordinary successes at a time when there have been very few. It shows the power of advocacy when 10 million women business owners speak with one voice.

By Ann Sullivan The collapse of the Obamacare repeal legislation in the Senate sent partisan pundits into a frenzy, but for those of us who are less interested in politics and more interested in good policy, here are five myths about health care reform worth debunking. 1. Fixing the ACA (Obamacare) is Dead: Yes, for the time being it is, but not in the long run. If you listen to speeches delivered from Democrats and Republicans, healthcare is far too important to the public and this sector of the economy to ignore. Senator McCain and others pleaded for the Senate to go through the committee process, which includes hearings and collaboration, to pass comprehensive legislation. In Capitol Hill-speak, that process is called “regular order.” That is likely the next move for Congress. 2. Republicans Control the Congress and the Executive Branch so Passage Should be Easy: This oft-repeated statement assumes that all Republicans think alike. In reality, the party runs the gamut of ultra-conservative to moderate to libertarian-ish. So, it’s not surprising that when it comes to healthcare reform, the party is all over the map. Getting Republicans to agree to a bill is a tall order given these different philosophical bents in both the House and Senate. 3. Democrats Don’t Want to Fix Obamacare: If you thought the Republicans are a disorganized bunch, take a look at the Democrats. They often pride themselves on their chaotic ways. Sure, some Democrats believe Obamacare is perfect, but the vast majority do not. In closing remarks of the Senate debate, Senator Schumer acknowledged the law needed revision, stating “it’s not perfect – let’s work together.” 4. The Congressional Budget Office is Partisan: Since the agency’s formation in 1975, the CBO’s budget scorekeeping on major public policy proposals has been criticized by politicians when estimates didn’t agree with their positions. The head of the CBO is appointed by the party in power and its mission is nonpartisan. 5. Reform Will Result in Reduced Premiums: Health insurance is a risk pool. Structuring the pool to include enough healthy people to subsidize the unhealthy people is a balance Obamacare was largely unsuccessful in achieving. The other side of the equation is the expense side of the delivery of healthcare—which is anything but transparent. Premiums will not come down until these two problems are resolved. Nibbling around the edges of health insurance regulations or a simple repeal will not achieve reduced premiums.

By Mark Lee What a year so far! 2017 has been eventful to say the least, yet AEO continues to patrol the Halls of Congress and the Administration advocating for our nation’s microentrepreneur and small business community.Our work in Washington and your strong advocacy on behalf of AEO’s priorities with Members of Congress has borne fruit in the 115th Congress.On Friday, July 19 the House passed the H.R. 2056, the “Microloan Modernization Act of 2017” preserving funding for the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Microloan program.However, there’s still work to do! The original version of the “Microloan Modernization Act of 2017”, introduced by Rep. Stephanie Murphy of Florida, repealed the 25% pre-loan, and 75% post-loan technical assistance rule, however the rule was changed to 50/50 during mark-up in the House Small Business Committee. The bill will now go to the Senate for consideration. The Senate companion bill,S.526,introduced by Senator Deb Fischer, includes full repeal of the 25/75 rule, which AEO supports. In addition to working on regulatory changes, our policy team has also been working on securing appropriations for federal programs that support microbusinesses. On July 13th, the House Appropriations Committee passed the FY2018 Financial Services & General Government (FSGG) funding bill.FSGG is the subcommittee of jurisdiction for the SBA and the Treasury Department’s CDFI Fund.The SBA’s Microloan program was funded at AEO’s budget request level of $31 million for technical assistance, supporting $44 million in loans.However, the CDFI Fund, while not eliminated as the Administration requested in their budget proposal, was only funded at $190 million which is $60 million below AEO’s request.Allocations for Women’s Business Centers ($17 million) and SBDCs ($120 million) were also below AEO’s request.The PRIME program was eliminated entirely. The fight for our nation’s small businesses has moved to the Senate, where things are likely to be much different.On July 26th, the Senate FSGG Appropriations Subcommittee held a hearing where Chair Shelley Moore-Capito (R-WV) took Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to task for the Administration’s desire to eliminate the CDFI Fund. During questioning by Chair Capito, Mr. Mnuchin indicated that the elimination of the CDFI Fund was not merit based, but defended the cut as part of the administration’s effort to increase defense spending through cuts to non-defense programs. We mentioned earlier this year that Senator Moore-Capito is a powerful ally of the CDFI Fund. In June, the Senator’s office indicated to AEO’s policy team that the FY2017 omnibus, which funded CDFI at $248 million, was an appropriate funding level for the program.We’re halfway there! When Congress returns from the August recess, the Senate will begin the FY2018 appropriations process.In addition, we will be urging them to take action on S. 526. Thank you for everything you do on behalf of our nation’s microentrepreneurs and small businesses, and let’s race to the finish!

By Ann Sullivan By all accounts, the U.S. will default on its monthly spending obligations of roughly $100 million by early fall, unless the Congress raises the debt ceiling. Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin sounded the alarm, urging Congress to act quickly. As the debate starts heating up, below is a guide to understanding the debate amongst all of the partisan noise and media hype. 1. Why does the Congress need to raise the debt ceiling? If Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the nation won’t be able to borrow any more money to finance the existing financial commitments agreed to by Congress and the President. This includes payments to contractors, social security recipients, Medicare and Medicaid payments and veteran’s pay – literally everything the government writes a check for. 2. What is the difference between the debt and the deficit? The deficit is a result of the government spending more than the revenue it takes in, and is calculated from year to year. The federal debt is an accumulation of the government’s annual budget deficits, or the amount of money the government owes. 3. Has Congress ever missed the deadline? Yes. However, Congress has always taken action at the final hour before it’s really too late. In 2011, lawmakers failed to raise the debt ceiling by the May deadline established that year. Congress ultimately raised the debt limit in August through the Budget Control Act of 2011—only two days before the Treasury estimated it would run out of funds. While initially Wall Street reacted negatively to the threat, it’s now seen as a yearly bluff. 4. Why does this happen every year? Congress establishes an annual budget. Raising the debt ceiling allows the government to pay the bills for expenses already incurred by Congress, which is done on an annual basis. It used to be considered a relatively noncontroversial action, but that is no longer the case. 5. What is a “clean” debt ceiling bill? Clean means sticking to the debt ceiling language without attaching other policy “riders.” As partisan gridlock worsens, the budget becomes the vehicle to pass legislation, making it an important tool for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin called for a clean bill, but that idea isn’t popular with the House Freedom Caucus. They “demand that any increase of the debt ceiling be paired with policy that addresses Washington’s unsustainable spending by cutting where necessary, capping where able and working to balance in the near future.”

By Jennifer White The House Small Business Committee wants to know: are burdens on small businesses from paperwork being reduced by the Paperwork Reduction Act? According to Sam Batkins, the Director of Regulatory Policy at American Action Forum, the short answer is they are not. The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) was designed to reduce the total amount of paperwork the federal government imposes on private businesses and citizens. In order to achieve this goal, it imposes procedural requirements on agencies that wish to collect information from the public. However, between the sheer volume of instructions that accompany some paperwork, and the lack of resources at various agencies, it doesn’t seem to be working. Look, for example, at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). According to Frank Cania, Founder and President of driven HR, the IRS is responsible for more paperwork than any other agency. “Small businesses fall into a cycle of having to file new forms every time an honest mistake is made in order to avoid IRS fines,” said Mr. Cania, who testified on behalf of Society for Human Resource Management. For perspective on how time consuming and complex some of the documents can be, he explained to the Committee that while an I-9 Form is only two pages long, the instructions are 15 pages long, and the instruction manual is “a slim 69 pages long.” According to Sally Katzen, Professor at NYU Law and Senior Advisor at Podesta Group, another key related issue with an agency like the IRS is that lack of resources to help individuals with compliance. “Used to, you could call and get someone to answer on the third ring,” she said. “Now, given the cuts to the IRS, the waiting period is well over two hours if you bother to stay on the phone. They’ve had to give up almost all of their assistance with compliance.” When asked by the Committee what Congress can do to make it better, Ms. Katzen answered that the key is investing in resources. “Somebody has to talk to somebody if you want the system to work. You need to put in the resources to enable that to happen.” It is important for agencies to be able to collect information because it not only aids government decision making, but is often redistributed to the public which some find critical for making business decisions. However, there has to be a way to reduce the volume of paperwork. “There is only so much agencies can do. Only Congress can change the statutory requirements,” Ms. Katzen concluded. To see the written testimony and witness list from today’s hearing, click here.

By Jennifer White WIPP worked in Washington this morning at a House Small Business Committee hearing focused on the proverbial question: What is going to make Washington work for America’s small businesses? For women entrepreneurs, Anne Chambers (Cincinnati, OH) testified, the answer begins with cooperation. “I think the tagline for my business, RED212, is helpful to this conversation,” she said. “At 211 degrees Fahrenheit, water is merely hot. But by raising the temperature just one degree to 212, change happens – steam is created with a force so powerful it can hurl a locomotive across a continent. That one degree makes all difference.” Thanking the Committee for consistently raising their cooperation by one degree to benefit small businesses, Ms. Chambers explained the issues centered on making Washington work for women entrepreneurs. WIPP is looking to Congress for help on tax reform, health care reform, access to capital, and access to federal contracts. Citing the key points of the WIPP 2017 Economic Blueprint, Ms. Chambers called for fair and equitable treatment for all businesses, effective pooling mechanisms for healthcare, a modernized microloan program, and a SBA study of tracks for women on Multiple Award Contracts. Members of the Committee asked a variety of questions, including what the top policy priority should be for small businesses. Maxine Turner, founder of Cuisine Unlimited and testifying on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said that the answer is all of them. “Priorities are regionalized,” she pointed out. “What is the most important for me may not be for someone in a different part of the country. Every single [one of these issues] has to be addressed.” “President Reagan once said, ‘the most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help,” Anne said. “But, what’s going to work for America’s small businesses and for women entrepreneurs is just that – help from Washington. WIPP believes that by working together in a bipartisan fashion, Washington can be ‘here to help,’” Ms. Chambers continued. “Women entrepreneurs all over this great nation expect our elected officials to help, whether it’s getting access to capital, obtaining access to federal markets, or lessening the tax burden.” Members of the Committee agreed that they are here to help and with reaching across the aisle, Congress can address these critical issues facing small businesses. To read testimony from today’s hearing, click here. For more information about Anne Chambers and her business, click here. Witnesses for “Making Washington Work for America’s Small Business” included: · Anne Chambers, Co-Founder and CEO of Red212, on behalf of Women Impacting Public Policy (WIPP) · Maxine Turner, Founder of Cuisine Unlimited, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce · Rutledge “Skip” Paal, Owner of Rutland Beard Floral Group, on behalf of the Society of American Florists · David Borris, Owner of Hel’s Kitchen Catering, on behalf of Main Street Alliance