October 14, 2024

Presidential candidate shot in Milwaukee

On October 14, 1912, Theodore Roosevelt did what any larger-than-life figure would do when faced with an assassination attempt—he gave an 84-minute campaign speech. Yes, you read that right. Shot at point-blank range, bleeding from the chest, and possibly on the brink of death, Roosevelt waved off medical attention to deliver his speech in true Rooseveltian fashion. Why cancel a campaign event over something as trivial as a gunshot wound?

Let’s paint the picture: Roosevelt, four years removed from the White House, was in the middle of his third campaign for president, running under the Progressive Party’s banner—the newly formed "Bull Moose" Party, as it would famously be called after this fateful night. Tensions were high after he had lost the Republican nomination to his former ally-turned-rival, President William Howard Taft. So, what better way to get back into the political ring than to survive an assassination attempt and just... keep going?

It was 8:10 p.m. in Milwaukee when Roosevelt stepped out of the Hotel Gilpatrick to greet the crowd gathered outside. Always the showman, he paused to wave his hat in appreciation, not knowing that within moments, his life would be hanging by a thread. As he stood there in the open car, a man named John Schrank, a New York City saloon keeper, fired a shot straight at Roosevelt’s chest.

Now, here’s where Roosevelt’s legendary toughness gets a bit of help from sheer luck—and his extensive preparedness. The bullet was slowed by a metal eyeglass case and a bulky, rolled-up 50-page speech sitting inside Roosevelt’s coat pocket. That’s right, the man literally had a bulletproof speech.

The round from Schrank’s .38-caliber revolver lodged itself in Roosevelt's chest but miraculously missed his vital organs. Blood quickly soaked his white shirt, turning it crimson. But did that stop Roosevelt? Of course not! As he was famous for saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” In this case, the “big stick” was his indomitable willpower.

Roosevelt’s first words to the shaken crowd were characteristic of his grit. “Ladies and gentlemen,” he declared, “I don’t know whether you fully understand that I have just been shot, but it takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose.” With that, he proceeded to speak for over an hour, despite the bullet still lodged in his chest.

At any point during those 84 minutes, Roosevelt could have passed out or bled out, but this was Theodore Roosevelt—the man who charged up San Juan Hill, wrestled with the political elite, and won. A gunshot was, apparently, just a minor inconvenience.

Even as he stood there, visibly weakened, his voice booming through the hall, Roosevelt wasn’t going to let a little assassination attempt get in the way of his message. He joked with the audience that the bullet was embedded in him so firmly that doctors had deemed it too dangerous to remove right away. “I give you my word,” he said, in classic Roosevelt flair, “I am going to make this speech, and then we can attend to my wound.”

This night in Milwaukee became one of the most memorable and defining moments of Roosevelt’s campaign, solidifying his status as a rugged, relentless leader who could truly withstand anything. It also helped cement the legacy of the Bull Moose Party, a fitting name for a movement led by someone with such ferocious tenacity.

The story of Roosevelt’s survival was front-page news across the country, and his political opponents must have been shaking in their boots—after all, how do you compete with a man who literally takes a bullet and keeps going?

While the Progressive Party ultimately didn’t succeed in getting Roosevelt back into the White House, the legend of that night in Milwaukee lived on. Roosevelt may not have won the election, but he certainly won the day. And in doing so, he reminded the nation that sometimes, when life (or a would-be assassin) throws a curveball, the only thing to do is to keep charging forward like a bull moose—one speech at a time.

October 11, 2024

S.2067 Service Dogs Assisting Veterans (SAVES) Act

The Service Dogs Assisting Veterans (SAVES) Act, introduced as S.2067 during the 118th Congress, is a bipartisan bill aimed at improving the quality of life for veterans through the provision of service dogs. Sponsored by Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) alongside Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM), the legislation proposes to establish a grant program under the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The key provision of the act is to fund nonprofit organizations that train and provide service dogs to veterans suffering from disabilities, including those with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury (TBI), and mobility impairments[1].

Core Elements of the SAVES Act:

  1. Grant Program Creation: The bill directs the VA to award competitive grants to accredited nonprofits that specialize in training service dogs. These grants are intended to fund programs that pair service dogs with veterans in need. The grants can be used for various aspects of these programs, such as training the dogs, aftercare, and public outreach to ensure veterans are aware of the service[2].
  2. Eligibility and Nonprofit Requirements: Nonprofits must meet specific criteria to receive funding, including accreditation from recognized bodies like Assistance Dogs International or a similarly reputable organization. They are required to present a comprehensive plan on how they will provide training to veterans, the types of service dogs they offer, and their ability to offer ongoing support for veterans paired with service dogs.
  3. Targeting Veterans in Need: The Act focuses on ensuring that veterans suffering from mental and physical impairments, such as PTSD, TBI, or physical disabilities, can access service dogs that improve their quality of life. One notable inclusion is the requirement for nonprofits to ensure equal access to women veterans, addressing a need for inclusivity in veteran care.
  4. Funding and Duration: The SAVES Act authorizes appropriations of $10 million annually from 2024 through 2028 to implement this program. The funds will be used to set up the grants, monitor the use of funds, and evaluate the effectiveness of the service dogs in improving veterans' health.

Legislative Context:

The bill was introduced in the Senate in June 2023 and referred to the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Hearings were held in July 2023, demonstrating a bipartisan commitment to advancing the legislation. However, as of the latest action, the bill remains in the committee stage, and it has not yet passed into law.

Policy Implications:

The SAVES Act represents a significant policy step toward addressing the mental health crisis among veterans, especially those who struggle with PTSD and other service-related conditions. Studies have shown that service dogs can provide emotional support, mitigate symptoms of anxiety and depression, and assist with physical tasks, making them a valuable resource for veterans who might otherwise have limited access to such services. The inclusion of funding for aftercare and training ensures that both the veterans and the service dogs are supported long-term, potentially reducing the burden on the VA's healthcare system.

From a financial standpoint, the $10 million annual allocation is a relatively modest investment when compared to the broader VA budget. The long-term benefits, however, could be substantial, especially if service dogs help to reduce hospitalizations and medical interventions for veterans with complex health needs.

The SAVES Act seeks to fill a gap in veteran care by expanding access to trained service dogs through a grant program. It highlights a growing recognition of alternative therapeutic approaches, which are crucial in supporting the nation's veterans. This legislation, if passed, would have a far-reaching impact on the veteran community, offering improved well-being and independence for those who have sacrificed much in service to their country.

 

October 09, 2024

Supreme Court Tackles Key Gun Cases This Term

The Supreme Court is set to delve into significant legal battles surrounding firearm regulations, with two pivotal cases on the docket this term.

Recently, the Court engaged in oral arguments for Garland v. VanDerStok, a case challenging federal regulations on "ghost guns." These untraceable firearms, often assembled from kits, have sparked intense debate over their legality and regulation. The outcome could have major implications for how these types of guns are governed federally.

Later in the term, the Justices will examine another crucial case that could redefine the legal landscape for gun manufacturers. This case involves Mexico's lawsuit against U.S. firearms manufacturers, accusing them of deliberately targeting the illegal gun market in Mexico. The central question is whether this lawsuit can proceed despite a federal law that generally shields gun makers from civil liability. The Court's decision could potentially create an exception to this immunity, significantly impacting the firearms industry's legal responsibilities.

Stay tuned as the Court's decisions in these cases may reshape aspects of gun regulation and liability in the United States.




Garland v. VanDerStok, No. 23-1141 (U.S. Oct. 9, 2024), https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-1141.html.

Supreme Court of the United States, Docket for 23-1141, SUPREMECOURT.GOV,  https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-1141.html 

October 05, 2024

Are YOU Ready to Vote?

 Confirm That You Are Registered to Vote in Your State

  1. Check Your Status Here
  2. If You Are Not Registered, Registration is Quick and Easy! Find Out How:
    1. Register to Vote
    2. Register and Vote in Your State
  3. Check Your Registration Deadlines
    Deadlines by State

Change Registration Info

Voting Outside of Election Day

Can I Vote by Mail?

Check If It's Available in Your State

Can I Vote Early?

Check If Early Voting Is Available in Your State

Can I Vote While Away From Where I Am Registered?

Check If You are Eligible to Vote Absentee (Domestic Civilians)

How Do I Vote as a Military Member/Family Member?

How to Register to Vote & Return Your Ballot, and What Info Is Needed for Each Form

Register and Request Your Absentee Ballot Using the Federal Post Card Application (FPCA)

If You Do Not Receive Your State Ballot, Use the Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot (FWAB)

Voting Residence for Service Members and Their Families

How Do I Vote as a U.S. Citizen Living Overseas?

Register and Request Your Absentee Ballot Using the Federal Post Card Application (FPCA)

Voting Residence for Overseas U.S. Citizens

 

October 01, 2024

How We Look at Legislation

In the world of policy advocacy, one of the most crucial tasks is analyzing and understanding legislation. Whether you're a lobbyist, business owner, or community leader, understanding how laws are written, interpreted, and implemented can have profound effects on your industry or cause. At EPIC Policy Group, we take a structured approach to reviewing and influencing legislation to ensure that our clients' interests are represented effectively. Here’s an inside look at how we approach legislation and why it matters for our clients.

1. Start with the Text: Understanding the Basics of Legislative Language

The first step in reviewing any piece of legislation is to carefully examine the text itself. Laws are written in a specific language—legalese—which can be dense and complicated for the uninitiated. Understanding the structure and terminology used in legislative text is critical. The text provides the foundation upon which all subsequent interpretation is based. This means we focus on the plain language of the bill, paying close attention to:

  • Key Definitions: Many pieces of legislation include specific definitions for terms that might otherwise be interpreted more broadly. This section sets the stage for how the law will be enforced and understood in the real world.
  • Legal Framework: The provisions of the law define who is affected, what actions are required or prohibited, and what the penalties or incentives are. These are the nuts and bolts of the legislation.
  • Scope and Impact: We assess how far-reaching the law is—whether it applies to a specific group, industry, or is more universal in application.

At this stage, the goal is to break down the complexities and determine the immediate effects of the legislation on the client’s interests.

2. Historical and Legislative Context: Where Does This Fit?

Once we understand the text of the bill, we examine its broader context. No good piece of legislation is written in a vacuum. We look at the historical precedents and legislative history to better understand the motivations behind the bill and its potential impact. This helps us answer questions like:

  • What problem is this legislation trying to solve?
  • How does it fit into the broader legal framework?
  • What existing laws does it complement, modify, or conflict with?

For example, if we’re working on a bill regarding data privacy, we’ll look at past privacy laws like the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)[1] or General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)[2] in Europe. Understanding these historical benchmarks helps us assess how this new legislation compares and what potential issues may arise during implementation or enforcement.

3. Intent of the Legislators: Why Was This Law Written?

After understanding the text and context, it’s important to understand the intent of the lawmakers. Legislative intent refers to what the drafters of the bill aimed to achieve. This can often be gleaned from:

  • Legislative Debates: During the process of passing a bill, lawmakers engage in discussions and debates. These debates often highlight the reasons for the bill’s introduction and what the bill seeks to accomplish.
  • Committee Reports: When a bill is reviewed by a legislative committee, they often issue a report explaining the purpose of the legislation. These reports are invaluable for understanding the finer points of the bill.
  • Statements by Sponsors: The lawmakers who sponsor a bill often provide insight into the specific goals of the legislation. Their public statements and press releases are useful in interpreting what the law is supposed to do.

Understanding legislative intent is crucial because, in some cases, courts rely on it to interpret ambiguous provisions. By understanding why a bill was introduced, we can better predict how it will be applied and whether it aligns with our client’s interests.

4. Evaluate the Stakeholders: Who Wins and Who Loses?

One of the most important parts of analyzing legislation is determining who will be impacted by it. Every law creates winners and losers. Identifying these groups early on helps us to either rally allies or prepare to counteract opposition. We ask:

  • Who benefits from this legislation? For example, a tax break for small businesses would clearly benefit entrepreneurs and start-ups, while a new regulation might benefit established corporations by raising the cost of entry for new competitors.
  • Who is hurt by this legislation? A new environmental regulation might impose significant compliance costs on manufacturers, but those costs might, in turn, benefit communities by reducing pollution.

This analysis of stakeholders is crucial in building coalitions and understanding where pushback might come from. Knowing the power dynamics around a piece of legislation helps us craft strategic advocacy efforts, whether it’s building support or defending against potential backlash.

5. Legal and Constitutional Considerations: Is This Law Constitutional?

In some cases, legislation may be vulnerable to legal challenges based on constitutional principles or other laws. At EPIC Policy Group, we work to ensure that any legislation we support or oppose is legally sound. When reviewing legislation, we consider:

  • Constitutionality: Does the legislation violate any constitutional protections? This is particularly important when dealing with issues related to civil liberties, such as gun rights or free speech.
  • Precedent: How have courts ruled on similar issues in the past? Understanding judicial precedent can give us a good sense of how a law might be interpreted if challenged in court.
  • Potential Legal Challenges: If the legislation is likely to face a lawsuit, we help our clients prepare for that scenario. This may involve working to craft arguments that defend the law or find ways to mitigate legal risks.

For example, if we are dealing with firearm-related legislation, we carefully review Second Amendment jurisprudence and recent court rulings to ensure that the proposed law is consistent with established constitutional interpretations.

6. Implementation and Enforcement: How Will This Law Be Put into Action?

Even the best-written law is meaningless if it cannot be effectively implemented or enforced. That’s why we pay close attention to how the law will be carried out in practice. This includes:

  • Regulatory Agencies: Many laws delegate authority to regulatory agencies to implement specific provisions. We look at which agency will be responsible and how they are likely to enforce the law.
  • Funding and Resources: Does the law provide adequate funding for implementation? Many good laws fail because they are underfunded or lack the necessary infrastructure for enforcement.
  • Compliance Requirements: How difficult will it be for businesses or individuals to comply with the law? We evaluate whether the compliance burden is reasonable and what steps need to be taken to ensure clients can meet the law’s requirements.

Understanding the practical implications of legislation is crucial for providing clients with actionable advice. If a law is too burdensome or likely to be inconsistently enforced, we work with legislators to address those concerns before the bill becomes law.

7. Strategic Action: How Do We Influence the Outcome?

Once we've thoroughly analyzed the legislation, the next step is developing a strategy to influence its passage or defeat. Our approach may include:

  • Direct Lobbying: Engaging directly with legislators to advocate for changes to the bill that align with our client’s interests. This might involve meetings with key lawmakers, providing testimony at committee hearings, or offering amendments to improve the bill.
  • Building Coalitions: Partnering with other organizations, businesses, or interest groups that share our position on the bill. A broad coalition can amplify our message and increase the likelihood of success.
  • Grassroots Advocacy: Mobilizing our client’s supporters to contact their legislators, write letters, or participate in advocacy campaigns. Engaging constituents can be a powerful tool in shaping legislative outcomes.

By developing a comprehensive advocacy strategy, we ensure that our clients’ voices are heard and their interests are protected throughout the legislative process.

The Power of Legislative Insight

At EPIC Policy Group, our job is to understand the complex world of legislation and translate it into actionable insights for our clients. By breaking down each bill and understanding its text, context, intent, stakeholders, legal implications, and practical enforcement, we can help our clients navigate the legislative process with confidence.

Whether you’re a business leader, industry association, or community organization, understanding how to analyze and influence legislation is essential to achieving your policy goals. With the right approach, you can not only anticipate the impact of new laws but also play an active role in shaping them to work in your favor.

 



[1] California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) | State of California .... 13 Mar. 2024, https://www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa.

[2] General data protection regulation (GDPR) - EUR-Lex.\ 01 Jul. 2022, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr.html.

 

September 30, 2024

Famous Cookies and the Sound of Silence

In the grand story of life, some people leave behind legacies so delicious that they’re remembered for their cookies—and Wally Amos was one such man. Born in 1936 in Tallahassee, Florida, Wally Amos had a journey that combined Hollywood stardom, mouth-watering chocolate chip cookies, and a profound love for literacy. He was a man with a passion for baking and an even deeper passion for reading. You could say he was just a guy from Florida who had a fetish for chocolate chips and books—and what a beautiful combo that was.

From Mailroom to Music Legends

Before Wally Amos became the “Famous Amos” we all know, he wasn’t just dipping into cookie dough; he was knee-deep in managing music legends. Yep, we’re talking about a man who, while working at the William Morris Agency, signed Simon & Garfunkel and worked with legends like The Supremes, Diana Ross, and Marvin Gaye. Wally was the first black talent agent at William Morris, breaking barriers and shaking things up in the entertainment industry. But even in his high-flying Hollywood career, he found peace and comfort in something far more humble—baking chocolate chip cookies.


Cookies became Wally’s therapy. What started as a way to relax turned into a business idea that would make him famous in a whole new way. In 1975, he opened the first Famous Amos cookie store on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles, and suddenly, the world had a reason to smile a little wider. His cookies were so fresh, they seemed to leap off the shelves and into the hearts of cookie lovers everywhere—from local supermarkets to upscale department stores like Bloomingdale’s and Neiman Marcus.

The Sweet Success (and the Crumbles)

Wally’s cookie empire took off fast—maybe a little too fast. By the mid-1980s, the rapid growth became too much to handle, and Wally eventually sold his business. Though he lost control of the brand, he stayed on as the spokesperson, and the world could still feel his passion for those delightful, chocolate-filled bites of joy. His enthusiasm for promoting the cookies was as vibrant as his famous Panama hats and the kazoos he often carried.

But if there’s one thing Wally Amos knew, it was how to bounce back. Even after losing his company, he tried launching other cookie brands like Chip & Cookie and The Cookie Kahuna. And in true “never-give-up” fashion, even when his cookie ventures didn’t pan out (like his appearance on Shark Tank in 2016), he kept going. He kept baking. He kept dreaming. And his final cookie company, Aunt Della’s, was his sweet tribute to his beloved aunt who inspired his love for baking in the first place.

The Sound of Literacy

For Wally Amos, it wasn’t just about cookies. Sure, he loved the semisweet chocolate chips and vanilla extract, but what he really loved? Books. Literacy. The smell of a good story. He was as passionate about reading as he was about baking. And for him, promoting literacy was a key ingredient to a better life for children everywhere.

Wally’s devotion to reading led him to become a powerful literacy advocate. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush awarded him the National Literacy Award—a testament to how much Wally believed in the power of words. From his cookie shop in Hawaii, where he’d relocated in the late ‘70s, Wally would read to children, spreading his love for books one page at a time. His message was simple: reading is fundamental, and it should start as early as possible. He once even quipped that parents should start reading to their children before birth, while they’re still in the womb.

Amos founded the Read It Loud! Foundation in 2005, which encouraged parents to read aloud to their children. He worked tirelessly with organizations like Read to Me International and the YMCA, promoting literacy wherever he could. Whether he was donning his watermelon hat and reading aloud at his cookie shop or traveling the country as a motivational speaker, Wally’s true mission was to get books into the hands of as many kids as possible.


The Legacy of a Cookie Lover

Wally Amos’ story is about so much more than chocolate chip cookies, though his cookies were legendary. It’s a story about perseverance, reinvention, and using your platform for good. He may have started in the mailroom of the William Morris Agency, risen to become a talent agent for some of the biggest stars in music, and become a cookie magnate, but his sweetest success was promoting literacy. He wanted the world to know that the best recipe for a good life included two ingredients: cookies and books.

So, here’s to Wally Amos who passed away last month, the man who taught us that you can go from signing Simon & Garfunkel to selling chocolate chip cookies, to encouraging kids to love reading. He was, in his own words, a guy who believed that “you must first ask for what you want before you can have it,” and he wanted a world filled with cookies and literate minds. What a world that is.

In the end, Famous Amos wasn’t just famous for his cookies—he was famous for his heart. And that’s one recipe the world will never forget.

Now go out and read a book and eat a chocolate chip cookie. 

Be good to one another! 

September 27, 2024

The Art of Campaigning: Balancing Sales, Marketing, and Warfighting

Last night, I had an insightful conversation with a friend who is currently running for office. We found ourselves diving deep into the mechanics of political campaigns, breaking them down into two fundamental approaches that every candidate must master to be successful: sales/marketing and warfighting. These two elements, though seemingly distinct, are interwoven and essential to the balance required for a successful political campaign. However, maintaining that balance is no small feat—it's one that many candidates struggle to achieve.

The campaign journey is more than just knocking on doors or sharing polished sound bites on social media. It’s about understanding that each move you make, each message you deliver, has to serve two purposes: reaching voters (sales/marketing) and outmaneuvering your opponent (warfighting). You need to connect with people and show them your values, your vision for the future. At the same time, you need to play a strategic game against your competition, anticipating their moves and positioning yourself to win when it counts.

This idea can be summed up by a quote from General Alfred M. Gray, former Commandant of the Marine Corps:

“In tactics, the most important thing is not whether you go left or right, but why you go left or right.”

Let’s explore these two perspectives in more detail.

Sales/Marketing: Winning Over the Voter

At its core, sales and marketing is about one thing: connection. Just as a company seeks to sell its products or services to consumers, a political candidate must sell their message to the voter. But unlike businesses that can offer tangible products, candidates are selling their vision, their leadership, and the future they promise to build. This makes the process both more challenging and more rewarding when done effectively.

Steve Jobs encapsulated the essence of marketing perfectly:

“Marketing is about values. It is a complicated and noisy world, and we are not going to get a chance to get people to remember much about us. No company is. So, we have to be really clear about what we want them to know about us.”

Your campaign message has to cut through the noise. The political landscape is loud—countless candidates, ads, and opinions are competing for attention. In this sea of chaos, clarity is power. If you aren’t clear about who you are, what you stand for, and what you aim to achieve, voters will move on to the next name on the ballot.

A candidate must build a personal brand, not unlike a company builds its reputation. Voters need to know your values, your vision, and what differentiates you from your opponent. That’s your pitch. The goal is to make it so clear that when people think about you, they instantly know what you stand for—just like they associate Apple with innovation or Nike with performance.

Warfighting: Battling Your Opponent

Now, here’s where many candidates falter. While marketing and messaging are vital, politics is also a battleground. Campaigns are, in many ways, fights for survival. And as much as you need to connect with voters, you also need to play an aggressive, strategic game against your competition. In the words of Sir William Slim:

“There is only one principle of war and that’s this: Hit the other fellow, as quick as you can, and as hard as you can, where it hurts him the most, when he ain’t looking.”

That might sound harsh, but politics is not a gentle sport. It’s a zero-sum game. There are winners, and there are losers. To succeed, a candidate must stay on the offensive, anticipating moves from opponents and responding with calculated strikes that put them on their back foot.

This doesn’t mean a campaign should devolve into personal attacks or petty politics. Rather, it’s about staying sharp, being aware of vulnerabilities, and positioning yourself in a way that neutralizes threats before they materialize. It’s about out-strategizing your opponent. When done well, warfighting becomes an art form—a chess game where every move you make shifts the momentum in your favor.

Finding the Balance

Balancing these two sides—sales/marketing and warfighting—is where the magic happens. It’s where campaigns transform from mediocre efforts into successful political movements. A successful candidate needs to master both, and most importantly, know when to lean into one over the other.

So, if you’re running for office, congratulations! You’ve chosen to serve, which is no small task. But beyond that, you’ve chosen to enter a competitive arena where many have failed. To stand a chance, take a moment to reflect on your campaign and ask yourself:

  1. Am I rising above the noise to let the people know about me, my campaign, and my vision for the future?
    Your marketing efforts should be sharp and focused, connecting with voters on a level that makes you memorable. Are you clear on what you want people to know about you? Are your values resonating with them?
  2. Am I fighting or just going through the motions?
    Campaigning is hard work, but it’s also strategic. Are you playing the game with precision, or are you simply hoping to coast along? Have you identified your opponent's weaknesses, and are you capitalizing on them?

Rise and Fight!

Campaigns, at their core, are both a sales pitch and a battle. The candidates who succeed are the ones who can master this balance. They rise above the noise with a clear message, while simultaneously engaging in a calculated fight against their opponents.

So, if you’re running for office, I commend you for stepping up, take these principles to heart. Refine your message, strategize your tactics, and remember: politics isn’t just about showing up—it’s about showing up to win. Rise and fight! Good luck.

 

September 26, 2024

California’s Expansion of Gun Control: A Violation of Due Process?

California has long been at the forefront of gun control legislation, often introducing laws aimed at reducing firearm violence and tightening restrictions on who can legally own a firearm. Governor Gavin Newsom’s latest move follows this trend, expanding the criteria under which an individual can be denied a firearm to include those accused of stalking. On the surface, this may seem like a well-intentioned policy aimed at preventing dangerous individuals from accessing firearms. However, a closer examination reveals significant concerns regarding the violation of due process rights and the presumption of innocence that are fundamental to our legal system.

The Problem with “Accused”

The most alarming aspect of this legislation is the inclusion of individuals who are merely accused of stalking. In the United States, individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty. This principle is enshrined in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which guarantee due process of law before any deprivation of life, liberty, or property. By preventing someone who has not been convicted of a crime from exercising their Second Amendment rights, California’s law fundamentally undermines this constitutional guarantee.

Stalking accusations, like many other allegations, can be complex and nuanced. The legal process exists to determine whether the accused is, in fact, guilty. By allowing mere accusations to result in the deprivation of a constitutional right, the law strips the accused of their ability to defend themselves in court before facing penalties. This circumvents the necessary legal procedures designed to protect individuals from arbitrary government action.

The Second Amendment and Individual Rights

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly establishes the right of individuals to bear arms. Over the years, this right has been subject to various interpretations and limitations, but it remains a cornerstone of American individual liberty. When the government starts restricting this right based on accusations rather than convictions, it sets a dangerous precedent. If the government can infringe upon Second Amendment rights based solely on accusations, what’s to stop similar restrictions from being applied to other fundamental rights, like free speech or voting?

One of the core principles of constitutional rights is that they cannot be taken away lightly. The legal system has long established that fundamental rights can only be restricted under strict scrutiny, the highest standard of judicial review. To pass strict scrutiny, the government must demonstrate that a law is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. While public safety is undeniably a compelling interest, restricting gun ownership based on accusations fails to meet the “narrowly tailored” requirement. There are less restrictive ways to ensure public safety, such as ensuring due process through the courts, rather than bypassing it entirely.

Precedents and the Slippery Slope

This is not the first time California has taken an aggressive stance on gun control, and it likely won’t be the last. However, by expanding the criteria for denying gun ownership to individuals accused of stalking, the state risks creating a slippery slope. If the threshold for restricting Second Amendment rights becomes merely an accusation, what other rights might follow suit?

It is also worth noting that accusations can sometimes be false, exaggerated, or made in the heat of emotional disputes. Domestic situations, workplace conflicts, or personal vendettas can lead to wrongful accusations, with potentially devastating consequences. Without the safeguard of due process, individuals could be stripped of their rights based on flimsy or false claims, with no immediate recourse.

California’s new law could also disproportionately impact vulnerable populations. Historically, laws that rely on accusations without proper judicial oversight tend to affect minority communities more harshly, as they are often subject to higher rates of accusations and arrests. This law could exacerbate existing inequalities in the criminal justice system by depriving individuals in these communities of their constitutional rights without proper legal proceedings.

Due Process: More Than Just a Concept

At its core, due process is more than just a legal concept—it is a safeguard that protects citizens from government overreach. It ensures that every person has the right to be heard, to present evidence, and to have their case decided by a neutral party. California’s new legislation bypasses these protections. By shifting the burden from the state to prove guilt to the accused to prove innocence, it turns the presumption of innocence on its head.

Imagine being accused of a crime—stalking, in this case—but before you’ve had your day in court, the government has already restricted your constitutional rights. This is what this legislation essentially allows. Without the opportunity for the accused to defend themselves or present their side of the story, they are effectively punished before any determination of guilt has been made.

In a country that prides itself on justice and fairness, this is an alarming precedent. While public safety is an imperative, it cannot come at the expense of constitutional rights. Protecting due process is essential, not just for those accused of stalking, but for everyone. Once we begin allowing accusations to substitute for convictions in the realm of constitutional rights, we open the door to significant abuses of power.

A Dangerous Path Forward

Governor Newsom’s expansion of California’s gun control laws may be rooted in good intentions, but its impact on due process and the presumption of innocence is extremely concerning. Denying individuals their Constitutional rights based on accusations alone violates the foundational principles of fairness and justice that are supposed to protect every citizen.

If this law is allowed to stand, it sets a precedent that could easily expand to other rights and other accusations. As Americans, we must be vigilant in protecting not only public safety but also the constitutional rights that define our nation. This balance is difficult, but it cannot be achieved by sacrificing due process and treating accusations as convictions.

At the heart of the American legal system is the principle that every individual is innocent until proven guilty. Any legislation that undermines this principle—whether in the name of gun control or any other policy—should be critically examined and challenged. Rights, once taken away, are difficult to regain, and it is imperative that we protect them vigilantly.

California’s latest gun control measure should serve as a wake-up call to those who value individual liberty and constitutional protections. In the pursuit of safety, we must not lose sight of the fundamental principles that make our justice system fair and just. Every accused individual deserves their day in court, and no one should lose their rights without due process.

 

September 25, 2024

Why an independant judiciary is neccessary

Justice Robert Brutinel announced his retirement from the Arizona Supreme Court[1], effective October 31, and marks a significant moment in the state's judiciary, with the implications extending beyond just filling an empty seat. His departure provides Governor Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, with the opportunity to appoint a replacement, a development that is politically noteworthy because it is the first time in nearly two decades that a Democratic governor will get to select a member of Arizona's highest court. Understanding the potential impacts of this appointment and the importance of retaining independent voices like Justice Clint Bolick on the court requires an exploration of the court's composition, the political dynamics surrounding judicial appointments, and the value of judicial independence.

Impact of Brutinel’s Departure and Hobbs’ Appointment

The Arizona Supreme Court has been largely shaped by Republican governors over the last 19 years, particularly with Governor Doug Ducey’s expansion of the court from five to seven justices and his subsequent appointments. The current court's makeup leans conservative due to these appointments. Justice Brutinel himself, appointed by Republican Governor Jan Brewer in 2010, is regarded as a conservative figure who has upheld many key rulings favoring the Republican-leaning legislature and policies in Arizona. His departure opens a door for Governor Hobbs to influence the ideological balance of the court, potentially moderating its conservative tilt.

Hobbs’ selection of a new justice will likely aim to reflect her administration's priorities and values, which could result in a shift toward more progressive judicial outcomes, especially in areas like voting rights, criminal justice reform, environmental regulations, and health care access. While Hobbs is not expected to drastically alter the ideological balance immediately (given the court’s continued conservative majority), her appointment can set the stage for long-term changes. The selection of even a moderately progressive justice could introduce a broader scope of judicial philosophy and potentially slow the conservative legal trends that have dominated the state in recent years.

Why Retaining an Independent Justice Like Clint Bolick is Important

In light of Brutinel's departure and the upcoming appointment, it’s crucial to underscore the importance of maintaining judicial independence and why figures like Justice Clint Bolick play a critical role in the Arizona Supreme Court.

Justice Clint Bolick, appointed by Governor Ducey in 2016, has carved out a reputation as an independent thinker on the bench. Though appointed by a Republican governor, Justice Bolick’s judicial philosophy is often described as libertarian-leaning, focused on individual rights, economic liberty, and limited government. His independence and willingness to diverge from traditional party lines have made him a pivotal figure in maintaining a balanced judiciary, particularly when it comes to controversial issues like school choice, government regulation, and civil liberties. His presence on the court offers a counterbalance to more rigidly ideological justices, whether they lean conservative or progressive.

The retention of an independent justice like Bolick is important for several reasons:

  1. Judicial Independence: Bolick’s track record demonstrates a commitment to interpreting the law based on constitutional principles rather than adhering to partisan preferences. This is vital for maintaining public confidence in the judiciary. An independent judiciary that resists political pressures can ensure fair and just rulings, safeguarding the rights of all citizens irrespective of their political affiliations.
  2. Balancing Partisanship: As the political climate in Arizona becomes increasingly polarized, having a voice like Bolick’s on the court helps prevent the judiciary from becoming another battleground for partisan politics. While governors naturally appoint justices who reflect their political leanings, independent-minded justices like Bolick help ensure that decisions are grounded in law rather than politics. This helps maintain a degree of ideological diversity and prevents the court from becoming dominated by one party's agenda.
  3. Focus on Individual Rights: Bolick’s emphasis on individual rights, particularly his defense of economic liberty and his skepticism of government overreach, provides a necessary check on the power of both the executive and legislative branches. This approach aligns with the libertarian tradition that prioritizes limited government intervention and protects personal freedoms, which can serve as a counterweight to judicial activism from either the right or left.
  4. Continuity of Legal Thought: The Arizona Supreme Court has historically had a blend of legal perspectives that has enabled it to handle complex and evolving legal questions effectively. Bolick’s unique stance, which often marries conservative principles with libertarianism, ensures continuity in legal reasoning that values precedent and individual autonomy. In a time when the composition of courts is subject to rapid changes due to political appointments, retaining justices who prioritize constitutional interpretation over political expediency is critical for the long-term stability of legal jurisprudence.

The Broader Significance of Judicial Appointments in Arizona

Judicial appointments are particularly significant in Arizona due to the state’s use of a merit selection system for its Supreme Court justices. Under this system, a bipartisan commission recommends a slate of qualified candidates to the governor, who then makes the appointment. After appointment, justices must stand for retention elections, giving voters the opportunity to retain or remove them from the bench.

This process is designed to emphasize qualifications over politics, yet governors still have substantial influence through their choices from the commission’s list. With Hobbs’ upcoming appointment, there is heightened attention to who will be selected, as it could signal her administration’s priorities and the future direction of the court.

The significance of Brutinel’s replacement goes beyond just this single appointment, though. It underscores the delicate balance between judicial independence and the inevitable political influence that comes with gubernatorial appointments. In a state like Arizona, which has experienced rapid demographic changes and political shifts, the makeup of the judiciary will be critical in shaping how key legal questions—on immigration, voting rights, environmental policies, and more—are addressed in the future.

Moreover, while Hobbs’ appointment might not immediately swing the court's ideological balance, it will likely influence how future cases are decided, especially on divisive issues where a single vote can make the difference. Justices like Clint Bolick, with their independent streak, will continue to play a crucial role in these deliberations, ensuring that the court does not become merely an extension of the partisan battles being waged in the state legislature or governor’s office.

Justice Robert Brutinel’s retirement and Governor Katie Hobbs’ forthcoming appointment mark a pivotal moment for the Arizona Supreme Court. While the court has leaned conservative due to appointments by Republican governors, this moment offers the potential for a slight ideological shift. Governor Hobbs’ pick will be closely watched, particularly for how it may influence key issues that come before the court in the coming years.

The importance of retaining an independent justice like Clint Bolick cannot be overstated. Bolick’s focus on individual rights, limited government, and judicial independence offers a counterbalance to partisanship and ensures that the court remains a place where legal principles, rather than political ideologies, guide decisions. In an era of increasing political polarization, figures like Bolick help preserve the integrity of the judiciary, providing a necessary check on both executive and legislative overreach and ensuring that the Arizona Supreme Court remains a guardian of the rule of law.

 

September 19, 2024

Kamala Harris’s Gun Storage Law: A Constitutional Controversy

In 2007, as San Francisco's district attorney, Kamala Harris introduced a controversial piece of legislation that sparked significant debate about the balance between public safety and constitutional rights. The law, which Harris helped draft, allowed authorities to inspect homes of legal gun owners to ensure firearms were stored properly. This legislation, eventually signed into law by then-Mayor Gavin Newsom, was part of a broader effort to impose stricter gun control measures in San Francisco, including inventory requirements for gun distributors and a ban on possessing guns in public housing.

Harris argued that these measures were necessary to promote responsible behavior and align with community values. During a press conference, she emphasized the importance of legislating values to encourage certain types of behavior, suggesting that the law was as much about shaping societal norms as it was about enforcing safety.

However, critics argue that the law infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. The idea that authorities could "walk into" homes unannounced raised concerns about privacy and the potential for government overreach. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to review the San Francisco ordinance, especially in the wake of the Heller decision, surprised many. The Heller ruling affirmed an individual's right to keep a functional firearm in a state of readiness at home, yet the San Francisco ordinance seemed to challenge this by imposing strict storage requirements.

Proponents of the law, including Harris's campaign spokesperson, maintain that it strikes a balance between gun rights and public safety, with the Ninth Circuit upholding the law as constitutional. They argue that sensible gun storage laws are essential for reducing gun-related accidents and incidents, aligning with Harris's stance as a gun owner who supports common-sense safety laws.

The controversy underscores a broader national debate on gun control and constitutional rights. While some see these measures as necessary for public safety, others view them as a slippery slope towards eroding fundamental freedoms. As Harris continues her political journey, her past actions and statements on gun control remain a focal point for both supporters and critics, highlighting the ongoing tension between security and liberty in American society.

Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL) remains steadfast in its commitment to safeguard the rights of Arizona's lawful firearms owners. As a grassroots organization, AzCDL tirelessly advocates for the preservation of the Second Amendment, actively opposing any legislation that threatens to infringe upon individual gun rights. In response to measures similar to San Francisco's controversial gun storage law, AzCDL emphasizes the importance of vigilance and proactive engagement in legislative processes to prevent such policies from taking root in Arizona. By mobilizing its members and fostering a community dedicated to constitutional freedoms, AzCDL continues to stand as a robust defender against any encroachments on the rights of firearms owners, ensuring that Arizona remains a stronghold for gun rights advocacy.

Making Effective Decisions with Imperfect Information

In a world teeming with information and choices, the art of decision-making can often feel overwhelming. Many of us fall prey to "paralysis by analysis," where the quest for perfection stalls progress. Yet, there's a powerful antidote rooted in both military doctrine and business acumen: the concept of a "bias for action." By embracing this mindset, you can make quicker, more effective decisions—even with imperfect information.

The Bias for Action: A Catalyst for Success

Bias for action refers to the tendency to take initiative and make decisions swiftly, even in the face of uncertainty. It's a principle celebrated in leadership and business, exemplified by companies like Amazon, which prioritize action over perfection. We know that nothing is perfect. Psychological studies back this approach, showing that human nature often favors activity over inactivity, driving innovation and progress.

The Marine Corps 70% Rule: A Strategic Approach

A compelling framework for bias for action is the Marine Corps' 70% Rule. This principle encourages decisive action once about 70% of the necessary information is available. Originating from military doctrine, it ensures that decisions are made promptly, especially in high-stakes scenarios. The logic behind the 70% threshold is simple: it's a balance between being informed and avoiding delays that could jeopardize success.

Applying the 70% Rule in Daily Life

Business Decisions: Entrepreneurs and executives can apply the 70% Rule to strategic decisions such as product launches or market entries. In fast-paced environments, waiting for perfect conditions can mean missing critical opportunities and leave money on the table. By iterating quickly based on initial feedback, startup founders exemplify this approach, proving that action often trumps perfection.

Personal Development: The 70% Rule isn’t just for business. It’s a powerful tool for personal growth, fitness, and career changes. Taking action, even with limited information, often leads to more progress than overplanning. Whether it’s starting a new workout routine or exploring a career shift, the key is to begin and adapt along the way.

Project Management: In team settings, especially within agile development environments, a bias for action can lead to better results. Iterative progress, driven by quick decision-making, fosters an atmosphere of continuous improvement and innovation.

When to Exercise Caution

While the 70% Rule is effective, it's crucial to recognize situations where more information is necessary. High-risk decisions involving financial, health, or safety concerns may require a more cautious approach and more extensive research. Similarly, areas like regulatory compliance or legal negotiations often demand thorough data analysis to avoid costly mistakes.

Cultivating a Bias for Action

Developing a bias for action involves a mindset shift. Start by making small, quick decisions to build confidence and resilience. Embrace mistakes as learning opportunities, and gradually tackle larger decisions with the same approach. Practical tools like time-boxing, the Eisenhower Matrix for prioritization, and realistic goal setting can facilitate this transformation.


Embrace Imperfection and Act

In an uncertain world, the ability to make effective decisions with imperfect information is a valuable skill. By adopting a bias for action and utilizing frameworks like the 70% Rule, you can navigate challenges with confidence and agility. So, take the first step today—embrace imperfection, act decisively, and watch as opportunities unfold before you.

Additional Resources

For further exploration of these concepts, consider reading Corps Business: The 30 Management Principles of the U.S. Marines written by David Freedman. 

September 11, 2024

The Importance of Social Entrepreneurship

In today's world, the lines between business, government, and social impact are increasingly blurred, creating new opportunities to address complex social and environmental challenges. Enter social entrepreneurship—an innovative approach that harnesses the power of business to drive positive change. Social entrepreneurs use their ingenuity and resourcefulness to tackle pressing issues like poverty, inequality, access to education, and environmental degradation, all while building sustainable business models that can grow and scale.

Why Social Entrepreneurship Matters

Traditional businesses primarily focus on profit, while non-profit organizations often rely heavily on donations and grants. Social entrepreneurs, however, bridge the gap between these two worlds, employing market-driven strategies to achieve social good. They take on problems that are often neglected by the public and private sectors, creating lasting solutions where others have failed.

Take, for example, the rise of microfinance institutions that provide small loans to individuals in low-income communities. Or think of businesses like TOMS Shoes, where every purchase helps someone in need. These ventures show that businesses can profit while contributing to the welfare of society. Social entrepreneurship is vital because it offers a new model for creating positive social and environmental impact—one that is financially sustainable, scalable, and highly adaptive to the needs of local communities.

How EPIC Policy Partners with Organizations for Change

At EPIC Policy, we understand that fostering social entrepreneurship is more than just a buzzword—it’s a crucial pathway to systemic change. That's why we partner with organizations, both big and small, to help them navigate the complexities of advocacy, legislation, and public policy. Whether it's advising on regulatory frameworks, providing legislative tracking services, or creating strategic communications plans, we ensure that social entrepreneurs have the support they need to amplify their impact.

Our team brings a wealth of experience in government affairs, policy analysis, and grassroots advocacy to the table. By leveraging these skills, we help social enterprises and mission-driven organizations tackle the challenges they face, from securing funding and scaling their initiatives to influencing public policy and gaining community support. We know that social entrepreneurs don’t just need great ideas; they need the right tools, networks, and knowledge to make those ideas a reality.

Facilitating Solutions for Positive Change

EPIC Policy has a unique approach to partnering with social entrepreneurs. We start by understanding the core mission and goals of each organization we work with, ensuring that our strategies align with their desired impact. From there, we use our deep knowledge of policy and advocacy to help them build bridges with lawmakers, engage stakeholders, and drive awareness of their initiatives.

By partnering with social entrepreneurs, EPIC Policy is helping to pave the way for innovative, sustainable solutions that drive positive change. Our clients include those who advocate for motorcycle rights, veterans' issues, and economic development, among other causes. We believe in their missions, and we provide the resources and guidance they need to succeed in an ever-changing policy landscape.

Join Us in Creating Lasting Change

Social entrepreneurship is more than just a movement; it is a powerful force for good. At EPIC Policy, we are proud to stand beside social entrepreneurs as they challenge the status quo and redefine what's possible. Together, we can create lasting, meaningful change that benefits not just a few but all of us.

If you're a social entrepreneur looking to make a difference, reach out to EPIC Policy today. Let's explore how we can work together to turn your vision into reality and make the world a better place, one innovative idea at a time.

https://epicpolicygroup.com/contact 

September 09, 2024

Navigating Policy Shifts in the Credit Union Mortgage Industry

This article explores the evolving policy landscape affecting the credit union mortgage industry. It highlights the dynamic shifts in regulatory practices, technological advancements, and political influences shaping the future of mortgage lending for credit unions.

Key Topics and Takeaways from a recent Discussion

Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Proposal on AI-Generated Robocalls

The FCC has introduced a groundbreaking proposal aimed at regulating AI-generated robocalls. This proposal mandates an additional opt-in specifically for AI-generated calls, adding a new layer of consumer protection. While seemingly minor, this change carries significant implications for credit unions using or planning to use AI technology in their communication strategies.

Credit unions must stay vigilant about these changes, as many consumers are unfamiliar with AI technology. The fear and uncertainty surrounding AI, coupled with the negative connotations associated with "robocalls," could lead to fewer consumers opting in, potentially limiting credit unions' communication capabilities. Although the proposal seeks to enhance consumer protection, its broader impact on credit union practices and customer engagement remains to be seen.

The Role of AI in Credit Unions: A New Frontier

As AI technology becomes more pervasive, its use in credit unions is expected to grow significantly over the next five to ten years. Many credit unions are just beginning to explore AI's potential applications, such as automating payment reminders or providing customer support through AI-driven bots. The uncertainty around AI regulation, like the FCC's proposal, means that credit unions need to remain adaptable and forward-thinking to navigate this new regulatory environment successfully.

Insights on Upcoming Regulation from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)

The CFPB is expected to release new regulations concerning "junk fees" in the housing market in late fall or early winter. This heightened scrutiny over various fees, such as those for sending out payoff statements, indicates a tightening regulatory landscape.

A recent amicus brief filed by the CFPB in the Salmon v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC case serves as a critical example of the Bureau's stance. The case revolves around the legality of certain fees associated with mortgage payoffs, which the CFPB argues violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. EPIC Policy advises credit unions to closely monitor these developments, as they could signal a shift in how fees are regulated, potentially impacting the non-interest income strategies of credit unions.

Political Climate and Its Impact on Credit Unions

With the U.S. elections approaching, the discussion addresses the heightened political activities and their potential impact on the credit union sector.

A new housing policy proposal from the Harris administration aims to provide $25,000 in federal down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers. While the proposal reflects a recognition of housing affordability challenges, it also raises questions about the potential economic impact, including the risk of inflating home prices further. The debate over this proposal is far from settled, with arguments on both sides regarding its potential benefits and drawbacks.

The Election’s Effect on Regulatory Focus and Direction

The broader political implications, including the nomination of new vice-presidential candidates and their possible influence on housing and financial services policies, are also critical to consider. J.D. Vance, the Republican vice-presidential candidate and member of the Senate Banking Committee, is identified as a key figure to watch due to his mixed stance on various financial issues. His bipartisan collaborations with figures like Elizabeth Warren suggest a willingness to cross party lines on certain matters, adding complexity to the policy landscape.

Tim Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate, has a history of implementing restrictive housing regulations as the Governor of Minnesota, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the election season intensifies, understanding where these candidates stand on mortgage-related policies will be crucial for credit unions aiming to stay ahead of potential regulatory changes.

The Future of Credit Union Regulation: Navigating Uncertainty

There is a growing importance of staying informed and engaged in the regulatory process, particularly as credit unions grapple with new challenges around AI, consumer protection, and evolving political landscapes. The major questions doctrine and recent Supreme Court decisions, such as the Chevron decision, could reshape the way regulatory agencies like the CFPB approach rulemaking, providing credit unions with potential avenues for challenging perceived regulatory overreach.

The credit union mortgage industry is navigating a period of significant change, driven by new technological opportunities, evolving consumer expectations, and a complex regulatory environment. Credit unions must remain proactive, keeping a close watch on both regulatory developments and political shifts to adapt successfully to the challenges and opportunities ahead.

For more information and updates, visit EPIC Policy's website and follow their LinkedIn page.

www.epicpolicygroup.com

https://www.linkedin.com/company/epicpolicygroup