Jan 31

Sec. of State Jason Kander and the BBB Offer Consumer Protection Advice

by

January 31, 2014

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – While federal investigators and the national media are trying to figure out the real impact of the hacking and digital theft impacting Target customers, experts are warning Missourians to watch their money closer to home.

On “Missouri Viewpoints”, Secretary of State Jason Kander and the Better Business Bureau’s Tracy Hardgrove explain the battle against con artists from both the public and private sectors.

MWSnap150While consumers are often better prepared to spot some scams than before, Hardgrove says no one can assume they are safe.

“There are more scams now than there ever have been and they are more stealth, sneakier than they ever have been and so the consumer has to be wiser than they ever have been.”

That’s why the infamous Nigerian money transfer scam is not seen in too many inboxes anymore. That fraud, and other like it, are being replaced by more sophisticated ones. The newer ones involve identity theft and often use more believable tactics, according to Hardgrove.

She warns against assuming any email you get is legitimate. Sometimes, the email claims to be from your bank or broker. It may even look real, with the correct logos and crisp graphics but be from a thief.

“It looks like a legitimate email, saying ‘we need to verify this’ or ‘there’s a problem with your account, send me this information’ and the minute you send that information they have access to your account.”

She says to always pick up the phone and call you bank, broker or financial institution instead of replying to an email or, better yet, meet with them in person. Beware of emails that claim to be from a government agency as well. The BBB says they’ve received reports of emails claiming to be from the FBI or the IRS that demand personal information like Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers or personal identifying information.

Those agencies to not initiate contact with anyone via email.

Hardgrove says one of the best methods of financial self-defense is also one of the most simple: ask questions. Whether you are called directly by someone asking for a charitable donation or get a letter from what appears to be your financial institution, the person on the other end of the line should be ready and willing to give you the information you need.

“If they are unwilling to answer any questions you have, I would take that as a red flag.”

If the sales pitch involves securities and other investments, the Missouri Secretary of State’s Office will likely be involved. Secretary Jason Kander doesn’t want a small number of con artists to harm the financial services industry, but he does want the bad guys to pay.

MWSnap149“The vast majority of folks who work in the financial services sector are good folks who are just trying to help you grow your wealth for retirement but, like anything else, there are a few bad apples and we make sure to work with the industry and, in some cases, be the policeman to make sure we return money to folks who have lost it.”

Of course, losing money is always a risk with any investment – including the real ones.

Both Hardgrove and Kander suggest checking on the broker or salesperson before transferring money anywhere. You can do that through the local BBB and through the Secretary’s office because the latter is where professional registrations are managed. If the financial agent or broker is not registered with the Secretary of State’s Office, they cannot legally sell investments in the state.

The bottom line when it comes to your bottom line is “buyer beware”.

On The Web:

Better Business Bureau www.BBB.org

Missouri Secretary Of State: www.SOS.MO.gov

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/sec-of-state-jason-kander-and-the-bbb-offer-consumer-protection-advice/

Jan 24

Should Missouri Become A “Right To Work” State?

by

January 24, 2014

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – It’s the center of the most controversy so far in the 2014 Missouri Legislative Session and if lawmakers don’t decide the issue at the Capitol, you might have to at the ballot booth.

The so-called “Right To Work” proposal is being promoted as a way to make Missouri more competitive economically. Supporters say it’s also a way for workers to be protected from being force to join a union in order to have a job.

Americans For Prosperity’s Missouri State Director, Patrick Werner, is among those leading the charge for the change.

MWSnap147“For us, it’s sort of a liberty issue. It’s a choice issue. It’s a case where if you want to go into a business or if you want to take a job at a certain company that has a union shop there, you have a choice that if you want to join it, great. But if you don’t want to, you shouldn’t have to or you shouldn’t be forced into paying dues.”

To opponents, including Missouri Jobs With Justice, it’s anti-worker. Rev, Martin Rafanan is part of a key MOJWJ committee that deal with the issue.

“Literally, it is a bill which limits the ability of workers to organize and limits the ability of workers to get better salaries, better benefits, more protection and a voice in the workplace.”MWSnap148

While both sides agree there will be a limiting impact on unions if the law were passed, they disagree on whether that’s good for workers and Missouri’s economy.

Opponents say the bill is a way to write union-busting into law and prevent workers from organizing. Werner says the only change is that unions will have to compete for membership instead of forcing workers to join or pay dues as part of an employment condition. In other words, unions would still be free to organize, operate and collectively bargain but they would have to demonstrate a clear value to get their coworkers to sign up and pay the dues.

Werner calls that a “liberty centric” approach.

Rafanan doesn’t buy into that argument, calling it a matter of fairness. He argues that even non-union employees benefit from the pay scales, benefit packages and workplace conditions negotiated by unions, so they should be required to pay for the results of collective bargaining.

“When you are actually protected, you need to pay for those services. So, that’s nothing more than paying for something you are already receiving.”

The idea is being debated in the State House at this point, where Republicans have more than enough votes to move some form of “Right To Work” forward. While Republicans hold a controlling majority in the Senate, the outcome of the debate is less clear in that chamber.

Governor Nixon is expected to veto a “Right To Work” bill should it come to his desk. As a result some supporters of the idea want to bypass the Governor altogether and are pushing for lawmakers to place the idea on the ballot for later this year.

On the web:

House Bill 1053: http://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=HB1053&year=2014&code=R

House Joint Resolution 44: http://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=HJR44&year=2014&code=R

Americans For Prosperity-Missouri: www.MOAFP.org

Missouri Jobs With Justice: www.MOJWJ.org

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/should-missouri-become-a-right-to-work-state/

Jan 17

Animal Rights Advocates Oppose Missouri’s “Right To Farm” Amendment

by

January 17, 2014

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – Supporters of the so-called “Right To Farm Amendment” to the Missouri Constitution spoke out last week on “Missouri Viewpoints” and, this week, their opponents get the spotlight.

If approved by voters later this year, the amendment would elevate legal protections for agriculture, especially animal agriculture, to the constitutional level, making some aspects of regulations harder to impose. Supporters say legal and legislative “attacks” on farming require the change.

Bob Baker from the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation calls it a “fake problem” and a “fake solution”, saying the right to farm is so far entrenched in the state that a constitutional amendment is not needed.

Baker and MAAL have clashed with agriculture interests regularly. MAAL was among the supporters of 2010’s Proposition “B”, which animal rights groups say was designed to crack down on unethical dog breeders but agriculture groups say also impacted animal agriculture. Farming groups say the referendum language was written in a way that would have hurt beef, pork and poultry farming as well.

Baker disputes that claim. Proposition “B” narrowly passed on the ballot but was quickly thrown out by the Legislature and replaced with a compromise law that was hammered out by agriculture groups, animal welfare advocates, lawmakers on both sides and Governor Nixon.

MWSnap146As far as this year’s amendment is concerned, Baker doesn’t see the point.

“It’s just an atta-boy, a ‘good job, agriculture people’. It doesn’t really do anything. It just guarantees a right to farm and we already have that right to farm.”

Even though the proposed amendment would not change anything for farmers, in Baker’s view, he still wants the measure to be rejected.

“Our concern is that it will result in a lot of frivolous lawsuits against animal welfare laws. I doubt if they would prevail but it’s just going to cause a lot of headaches.”

He also doesn’t like the idea of singling out industries for additional protection in the state.

“There are other industries that are more important than even agriculture in the state. Are we going to have a constitutional amendment for the right to assemble airplanes? Are we going to have a constitutional amendment for the right to assemble cars, to manufacture cars in the state?

“It’s just silly. It really is nonsense.”

Supporters of the ballot issue say animal agriculture must be singled out for extra legal protection because animal rights groups are singling it out for extinction. Baker disputes that notion as well.

“I think that’s a boogey man that they created for fundraising. The fact is, under Missouri’s constitution, the Legislature can nullify that or repeal it and they did that on Proposition B on the puppy mill thing.

“So, in fact, if their fear is really true, that some boogey man is going to come in here and shut down farming by a ballot initiative, the Legislature can repeal it. They don’t need this protection.”

Voters will decide the fate of the proposed amendment in November. Both sides agree that passage of the plan will not end the legal wrangling over the issue, though.

Both Baker and Dan Kleinsorge from Missouri Farmers Care, which supports the proposal, have said on “Missouri Viewpoints” that the courts will likely have to decide what the measure means and what rights are covered by the amendment language.

On the web:

Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation: www.MAAL.org

Ballot Language Information: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2014ballot/

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/animal-rights-advocates-oppose-missouris-right-to-farm-amendment/

Jan 10

Does Missouri Need A “Right To Farm” Amendment?

by

January 10, 2014

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – There’s no question that Missouri is, among other things, an agriculture state. Farming of some kind happens in every county in the state and agriculture impacts many other industries as well.

At the same time, Missouri is known as one of the more infamous states when it comes to so-called “puppy mills”. Animal welfare advocates were successful in 2010 in passing a statewide referendum (Proposition B) that cracked down on what they call unethical and abusive dog breeders.

Because of concerns about language in that law that farming groups say would carry over into animal agriculture, they leaned hard on lawmakers immediately and had parts of the law changed right after voters approved it.

Now, a coalition of agriculture groups is taking the debate one step higher – to the state constitutional level.

Missouri Farmers Care is the coalition promoting the so-called “Farming Rights Amendment” that would, if passed by voters, codify the right to farm into the state constitution. Doing that would make it more difficult to restrict animal agriculture through new laws in the future.

Last year, the Missouri Legislature voted to put the measure on the November, 2014 ballot.

Dan Kleinsorge is the Executive Director of Missouri Farmers Care. While he says the passage of Prop B was a wakeup call to farmers, this amendment is designed to be proactive to protect agriculture, including animal farming, as an industry and way of life in the state.

MWSnap145“It’s not just the farmer, it’s also the truck driver bringing that product from the farm to the market. It’s from the market to an international market. This is the number one industry in our state so it’s a huge part of our state economy.

“The second thing is they [Missourians] really see it in their grocery bill. We’ve seen grocery prices rise in recent years…we don’t need to add extremist groups attacking agriculture. We don’t need to add that margin into our food prices because it’s already a problem and we want to ensure that grocery prices remain low and remain stable.”

The “extremist groups” Kleinsorge refers to are animal rights organizations including PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the Humane Society of the United States which, often, has no connection to local humane society shelters.

He accuses these groups of wanting to put animal agriculture out of business in favor of an animal rights/vegan agenda.

There’s no specific vegan agenda listed on the websites of Missouri-based animal rights organizations.

On the Humane Society of the United States’ website, the organization states: “The HSUS promotes eating with conscience and embracing the Three Rs—reducing the consumption of meat and other animal-based foods; refining the diet by avoiding products from the worst production systems (e.g., switching to cage-free eggs); and replacing meat and other animal-based foods in the diet with plant-based foods.”

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is direct in its opposition to animal-based foods. On its website, a banner at the top of the page states “Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way.” (bold print is in the original text)

Missouri agriculture groups point out that the national animal advocacy organizations supported Proposition B in 2010.

While eating meat or going vegan may be a lifestyle choice, Missouri Farmers Care and its supporting members worry that animal rights’ groups are working to use referendums, legislation and the courts to take that choice away from consumers. The way to do that, agriculture advocates believe, is to attack animal farming and put livestock producers out of business.

That’s why Kleinsorge says there’s a need to single out agriculture for protection in the Missouri constitution. To him, there’s no need to amend the constitution in order to protect manufacturing or specific white-collar businesses.

“The difference between insurance and agriculture, the difference between manufacturing and agriculture is there isn’t a concerted effort to put those folks out of business.
“That sounds a little extreme but the truth is these animal rights groups really want to put animal agriculture out of business.”

Because of the severe weather at the time, a representative from the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation, which is against the proposed amendment, was unable to be at the studio to provide the opposing viewpoint.

That interview has been rescheduled.

On the web:
Missouri Farmers Care: www.MoFarmersCare.com

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/does-missouri-need-a-right-to-farm-amendment/

Jan 03

Keeping Those New Year’s Financial Resolutions

by

January 3, 2014

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – It’s among the most common New Year’s resolutions and it’s among the most broken promises we make to ourselves: managing our personal finances better.

On the new “Missouri Viewpoints”, Vantage Credit Union’s Rachel Parrent offers advice on taking control of your finances. She sees a pattern with her clients and understands why so many Missourians struggle to get ahead when it comes to managing money. To Parrent, the obstacles are sometimes a matter of mindset.

“It’s [money] is such a hard thing to get a hold of. It’s very easy to let go of but it’s very hard to get. So, I think the challenge for people is learning how to control what they have instead of worrying about ‘how much more can I achieve and how much more can I receive from my job or from other jobs, odd jobs, how can I control what I already have’. I think a lot of us want to live in denial.”

Step One to get passed that problem is to do an honest assessment of your personal finances. That means looking at, among other things, income, expenses and debt. Resources to help are available from fee-based financial planners and are often available at banks and credit unions.

Another part of that honest assessment, Parrent says, is deciding what you want to accomplish financially.

“I think the first place you need to start is figuring out what’s important to you.”

Whether decreasing debt and/or increasing savings are the main goal, or buying a new home or starting a business, understanding priorities has to come first.

“Where do you really want to be? Then you have to evaluate ‘what are was actually doing with our money and how can we possibly change our habits a little bit or modify things here and there to make this goal or this dream a reality’?”

Parrent knows that’s easier said than done. That’s why she recommends connecting with experts or at least looking for tolls to help. She says many worksheets and guides are available online through websites such as SmartAboutMoney.org and others.

While assessing and making a financial plan, Parrent says to keep your eyes on the monetary prize. That means remembering the goal you set once you determined your financial priorities. Doing that could make taking even uncomfortable financial steps easier.

Some studies show that 15% to 20% of Americans’ take home pay goes to impulse purchases: items we don’t need, items we didn’t plan to buy and sometimes items we don’t even remember purchasing at the end of the day.

That could be a candy bar at the grocery store checkout, an unplanned detour through the fast food drive through, a $5.00 cup of name brand coffee instead of brewing your own at home or nearly-countless other mini money traps.

On a bigger scale, the new year is a good time to evaluate other, bigger drains on your money. This includes where you use an ATM, as using ones outside of your bank or credit union’s network can cost you a few dollars per transaction. Also, Parrent recommends reevaluating your insurance coverage to make sure you have the right amount and that you are getting the best premium rates.

Another way to keep up the resolution after you assess your finances and set those priorities is to set short term goals. Parrent explains that because it’s easy to get discouraged when reaching for a large, long-term financial goal, smaller goals can provide reassurance.

That could mean setting a goal to have $100 in savings by the end of the month as part of your goal to have three months’ expenses in savings by the end of the year. Reaching the short term goal by the end of the month provides some confidence in your ability to reach the goal.

While getting started is sometimes the hardest part, Parrent says planning shouldn’t be a one-time endeavor. Reviewing your financial plan regularly is the best way to manage your finances. She recommends reviewing your money and goals every month.

She knows adding financial review and management to your personal to-do list may not be easy, but Parrent says it’s worth it in the long run.

“Anything that’s worth it is going to take work.”

On the web:

Missouri Credit Union Association: https://www.mcua.org/

Vantage Credit Union: http://www.vcu.com/

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/keeping-those-new-years-financial-resolutions/

Dec 27

Common Core, School Choice and Public Education

by

December 27, 2013

by Mike Ferguson

(St. Charles, MO) – It’s for the children!

That’s the rally cry on both sides of the debate when it comes to education issues in Missouri.

In November, Missouri Education Commissioner Dr. Chris Nicastro was interviewed on “Missouri Viewpoints” to discuss her views on pressing issues facing public education. Since she was interviewed for the entire program, the opposing side of the debate is highlighted for an equal amount of time this week.

Among the issues discussed is Common Core Education Standards, which Missouri is using in schools now. By this coming Fall, all public schools in the state will be using the approach to education. What that approach is remains the center of debate.

Supporters say it’s simply a set of expectations that puts all states – and all public school students in the country – on the same set of standards. They say that will help improve education and insist that local schools remain in charge of the curriculum.

Opponents of the system say it’s a top-down approach that dictates what is taught and, in some cases, even pushes liberal political views on school children.

Anne Gassel is with the Missouri Coalition Against Common Core, which continues to oppose the use of the system in the state.

MWSnap142Among her objections: that the standards aren’t realistic and can damage students academically.

“Some of the standards, especially in the lowest grades, are developmentally inappropriate. So, you’re asking kids at the very youngest ages, when they first get in to school, to do things that they’re not cognitively ready to do.

“That’s going to set those kids up for failure.”

As an example, Gassel points to math standards in the first and second grades that she says requires children to understand some algebraic concepts.

She calls the overall standards “…too much on the low end and very weak on the high end, on the high school side…”

Gassel’s organization has several action items listed on their website (listed below) regarding Common Core. While they work generally at the statewide level, the group wants supporters to work on the issues at the local school district level as well.

In other education matters, the Show Me Institute’s Dr. James Shuls says it’s time to rethink public education in general and the motivators that drive results in the classroom.

MWSnap143“Everyone wants kids to get a good education, we just have very different ideas on how that happens.

“From my mindset, more of a free market mindset, that happens by giving people choices, letting schools compete for students and allowing students to choose the schools that’s going to best meet their needs.”

That’s basically a call to reform the education system by making it less of a system and allowing market forces to drive education. To Shuls, that more individualistic approach will empower parents and students with more authority over education and increase accountability of schools.

“We haven’t discovered the one best method for teaching kids. We haven’t discovered the one best progression of learning for kids nor have we discovered the one best test. So, we should give people options and allow them to choose a school that’s going to best meet their needs.”

Shuls sums up his view of the difference between a market-based approach and the current approach to public education:

“What the market does, it says when schools are failing, let’s close them. What the traditional system does, it says when schools are failing, let’s keep them open as long as possible.”

That, according to Shuls, is what traps students in failing schools and harms their chances not just to get a solid education now but impacts their ability to succeed in college and in the workforce later.

On the web:
Previous “Missouri Viewpoints” program featuring Missouri Education Commissioner Dr. Chris Nicastro:
http://missouriviewpoints.com/facing-public-educations-challenges-in-missouri/

Missourians Against Common Core:
http://www.moagainstcommoncore.com/

Show Me Institute:
http://www.ShowMeInstitute.org

Permanent link to this article: http://americanviewpoints.tv/common-core-school-choice-and-public-education/

Older posts «

» Newer posts