LTE: Professional licensing must be protected in economy recovery
Professional licensing must be protected in economy recovery
By: Roger Grabman, PE, NSPE
Op-ed: Consumers are right to demand rigorous professional licensing remain as states reopen
From Juneau to Tallahassee, the issue of licensing reform is once again coming to the fore in statehouses across America as lawmakers weigh a range of measures to reverse the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
While licensing reform is predominately a state issue, the Trump administration has issued federal reports to guide state legislators on the difficult, delicate task of revising licensing laws.
Recently, the Trump administration issued an executive order loosening a raft of federal regulations in response to the pandemic. This approach is likely to be emulated by governors and state legislatures across America.
The purported intentions of the reformers: noble.
The apparent bipartisanship around their efforts: refreshing.
The allure of jumping onto their bandwagon: understandable.
However, as is so often the case with legislative solutions to complex problems, the devil is in the details — or perhaps, in the lack of them.
As we have seen throughout the current crisis, existing professional licensing models have allowed professionals to move to areas where their expertise is most needed without jeopardizing the public’s health, safety, and welfare. At all times, but especially during times of national crisis, the public needs to have confidence that our nation’s critical physical and financial infrastructure is in the hands of competent, qualified professionals.
While proposals to weaken licensing vary, there is a deeply troubling and potentially dangerous constant across them all: They rely on a one-size-fits-all approach.
These proposals make no distinction between easing licensing where there is a legitimate need and weakening necessary qualifications and licensing requirements for professions upon which the health, safety, and welfare of the public at large depend.
Fast-tracking these proposals, as some state lawmakers have suggested, would be a serious mistake.
It is not hard to imagine the consequences of unlicensed individuals planning highways where the curves are too sharp, roadways where hills are steep and hazardous in poor weather conditions, or bridges that are not designed to withstand earthquakes. The long-term consequences could be catastrophic.
Intentional or not, anti-licensing bills disregard the important role of licensing in setting a minimum level of expertise for high-impact, highly complex professions such as engineering and landscape architecture. The legislation also ignores the role of responsible licensing systems to ensure professionals stay current in their field and provide oversight and enforcement against bad actors.
Professional licensing systems are in place to protect the public. They’re rigorous for a reason — and they’re too important to be swept aside by broad-brush reform. Lawmakers need to realize and value what their constituents already know: Professional licensing protects the public, and the public supports professional licensing.
A nation-wide survey of likely voters released in February by the Alliance for Responsible Professional Licensing (ARPL) found that nearly three-quarters of voters believe it is important to regulate professionals in accounting, engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, surveying and related fields with high impact on the public’s safety and well-being.
This concern about licensing reform becoming indiscriminate deregulation is well-founded. Legislation that would do just that was popping up in statehouses before the pandemic with alarming regularity, and it is expected to return as legislatures and courts reconvene.
Some measures bizarrely suggested that professionals should show qualifications only after harm has occurred and then, only the least possible amount of qualification is required. A smarter approach is to start with a bias toward safety and verified qualifications. Proponents seem to have forgotten the adage “Better safe than sorry” — not “Better sorry than safe.”
And the public agrees. The same ARPL survey found the public would rather be safe first with 71 percent of voters wanting licensing required — unless it can be proven that eliminating it will not impact public health and safety.
These proposals weaken professional licensing standards that keep the public safe, and the only remedies they offer for bad outcomes are costly litigation or posting a negative online review. That may work for bad take-out, but it is of little consolation for a structural deficiency in a bridge, road, or building.
No fair-minded observer questions that unnecessary barriers to entry exist for many occupations and trades. Governors, state legislators, and activist groups are right to focus their rhetoric and their energy on eliminating these barriers where possible to jumpstart an ailing economy.
Yet when it comes to professions with high public impact, maintaining licensing standards is imperative to ensuring public trust and safety.
As the discussions continue in statehouse committee rooms, lawmakers would do well to respect the concerns of their constituents and eschew risky, one-size-fits-all measures that would weaken critical qualifications and endanger the public they serve.
Tom Smith is executive director of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Wendy Miller is president of the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA).
Matthew M. Miller is Chief Executive Officer of the Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards (CLARB).
Op-ed published in The Hill:
read more
CPA Conversations Podcast: The Fight to Protect Responsible Professional Licensing
Skip Braziel, Vice President – State Regulation and Legislation with AICPA and Veronica Meadows, Senior Director of Strategy with CLARB discuss the ongoing fight to ensure responsible licensing standards for professions that protect the public interest, new public opinion results on the importance of professional licensing, and how coronavirus has affected this issue.
read more
Chad Danos, Licensed Landscape Architect
Chad Danos, licensed landscape architect, explains the unique impact of his work on protecting the public and bettering communities — and why deregulating the profession would result in dangerous unintended consequences.
read more
LTE: Floridians Right to Demand Rigorous Professional Licensing
Floridians Right to Demand Rigorous Professional Licensing
By: Christopher Sharek, President, ASCE Florida Section
Tallahassee Democrat
A recent article in the Democrat, Deregulate it? Florida lawmakers aim to boost employment by cutting licensing requirements (Feb. 7, 2020), described efforts by some state legislators to weaken or eliminate licensing requirements for Florida professions.
While lowering barriers to entry for occupations is a worthy goal that should be pursued, lawmakers must be careful not to sweep up professions with high public impact in the name of “reform.”
These proposals ignore one simple fact: the best way to ensure that Florida consumers are protected is to continue to require rigorous education, examination and experience for professions that directly impact public health, safety and welfare — overseen by licensing boards composed of independent experts.
The devil, as always, is in the details. Broad-brush deregulation will have the unintended consequence of putting all Floridians at needless risk.
A clear majority of consumers believe the current system protects the public, and they understand certain professions — like engineers, architects, landscape architects and certified public accountants (CPAs) — have systems in place that are rigorous for a reason. For example, professional engineers are designing the bridges you cross every day and the safe drinking water systems on which your family relies. By doing away with licensure, Florida is doing a disservice to its citizens.
Tallahassee would do well to listen to the will of consumers who are actually affected by changes in licensing laws. We ask leadership to be mindful of legislation that undermines the systems that are in place to ensure the safety, health, and welfare of our citizens.
read more
CLEAR Podcast, Episode 26: ARPL
Skip Braziel, Vice President – State Regulation and Legislation with AICPA and David Cox, CEO of NCEES introduce listeners to the Alliance for Responsible Professional Licensing.
It’s about our duty to protect the public, and where we see that threatened is where ARPL will become involved.
read more
Skip Braziel talks licensing on Cronkite News, Arizona PBS
Skip Braziel, ARPL, speaks with Cronkite News, Arizona PBS about the importance of responsible licensing for professions with high public impact.
We are very specific, unique professions that have a high public impact. If something goes wrong, the public suffers a great deal. So we want to make sure that the standards remain high and that we balance economic development with public safety.
read more
New Survey: Consumers Concerned About Rush to Eliminate Professional Licensing
2/5/2020
New Survey: Consumers Concerned About Rush to Eliminate Professional Licensing
Clear Support for Rigorous Professional Licensing to Protect the Public Exists
Findings Come as State Legislatures Weigh Weakening or Eliminating Licensing
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Alliance for Responsible Professional Licensing (ARPL) today announced the results of a national survey that indicated widespread public support for maintaining rigorous professional licensing standards for professions that have a clear impact on public health, safety and welfare. These findings were announced as many state legislatures are considering broad proposals to overhaul or eliminate state licensing requirements in the current legislative session.
Legislation weakening state professional licensing requirements was introduced in the West Virginia legislature earlier this month. Similar legislation is expected to be introduced in other states in the coming weeks and months.
Eliminating licensing has become a top priority of groups such as the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, with model legislative proposals that include the complete elimination of all professional and occupational licensing.
The survey was conducted by Benenson Strategy Group and yielded these key findings:
-
75% of voters believe that it is important to ensure qualifications for professionals in certain industries. A majority of voters believe that current professional licensing requirements protect the public and should not be reformed.
-
More than 70% of voters believe that regulating professionals in accounting, engineering, architecture, landscape architecture,and related fields with high impact on public safety and welfare is important.
-
71% of voters believe professional licensing should be required unless it can be proven that eliminating licensing will not have a negative impact on public health and safety. The public is wary of the alternative approach: requiring licensing only when it is proven necessary for health and safety.
-
67% of voters believe that consumers are best protected by a system that regulates education, examination and experience standards—all of which are overseen by a professional licensing board.
“An overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the American people understand that professional licensing is rigorous for good reason and they want to keep it that way,” said Skip Braziel, a member of the ARPL, who also serves as Vice President for State Regulatory and Legislative Affairs at the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA). “Consumers want to know that the professionals they hire are qualified and as this survey makes clear, voters want to see responsible licensing protected.”
“The public recognizes the critical role that licensing and licensing boards play in protecting the public,” said Marta Zaniewski, an ARPL member who also serves as the Assistant Vice President of External Engagement for the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB). “This is why consumers are understandably wary of the anti-licensing proposals being floated in their state capitals. Licensing boards not only establish qualifications for a profession, but act on the public’s behalf to uphold the highest standards for our profession and take action against bad practitioners. This indispensable public protection role will be lost if licensing is eliminated.”
You can read the survey summary here.
Background:
ARPL is a unique coalition that brings together professional organizations and their licensing boards at a time when there is significant concern over the appropriate level of licensing required by law. The coalition was formed to ensure their voices are heard by policymakers and the public amid the growing debate around licensing. You can learn more about the Alliance and the importance of professional licensing at www.responsiblelicensing.org.
Members of ARPL include the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), American Institute of Architects (AIA), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), the Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards (CLARB), National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA), National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) and National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES).
For more information about the study or to request an interview with an ARPL representative, please contact Joe Sangiorgio at JSangiorgio@craftdc.com or 1-202-550-2709.
read more
New Research: Exploring Public Opinion of Professional Licensing
A recent national survey was conducted to understand public opinion toward professional licensing standards.
Click here to download an executive summary of the research findings.
read more
AICPA CEO Melancon: CPA licensing under threat
American Institute of CPAs president and CEO Barry Melancon talked about the need for CPAs to learn new skills as hiring of accounting graduates has slowed and the CPA licensing model has come under threat in some states… It’s not just targeted to CPAs, but it’s targeted to all licensing. Now that doesn’t mean it’s manifested itself in every state, but it’s manifested itself with attempts in probably about 35 states over the last four years.
Read the full article here: https://www.accountingtoday.com/news/aicpa-ceo-melancon-cpa-licensing-under-threat
read more