Washington 5788 public hearing

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by hmiller

Individuals who signed up pro and con all testified that changes had to be made. I am glad that the representatives listened.

Once again the fear of disappointing voters and the principals of chaos won out again. There is no reason not to employ this strategy over and over again.

[Steven L. Smith]

The current law on pest inspectors is confusing, has loopholes, and is vague. The requirement
to get a structural pest inspector license will be redundant. The DOA does not do anything
about people doing pest inspections who are unlicensed. The bond requirement for pest
inspectors is too low for a home inspector. No other state couples a pest inspection with a
home inspection.

I cannot say that I disagree with that. I think it is all disorganized and confusing, hence all the arguments here for years. However, these quotes are not from the state, this is just their summary of some of the people who testified at the hearing. So it should not be interpreted as the state position that their law is confusing, even though it might be for many.

[dhelm]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

Don't think it is going to be that easy, should the licensing proponents win the work will just move to get the law repealed, there are forces stirring within the country that are beginning to demand the promised fruits of licensing, and if they are not forthcoming then many are going to seek the repeal of useless laws. Should keep us all busy, bitter and at each others throats for decades to come.

I want to know who you think all those "proponents" are. I certainly haven't read much on this BB from avid proponents. There did not seem to be any organized proponents at the public hearing either. Who are these "organized proponents"?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by dhelm

Who are these "organized proponents"?

"organized"...? I don't know.

The proponents for your legislation...as they appeared on this message board...were hardly "organized", but did what they could in their own way to further the cause for socialization of the the home inspection industry.

Most popular was the "passive proponent" approach. There are two of these used by Washington and Idaho home inspectors. You will recognize the first type of passive proponent by his use of such phrases: "There are problems with this bill, but they don't affect me. I don't care if it passes or not" or words to this effect. These proponents see the bill as affecting "the other guy" and are willing to let it happen, as long as it doesn't happen to them.

The second type of passive proponent preaches "As far as licensing goes, this bill has more positives than negatives. Since licensing is coming sooner or later, we may as well do what we can to this bill to see that it works." They think that licensing might be a good thing from a marketing sense, but lack either the personality or the tools to strongly address the objections to it.

Very few OPENLY supported this measure on the message board, as very few do. The active proponent works in the dark and must play his cards close to the vest. Some active proponents will actually (like ASHI's St. Louis President) pretend to oppose the legislation in words, and push for its passage with their deeds.

Nobody, including legislators, are buying the "best interest of the consumer" line anymore. That card has been over played and the glaring absence of any consumer oriented groups supporting this legislation speaks quite loudly.

New Hampshire's defeat of the ASHI sponsored bill has a media blitz going on right now attempting to generate public ire against those opposing their bill...but no one is taking the bait.

"Support" for licensing is and must remain clandestine and secretive as long as the "need" for licensing remains absent. Thus, the passive supporters will always be the most vocal.

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by jbushart

"Support" for licensing is and must remain clandestine and secretive as long as the "need" for licensing remains absent. Thus, the passive supporters will always be the most vocal.

The difference is obvious, none of us who oppose licensing have anything to personally gain when licensing is defeated, it is not about us. The proponents on the other hand have a personal stake and a personal investment in the outcome of licensing, some believe that licensing will eliminate their competition others have been promised positions of authority on proposed boards where they can then lord power over their competitors.

It appears that there is a disproportionate number of home inspectors who believe they know what is best for the rest of us and are willing to do whatever it takes to insure their rise to power.

One of the best ways to cool the licensing Nazi's zeal is to eliminate all language regarding grandfathering. By forcing everyone to jump through the same hoops necessary to be licensed the language that is commonly inserted to crush competition can be nullified.

Furthermore, there is no doubt that many high ranking office holders in many HI associations have never had to comply with the current entry requirements foisted on their new applicants. By forcing these old dogs to submit to the same tests and requirements that they want everyone else to comply with to be licensed will surely help reduce their enthusiasm for licensing legislation.

When faced with the inevitability of licensing, No Grandfathering Whatsoever should be the battle cry, legislators will love it and the Licensing Nazis will despise you for it.

Licensing Solves Nothing - Chaos rules!

[Harold E. Miller]

Originally Posted by jbushart

"organized"...? I don't know.

The proponents for your legislation...as they appeared on this message board...were hardly "organized", but did what they could in their own way to further the cause for socialization of the the home inspection industry.

Most popular was the "passive proponent" approach. There are two of these used by Washington and Idaho home inspectors. You will recognize the first type of passive proponent by his use of such phrases: "There are problems with this bill, but they don't affect me. I don't care if it passes or not" or words to this effect. These proponents see the bill as affecting "the other guy" and are willing to let it happen, as long as it doesn't happen to them.

The second type of passive proponent preaches "As far as licensing goes, this bill has more positives than negatives. Since licensing is coming sooner or later, we may as well do what we can to this bill to see that it works." They think that licensing might be a good thing from a marketing sense, but lack either the personality or the tools to strongly address the objections to it.


.

Hey Steve and David....think you could get the "passive proponent" theories included in the Poli-Sci classes at your college?
I feel cheated that when I went to college they didn't teach this concept.
I wonder why it is only Washington and Idaho inspectors that use the concept?

[dhelm]

Passive proponents don't do anything. Google passive (better yet, look in the dictionary). The only people who have any affect on legislation are those that "actively" support or are against legislation. The primary defeaters (if it is actually defeated) of this Washington bill seem to be a number of very active ashi people(the very ones who have the most to gain by being grandfathered).

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by dhelm

The primary defeaters (if it is actually defeated) of this Washington bill seem to be a number of very active ashi people(the very ones who have the most to gain by being grandfathered).

There is never anything posted on the ASHI board in regards to legislation so there is no way for me to judge the validity of your statement. What is so bad about this bill would have caused a number of ASHI members to band together to work for its defeat?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by dhelm

Passive proponents don't do anything.

Obviously.

[dhelm]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Obviously.

So which is it? Passive proponents pushing legislation or passive proponents doing nothing?

[dhelm]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

There is never anything posted on the ASHI board in regards to legislation so there is no way for me to judge the validity of your statement. What is so bad about this bill would have caused a number of ASHI members to band together to work for its defeat?

The people who were organised were whilag, the so called coalition that consisted mostly of ashi.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by dhelm

So which is it? Passive proponents pushing legislation or passive proponents doing nothing?

Your passive proponents pushing legislation...did nothing. The current status of your bill attests to this.

[Harold E. Miller]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

There is never anything posted on the ASHI board in regards to legislation so there is no way for me to judge the validity of your statement. What is so bad about this bill would have caused a number of ASHI members to band together to work for its defeat?

Joe..did you not read the first page of this post? Larry Stamp is not NACHI....he is a member of ASHI.... working with other members of WHILAG, which is mainly ASHI members http://www.nachi.org/forum/f14/washington-5788-public-hearing-14915/

Larry and others have been campaigning "actively" against the legislation for a while.
http://www.nachi.org/forum/f14/wa-legislation-email-larry-stamp-whilag-14086/

..er should I say passively?