Associations Working Together is The Power of A


John H. Graham IV, CAE
President & CEO, ASAE
Associations are pioneers of collaborative problem solving, what we call The Power of A. In that spirit, ASAE created this site to stimulate discussion among association leaders, policymakers & other stakeholders, so that the best and brightest ideas can be shared & help resolve issues of importance. Please join in our conversation. Every voice is welcomed. Every opinion valued. Every solution in sight. Thank you.

Join the association community's open forum as we work to solve the nation's most critical issues. 

ASAE and other travel-focused associations have been sharing stories about how the economy and negative media attention has forced some corporations and associations to cancel or move their meetings from certain high-profile destinations and properties to avoid public criticism.  Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that the federal government has also been pulling meetings from some of these same traditionally popular meeting destinations, due to concerns about how the meeting will be perceived.

The General Services Administration, which issues federal employee travel per diems, has no restrictions on locations for agency meetings, but each agency can set their own internal guidance.  A sample of the guidance obtained by the Journal:

-          A Department of Justice memo states conferences “are not to be held in cities that are vacation destinations/spa/resort/gambling.”

-          The FBI recently issued an internal memo that listed Las Vegas and Orlando as the first two cities “on the chopping block” for meetings.  A conference planner at the MGM Mirage confirmed that the FBI politely declined her proposal for a Las Vegas meeting.

-          The Department of Agriculture issued internal travel guidelines that asked employees to hold meetings in cities that met three criteria: the city is a travel hub, it is low in cost, and it is a “non-resort location.”  The memo includes the following as examples of cities meeting all three criteria: Chicago, Denver, Portland (OR), St. Louis, Washington DC, Milwaukee, Phoenix, and Fort Collins (CO).  The memo also claims “resort locations” aren’t banned, but the planner must “provide robust justification” for the location.

The concern for travel associations and local convention and visitors bureaus (CVBs) is that labeling certain cities like Las Vegas, Reno, and Orlando as resorts discourages associations, businesses, and federal agencies from meeting at these locations and hurts local economies dependent on strong convention bookings and business travel.  Pressure is coming from the media, internal stakeholders and certain policymakers for businesses to avoid holding “junkets” in a bad economy; President Obama earlier this year even singled out Las Vegas as a place for firms receiving Recovery Act funds to avoid.

Earlier this month, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) sent a letter to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel asking the White House to reverse the informal guidance which discouraged meetings held in Las Vegas.  He cited numbers showing the affordability of having meetings in the city, including an average hotel room this summer costing $96.  Emanuel responded with a letter saying policy on meeting location was not dictated by destination but by the cost of holding the meeting.

How does an association balance its responsibility to hold a meeting in a destination with first-rate facilities without coming across as extravagant?

Quick Hits

Energy and Commerce Chairman Waxman and the Blue Dogs strike a deal to allow an independent board to make cuts and set rates for government health care programs…  While the agreement is a step forward, the Blue Dogs still have concerns (subscription) on the House health care bill… Finance Committee deliberations are still ongoing.

by: Robert

Bookmark and Share

As many people travel over the July 4th recess, the travel and hospitality community are working with Congress to help revitalize the nation’s economy.

USTA, the U.S. Travel Association (formerly the Travel Industry Association) is working on numerous fronts to help keep the U.S. tourism industry vibrant in the face of a down economy.  Legislatively, USTA is supporting the Travel Promotion Act of 2009, legislation that establishes a private-government partnership to promote the U.S. as a tourist destination for overseas visitors.  The first step has already been taken with the “Discover America” website to highlight destinations for foreign visitors.  The legislation is currently out of committee in the Senate but consideration has been held up on the floor due to procedural concerns.

USTA is also using new media to promote travel in the U.S.  The “Power of Travel” website was created to centralize statistics and facts about the benefits of tourism to the U.S. economy.  In tandem with this, USTA conducted its “Faces of Travel” contest, where individuals shared their stories of the importance of travel via YouTube.  In its most recent contest, USTA selected Paco Saldaña as their winner; his video is below:

Saldana Video

The American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA) is also encouraging tourism by making travel planning easier and cheaper.  Their “Travel Sense” website is a central location for connecting people with their members, as well as providing travel tips and resources.

Is your association involved with travel issues?  If so, share your story with us.

Quick Hits

Members of Congress are also travelling this week - back home to their districts and states.  ASAE encourages its members to take advantage of seeing their members of Congress back home to share with them information on health care, the importance of travel, and other association issues.

Wal-Mart comes out in favor of an employer mandate (see its letter here)… President Obama continues to push health care reform through a White House town hall meeting.  You can find out how to participate and ask a question hereNew York Times story on how three-quarters of those who fall into medical bankrupcy had insurance when they filed… Questions by critics on how much the promised pharmaceutical health care reform savings will save.

by: Robert

Bookmark and Share

Yesterday, the Senate Finance Committee leaked its outline for its health care legislation, partly in response to the Congressional Budget Office’s scoring of previous draft language.  The document (seen here) is not legislative language, but the concepts do have some impact on small businesses and associations if they were enacted:

  • The draft incorporates the Small business Health Options Program (SHOP) Act exchange idea, where small businesses can determine their coverage through one centralized location.  There is not a specified role for associations or “navigators” mentioned in the draft.
  • To reduce the cost, the proposal grants tax credits to individuals and families up to 300% of the federal poverty level.  This is down from the 400% level proposed by the Senate HELP Committee.
  • The legislation defines small businesses eligible for a small business tax credit as fewer than 25 employees with average wages below $40,000 until their state creates an Exchange.  Some in the small business community object to this arbitrary definition of a small business.  This concept and the numbers are also contained in the HELP Committee draft.
  • The tax exclusion for employer-based coverage would be capped at either 10% or 20% above the Federal Health benefits Program.  This is a limited cap, as opposed to completely removing the tax exclusion for the benefit.
  • There is no public plan in the draft.  Instead, the draft incorporates Senator Conrad’s (D-ND) cooperative concept.  The Department of Health and Human Services would provide seed money for individuals to create a “co-op” to purchase or create health insurance plans.  Based on the language released so far, this is not association health plans, as it is driven by individuals or small businesses.
  • The legislation has a mandate for everyone to have health insurance.  The draft also has a “free rider” approach to an employer mandate: there is no absolute mandate for employers to provide insurance for employees, but employers whose workers receive Medicaid or a tax credit through an Exchange must contribute half of the average Medicaid cost for workers or 100% of the cost of the tax credit received for providing the workers with health insurance.  This is an idea incorporated from the Wyden-Bennett health care bill.  Additionally, workers could only leave their employer-sponsored coverage and go through an exchange if their employer’s insurance plan was costing the worker more than 12.5% of their income.

Do you think that this draft has the best chance of passage, or is it contrasting itself to the HELP bill to allow the final Senate bill to be a compromise of the two?

Quick Hits

Congratulations to Paco Saldana, the winner of the U.S. Travel Association’s contest to find the best grassroots lobbyist to advocate for increased U.S. travel.  Details on USTA’s innovative campaign can be found here… The Consumer Electronics Association has launched its new campaign “The Innovation Movement“.  The goal of the campaign is to tap into the industry’s brain trust to show how the industry drives economic improvement… The House “Tri-Com” health care draft will be released this afternoon.  Check back here to find more details and analysis on the language.