Government | The Barefoot Spirit

Immigrants Built Our Economy

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 01 Nov 2018 17:00:20 +0000

Michael’s grandfather, John Francis Houlihan, came over from Ireland in the late 1800s. He was 19 years old. The only passage he could book was above deck on an ocean steamer headed for New York loaded with cattle in the hold. All the immigrants had to make the crossing above deck, exposed to the inclement weather of the North Atlantic. It was cold and windy and at night, the immigrants would huddle next to the smokestacks for warmth. It was a long trip. It was there that he met Michael’s grandmother Nellie, also a teenager at the time, and they fell in love.

When they got to Ellis Island, they were incarcerated in separate prison-like housing until they could prove on paper that they had gainful employment. Communications took forever in those days, so they remained imprisoned for several months. Finally, the word came from San Francisco that John was offered a job cleaning stables at the Sutro Stables that housed the San Francisco Police Department’s horses. John knew horses, but wouldn’t leave until he secured a job for Nellie as a washerwoman in a boarding house in San Francisco.

When they got to San Francisco, they were met with open hostility and prejudice against Irish immigrants because they would take lowly jobs at very low wages. Further, they were viewed as unamerican “papists” because of their Catholic religion which emanated from the Pope in Rome.

In the years that followed, they scraped together enough to make a down payment on their own boarding house. They studied the constitution diligently and became naturalized citizens earning the right to vote. John worked his way up in the stable to become the head horseman. Nellie worked managing room rentals and provided cleaning services for transients.

In 1906, an 8.6 earthquake and ensuing fire destroyed the city. The Sutro stable caught fire. All of the horses perished except the mayor’s prized Percherons. In the confusion and calamity, John had the presence of mind to save them. The mayor asked John how he could possibly thank him. John replied, “Make me a beat cop in the Irish ghetto,” which was the Mission District at the time and the place John and Nellie called home.

John served as a beat cop, walking the streets of the Mission District for 40 years, serving the people of the Mission, keeping the peace, fighting crime, helping in the emergencies, and putting his life on the line. He saw the reconstruction of the City. He attended the Panama Pacific Exhibition in 1915. The Palace of Fine Arts is the only building left standing from the World’s Fair that showed the world that San Francisco was back in business and now; through the newly opened Panama Canal.

John saw World War I and the influx of Italian immigrants that came into the Mission immediately following. He saw prohibition force average Americans to break the law. He saw the Great Depression, the Repeal of Prohibition and World War II. All that time, he saw wave after wave of immigrants come into the Mission and work their way into better lives.

During that time, they had three children. Two died in childbirth. One survived. The survivor, Michael’s father; John Charles Houlihan, was a public servant. Michael’s father worked with others to develop containerized shipping which revolutionized the shipping industry and reduced what they used to call shrinkage, or pilfering by dock workers. The containers were now locked. This alone cut the cost of world commerce significantly. Several container ports sprang up all over the world in the 1970s and ’80s. Shipping was now efficient, safe, and dependable. It became a standard.

Immigrants Don’t Take Citizenship for Granted

Michael grew up spending summers with his Irish grandfather who constantly reminded him of the great opportunity the United States offered to get ahead. He told Michael that hard work paid off in America. He extolled the virtues of American citizenship and expressed deep gratitude for his chance to get ahead in the United States until the day he died.

John and his son gave back to the country in different ways, but their lives improve the lives of many Americans. Think of all the jobs that containerized shipping created, and for that matter, Barefoot Wine.

Immigrants are the backbone of the economy and are why America is so “Great”! Let’s welcome the immigrants who want to work and show their appreciation for having been given the chance. In order to become naturalized citizens and gain the right to vote, they have to learn about the constitution, the divisions of government; and why they exist as well as the checks and balances they provide. Native-born Americans have no such requirement. They can just vote without that knowledge, or not even vote at all. Immigrants generally don’t take citizenship for granted. They understand our government and they vote.

Let’s rethink the value of immigrants and let’s all vote! Democracy is not something immigrants take for granted. Why should we?

Who We Are

Michael Houlihan and Bonnie Harvey co-authored the New York Times bestselling business book, The Barefoot Spirit: How Hardship, Hustle, and Heart Built America’s #1 Wine Brand. The book has been selected as recommended reading in the CEO Library for CEO Forum, the C-Suite Book Club, and numerous university classes on business and entrepreneurship. It chronicles their humble beginnings from the laundry room of a rented Sonoma County farmhouse to the board room of E&J Gallo, who ultimately acquired their brand and engaged them as brand consultants. Barefoot is now the world’s largest wine brand.

Beginning with virtually no money and no wine industry experience, they employed innovative ideas to overcome obstacles, create new markets and forge strategic alliances. They pioneered Worthy Cause Marketing and performance-based compensation. They built an internationally bestselling brand and received their industry’s “Hot Brand” award for several consecutive years.

They offer their Guiding Principles for Success (GPS) to help entrepreneurs become successful. Their book, The Entrepreneurial Culture: 23 Ways To Engage and Empower Your People, helps corporations maximize the value of their human resources.

Currently they travel the world leading workshops, trainings, & keynoting at business schools, corporations, conferences. They are regular media guests and contributors to international publications and professional journals. They are C-Suite Network Advisors & Contributing Editors. Visit their popular brand building site at www.consumerbrandbuilders.com.

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Immigrants Built Our Economy appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Stop Single-Use Plastic Pollution by Leveling the Playing Field

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:00:58 +0000

The European Union finally voted this week on a proposition that’s been on the table since May 2018. It’s a proposition to ban single-use plastics. How this finally happened at this highest level of European government is a testament, in our opinion, to the more intelligent use of social media.

Enlightening documentaries like David Attenborough’s BBC Blue Planet Series and vivid YouTube posts like Richard Horner’s Dive through a sea of plastics have educated and motivated average citizens to demand controls on industry. Shocking videos like Dead whale had eaten 80 plastic bags and ‘Decades’ of deep-sea plastic pollution have finally created the political climate for new laws. Videos that demonstrate how tiny plastic fragments in the ocean can end up in fish and can be passed on to humans are a serious wake-up call for even the most apathetic consumer. But, producers have yet to catch up…

So, the 21st-century environmental action process goes something like this:

Activists and scientists decry the environmental problem that commercial and industrial practices are causing. (They are discredited by accusations of having a political agenda.)
The public gets confused because the proponents create debate and uncertainty. (Most consumers don’t actually see the pollution or realize its effect on their own health.)
Actual videos of the problem finally go viral on YouTube and other social platforms. (Many consumers see it for the first time and realize it will affect their own and their children’s health.)
Pressure mounts on elected officials to do something about it. (Industry won’t control itself so people resort to pressuring the government for more controls.)
Lawmakers pass laws controlling commerce and industry. (Consumers pay more in the short run in their desire to protect their health.)

It’s unfortunate that commerce and industry couldn’t see this coming and regulate themselves to a point that many of these types of environmental catastrophes would not have taken place …and continue to mount. As business people ourselves, we hate to see more arduous government controls clumsily pushed on industry. We know that these kinds of controls will hurt business in the short run by increasing costs. But, by the same token, it’s clear that industry will not control itself without governmental intervention. This is the price industry pays for no self-control. And the fact is that these controls will ultimately help new, non-polluting packaging industries that are currently competing with unfairly “cheaper” single-use plastic producers.

The Elephant in the Room…Competition

The elephant in the room that nobody wants to discuss is competition, plain and simple. Why would a perfectly sensitive company, concerned with the health and welfare of its employees and customers, go to single-use plastics in the first place? It’s simple. It’s competition! Because industry is not yet paying the real cost of pollution, it operates on the false premise that it’s cheaper to pollute. If one producer does it, they all have to do it!

The New European Law

Governmental controls will ultimately change that – but at a steep price to industry. Industry could avoid these controls if they could agree on their own rules and regulations to level the playing field. Perhaps this move by the European Union will send a clear message to American companies that their own consumers are watching these videos and fearing for their own health as well. Perhaps this new European law will send the message that viral videos demonstrating the unhealthy effects of industrial pollution result in more government controls.

What’s interesting about the European law is that it gets very specific. It bans outright single-use plastics where there are readily available alternatives such as paper and cardboard. It also bans cigarette filters which are the #1 pollutant on our beaches. This we can tell you from personal beach cleaning experience. It also calls for 90% of all plastic drink bottles to be collected for recycling by 2025. One member of the European Parliament said that without action now there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by 2050. Just imagine…

So, as much as we hate more governmental control, let’s level the playing field for business. Let’s not give polluters an unfair cost advantage that their competitors feel obligated to copy. Our lives and that of our children depend on it. So do all forms of life on the planet we call home. Producers, whether they be environmentally responsible or not, can only stay in business if end-users purchase their products. Consumers, we implore you to spend your money wisely. Check out the videos and decide for yourself!

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Stop Single-Use Plastic Pollution by Leveling the Playing Field appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Civics the Hard Way

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 17:00:14 +0000

We often write about the need to return to Civics as a mandatory course in high school and even grammar school. We need to take a driving test to get a driver’s license. But we don’t need to complete a basic civics course to vote. Unless of course, if you are a naturalized citizen, in which case it’s mandatory. Go figure.

In the US today we are starting to see the effects of generations who are unaware of the three branches of government, why they were created, and what they do.

But the recent decisions by the Judicial Department against the excesses of the Executive Department are a much needed cold bucket of water dousing too much hot air and smoke about what is true.

So what is true?

According to Merriam-Webster and others, truth is “in accordance with the facts” and truth is “actuality.” The idea that “truth is not truth” or that there are “alternative facts” ultimately holds no water with the Department of Justice. It is their job to ascertain the facts. And that is exactly what they’re doing.

Their job is to adjudicate the laws and, based on the facts, render a judgment. These facts are not subject to a vote. They exist outside of opinion and politics. They either took place in actuality or they did not.

The judicial department is there for a reason. The founding fathers, concerned about the excesses of King George, didn’t want a repeat in the new nation. They appreciated the power and necessity for a strong executive, but they knew it had to be constrained. They thought the legislature would act as a constraint on the executive. But just in case it didn’t, as is the case currently, they created an independent judiciary that would be guided by facts and the law – sort of a safety net.

The problem with justice is that it moves so slowly. It takes time to get the facts. It takes time to get to the truth. But it does happen eventually, even though much damage can continue to take place before its verdicts are read.

We need to get back to the facts.

Here’s a fact: in California, we saw a 7-mile high “fire tornado,” a 3000-degree pillar of fire spinning at 160+ miles an hour with a footprint the size of three football fields. This happened during the largest wildfire in the state’s history, part of the increasing and undeniable fact of climate change.

Obviously, Mother Nature is not going to take a break as she inches toward a global climate less suitable for human habitation than any we have seen. She’s not going to wait until the final judgment about whether this change is man-made or whether or not we can do something about it.

This is why we can’t sit around waiting for justice to run its course.

This is why the founding fathers had the wisdom to realize that the people needed to speak every two years in the elections for the House of Representatives. They set up another safety net to protect against a runaway executive and that was the power to actually recall the chief executive through articles of impeachment.

But of course, that won’t work unless a majority of the members of the House vote the same way. And that gets it back to the people because that won’t happen unless the people vote for representatives who are willing to use this constitutional check and balance.

We know all this sounds rudimentary to many of our readers. But reading the news these days, we felt obligated to restate the obvious. There is obviously a large group within our country who is not aware of the simple reasons for checks and balances and the three divisions of our government. The recent actions by the Department of Justice are giving them a crash course in high school civics. And Mother Nature is giving us a crash course in reality. Like it or not, climate change is a fact.

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Civics the Hard Way appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Technology-Driven Fear and Impatience Can Blind Us to Long-Term Solutions

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 08 Mar 2018 18:00:29 +0000

Our hearts went out to the Florida high school shooting victims, and to their families and friends. We were heartened by the courage of the surviving students. Their commitment to prevent gun violence on the heels of this horrific event certainly got everyone’s attention, including many elected officials.

The debate goes on about how to best safeguard our children. But is that debate being influenced by the effects of technology? Have we become blinded by fear, impatience, and cynicism?

Long ago the news media realized that they could sell more papers using fear than with education, hope, or understanding. They also realized that they were in the entertainment business. Sensational headlines with dire consequences caught people’s eye and got their money. Hollywood was quick to jump on the bandwagon proliferating violence in the movies. And now video games pander to youth with even more violence.

Today, fear is being amplified through more avenues, and in more platforms than humans have ever been exposed to. We have become overloaded with more information than we can possibly digest. We’ve become impatient for the bottom line, “the one thing,” and the quick fix. Add to this the feeling of disempowerment, a short attention span, and the sinister view that things can’t be changed, and we get a population seriously considering quick “solutions” that are oversimplified, dangerous, and ultimately cause more problems than they solve.

Such is the case with the increasingly popular suggestion that schools become “hardened targets.” Imagine that schools become like a hardened target in a war zone. The logic, if you could call it that, assumes that there is no other way to protect our children than to arm their teachers. It also assumes that teachers would not be initial targets themselves. It assumes a teacher could access a locked weapon in time and use it effectively, resulting in no students getting hurt. It also assumes that no perpetrators could access the teachers’ weapons. Does anyone believe that is possible? Really?!

What about all the other “soft” targets where people congregate. Do we then have to “harden” the malls, theaters, ball parks, markets, churches and concert halls as well? As mentioned, this hardening of targets assumes that there is no other way.

Years ago, our government began cutting back on funding for mental health, we reversed a ban on assault weapons, made them available to teenagers, and balked at extended background checks. So now, to make up for the reckless proliferation of weapons of war and more disturbed people on the street, we’re going to harden the schools? Well, that certainly won’t hurt gun sales. On the contrary, it may very well increase them as more citizens buy into fighting fire with more firepower. And where does that lead?

We think that the right to bear arms comes with certain responsibilities: refunding mental health care programs to help keep firearms out of the hands of the depressed, disturbed, or otherwise imbalanced; age limitations on the purchase of certain types of firearms; extended background checks; holding parents responsible for the security of their own firearms; and teaching students and others how to recognize increasingly isolated and disturbed students. Hardening our schools does nothing to address these core issues. It just proliferates the hardening of other people-rich soft targets. And it increases gun sales.

We support a more comprehensive solution. It will take some time and some thought. But if we truly want to reduce gun violence, there is no simple solution that doesn’t cause more problems down the line. Instead of hardening our schools, perhaps we should be heartening our attitude toward mental health, “entertainment”, and videogames. Let’s get to the root of gun violence and earn the right to bear arms responsibly.

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Technology-Driven Fear and Impatience Can Blind Us to Long-Term Solutions appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Are We Ignoring the True Cost of Oil?

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:00:01 +0000

What does China, India and the rest of the world know that the US is trying to ignore? The true cost to us and to the atmosphere of burning petroleum, that’s what! Even now, as China and India suffocate on toxic exhaust, the US is doubling down on its commitment to a long-term oil-fueled economy.

Last month China, one of the world’s top vehicle markets, announced that they were outlawing gas burning vehicles in the near future. A week later this prompted the international automotive industry to declare, “The future of the automotive industry is electric”.

But in the US, we are scrambling to produce more oil, a proven health hazard for the planet and its inhabitants. We are reducing subsidies on electric vehicles. And we are opening protected lands for more oil exploration. Just in case anyone complains, we are dismantling the EPA safeguards and packing top government positions with oil men. Oh, and if you think you can take it to the courts, we’re appointing justices who view these moves favorably.

What we are witnessing in our country today is nothing less than a takeover by an industry that is racing down a one-way dead-end street! Global climate change will not be altered because the US does nothing to slow it down for a few years, and it cares not if the words “climate change” are outlawed, debated, or denied. It continually moves forward.

This interest group wants to prevent us from accessing clean energy alternatives, prevent us and our children from a healthy future, and stab us, the tax payers, with the true costs of man-made climate change. These include but are not limited to dramatic increases in our taxes, our insurance premiums, and our medical bills.

The rest of the world has already figured out these true costs and are now taking steps to protect their citizens. What’s up with us? The cost of recovery from record floods, winds, fires and hurricanes can totally bankrupt us and destroy our economy. How many more years can we afford to foot the bill for rebuilding after these now annual, major catastrophes?

We are business people. We have dedicated our lives to helping others be successful. We have to speak out on this obvious “elephant in the room.” It would be irresponsible for us to not take a stand with the rest of the world, the health of our planet, and the next generation who will be stuck picking up the tab in so many ways. Simply stated, the destruction of the environment is not good for business. Just ask the business owners who lost everything in Houston, Florida, Puerto Rico, and Santa Rosa – just in the last year.

We support fiscal conservancy and reduced government burdens on small businesses. But we strongly oppose a lopsided economy where one mega-industry is unfairly favored at the ultimate expense of small and medium-size business, and all done by a government that couldn’t get a majority vote.

We have a friend in Silicon Valley who has a very successful business that converts any vehicle to the best use of alternative power. He recently reported that they were looking to India for their next big order because the US market was becoming more limited. Is this a sign that we are starting a brain drain where our best ideas are leaving the country? How will that bode for the future of our economy?

There are many reasons why our government must stop trying to prop up an ultimately short-term “buggy whip” industry at our collective expense. But probably the best reason is coming from our own kids, “So mom, dad, what were you thinking?”

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Are We Ignoring the True Cost of Oil? appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Is Tech Dumbing Us Down and Making Us Vulnerable to Mob Rule?

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 18:00:55 +0000

As a result of ever-present information sharing technology, are we losing our freedom? According to Thomas Jefferson, we are moving in that direction! “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be,” he said. “If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed.” By “informed” he meant well informed about the truth of matters, not just blasted with information coming from unreliable sources.

You can’t get a driver’s license without knowing the rules of the road, but you can vote without knowing the rules of the government – unless you are a naturalized citizen! Then you have to know the divisions of government, what they do, and how they check and balance each other. Why should native-born Americans know any less?

As we get further into the information age, we have become more and more inundated with a constant din of information and noise. Is it any wonder we have such short attention spans? Is it any wonder we want to hack everything so we can get the process without the principles?

We may think that all this access to information is making us smarter, but isn’t it just dumbing us down with over-generalized sound bites, sensationalized headlines, and simplistic explanations? Just having access to information doesn’t make us smarter. There needs to be a learning process that involves deductions, analysis, and validation in order to improve our intellect.

In the last election, we had two candidates, one at each extreme of the political spectrum. Each one addressed two very different crowds. But what both crowds had in common was a simplistic view of what the president could do legally. And it was wrong! Neither candidate could actually deliver what they promised without breaking the law. Nonetheless, both candidates got votes …and one got elected!

Why? Is it because we’ve grown so impatient that we want simple answers that sound good to us and we don’t know enough about how the government works to realize they are impossible to execute?

Are we now living in a country whose citizens think that they are voting for a cure-all candidate who can exercise extra-legal power to “get the job done”? If so, what’s to stop future candidates from pandering to this uninformed “populism?” As long as we don’t make knowledge of basic Civics a requirement, nothing!

Many folks who preferred a candidate who was not on the final ballot simply didn’t vote. They were not willing to cast their vote for the “lessor of two evils.” “That’ll show ‘em!” they may have thought – But without their vote, they got 4 years with the “greater of two evils.”

Hostile governments know what Jefferson warned us about. They know that we are likely to take action without fact checking. That’s why they spent millions on Facebook ads and tweets. They know the ads and tweets will get passed on before they are verified. Why? We’ve become impatient and want simple answers fast! This enables them to spread distraction, polarity, and chaos. This enables them to divide and (possibly) conquer.

The evidence is mounting that US election, the Brexit vote, and the Catalan succession votes were all at least influenced by foreign ads that played on simplistic cure-all themes.

Most of the world’s democracies are parliamentary systems where the prime minister is elected by the legislature, not directly by the people. So, to change government you just vote for the opposition party so that you can presumably cause a vote of non-confidence and form a new government, more to your liking. But in practice, fragile coalitions must be formed because the multi-party system may not allow a clear majority in those legislatures.

In the US, our founders wanted to allow us the ability to vote for legislators of one party and a president of another. The problem is, however, that the decision you make on election day lasts 4 years! Even more reason to have an educated population.

So, if this sounds like a plea to bring back Civics class, it is – to save our democracy, to save our economy, and to save what really makes America great, diversity!

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Is Tech Dumbing Us Down and Making Us Vulnerable to Mob Rule? appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Can Legislative Indecision Hurt Small Business?

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 17:00:21 +0000

A small business owner recently asked us if we thought Washington’s indecision over the health care issue could affect her business. Our answer was not the one she wanted to hear.

It has been the public’s willingness to commit to the purchases of new cars, refrigerators, and houses that has greatly determined the state of the economy since the great depression. This is still the situation today. As long as we continue to make these major purchases, it’s smooth sailing. But will consumers be able to afford the payments on major purchases if they have a major increase in their health care costs?

What if consumers are thinking about that new car or house right now and reading the news about the government’s indecision on health care costs? What if, suddenly, consumers had to fork up another $300-600 per month …or more? Would they be more likely or less likely to make that new car purchase PLUS committing themselves to hundreds of dollars more in monthly payments? Just the specter of this possibility may be enough to make them second guess that next major purchase.

Once a considerable segment of the market decides to postpone these kinds of purchases, the dominoes begin to start falling and sales in most businesses are negatively affected. We saw this in the last recession. Initially the pundits said it would be contained to the real estate sector. But they didn’t factor in that consumers felt less wealthy, even if it their “wealth” was on paper. They immediately cut back on their spending, especially for those major purchases. This trickled down to startups and small businesses, and many jobs were lost.

We fear the potential for this same phenomenon is at work today. Real estate is now in a significant bubble, the stock market is once more overvalued. We have lived long enough to have seen the economy take a big hit, just because the press focused too much news on poor early holiday sales, which created a self-fulfilling prophecy scaring consumers out of their wits and out of the stores. How about governmental indecision on a major part of the consumer’s personal budget?

Whether you agree with the concept of government health care or not, it’s here and it’s here to stay. Americans now expect government health care at some level. So that’s a dead debate. Now the question is, what kind and how much? This is an important enough decision that it requires some bi-party cooperation. There’s no doubt the existing health care plan needs fixing and the new plans obviously need to be better thought out. There’s no simple solution.

No elected official wants to face reelection with their name on a bill that leaves 20 million people uncovered or facing radically increased premiums. Meanwhile, the indecision about the future of health care can cause unnecessary negative effects on the economy. Indecision creates insecurity, and insecurity results in more indecision.

We are pro-business. We especially love to support startups and small businesses. For us, this current situation directly impacts those businesses, since the postponement of major purchases will have a ripple effect that will hurt businesses at every level. We would like to see all elected officials understand that working together to solve this problem quickly is more important than honoring any pre-election pledges made without consideration of the big picture. The economy is fragile, so let’s not spook the consumers!

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Can Legislative Indecision Hurt Small Business? appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Government Set to Terminate the Blue Energy Star Program

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:01:45 +0000

While we can understand the frustration many may have with our over blown bureaucracies and endless miles of red tape, we can’t understand the current administration’s budget blueprint to ax the immensely popular Energy Star Rating program. Ouch!

The program, now in its 25^th year, is beloved by consumer and the 16,000 companies and organizations that voluntarily participate to produce more efficient appliances to reduce energy consumption, dependence on foreign oil, and significantly reduce carbon emissions. According to the EPA’s Energy Star’s web site, “Energy use in homes, buildings, and industry account for two thirds of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. As of December 2013, families and businesses have realized estimated savings of more than $295 billion on utility bills and prevented more than 2.1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the past two decades. The interplay of government, business, and market forces brought together through ENERGY STAR has changed the energy efficiency landscape.”

The Energy Star System is a simple no-brainer way of advising the consumer about the ultimate energy cost to them of appliances, homes, commercial buildings and industrial plants. The site adds, “ENERGY STAR has been instrumental in reducing this energy use in order to realize significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions – contributing to important health and environmental benefits by addressing the challenges of climate change while strengthening our economy. ENERGY STAR benefits have grown steadily over time, nearly tripling in the last decade.”

The program has wide-spread, bi-partisan support, is embraced by the Fortune 500 and represents a cooperative effort by many sectors of our economy from “manufacturers and trade associations, to retailers and efficiency program providers, to home builders and small businesses. ENERGY STAR has grown to represent products in more than 70 different categories, with more than 4.8 billion sold since 1992. More than 1.5 million new homes and more than 22,000 facilities proudly carry EPA’s ENERGY STAR certification, use dramatically less energy, and are responsible for substantially less greenhouse gas emissions than their peers.”

According to the site, “an ENERGY STAR clothes washer uses about 70 percent less energy and 75 percent less water than a standard washer used 20 years ago, (and) a home with the star is 15% more efficient. 85 percent of Americans recognize the blue ENERGY STAR label. Of the households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR certified product, about 75% credited the (Energy Star) label as an important factor in their decision. The latest Good Housekeeping internal reader audit shows that at 92%, ENERGY STAR is now tied with Good Housekeeping (Seal of Approval) in terms of brand influence.” So why ax it?

Do we really want to turn back the clock that far? Do we really want to pay that much more for energy again? At what point does this move become an obvious attempt to bilk the consumer, stifle progress, and hurt the international competitiveness of US products to satisfy one, powerful, interest group? Who could possibly win if this vital all-American program is eliminated? We think it obvious! The energy companies!

So, no matter what your political affiliation, let your federally elected representatives know that the Blue Energy Star label is well worth saving to reduce your operating costs, reduce our foreign dependency, reduce our emissions, increase our health, and bolster our economy. Eliminating the Blue Star is a bad for American business and human welfare all the way around!

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Government Set to Terminate the Blue Energy Star Program appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

Can the Kids Save the Environment?

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:00:45 +0000

Do children and young people have a constitutional right to a healthy environment? Is the government liable for promoting fossil fuel production and greenhouse gas emissions that accelerate climate change? According to the Washington Post, a pioneering lawsuit being brought against the US Federal Government by 21, 9- through 20-year-olds is claiming exactly that.

They contend that their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property are being violated by the government. They also contend that the government’s behavior is violating the public trust doctrine that holds the government responsible for the preservation of certain vital resources for use by the public, including, in this case, a healthy climate system.

Interestingly, the lawsuit was originally filed under the Obama administration. In November of 2016, the lawsuit cleared a major hurdle, thanks to U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken, who denied motions filed by the government and the fossil fuel industry to dismiss it. She so ordered that it should go to trial.

“Exercising my ‘reasoned judgement,’ I have no doubt that the right to a climate system capable of sustaining human life is fundamental to a free and ordered society.” – U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken

This is major! It could disrupt the way environmental advocacy is being conducted globally. Already in the Netherlands, a court hearing a similar plea ordered the Dutch Government to reduce carbon emissions by 25% over a five-year period. Other analogous lawsuits are being brought in South Africa, Austria, and Pakistan.

The issue here is simple. If the government is in a position to promote or discourage the use of fossil fuels through laws, taxes, and permissions, are they liable for negatively effecting your life, liberty, and property? And if they promote the use of fossil fuels, are they violating the public trust?

So, the crux of the issue boils down to whether it can be proven in a court of law, that human activity and burning of fossil fuels in fact causes climate change. Unlike politics, where you can have 99% of the scientists agree that human activity causes climate change, and still say “It’s a debate,” in a court of law, a preponderance of facts still matter.

Speaking of facts, the plaintiffs had to submit a request that the Department of Justice preserve all documents relevant to the lawsuit, including climate change information and information on energy and emissions, and, get this, cease any destruction of these documents! This was right after the new administration’s immediate ploy to remove climate change information from the White House and other federal agency websites.

Julia Olson, chief legal counsel for the plaintiffs and executive director of the advocacy group, Our Children’s Trust, said “Destroying evidence is illegal and we just put these new US Defendants and the Industry Defendants on notice that they are barred from doing so.”

The new administration especially does not want this to get to court where a decision will be based on the facts. That’s why they have filed a motion to stay litigation and appeal the district court’s decision to clear the lawsuit for trial. They know that if this gets to trial and the plaintiffs prevail, like they did in the Netherlands, they could be ordered to reduce emissions whether they wanted to or not.

Unbelievably, the government’s argument against preserving the critical documents that could prove the relationship between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change is that it would put an unnecessary burden on the government just to maintain these files that already exist!

We support the children and young people who are taking this novel and noble action. We put our faith in the court system which must decide on the facts. Let the court end the “debate” and demonstrate its counterbalancing power to help future generations avoid catastrophe. Even a reluctant government would have to execute a court order. Find out more about this landmark lawsuit at Our Children’s Trust.

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post Can the Kids Save the Environment? appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.

On Independence Day, We’re more Interdependent than Ever

Michael Houlihan & Bonnie Harvey — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:01:11 +0000

As we approach the nation’s 236^th year of independence from England and thereby Europe, we find ourselves glued to the financial news out of Europe like we were still part of it. And we are, more than ever. We worry about the economies of China and Russia as if they were our own – regardless of our political differences. Why? Because our very livelihood depends on the world’s economic and environmental health.

We live on the Pacific Coast where debris from the Japanese tsunami is now just starting to wash up from a catastrophe clear across the world’s largest ocean. Beyond our human empathy for the brave people of Japan, many Japanese products we took for granted became scarce. We were confronted with how the damage to their infrastructure affected our marketplace.

If there’s even a hint of an interruption in the supply of oil from the Middle East, we feel it at the pump. That cost trickles up into everything we buy, including the food we eat.

On the West Coast, we’re now getting air pollution from China. If the developing world continues to copy our approach to “prosperity,” we will suffer the health and environmental consequences right here in the USA.

So yes, we wave the flag and celebrate our great nation. We are thankful for the opportunities and freedoms we enjoy. We are proud to be Americans. But independence? We are all here on the same planet, all interdependent and becoming more so every year.

The good news is that the superpowers all know that their customers and suppliers in the other superpowers are too important to allow anything that would hurt their infrastructure, economy, or the world atmosphere. The bad news is that we haven’t yet realized that our economies and health are ultimately dependent on the health of the environment.

But we as individuals are not completely powerless, especially in America. Over and over again we hear that the world economy depends largely on the health of the American consumer. We all know by now that we vote with our money. In our incessant desire to get everything at the very lowest price, we can inadvertently subsidize political, social, health and environmental practices we would never allow in our own country. Every purchase we make is a vote for how it was made, the working conditions and how it got to us.

It’s hard to blame the government when the lobbyists are financed by our choices. If all politics are local, as it is often said, we can start to make changes in the way we spend our money. We can shop at the local organic farmer’s market and try to buy as many goods and services from local merchants as possible. We can avoid the purchase of single use plastics and vote for cleaner beaches. We can vote for lower healthcare costs by making healthier food choices. Every time we fill up with gas we can at least recognize where those funds are going and hope the day will come soon when we will have cleaner alternatives. Car-pooling, biking, and just plain walking are great votes for a more sustainable future.

This Independence Day let’s recognize our interdependence and how our individual choices can shape the future of not only our great country, but also the world. We are free to make independent choices in how we spend our money, thereby casting our votes. We can yet bring in the “New Order” that our nation’s founders called for by recognizing our true power right here in our wallets.

Happy Birthday USA!

Who We Are

To make inquiries for keynote speaking, trainings or consulting, please contact sales@thebarefootspirit.com.

The post On Independence Day, We’re more Interdependent than Ever appeared first on The Barefoot Spirit.