Over the years, I have returned to one passage in the book often, and every time, I am awed by Dillard’s masterful description of a child’s entry into consciousness, of a child who for the first time becomes aware of the difference “between seeing and knowing you see, between being and knowing you be.”

Dillard compares her own memory of this moment of transition—this moment at the edge of self-awareness—as “the gift at the moment of opening it.” Crossing that threshold into wakefulness of one’s self is the opening of the gift of one’s potential. From that moment forward, we become consciously aware not only of what our place in the world is, but also filled with expectation of what it can be.

As 2012 begins, we all find ourselves at various moments of transition. We have before us the gift of a New Year, essentially unopened and unexamined in these first few early days of January, but certainly full of potential and expectation.

We wish you peace and prosperity in 2012, and much happiness with the many gifts the New Year brings.

More New Year’s Columns By Kelly Scanlon

Think Like a Dog About the New Year

All I Want for Christmas . . .

Finding Strength in the Unknown

It’s a New Year . . . So, Celebrate Your Birthday?

Against this backdrop, Kansas City has recently announced the lofty goal of becoming “America’s Most Entrepreneurial City.”

So what does it mean to be an “Entrepreneurial City”? What characteristics must such a city possess? It strikes me that a city with such aspirations likely possesses some of the same traits as individuals with entrepreneurial ambitions. Let’s take a look at just a few of them.

Vision. An entrepreneurial type must be able to come up with new ideas, challenge assumptions, and shatter traditional ways of thinking to create new and innovative products and services.

Drive. Entrepreneurs are change agents. They see a problem or a challenge and set about to solve it themselves. They charge themselves with coming up with the solution, of making something happen.

Passion. Entrepreneurs not only have a vision, they have fire in the belly. And when they talk about their ideas, their passion comes through and infects others. That’s part of how they build followers and supporters.

To be sure, there are other characteristics to consider as well, but the bottom line is that most successful entrepreneurs share the ability to see opportunity where others see only risk. They possess the passion and drive to push through when the going gets tough. And they are an optimistic lot, believing they will succeed despite the nay-sayers and non-believers.

So what do you think, Kansas City? Does Kansas City have the entrepreneurial traits it takes to make us “America’s Most Entrepreneurial City”?

This week, many veterans and their families will be giving thanks for just being home. With the majority of troops home from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, more soldiers will be celebrating Thanksgiving in the United States.

While thankful to be home, many former soldiers who left the military upon returning home are not celebrating new jobs. The sluggish economy and high unemployment mean a tough job hunt in the civilian workforce. The Obama administration and Congress are hoping a tax credit that is part of the American Jobs Act will help unemployed veterans and small businesses at the same time.

The Returning Heroes Tax Credit provides businesses that hire unemployed veterans with a maximum credit of $5,600 per veteran, and the Wounded Warriors Tax Credit offers businesses that hire veterans with service-connected disabilities with a maximum credit of $9,600 per veteran. Congress passed both measures apart from the American Jobs Act last week and President Barack Obama signed them into law on Monday.

Returning Heroes Tax Credit
The Returning Heroes Tax Credit provides a new credit of 40 percent of the first $6,000 of wages (up to $2,400) for employers that hire veterans who have been unemployed at least four weeks. Businesses can receive a credit of 40 percent of the first $14,000 of wages (up to $5,600) for hiring veterans who have been unemployed longer than six months.

Wounded Warrior Tax Credit
The Wounded Warrior Tax Credit doubles the existing tax credit for long-term unemployed veterans with service-connected disabilities. Under the existing Work Opportunity Tax Credit for veterans with service-connected disabilities, employers can receive up to a $4,800 credit for hiring service-disabled veterans. The new law allows a maximum credit of $9,600 (40 percent of the first $24,000 of wages) for companies that hire veterans with service-connected disabilities who have been unemployed longer than six months.

When he signed the bills, President Obama said, “Today, because Democrats and Republicans came together, I’m proud to sign those proposals into law.  And I urge every business owner out there who’s hiring to hire a veteran right away. “

At 7.7 percent, the unemployment rate among all veteran groups is actually lower than the 9 percent overall unemployment rate, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, start segmenting the veterans and the rates climb. For veterans who have served since 2001, the unemployment rate was 12.1 percent in October. The unemployment rate for veterans ages 18-24 was 30.4 percent in October, versus 15.4 percent overall. Nearly half (48.3 percent) of Black veterans ages 18-24 were unemployed in October, compared to 24.9 percent overall.

 “While we’ve added more than 350,000 private sector jobs over the last three months, we’ve got 850,000 veterans who can’t find work,” Obama said. “And even though the overall unemployment rate came down just a little bit last month, unemployment for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan continued to rise.  And that isn’t right. These men and women are the best that America has to offer. They are some of the most highly trained, highly educated, highly skilled workers that we have.”

For the second time in two months the U.S. Small Business Administration is proposing changes to the definition of “small,” for small businesses seeking government contracting. The changes are part of an ongoing review of size standards.

The latest proposed changes would increase the revenue limits for small businesses in 29 industries in one sub-industry in two broad categories of businesses, ranging from real estate and property management to formal wear and costume rental. The changes are based on annual gross revenues (averaged over three years) and delineate how large a business can be and still qualify as small for federal government programs.

Last month, the SBA proposed changes to the size definition of small businesses in 52 industries in two broad categories of businesses, ranging from travel agencies and movie production to waste management.

The adjustments are part of an ongoing comprehensive review of all size standards as required under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010. The SBA is evaluating all industries in these sectors that have revenue-based size standards to determine whether the existing size standards should be adjusted.  The last overall review of size standards occurred more than 25 years ago.

The proposed changes take into account the structural characteristics within individual industries, including average firm size, degree of competition, and federal government contracting trends.  This ensures that size definitions reflect current economic conditions within those industries. 

The upward revisions would allow some small businesses that are close to exceeding their current size standards to retain small business eligibility under the proposed higher size standards, and give federal agencies a larger selection of small businesses to choose from for small business procurement opportunities.  The SBA estimates that an additional 14,500 small businesses could qualify for SBA financial assistance under the increased limits.

The government is accepting public comments on the proposed changes at www.regulations.gov and all comments will be posted to that site for public review.

For more information about SBA’s revisions to its small business size standards, click on “What’s New with Size Standards” at www.sba.gov/size.

There was little doubt that the Affordable Care Act—health care reform—would ultimately be in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. After more than a year of conjecture, it’s official. The Court will consider three cases challenging the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.

Since being passed in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act has been the target of more than 20 court challenges, as well as Congressional repeal efforts. One of the most significant court challenges was made by a consortium of 26 states. The lower courts have split on the various cases. Two of four appellate courts have upheld the law and one said the court challenge was premature because it hadn’t yet taken effect. Only the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta has struck down the law.

Most of the court challenges have focused on whether Congress has the power to require individuals to purchase insurance or pay a penalty. Now the Supreme Court will decide that issue as it hears the cases during the spring session. Although many issues were contested in the various cases, the Court will consider only four:

• The constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act’s provisions requiring virtually all Americans to obtain health insurance (known as the “individual mandate”).
• If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, is the entire law invalid or do the remaining portions of the law still stand?
• Is the law’s expansion of the Medicaid program constitutional?
• Does the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) bar challenges to the individual mandate (the AIA prevents federal courts from striking down tax laws before they take effect.)?

While the Court will review the individual mandate, it has not agreed to consider the Affordable Care Act’s employer provisions, which will require employers with 50 or more employees to provide affordable minimal essential health coverage to their full-time employees or pay a penalty under certain circumstances.

The Supreme Court is taking up the case in the midst of the presidential election. Oral arguments will likely begin in March  2012, with the Court issuing its opinions by late summer.

It may not sound like much, but for a small business, 3 percent on an invoice can mean the difference between making payroll or not. It can be the cash you need to pay a vendor or make a loan payment. For a small business, 3 percent can be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back.

The 3 percent we’re talking about is the amount the IRS would withhold from payments on government contracts beginning in 2013. For example, on an invoice of $100,000, the government would pay the business $97,000 rather than the full amount, with the rest diverted to the IRS to cover the company’s tax liability.

The U.S. House last week provided some encouragement to opponents of the requirement, however, when it voted 405-16 vote to repeal the rule. The repeal measure now heads to the Senate for consideration.

The 3% Withholding Tax was part of the Tax Reconciliation Act of 2005 and was originally scheduled to be implemented Jan. 1, 2011. That date was pushed back a year by the 2009 economic stimulus law, and the IRS announced this summer that it would delay implementation until 2013.

“Compliance with this withholding tax will impose significant financial burdens on both the public and private sectors, adversely affecting job creation and economic growth at a time when we can least afford it,” said Rep. Sam Graves (MO-R), chair of the House Small Business Committee, in a statement. “It will also further limit the cash flow of small companies that operate with thin margins in a difficult economy. Startups and small firms with a high volume of government contracts will be particularly disadvantaged.”

The withholding mandate is intended to fight tax evasion by companies selling to government entities. A 2004 Government Accountability Office report found that more than 27,000 defense contractors owed about $3 billion in unpaid taxes. The 3 percent withholding mandate would help the IRS close that gap and raise an estimated $7 billion by 2015. The provision applies to Medicare payments to medical professionals and farm payments, as well as sales of other goods and services to governments by businesses of all sizes.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has said the 3 percent withholding would reduce capital that small businesses need for day-to-day operations, and companies would need to develop new internal accounting systems to track, handle, and reconcile these payments. The additional personnel and system costs will increase bids rates on government projects in order for businesses to maintain profit margins, the Chamber said.

The amount withheld also could exceed a company’s actual tax liability, according to the Chamber.

“The 3% Withholding Tax essentially provides the federal government with an interest-free loan and will especially have a negative impact on small businesses as resources are shifted to handle the administrative burden on tracking and reconciling transactions as well as securing capital for day-to-day operations, job creation and business expansion,” the Chamber said in a statement posted on a website it set up to oppose the mandate.

A coalition of more than 125 organizations is lobbying against the withholding requirement. In its statement to the House subcommittee earlier this summer, the coalition said the mandate is already causing problems despite the fact that implementation has been delayed. Because government contracts often cover five years or longer, companies entering into long-term contracts must be aware of the change now and consider additional administrative and financing costs of the 3 percent withholding in future years.

“No, thank you. Black’s fine.”

I eat in restaurants several times a week. I order coffee with nearly every meal. And every one of those meals involves the “cream-or-sugar-no-thank-you-black’s-fine” exchange.

I’m a straight up, brew it strong, several cups a day, just inject it into my veins kind of coffee drinker. No flavors, no froth, no foam – just strong black coffee, and preferably from The Roasterie. That’s been my coffee drinking preference for more than three decades. I’m not going to change.

Yet every time, and I do mean EVERY time, my coffee comes

Small business owners in this economy have a lot to worry about, and a lot to complain about. Regulatory burdens, however, topped the list of small business challenges in a recent Gallup poll.

Twenty-two percent of respondents cited “complying with government regulations” as the most important problem facing small businesses today, followed by “consumer confidence” at 15 percent and “lack of consumer demand” at 12 percent.

“There is always a debate to be had and a balance to be struck between the public benefits associated with government regulations and the cost of those regulations on business,” said Dennis Jacobe, chief economist at Gallup. “While regulatory change can have a big impact on individual companies and industries, most often it does not have a major impact on the overall U.S. economy. However, these are not normal economic times, and small-business owners seem to feel government regulations are making their difficult operating environment even more challenging.”

As they look to 2012, more than one third (36 percent) of small business owners said they are very or moderately worried about going out of business. A similar number (37 percent) are worried about not being able to compete with large or global competitors. The ability to hire the number of employees they need is a concern for 36 percent of respondents, while 32 percent are concerned about meeting payroll and 30 percent are worried about staff reductions.

“Growth in sales” (15 percent) was most often cited by respondents when asked what they need in order for their business to thrive in 2012. “Job creation” was the next most common response at 14 percent, followed by “fewer government regulations” at 12 percent. An “improved economy” came in at number four, with 8 percent.

Job creation is getting a lot of attention these days by politicians on both sides. When asked what would motivate them to hire new employees in 2012, 27 percent of small business owners in the Gallup survey said an increase in revenue or sales. Twenty percent are waiting until the economy improves and 17 percent said they would hire to support growth or expansion plans.

Results for the total dataset are based on telephone interviews with 604 small-business owners, conducted Oct. 3-6. For results based on the total sample of small-business owners, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points with 95 percent confidence.

Oh so close, and yet, in the end, a stalemate once again. A special session of the Missouri General Assembly called by Gov. Jay Nixon to push forward an economic development agenda looks to be a bust as the House and Senate can’t reach agreement.

The special session showed particular promise for a long-sought initiative that would provide additional financial support to young bioscience companies in the state. Supporters of the Missouri Science and Innovation Reinvestment Act (MOSIRA) say the measure would bolster the bioscience industry and create new companies and jobs.

“MOSIRA will create a stable, ongoing source of funding to foster investment and job growth in high-tech and scientific research companies,” Nixon has previously said.

MOSIRA would create a funding source to spark growth in research and technology enterprises by capturing a small percentage of the growth in state revenue over a base year from a designated group of Missouri science and innovation companies.

The funding mechanism is similar to one used across the state line to support the bioscience industry in Kansas through the Kansas Bioscience Authority. The KBA returns $9.41 to the state economy for each dollar invested. A number of small bioscience companies in Kansas City have received investments through KBA.

“MOSIRA and Missouri Technology Corporation, coupled with the important activities of the Kansas Bioscience Authority, hold huge promise to accelerate the collective position of the Kansas City marketplace, both states of Missouri and Kansas, and propel our larger region into a global bioscience force that will benefit our economies for the future,” said Kelly Gillespie, executive director of the Missouri Bioscience Association and a key proponent of MOSIRA.

Though MOSIRA has bipartisan support, proponents have fought for two years to win passage of the initiative. At times derailed by opposition to stem cell research and at other times hijacked as leverage for unrelated agendas, MOSIRA looked to finally become law after it was approved by both chambers (30-4 in the Senate, 94-48 in the House) earlier in the special session and sent to Gov. Nixon on Sept. 23 for his signature.

MOSIRA may once again be kicked to the curb, however, because of a last-minute provision inserted that states it can only be enacted if a larger economic development initiative is passed during the special session. That economic development package, which includes incentives for creating an international air cargo hub at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and provisions to keep Missouri companies from jumping the state line, is at a stalemate, as the two chambers can’t reconcile differing versions of the legislation and the Senate has reportedly ended negotiations.

Much of the disagreement centers on sunset provisions for two tax credit bills targeted at historic preservation and low-income housing. The Senate version calls for those tax credits to expire, while the House opposes inclusion of expiration dates.

The fact that the disagreement has nothing to do with bioscience doesn’t help the prospects of MOSIRA. However, there is still a chance the initiative could become law with Gov. Nixon’s signature. MOSIRA supporters are arguing that the contingency clause included in the bill was passed is unconstitutional. And, failing that, there’s always next year, as the General Assembly convenes in just a few months for its regular session.

With bipartisan support in the General Assembly and strong advocates in the bioscience and business communities, the fight for MOSIRA will continue.

“We have evidence that legislators overwhelming supported this long-sought policy change, and we are resolved to work through all implementation hurdles, in order to get this stood up and working,” Kelly said. “Missouri has a vast amount of research, and a deep bench of innovative technologies primed to be commercialized that could quickly become substantial employers and job creators for our state.

It has been a long legislative battle, but the growing acceptance and awareness by Missouri elected officials, is breaking our way.”

“Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.”

Anyone following the news of Jobs’ death on social media the last few hours has to be struck by the extent of his revolutionary contributions over the last few decades. We all knew Steve Jobs was a creative genius. Even people who are not Apple groupies cannot deny that he was a tech pioneer. But witnessing the roll call of his accomplishments played out in condensed fashion during one short evening of tweets somehow reinforces the magnitude of his genius. Not a one-trick pony visionary with a single product, cure or idea that changed the world, Jobs was a genius who introduced innovation after innovation that indeed pushed the human race forward and radically changed the boundaries of how we work and play.

Still, of all these contributions, something that I read somewhere shortly after he resigned in August struck me as being perhaps his greatest contribution: He and Apple have created nearly 50,000 jobs. And if you count the spinoff companies Jobs and Apple have inspired, the young techies who are developing apps for all the products Apple produced, the people who started companies – tech or not – simply because Jobs inspired them, and the companies that owe their ability to operate, innovate and grow because of the products Jobs created, well . . . I think you can see how staggering that “Jobs” number becomes.

Jobs’ “Jobs Legacy” reinforces why innovation in this country needs to be supported.