Forced continued education only benefits the forced education providers. Forced continued education is an unnecessary burden to the licensed professional. Forced continued education does not improve the health, safety and welfare of the public. Forced continued education is a waste of the States time, resources and money.

The AIA claims, in comment 1344, some of the short comings of forced continued education:

“It is easy to lose billable hours especially when the Architect chases after required MCE hours without focusing their attention towards their practice.” and “It causes the Architects the burden of documentation and accountability.”

                                    CEU = Force Education = AIA Fees

The State did not account for the cost to monitor the continued education programs with their “cost and benefits analysis”. They will implement this program, but quickly realize they do not have the money or qualified staff to address complaints, let alone provide overall management. They will also realize they lack the expertise to pre-approve courses or documentation and accountability. In a short period, I believe the State will outsource most, if not all of this program in an effort to save money and wash their hands of this ill-conceived mess. Or at the very least, they will look to established organizations for assistance. Now enter, guess who, the AIA.

State Approval = AIA Approval = AIA Fee

Several comments above indicate something like “well I approve of CE but can you give me an exemption because I’m old or travel or work for the government or work in a small firm or work for the military or retired or what ever”. Others also say something like “well I guess we have to have it so let’s water it down to accept credits for this or that”.

How can the State justify a program, hidden under the radar that impacts all professionals, without a legitimate period of comments, debate and vote.

Please continue to voice opposition of forced continued education. Let the State know that they enact this legislation in the face of overwhelming opposition, without any clear objectives for professional improvements, without adequate study, without supporting documentation of the cost vs. benefits of forced education, with their hands in the pockets of the forced education provide lobbies, and with their eyes open to the obvious implementation problems and potential State money lost.