Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
Will 50-Year Mortgages Save the Housing Affordability Crisis?
ATLANTA, Georgia, Nov. 20 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Will 50-Year Mortgages Save the Housing Affordability Crisis?
*
Many of us remember the episode of The Office in which Michael Scott plans to purchase a new house. He excitedly gives Dwight a tour and fantasizes about his future there, until he realizes that the mortgage contract he is about to sign has a 30-year term. Michael immediately panics and starts finding issues with the house.
What Michael's real estate agent fails to explain is that the vast majority of home buyers don't keep
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, Nov. 20 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Will 50-Year Mortgages Save the Housing Affordability Crisis?
*
Many of us remember the episode of The Office in which Michael Scott plans to purchase a new house. He excitedly gives Dwight a tour and fantasizes about his future there, until he realizes that the mortgage contract he is about to sign has a 30-year term. Michael immediately panics and starts finding issues with the house.
What Michael's real estate agent fails to explain is that the vast majority of home buyers don't keepthe same 30-year mortgage from start to finish. In fact, the average 30-year loan only lasts around 7-12 years, since people move and sell their homes, refinance with a new mortgage or pay it off early.
So why don't mortgages have 7-12 year terms? Because most people can't afford them.
The 30-year mortgage was created during the New Deal to replace much shorter, unaffordable loans that most buyers couldn't sustain. It expanded access to homeownership at a time when the major barrier was the structure of mortgages themselves.
The 50-year mortgage idea recently floated by the Trump administration grows out of the same motivation of the 30-year mortgage of the 1930sto make home ownership more accessible to people who would otherwise be renters.
But today, the main barrier is not how we finance homesit's that we don't build enough of them.
Like the 30-year mortgage, the 50-year mortgage, if implemented, would almost never actually be held for 50 years. The real issue is that this proposal attempts to solve a supply-side problem with a demand-side solution. Longer mortgage terms treat the symptomhigh monthly paymentsbut not the cause, which is an under supply of housing.
That problem isn't going to be solved by a 30-year, 50-year or 100-year mortgage.
In fact, 50-year mortgages will further increase housing prices. Why? Because as terms lengthen, monthly payments will fallallowing buyers to qualify for larger loans. These buyers can then bid more for the same limited number of homes.
So, what's the solution to the housing supply problem? We need to make it simpler to build.
Georgia illustrates the problem clearly. The state has added more than a million new residents each decade, but construction has lagged behind. A recent analysis found that 94 of Georgia's 159 counties now face a housing shortage.
Why aren't we building enough?
One major reason is increased regulation, which results in delays and uncertainty in the permitting process. Builders can only break ground when a building permit is issued, which is after zoning and land-use decisions have been made. When those permits are slow or unpredictable, each month of delay adds carrying costs for land, labor and financing; those costs are eventually baked into the sale price. Regulatory costs now account for roughly 27% of the price of a new home.
Permit reform would be far more impactful than a 50-year mortgage. Luckily, the state is already looking into this. Proposed legislation would require local governments to approve or deny a building permit within 45 days. If a permit is denied and the builder fixes the issues and resubmits, the local government would have 14 days to respond and any denial would have to include a written explanation citing the specific rules behind it. These guardrails don't weaken safety or quality standards; they simply make the process timely and predictable so builders know what to expect.
We also know this kind of reform works.
Arizona recently adopted a similar "permit freedom" policy. There, the average time to close out a residential building permit fell from about 200 days in 2022 to 126 days in 2024. Analysts at Common Sense Institute Arizona estimate that this change alone will allow roughly 3,800 additional homes to be built each year and could reduce housing prices by as much as 5%.
Streamlining permits and trimming unnecessary fees would do more to help first-time buyers than tacking 20 extra years onto their mortgage. The goal is not to maximize the amount of debt a household can carry; it is to make it possible for more families to buy reasonably priced homes in the first place.
Michael Scott's panic was played for laughs, but his reaction is understandable. The mortgage is one of the most visible parts of the home-buying process, so it's easy to assume that changing the loan is the key to affordability. But as the data show, if policymakers want to help people become homeowners, they should spend less time dreaming up longer mortgage terms and more time making it faster, cheaper and simpler to build the homes Americans need.
***
Original text here: https://www.georgiapolicy.org/news/will-50-year-mortgages-save-the-housing-affordability-crisis/
National Study Offers Fresh Insight Into the Lives and Livelihoods of U.S. Artists
NEW YORK, Nov. 20 -- The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
New National Study Offers Fresh Insight into the Lives and Livelihoods of US Artists
At a time when creative work is both celebrated and increasingly difficult to sustain, the Mellon Foundation today released the National Survey of Artists, a study conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago (NORC), that sheds new light on the lives, work, and economic realities of artists across the United States.
Drawing on responses from a nationally representative sample of artists and culture bearers, the study offers
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, Nov. 20 -- The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
New National Study Offers Fresh Insight into the Lives and Livelihoods of US Artists
At a time when creative work is both celebrated and increasingly difficult to sustain, the Mellon Foundation today released the National Survey of Artists, a study conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago (NORC), that sheds new light on the lives, work, and economic realities of artists across the United States.
Drawing on responses from a nationally representative sample of artists and culture bearers, the study offersone of the most comprehensive portraits to date of how creative workers live, work, and sustain their practices. It expands national understanding of who counts as an artist, beyond those who earn a living solely from their art, while revealing the complex ways creative workers build their livelihoods, often across multiple jobs, and the financial challenges they face. Together, these findings illuminate the diverse forms of artistic contributions that drive and enrich the nation's cultural life amid shifting economic and social conditions.
Key findings reveal that artists across the United States continue to face significant financial insecurity and complex working lives. More than half (57%) of artists reported being somewhat or very worried about at least one form of financial vulnerability--such as affording food, housing, medical care, or utilities--with 22% concerned about having enough to eat and 32% about covering medical costs in the month ahead.
The study also highlights the multifaceted nature of artistic employment: 34% of artists are fully self-employed, 50% are self-employed in their primary job, and 11% juggled three or more jobs in the past year. Nearly one-third (28%) identify as teaching artists, another 28% provide unpaid care for a loved one with a health condition or disability, and 8% have served in the U.S. military. Together, these findings offer one of the clearest pictures to date of how creative workers sustain their practices amid overlapping economic, professional, and personal demands--providing critical insight for funders, policymakers, and arts organizations working to strengthen support systems for artists nationwide.
"Artists are essential to how we understand and shape the world around us, yet we have long lacked a complete picture of who they are and how they make their lives and work possible," said Deana Haggag, Program Director for Arts and Culture at the Mellon Foundation. "There are many incredible organizations across the country working tirelessly to support artists and ensure they are able to live with dignity. By expanding our definition of what it means to be an artist and illuminating the diverse conditions under which they live and work, we hope this study helps the field imagine systems and possibilities that can more fully sustain creative life in the United States."
The report arrives at a pivotal time for creative workers and the broader U.S. economy. As inflation and the ongoing rise of gig and contract work reshape the artistic world, artists continue to be affected by income instability and limited access to benefits. By capturing the full scope of artists' work lives - from employment patterns to financial vulnerability - the study provides the field with evidence to inform smarter investments, public policy, and support systems that can strengthen creative work for the long term.
"We're proud to partner with Mellon on this groundbreaking effort to better understand artists as workers," said Gwendolyn Rugg, Senior Research Scientist at NORC and lead author of the report. "Artists contribute immeasurably to our communities, yet we have only ever had very limited data on them which by and large did not reflect the full population of working artists and culture bearers in the U.S. With the publication of this study, we now have for the first time a more expansive national portrait of who artists are, how they live and work, and what challenges they experience. This lays the groundwork for creating programs and policies that are truly responsive to artists' needs."
Together, Mellon and NORC invite policymakers, funders, researchers, and arts leaders to use these findings to better understand--and support--the nation's artists. The full National Survey of Artists topline report, dataset, and accompanying materials are available here (https://www.mellon.org/article/window-into-us-artists-their-livelihoods).
* * *
About the National Survey of Artists
The National Survey of Artists was designed and conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago with funding and research support from the Mellon Foundation. The project outputs include the survey instrument, a public-use dataset, technical documentation, and a topline report. The findings reflect responses from a nationally representative sample of artists and culture bearers who maintain a dedicated, professionalized artistic practice. By centering artists as workers, the study provides essential data for building policies and systems that reflect how creative professionals actually live and work in the United States.
*
About NORC at the University of Chicago
NORC at the University of Chicago conducts research and analysis that decision-makers trust. As a nonpartisan research organization and a pioneer in measuring and understanding the world, we have studied almost every aspect of the human experience and every major news event for more than eight decades. Today, we partner with government, corporate, and nonprofit clients around the world to provide the objectivity and expertise necessary to inform the critical decisions facing society.
*
About The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation is the nation's largest supporter of the arts and humanities. Since 1969, the Foundation has been guided by its core belief that the humanities and arts are essential to human understanding. The Foundation believes that the arts and humanities are where we express our complex humanity, and that everyone deserves the beauty and empowerment that can be found there. Through our grants, we seek to build just communities enriched by meaning and guided by critical thinking, where ideas and imagination can thrive. Learn more at mellon.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.mellon.org/news/new-national-study-offers-fresh-insight-lives-livelihoods-us-artists
National Right to Work Foundation Sues UCLA Over Public Records Request for Union "Strategic Research" Workshops
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, Nov. 20 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
National Right to Work Foundation Sues UCLA Over Public Records Request for Union "Strategic Research" Workshops
*
UCLA administrators have stonewalled requests regarding taxpayer-funded events designed to expand Big Labor's forced-dues ranks
Los Angeles, CA (November XX, 2025) - The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has just filed a lawsuit against the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). The case challenges the university's failure to produce
... Show Full Article
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, Nov. 20 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
National Right to Work Foundation Sues UCLA Over Public Records Request for Union "Strategic Research" Workshops
*
UCLA administrators have stonewalled requests regarding taxpayer-funded events designed to expand Big Labor's forced-dues ranks
Los Angeles, CA (November XX, 2025) - The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has just filed a lawsuit against the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). The case challenges the university's failure to producepublic records regarding two conferences promoting aggressive union campaign tactics. Foundation attorneys filed the lawsuit in the Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday.
The Foundation litigates hundreds of cases each year for working men and women who face abuses of their individual rights due to compulsory unionism. Foundation cases often involve men and women who want to resist unionization campaigns at their workplaces, but face intimidation, threats, and other coercion from union officials and other union operatives.
Both events about which the Foundation requested information dealt with so-called "strategic research," a tactic that "prioritizes gathering targeted information" to find new businesses and workers on which to launch unionization campaigns or other campaigns. The events, titled the "UCLA Strategic Labor Research Conference" and "Private Equity Research Strategies," both had heavy political overtones as well, with the former drawing attendees "working outside labor in adjacent social movements, like climate change, food justice and housing," according to UCLA's website. Both gatherings took place between April and August of 2024.
Union officials wield significant influence at UCLA. Currently, the university is subject to at least 16 union monopoly bargaining contracts, including with the powerful United Auto Workers (UAW), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and other unions.
According to the complaint, the Foundation submitted public records requests for documents, presentation materials, speaker information, and related items for both events on August 18, 2025. UCLA public records staff acknowledged the requests promptly, but have delayed any substantive response.
Notably, the Foundation's requests are similar to requests made by others about the same events near the beginning of 2025. As the lawsuit points out, this means UCLA officials should have compiled and produced these documents earlier this year. Their failure to produce the documents to the Foundation in late 2025 shows the officials have ignored their legal obligation under the California Public Records Act for nearly a year now.
"The CPRA requires that an agency produce records responsive to a request made by a member of the public promptly, and Defendants' conduct constitutes an unlawful and bad-faith delay in violation of this statutory duty," the complaint says. "Through this unjustified delay, Respondents have denied Petitioner access to responsive public records without legal basis."
Section 6258 of the California Government Code authorizes declarative or injunctive relief for those who wish to enforce their right to inspect or receive a public record.
"Poll after poll shows that Americans overwhelmingly oppose forcing workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment. So it is outrageous that taxpayers appear to be funding conferences specifically designed to coordinate how to expand union bosses' forced-dues ranks," commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. "The public deserves to know what kind of tactics - and potentially radical political activity - the UCLA administration is using taxpayer dollars to promote, as well as what role union officials have in pushing their agenda at one of the nation's largest public college campuses."
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Print Share
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, assists thousands of employees in about 200 cases nationwide per year.
Posted on Nov 20, 2025 in News Releases
***
Original text here: https://www.nrtw.org/news/ucla-lawsuit-11182025/
LAWSUIT: New Jersey school board member silenced for asking constituents about a proposed tax increase
PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, Nov. 20 -- The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression posted the following news release:
* * *
LAWSUIT: New Jersey school board member silenced for asking constituents about a proposed tax increase
*
ALLOWAY TOWNSHIP, N.J., Nov. 20, 2025 A local school board member's Facebook post to community members about a tax hike should have started a conversation instead, it led to censorship.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is suing the commissioner of New Jersey's Department of Education and members of the state's School Ethics Commission to
... Show Full Article
PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, Nov. 20 -- The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression posted the following news release:
* * *
LAWSUIT: New Jersey school board member silenced for asking constituents about a proposed tax increase
*
ALLOWAY TOWNSHIP, N.J., Nov. 20, 2025 A local school board member's Facebook post to community members about a tax hike should have started a conversation instead, it led to censorship.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is suing the commissioner of New Jersey's Department of Education and members of the state's School Ethics Commission tostop them from abusing a law to chill the speech of an elected school board member who used social media to seek her constituents' input.
"I didn't join the school board to be told to shut up," said Gail Nazarene, an elected school board member, Navy veteran, and grandma in Alloway Township. "New Jersey officials claim the authority to punish me simply for asking folks questions about important issues, particularly when it affects their wallets. I should be free to communicate with constituents and get their views without being censored by state officials."
COURTESY PHOTOS OF GAIL NAZARENE
In April, Gail used Facebook to discuss tax increases and other school issues with constituents. In one post, she asked, "As a resident of Alloway, I am wondering what other residents think about a 9-15% school tax increase?" She clarified in her later posts that she was asking in her personal capacity. But another school board member saw the posts and filed a complaint against her, claiming Gail had violated New Jersey's School Ethics Act because she allegedly had spoken on the board's behalf. The complaint is pending before the state's School Ethics Commission.
"Americans deserve to know what their elected officials think about important issues," said FIRE attorney Daniel Zahn. "New Jersey is muzzling elected officials and preventing them from talking with their community, the very people they were elected to represent."
The state broadly interprets the School Ethics Act to bar elected officials from discussing issues relating to schools on social media. And this isn't the first time it's done so. The School Ethics Commission has previously warned elected officials against engaging with constituents on social media and previously interpreted the act to prevent elected school board members from discussing matters of public concern on social media and in op-eds.
But the First Amendment protects Gail's right to speak freely on such issues.
Gail has stopped soliciting constituent feedback online. She fears any posts about school board issues will lead to punishment, including reprimand, censure, suspension, or removal. But she also is concerned about the loss of First Amendment freedoms for her and her constituents.
"When the state silences school board members, parents and taxpayers are kept in the dark," said FIRE attorney Greg Greubel. "The School Ethics Act can't be turned into an unconstitutional gag rule."
Today's federal lawsuit asks the court to declare New Jersey's School Ethics Act unconstitutional as interpreted by the state and stop its use against elected officials speaking out about public issues.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.
CONTACT
Katie Stalcup, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; media@thefire.org
***
Original text here: https://www.thefire.org/news/lawsuit-new-jersey-school-board-member-silenced-asking-constituents-about-proposed-tax
Franco's Legacy at 50
DETROIT, Michigan, Nov. 20 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary:
* * *
Franco's Legacy at 50
Spain on the anniversary of the dictator's death.
By Mark Nayler
Today is the fiftieth anniversary of the death of the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco. Spain has been celebrating all year, with a calendar of educational and cultural events intended "to highlight the great transformation achieved in this half-century of democracy." Inaugurating the "Spain in Liberty" program in January, Socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez said: "You don't need to have a particular
... Show Full Article
DETROIT, Michigan, Nov. 20 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary:
* * *
Franco's Legacy at 50
Spain on the anniversary of the dictator's death.
By Mark Nayler
Today is the fiftieth anniversary of the death of the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco. Spain has been celebrating all year, with a calendar of educational and cultural events intended "to highlight the great transformation achieved in this half-century of democracy." Inaugurating the "Spain in Liberty" program in January, Socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez said: "You don't need to have a particularideology, to be on the left, in the center, or on the right, to regard with enormous sadness and terror the dark years of Francoism." You don't, but it certainly helps. "Liberty in Spain" deserves praise for innovatively addressing a complicated issue; but it has also highlighted deep-set disagreement over how Spain should confront its pastand even whether doing so is necessary.
In 1936, Franco led a rebellion against Spain's Republican government, triggering a three-year Civil War. After winning that, he ruled Spain for almost four decades, until his death in November 1975. Franco named King Juan Carlos as his successor, expecting him to rule as absolute monarchbut the new head of state rebelled, turning Spain into a constitutional monarchy instead. In 1977, Spaniards voted in the first general election for 41 years. The following year, the newly-convened congress passed a Constitution, an occasion celebrated annually on December 6. Despite the financial scandals that have surrounded 87-year-old Juan Carlos over recent years, he remains a revered figure for rejecting Francoismalthough he writes of his "enormous respect" for the dictator in his recently-published memoirs. This partly explains his absence from the opening ceremony of "Spain in Liberty" back in January.
Franco would no doubt be appalled by the progressive nation that Spain has become in the last half-century. The plurality of ideologies represented in its parliamentfrom atheistic Marxism to Catholic libertarianismis proof that fascism died with the dictator. According to Sanchez, though, its spirit lingers on as the animating force of the Spanish right. "The fascism that we thought we had left behind," he said in his inauguration speech, "is now the third political force in Europe." This was a misleading reference to Vox, a party standardly referred to as "far right" despite the fact that most of its policies are identical to those of the Conservative People's Party (PP). That said, its leader Santiago Abascal has made some spectacularly stupid remarks about the Franco regime. In 2019, for example, he accused Sanchez of leading the "worst [Spanish] government in 80 years." The Socialist-led coalition is a shambles, but to claim that Spaniards would be better off with a totalitarian dictatorship is ridiculous.
Unsurprisingly, Vox is opposed to "Spain in Liberty," calling it "absurd necrophilia." The PP's leader Alberto Nunez Feijoo has adopted a similar stance, saying: "They can dig up Franco 100 times and... behave as if they're nostalgic for the confrontation between Spaniards, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us don't want to build a future together." This was a reference to Sanchez's relocation of Franco's remains in 2019, from a grand mausoleum to a humble family graveyard.
The Spanish right claims that all this undermines modern Spain's foundations, which rest on a bedrock of amnesia. As the country transitioned to democracy, parties from both the left and right made a Pacto del Olvido, or "Pact of Forgetting." Not talking about the past was deemed a necessary condition of progress. This was enshrined in 1977's Amnesty Law, which prohibited the prosecution of war crimes committed by either side. Consequently, Spain has seen nothing comparable to the trials held in Nuremberg after the Second World War, or in Argentina after the Dirty War of 1976-83. Neither has it attempted anything like the Truth and Reconciliation Committee formed by Nelson Mandela in post-apartheid South Africa. In 2012, the UN's high commissioner on human rights declared Spain's 1977 Amnesty in violation of international lawbut it remains in place, stifling attempts at reconciliation.
Like some Socialist prime ministers before him, Sanchez has tried to break the silence. In 2022, congress passed his "Democratic Memory" lawan update to "Historical Memory" legislation introduced by a Socialist government in 2007. Sanchez says that this will help "settle Spanish democracy's debt to its past" by bringing "justice, reparation, and dignity" to victims of the Franco regime and their surviving relatives.
Part of the problem with this legislation is suggested by its name. As the author Javier Cercas has written, "the phrase 'historical memory' is ambiguous and deeply confusing... Memory is individual, partial, and subjective, [whereas] history is collective and aspires to be comprehensive and objective." (The quote is from his 2017 book The Impostor, which contains a fascinating discussion of this issue.) But the phrase "democratic memory" is not much of an improvement. Like "historical memory," it suggests a government trying to legislate over the past imposing a narrative, rather than creating the conditions for an open, honest conversation. History, surely, is done by historians, not politicians.
A closer look at the Democratic Memory law confirms this suspicion. It retrospectively declares the Franco regime illegala pointless symbolic gestureand criminalizes public endorsements of Franco as well as the Francisco Franco Foundation. Ironically, Sanchez has once again made Spain a country in which someone can be prosecuted for expressing an opinion not endorsed by the state. In principle, if not in content, Franco would have approved. As Cercas wrote of the original 2007 legislation: "[A] law of this kind is embarrassingly evocative of the methods of totalitarian states, which know that the best way to control the present is to control the past."
There are, however, some (potentially) positive aspects to the Democratic Memory law. It is now the state's responsibility to recover and identify the remains of an estimated 114,000 victims of Francoism, who "disappeared" during the regime and now lie in unmarked graves across the country. This vital work was previously conducted by the Association for the Recovery of Historical Memory, which had its funding abolished by Sanchez's Conservative predecessor Mariano Rajoy. No attempt to "build a future," as Feijoo puts it, can ignore this projectbut one wonders how competently the government will manage it, and what will happen when the PP next comes to power.
The new law also "updates" the teaching of the Civil War and dictatorship in schools, topics which have previously been neglected due to their sensitivity. This sounds positive, especially because some high-school teachers are reporting a surge in Franco's popularity amongst impressionable, uninformed students. A recent survey also found that a quarter (25.9%) of Spanish males aged between 18 and 26 think that authoritarianism is preferable to democracy "in certain situations" (which says a lot about the damage Sanchez's government has done to public trust in democracy). Any educational reform that encourages students to critically examine value judgements about the past, whether negative or positive, is to be welcomed.
Education, both in schools and in the sense promoted by this year's series of events, is perhaps the best way for Spain to face its past. It is not necessary to legislate against history, or to criminalize those who see the Franco era, for whatever reason, as a Golden Age. Paradoxically, Spanish democracy is strong enough to accommodate groups and individuals intent on glorifying the man who tried to destroy it.
* * *
Mark Nayler is a freelance journalist based in Malaga, Spain, and writes regularly for The Spectator and Foreign Policy on politics and culture.
***
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/francos-legacy-at-50/
Equipment Finance Industry Maintains Heightened Confidence for Sixth Consecutive Month
WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 -- The Equipment Leasing and Finance Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Equipment Finance Industry Maintains Heightened Confidence for Sixth Consecutive Month
*
Washington, DC, November 20, 2025 - The Equipment Leasing & Finance Foundation (the Foundation) today released its November 2025 Monthly Confidence Index for the Equipment Finance Industry (MCI-EFI), revealing confidence in the equipment finance market is at a heightened level for the sixth consecutive month. The index, which provides a qualitative assessment from key executives in the $1.3 trillion
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 -- The Equipment Leasing and Finance Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Equipment Finance Industry Maintains Heightened Confidence for Sixth Consecutive Month
*
Washington, DC, November 20, 2025 - The Equipment Leasing & Finance Foundation (the Foundation) today released its November 2025 Monthly Confidence Index for the Equipment Finance Industry (MCI-EFI), revealing confidence in the equipment finance market is at a heightened level for the sixth consecutive month. The index, which provides a qualitative assessment from key executives in the $1.3 trillionsector, was relatively unchanged at 59.9 in November, from 60.1 in October.
November 2025 Survey Results:
* Business Conditions - When assessing the next four months, 25% of responding executives believe business conditions will improve (down from 37.5% in October). The majority (62.5%) believe business conditions will remain the same (up from 54.2% the previous month) and 12.5% believe business conditions will worsen (up from 8.3% in October).
* Capex Demand - For the next four months, 20.8% of the survey respondents believe demand for leases and loans to fund capital expenditures (capex) will increase (down from 37.5% in October). Additionally, 62.5% expect demand to remain the same (up from 54.2%), and 16.7% believe demand will decline (up from 8.3% in October).
* Access to Capital - Over the next four months, 29.2% of respondents expect greater access to capital to fund equipment acquisitions, an increase from 25% in October. The majority (70.8%) anticipate the "same" access to capital to fund business, down from 75% the previous month. None expect "less" access to capital, unchanged from October.
* Employment - Regarding employment over the next four months, 33.3% of executives expect to hire more employees, an increase from 25% in October. Also, 58.3% foresee no change in headcount (down from 66.7% last month), and 8.3% expect to hire fewer employees, unchanged from October.
* U.S. Economy - Of the respondents, 4.2% evaluate the current U.S. economy as "excellent," up from none in October; 95.8% assess it as "fair," down from 100% last month; and none evaluate it as "poor," unchanged from October.
* Economic Outlook - Over the next six months, 37.5% of respondents believe that U.S. economic conditions will "get better," an increase from 30.4% in October. Another 41.7% expect the U.S. economy to "stay the same," up from 39.1%; and 20.8% believe economic conditions will worsen, down from 30.4% last month.
* Business Development Spending - Over the next six months, 45.8% of respondents believe their company will increase spending on business development activities, up from 29.2% in October. Those who believe there will be "no change" in business development spending decreased to 54.2% (from 66.7% in October), and none believe there will be a decrease in spending (down from 4.2% last month).
November 2025 MCI-EFI Survey Comments from Industry Executive Leadership:
Captive, Small Ticket
"We're anticipating a nice pickup in Q4 as lower rates, pent-up demand, and 2025's depreciation advantages drive renewed momentum." Jim DeFrank, EVP and Chief Operating Officer, Isuzu Finance of America, Inc.
Independent, Middle Ticket
"The equipment finance industry is well positioned for a downturn or an economic boom. The sector by nature finances equipment that is new during boom times and used during downturns, so we have a gameplan in either situation. Equipment finance industry participants that have strong asset management capabilities will perform better in the downturns vs others that do not invest in that capability and talent." Jeffry Elliott, CLFP, CEO of Elevex Capital and Equipment Leasing & Finance Association Treasurer
To access more details and read the full survey results, visit the MCI-EFI web page.
ABOUT THE FOUNDATION
The Equipment Leasing & Finance Foundation is a 501c3 non-profit organization with a mission to advance the $1.3 trillion equipment finance sector by producing data-forward research and market outlooks, as well as cultivating the next-generation workforce through Campus to Career programs, including curriculum development and collegiate scholarships. Founded in 1989 and 100% funded through charitable donations, the Foundation drives innovation and career development for the future of the industry. www.leasefoundation.org
Media Contact: Kelli Nienaber, knienaber@leasefoundation.org
***
Original text here: https://www.leasefoundation.org/news_item/equipment-finance-industry-maintains-heightened-confidence-for-sixth-consecutive-month/
Court Rules That Tracking Lobster Vessels for Conservation and Sustainability is Legal
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Nov. 20 -- The Conservation Law Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
Court Rules That Tracking Lobster Vessels for Conservation and Sustainability is Legal
Comprehensive monitoring is required for New England's iconic lobster industry to thrive
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed that the government is allowed to require electronic vessel trackers on federally permitted lobster fishing vessels. Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) filed an amicus brief in this case (Thompson v. Wilson), on behalf of itself and Ocean Conservancy, encouraging
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Nov. 20 -- The Conservation Law Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
Court Rules That Tracking Lobster Vessels for Conservation and Sustainability is Legal
Comprehensive monitoring is required for New England's iconic lobster industry to thrive
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed that the government is allowed to require electronic vessel trackers on federally permitted lobster fishing vessels. Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) filed an amicus brief in this case (Thompson v. Wilson), on behalf of itself and Ocean Conservancy, encouragingthe court to find in favor of this common-sense policy. This decision is a major step forward for a healthy, well-regulated lobster fishery.
"The First Circuit's ruling could not be more timely - the latest assessment found that New England's lobster population has declined," said CLF Staff Attorney Chloe Fross. "Our fishery managers urgently need reliable and detailed data to respond to the complex issues facing our ocean."
With climate change impacting our waters and some key fish populations on the verge of collapse, New England's fisheries are at a crossroads. It's more important than ever that the government enforces the rules to manage fishing successfully and equitably. Strong, effective management of the lobster fishery isn't possible without comprehensive and accurate data.
CLF has long fought to improve fisheries management in New England, and we'll continue to do so until New England's ocean, fisheries, and marine life can all thrive.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.clf.org/newsroom/court-rules-that-tracking-lobster-vessels-for-conservation-and-sustainability-is-legal/
