Right, by calling his company "Southwest Engineering Concepts" he is advertising engineering services. It is completely reasonable for someone seeking his services to assume he is licensed. If he is not (and he's not) then that's false advertising and actionable under Arizona State Law, Title 32, Chapter 1, Section 45. Almost every engineer I know, licensed, or unlicensed, knows it's a big deal to call yourself an "engineering company" and you better have a licensed engineer working as your primary engineer if you do that.

1. Practices, offers to practice or by any implication holds himself out as qualified to practice any board regulated profession or occupation if the person is not registered or certified as provided by this chapter.

2. Advertises or displays any card, sign or other device that may indicate to the public that the person is certified or registered or is qualified to practice any board regulated profession or occupation if the person is not certified or registered as provided by this chapter.

This. As a PE myself, this is what the entire thing really means to me: I am held accountable before the public for my actions and there is legal recourse than can be taken against me if I violate the public's trust.

Whether the state law is correct or not (and it's arguable both ways), he did violate it by advertising his company as an "engineering" firm (Southwest Engineering Concepts) and offering "engineering services". Stating you are an electrical engineer is fine, offering engineering services to the public when you are unlicensed, is not.

Arizona law, Title 32, Chapter 1, Article 45, (Violations)

1. Practices, offers to practice or by any implication holds himself out as qualified to practice any board regulated profession or occupation if the person is not registered or certified as provided by this chapter.

2. Advertises or displays any card, sign or other device that may indicate to the public that the person is certified or registered or is qualified to practice any board regulated profession or occupation if the person is not certified or registered as provided by this chapter.

Title 32, Chapter 1, Article 1 (Definitions)
11. "Engineering practice" means any professional service or creative work requiring engineering education, training and experience and the application of special knowledge of the mathematical, physical and engineering sciences to such professional services or creative work as consultation, research investigation, evaluation, planning, surveying as defined in paragraph 20, subdivisions (d) and (e) of this subsection, design, location, development, and review of construction for conformance with contract documents and design, in connection with any public or private utility, structure, building, machine, equipment, process, work or project. Such services and work include plans and designs relating to the location, development, mining and treatment of ore and other minerals. A person shall be deemed to be practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person practices any branch of the profession of engineering, or by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or any other manner represents that the person is a professional engineer or is able to perform or does perform any engineering service or other service recognized by educational authorities as engineering. A person employed on a full-time basis as an engineer by an employer engaged in the business of developing, mining and treating ores and other minerals shall not be deemed to be practicing engineering for the purposes of this chapter if the person engages in the practice of engineering exclusively for and as an employee of such employer and does not represent that the person is available and is not represented as being available to perform any engineering services for persons other than the person’s employer.

I recall the Oregon case and looked into it extensively while it was happening. This seems to me to be a different scenario.

I am a licensed PE, and my guess is that this dispute is not about whether he can call himself an engineer or not. It's perfectly acceptable to list "electrical engineer" or "mechanical engineer" etc., on your resume. The issue is that he has advertised his company as an engineering firm, selling engineering services, and nearly every state has a very specific and definite legal meaning for that.

If a customer knows this, and then goes to a company who indicates they are an engineering firm, and the expectation is that this is an engineering firm, then this is false advertising. Additionally, all PEs are accountable to the state board for ethical business practices. Whether or not this should be the law is up for debate, but the guy broke the law by calling his company "Southwest Engineering Concepts" and selling "engineering services".

PE exams are open-book. There were people bringing small bookshelves on handtrucks when I took it.

Different state boards have different requirements. I had to have a recommendation from two PEs who had worked with me, but there was no requirement to work under one for multiple years. The primary requirement for was for me to have worked with progressive responsibilities in an engineering role for four years.

For the Winter Olympics, the Japanese government decided to build the "world's best bobsled", paying millions of dollars in consulting fees to a consortium of 120 companies including Toyota, Nissan, etc. with no experience in making bobsleds. The government also paid children's textbook companies, TV shows to portray the heroic craftsmen who built the sled. The actual product was built by no-name subcontractors in snow-free Tokyo, with a shoestring budget and no experience in bobsleds. The resulting bobsled was uncomfortable, dangerous, and slow, so the Japanese bobsled team refused to ride it. The bobsled was loaned on contract to the Jamaican women's bobsled team, except they hated it too and ended up using an old Latvian bobsled that they borrowed from the German team.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/n...

That's what I was thinking too: I'd assume it would be like being at a bank drive-through window and that someone is watching me through a camera, so might as well tell that person thank you. Or some people might assume the car is being remote-controlled, and be telling that person thank you. Doesn't seem like odd behavior to me. I doubt many of those people are actually just thanking the car.

I saw an interview with him where he described himself as a "classical liberal".

I'm sorry, what? Three sharks wash up on the beach and die and it's suddenly an article on climate change and Trump hating? Really grasping for newsworthy stuff?

Whoops, you are quite correct. Brain cramp on my part.

The head of the FCC is a former Verizon lawyer who is opposed to net neutrality and for allowing ISPs to sell your personal data without you being aware of it.

I guess this is what MAGA means.

One was cheating to lose, the other cheating to win. Quite a big difference in my book.

Something here doesn't pass the sniff test. I mean, articles are often biased but the headline says "dismissed" while the text states that the expired three-year terms weren't renewed. Goldman says "what's the scientific reason for removing...", thereby both indicating that this is anti-science, and they they are being forcibly removed. Then she says that it's the other people inserting politics into science.

I don't know the whole story but just offhand this sounds incredibly one-sided. The EPA spokesman said there are hundreds of applicants, yet another individual stated that he has never known someone on the board to not be reinstated at the end of their term. So there's basically been the same 18 people for years and years? How open-minded and non-political is that? Sounds like the three-year term has been merely formal. Is there anything "scientific" about that?