Public Initiative to extend the Open Government Act (OGA) to apply to the Legislature. I don't have a link to the full text. If someone has that, please let me know.
This is the initiative spearheaded by Rep. Tina Sablan.
It changes the law as follows:
1. deletes the exception for the Legislature in the OGA
2. that means, the Legislature will have to prepare agendas, give notice 72hours in advance of sessions, allow public comment, and respond within 10 days to requests for public records;
3. there is an exception to the 72 hour notice requirement for emergencies, provided the reasons for calling the session emergency are stated in writing, 2/3 of the members agree it is an emergency, and there is an emergency agenda, etc. that eventually gets filed in the public record.
The pros are obvious--we get a more transparent government and greater ability to participate in our democracy.
There seem to be no cons in my opinion.
The OGA originally applied to the Legislature; there seems to be little reason it can't apply now.
The CEC brochure on the OGA initiative lists some cons that I'll address.
* The 72 hour notice would require new notice if discussion is continued over to another day. Really? I don't think so. I don't know of any legal opinion that supports this interpretation. In courts of law, when notice is required, if it's given and the matter is conintued, no new notice is generally required.
* If the Legislature mistakenly fails to give proper notice the act is null and void. Yes. This is not a con--this is good. We want all of our Legislators in on the process; we want the public to know about it. We want to stop secrecy and lies and quick deals behind closed doors that do not face public scrutiny.
* The 2/3rds rule may be hard to obtain in times of emergency. I think this could be true, but I also think that this rule is designed to prevent false "emergency" declarations--like we're seeing all the time from the executive branch. To me, this is not so much a "con" to the amendment as a reason to do some planning. I think the Legislature can and should prepare some contingency plans for dealing with emergencies, having participation by cell phone, etc.
* Requiring notice will decrease the likelihood that legislators will meet outside of committee members to discuss matters. This is pure B.S. The rule applies to official meetings--not informal discussions between legislators.
* The legislators and their assistants will have bigger workloads. Another piece of B.S. Paper or electronic notice is not significantly difficult; and the potential input from legislators who are prepared because they got notice, and from the public, means that we'll have a better chance to have good laws that won't need amending every few months.
For me, this is a really clear and very much needed amendment--This is a vote yes on the public initiative to extend the OGA to apply to the Legislature.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Voting on Initiatives--one by one-#4
Yes, I know. I've skipped #3 (the Open Government Act initiative). I haven't gotten to it yet. But thought I should post what I can.
Senate Legislative Initiative 16-11 (S.L.I. 16-11) has the same number as H.L.I. but is entirely separate and different. Not to be confused by the 16-11--be sure to check out the pre-fix.
S.L.I. 16-11 amends Article VIII, section 1 of the CNMI Constitution.
It makes the following changes:
1. It changes the day of elections in the CNMI from Saturdays to Tuesdays.
2. It sets all elections in only even-numbered years.
3. It adjusts terms of elected public officials to make sure the respective positions are filled until the next election in an even-numbered year. It does this by adding a year to terms, where necessary.
4. The next regular general election would be in 2012. The next governor's election would be 2014.
As noted in the CEC pamphlet on pros and cons, this means the governor we elect in this election, will have a 5 year term, the legislators will have 3 year terms, senators will have 5 year terms, and mayors will have 5 year terms.
It also means that we will not be having elections every year; will save money on the cost of elections; will not be hearing election "music" every year; and will have our elections more closely to the same time as elections in the U.S.
I do prefer Saturdays for elections. I think they provide greater opportunity for people to vote. But nothing in this Constitutional provision prohibits the Legislature from passing some type of law that mandates that all employers give at least one hour (or more) during the work day to their employees for the purpose of facilitating their ability to cast a ballot in the election.
And the cost savings, along with less election hoopla, seems to me a real bonus.
I'm pretty sure the even years were chosen because of federal elections, and now that we have a federal delegate, this will also enable us to coordinate CNMI elections with that election as well.
(I may regret this, especially if Benigno Fitial or Juan Pan wins the governor's position, but) In general, I would vote yes on this S.L.I. 16-11.
Senate Legislative Initiative 16-11 (S.L.I. 16-11) has the same number as H.L.I. but is entirely separate and different. Not to be confused by the 16-11--be sure to check out the pre-fix.
S.L.I. 16-11 amends Article VIII, section 1 of the CNMI Constitution.
It makes the following changes:
1. It changes the day of elections in the CNMI from Saturdays to Tuesdays.
2. It sets all elections in only even-numbered years.
3. It adjusts terms of elected public officials to make sure the respective positions are filled until the next election in an even-numbered year. It does this by adding a year to terms, where necessary.
4. The next regular general election would be in 2012. The next governor's election would be 2014.
As noted in the CEC pamphlet on pros and cons, this means the governor we elect in this election, will have a 5 year term, the legislators will have 3 year terms, senators will have 5 year terms, and mayors will have 5 year terms.
It also means that we will not be having elections every year; will save money on the cost of elections; will not be hearing election "music" every year; and will have our elections more closely to the same time as elections in the U.S.
I do prefer Saturdays for elections. I think they provide greater opportunity for people to vote. But nothing in this Constitutional provision prohibits the Legislature from passing some type of law that mandates that all employers give at least one hour (or more) during the work day to their employees for the purpose of facilitating their ability to cast a ballot in the election.
And the cost savings, along with less election hoopla, seems to me a real bonus.
I'm pretty sure the even years were chosen because of federal elections, and now that we have a federal delegate, this will also enable us to coordinate CNMI elections with that election as well.
(I may regret this, especially if Benigno Fitial or Juan Pan wins the governor's position, but) In general, I would vote yes on this S.L.I. 16-11.
Voting on Initiatives-one by one-#2
House Legislative Initiative 16-11 (H.L.I. 16-11) Amends Article III, section 9 (a) of the CNMI Constitution. Introduced by Diego T. Benavente, Joseph P. Deleon Guerrero, Ed Salas and Ray Yumul.
It makes the following changes:
1. deletes the language that provides for budget allocation at the same level as the previous year when no balanced budget is approved before the first day of the fiscal year.
2. provides that no money shall be drawn for government operations without a budget;
3. makes an exception to the no money rule for "certain government services and employees ...as provided by law... essential to the health safety, and welfare of the people... and to protect against damage to and destruction of property."
4. mandates that the Governor submit a balanced budget proposal to the Legislature by 4/1; and suspends his salary if he doesn't and until he does'
5. suspends the legislature's salary if they don't pass a balanced budget by 10/1 until they do pass one.
I've got to admit to having mixed feelings about this proposal. And to feeling that this type of issue is beyond my ability to figure out. Liberal minds differ on the need for this type of "balanced budget" requirement for state governments.
It seems extreme. It would also require quick legislative action to determine what essential services would remain in effectin the absence of a budget.
Is maintaining property a call to keep DPW workers on staff? What about parks and rec people? And the guys who hang out at the Multi-Purpose Center, sweeping the parking lot and making sure the building is clean?
Would the need to meet the deadline add more pressure for Saipan Senators to cave in to demands from the minority populations on Tinian and Rota?
It seems we have money problems, but don't we need more open government and transparency to see where the money is going, how much we've got from all sources, and some prosecutions for mishandling of funds? Would these tools provide the benefits we need?
Or do we really need this more drastic approach.
Part of me thinks the salaries should be held when people aren't doing their jobs. But what if the decision to vote against a proposed budget is made in good conscience?
I'm undecided on this H.L.I. 16-11.
EDIT: There is no link to the CEC pamphlet on pros and cons in this blog post because the CEC site doesn't have it up; their link is mistakenly tied to S.L.I. 16-11, not H.L.I. 16-11. But you can find the pros and cons for this H.L.I. 16-11 in the CEC's Voters Manual, at page 3.
It makes the following changes:
1. deletes the language that provides for budget allocation at the same level as the previous year when no balanced budget is approved before the first day of the fiscal year.
2. provides that no money shall be drawn for government operations without a budget;
3. makes an exception to the no money rule for "certain government services and employees ...as provided by law... essential to the health safety, and welfare of the people... and to protect against damage to and destruction of property."
4. mandates that the Governor submit a balanced budget proposal to the Legislature by 4/1; and suspends his salary if he doesn't and until he does'
5. suspends the legislature's salary if they don't pass a balanced budget by 10/1 until they do pass one.
I've got to admit to having mixed feelings about this proposal. And to feeling that this type of issue is beyond my ability to figure out. Liberal minds differ on the need for this type of "balanced budget" requirement for state governments.
It seems extreme. It would also require quick legislative action to determine what essential services would remain in effectin the absence of a budget.
Is maintaining property a call to keep DPW workers on staff? What about parks and rec people? And the guys who hang out at the Multi-Purpose Center, sweeping the parking lot and making sure the building is clean?
Would the need to meet the deadline add more pressure for Saipan Senators to cave in to demands from the minority populations on Tinian and Rota?
It seems we have money problems, but don't we need more open government and transparency to see where the money is going, how much we've got from all sources, and some prosecutions for mishandling of funds? Would these tools provide the benefits we need?
Or do we really need this more drastic approach.
Part of me thinks the salaries should be held when people aren't doing their jobs. But what if the decision to vote against a proposed budget is made in good conscience?
I'm undecided on this H.L.I. 16-11.
EDIT: There is no link to the CEC pamphlet on pros and cons in this blog post because the CEC site doesn't have it up; their link is mistakenly tied to S.L.I. 16-11, not H.L.I. 16-11. But you can find the pros and cons for this H.L.I. 16-11 in the CEC's Voters Manual, at page 3.
Voting on the Initiatives--one by one-#1.
If we're going to muck around with amendments to a document as important as the CNMI Constitution, we surely should know what we're voting on.
So in an effort to educate myself, I'm posting about these initiatives here. feel free to comment and add your own perspectives.
House Legislative Initiative 15-3. Introduced by Justo S. Quitugua. Passed in the house on 5/16/2007; in the Senate on 8/16/2007.
This changes Article XV of the CNMI Constitution as follows:
1. adds the language "high school student" as a defining criteria for one of the non-voting ex-officio members to the BOE.
The effect of this change is to exclude NMC students from the position. Is it better to hear from a high school student or an NMC student? I can see value in both. Without the language, either could be appointed. With it--only a high school student can be appointed.
2. deletes the language to select a teacher member from "an exclusive bargaining representative" within the "Department of Education" to just selecting one teacher from PSS; and adds that the selection process shall be established by law.
The effect of this change is to the selection process from one in the control of the teachers to a political choice. Presumably the Legislature could decide that the Governor should appoint the representative; or that the Commissioner of Education should do it; or that only former Teachers of the Year are eligible for the post. or any number of selection criteria could be included, including speaking indigenous language (I think this unlikely) or residency on island for a certain number of years or who knows what.
If the reason for having a teacher on the advisory board is to hear their perspective, it makes a lot of sense to let teachers have a voice in selecting that representative. It makes no sense to make it a political choice.
3. adds term limits to the elected board members. This means that no BOE board member may hold office for more than two terms. It's not clear if this means only 2 consecutive terms or two terms all together.
The effect of this change is to require new blood on the BOE; it also means that the voters have less choice because we can't vote for someone who has experience and is doing a good job if they've already served 2 terms.
4. adds that the budget shall be made "through an annual appropriation."
Duh. Do we need a constitutional amendment telling the Legislature that they have to do their jobs? And assume we had only a continuing resolution budget--if it provided for the 15% or greater amount called for by the Constitution, why would we need an appropriation? What is the constitutional value in this?
What about the PROS and CONS listed on the Commonwealth Election Site? It's quite obvious to me that niether the pros nor the cons actually address the CHANGES being proposed or deal with them in a deep, meaningful, or analytical way.
The pros?
The first pro-about guaranteeing 15 %--that's already part of the Constitution and nothing in the Legislative Initiative changes it or adds to it.
Term limits as a means to encourage new ideas and public involvement? They don't necessarily have that effect.
Giving responsibility to youth and getting their perspective? That's already possible; as noted above, the actual language forecloses choosing a college student, whose views may be equally valuable and needed.
The pros say the HLI ensures that one member is a public school teacher, but that's already assured. What is actually changed is the selection method.
The cons?
15% might not be enough? The Constitution as written provides for at least 15%, but not prevent more. Nothing in this part is changed by the HLI.
Limiting terms limits choices: agreed.
Requiring DOE rep to be a teacher may not take into considerations administrator issues. Um-the existing Constitution calls for a teacher rep; and so does the change. The only difference is in the selection process.
The change leaves the selection process undefined. agreed.
On the whole, I think this H.L.I. 15-3 is not in the interests of the CNMI, not necessary, and should be a NO vote.
So in an effort to educate myself, I'm posting about these initiatives here. feel free to comment and add your own perspectives.
House Legislative Initiative 15-3. Introduced by Justo S. Quitugua. Passed in the house on 5/16/2007; in the Senate on 8/16/2007.
This changes Article XV of the CNMI Constitution as follows:
1. adds the language "high school student" as a defining criteria for one of the non-voting ex-officio members to the BOE.
The effect of this change is to exclude NMC students from the position. Is it better to hear from a high school student or an NMC student? I can see value in both. Without the language, either could be appointed. With it--only a high school student can be appointed.
2. deletes the language to select a teacher member from "an exclusive bargaining representative" within the "Department of Education" to just selecting one teacher from PSS; and adds that the selection process shall be established by law.
The effect of this change is to the selection process from one in the control of the teachers to a political choice. Presumably the Legislature could decide that the Governor should appoint the representative; or that the Commissioner of Education should do it; or that only former Teachers of the Year are eligible for the post. or any number of selection criteria could be included, including speaking indigenous language (I think this unlikely) or residency on island for a certain number of years or who knows what.
If the reason for having a teacher on the advisory board is to hear their perspective, it makes a lot of sense to let teachers have a voice in selecting that representative. It makes no sense to make it a political choice.
3. adds term limits to the elected board members. This means that no BOE board member may hold office for more than two terms. It's not clear if this means only 2 consecutive terms or two terms all together.
The effect of this change is to require new blood on the BOE; it also means that the voters have less choice because we can't vote for someone who has experience and is doing a good job if they've already served 2 terms.
4. adds that the budget shall be made "through an annual appropriation."
Duh. Do we need a constitutional amendment telling the Legislature that they have to do their jobs? And assume we had only a continuing resolution budget--if it provided for the 15% or greater amount called for by the Constitution, why would we need an appropriation? What is the constitutional value in this?
What about the PROS and CONS listed on the Commonwealth Election Site? It's quite obvious to me that niether the pros nor the cons actually address the CHANGES being proposed or deal with them in a deep, meaningful, or analytical way.
The pros?
The first pro-about guaranteeing 15 %--that's already part of the Constitution and nothing in the Legislative Initiative changes it or adds to it.
Term limits as a means to encourage new ideas and public involvement? They don't necessarily have that effect.
Giving responsibility to youth and getting their perspective? That's already possible; as noted above, the actual language forecloses choosing a college student, whose views may be equally valuable and needed.
The pros say the HLI ensures that one member is a public school teacher, but that's already assured. What is actually changed is the selection method.
The cons?
15% might not be enough? The Constitution as written provides for at least 15%, but not prevent more. Nothing in this part is changed by the HLI.
Limiting terms limits choices: agreed.
Requiring DOE rep to be a teacher may not take into considerations administrator issues. Um-the existing Constitution calls for a teacher rep; and so does the change. The only difference is in the selection process.
The change leaves the selection process undefined. agreed.
On the whole, I think this H.L.I. 15-3 is not in the interests of the CNMI, not necessary, and should be a NO vote.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Bullshit Feminism
I'm a feminist. I promote equality and women's rights. When I went to law school, less than 1/3 of lawschool classes were women. I've protested against the values and practices that keep women out of political and economic power.
And I HATE it when women use feminist propaganda to promote anti-feminist practices.
Jacinta Kaipat is so outrageously wrong (saying that the regulation that we can't bring in foreign workers as personal maids is anti-women) that I can't think of a "punishment" bad enough.
1. Keeping women in low-paying jobs like maids is not a value of feminism. That women all over the world, and especially desperate women in third-world countries, hire themselves out as maids does not mean having maid jobs is a goal to aspire to.
2. Women can get into the workforce and be valuable and productive without personal domestic help.
3. The new regulation that would prohibit bringing in foreign domestic workers as personal maids does not mean that you can't have a maid. You can--just hire a U.S. citizen, a citizen from one of the Freely Associated States, a permanent resident. Of course, these people will expect to be paid at least minimum wage.
4. The new regulation respects the transition--if you have a maid and you aren't ready to join the rest of the world in the modern era and want to hold on to the past, renew her contract for 2 years. That will give you time to wrap your head around the reality of life.
5. Or you can incorporate and hire your maid through the CNMI-only worker program.
Wendy has a good discussion on all of this, too.
Of course, the community does seem to know that Jacinta Kaipat's opinion is utter nonsense, or, as one commenter at the Variety said, "pure drivel."
And I HATE it when women use feminist propaganda to promote anti-feminist practices.
Jacinta Kaipat is so outrageously wrong (saying that the regulation that we can't bring in foreign workers as personal maids is anti-women) that I can't think of a "punishment" bad enough.
1. Keeping women in low-paying jobs like maids is not a value of feminism. That women all over the world, and especially desperate women in third-world countries, hire themselves out as maids does not mean having maid jobs is a goal to aspire to.
2. Women can get into the workforce and be valuable and productive without personal domestic help.
3. The new regulation that would prohibit bringing in foreign domestic workers as personal maids does not mean that you can't have a maid. You can--just hire a U.S. citizen, a citizen from one of the Freely Associated States, a permanent resident. Of course, these people will expect to be paid at least minimum wage.
4. The new regulation respects the transition--if you have a maid and you aren't ready to join the rest of the world in the modern era and want to hold on to the past, renew her contract for 2 years. That will give you time to wrap your head around the reality of life.
5. Or you can incorporate and hire your maid through the CNMI-only worker program.
Wendy has a good discussion on all of this, too.
Of course, the community does seem to know that Jacinta Kaipat's opinion is utter nonsense, or, as one commenter at the Variety said, "pure drivel."
Monday, November 2, 2009
Election Choices? The Candidates.
We have an election to vote in this week. The field is less inspiring that many of us would like. Nonetheless, it is important to vote, to choose the lesser of evils, the more capable, the more likely to lead.
The following are my OPINIONS only.
I've been in Saipan for nearly 25 years (that anniversary comes 11/30). I've voted in every election since I got here.
I hate it when any U.S. citizen who lives here talks as if she has no interest, right, or responsibility to vote in local elections. I hate it even more when they claim ignorance. (These are mostly haoles, like me.) It's important that we exercise this freedom, that we educate ourselves. And it's the lowest form of arrogance and lack of commitment to community that leads eligible voters to slack off and fail to vote. I guess, I feel more disgust toward the non-voters than I do toward even our worst candidate.
I also hear a lot of reasons from various people about what influences their decisions. Some try to guess in advance who is likely to win--they want to be part of the winner's circle. They want to back a winner. I think this is stupid and irrational. This is not a horse-race. It's not a popularity contest. And deciding to vote because everyone else is going that way is not much better than not voting at all. I think every voter should make up his or her own mind and follow his or her own conscience in choosing whom to vote for.
There is a strong pull to vote for family members. I understand this. Family members are people we love, people we know, people to whom we owe family loyalty and devotion and respect. And candidates do need to know they have family support, or they'll never be able to withstand the pressures and temptations of public office. So I don't think this concept should be discounted completely. But I do think it is just one factor to consider and shouldn't be the only factor, or even the most important factor. If all other factors were equal, then I could see choosing the closest family member.
But it's rare that all other factors are equal. What are those factors? This is a difficult list to comprise. I like intelligent and honest candidates; but I also want those who tend to lean in the same political direction that I do (which is toward the liberal side that respects civil rights, promotes equality, relies on education, and protects the environment, and places these considerations above personal wealth, which is often wrapped up in the name of the "economy," and ahead of personal ambition).
So my assessment of some of our candidates for office?
Governor-Lieutenant Governor:
Fitial-Inos. (Covenant) I see Fitial as intelligent but less than honest. He's in favor of shutting off public access to information about the workings of government. He elevates the needs of individual businessmen above the rights of workers. He has an angle with a profit motive for every problem. I don't see him as a leader so much as a profiteer who wants the power and position to increase his own wealth and situation. He would be at the bottom of my list for Governor; and there is nothing about Inos that makes me want to vote for the ticket.
Juan Pan Guerrero-Camacho. (Independent) Juan Pan is another businessman who has been very willing to take from the CNMI government whatever he could. His recruitment deals for his company Paras Enterprises have been riddled with questions, both for public agency deals and private recruitment scandals. His contributions to the Red Cross do not cancel or outweigh his history. I don't see him as friendly toward rights or equality or the environment. Running-mate JJ Camacho is smart and educated and has a public record of voting. He's been very good at sharing information and making the House record accessible, and this is his great contribution. But I disagree with nearly every vote he's made. He's a backer of Fitial's agenda. To me, a vote for this team is the same as a vote for Fitial-Inos. And that would be a no.
Ray Guerrero-Borja. (Independent) Uncle Ray is family. That said, in all honesty, I don't think he's got the imagination or ideas to address the challenges of the office. Recycling his old slogan is an example of how worn-out he seems. Borja is a bright spot on the ticket. I think he's intelligent and capable. But he's not enough. I'd rather see this ticket prevail, though, than either Fitial-Inos or Pan Guerrero-Camacho, despite the extreme unlikelihood of that happening.
Hofschneider-Palacios. (Republican) Heinz has been in the CNMI Legislature a long time and we don't have all that much good to show from his work. Same for Arnold. Heinz has brains, but often fails to listen to other intelligent voices. Arnold cares little for the environment and would just as soon see his own interests take precedence. Despite the weaknesses of this team, though, I think they offer the best of a bad lot. I think Heinz appreciates the need for open government; and both could work hard to balance the extremely divergent interests of our community.
Senator from Saipan We're supposed to vote for two:
CAMACHO, Paul William (Independent) I know very little about this candidate. Most notably missing from his webpage bio is his education. We need smart, educated public officials. Even his experience is a bit thin. I'm not impressed. This is a likely no for me.
CRUZ, Gregorio Sanchez (Independent) Greg has gained notoriety of sorts for his Taotao Tano. I admire his willingness to stick his neck out, to complain, to demand answers, to be a loud mouth. But there's also some question whether his opinions are his own, or whether he's just the puppet. And again, what educational qualifications do we have here? This is a likely no for me.
SABLAN, Christina Marie Elise (Independent) Summa cum laude from College of Santa Fe. A term of experience in the House. The ability to articulate issues and generate discussions on hot issues; the ability to listen as others speak; the ability to open doors and documents for public view; the desire and attention to public rights and the environment. We are so lucky to have Tina as a candidate. I hope she wins by a landslide. YES, YES, YES. (Can I give her both of my votes?)
TEREGEYO, Ana Sablan (Covenant) She's on facebook, but mostly she's from a generation that has retired. I respect Ana Teregeyo and know she's intelligent. I disagree with her politics and even where I don't, I think she's not going to bring the energy and vision we need to the CNMI Senate. For me-a no.
KAIPAT, Jacinta Matagolai (Covenant) She's educated (holding a law degree) and intelligent, and cares about the environment. She's on Facebook and has a unique grasp of both modern technology and the best of our cultural history. But she also supports Governor Fitial's vision of a segregated work-force, with foreign workers consigned to low pay and no rights--a two-tiered system that is a violation of civil liberties and an evil. And she's blind to the problems of this labor system. I can't support her candidacy.
QUITUGUA, Justo Songao (Democrat) He's intelligent and educated, and has been an educator himself. He has experience in the House and has authored bills promoting different kinds of education reform--a mixed bag in my opinion. The good being to promote vocational training in our public schools; the less good to give money to Tony Pellegrino for his private business ventures to do similarly. He failed to support the national marine monument; and he hasn't been much in favor of civil rights. He's a Democrat in name, and we could use a few more of those in our local politics, but I'm on the fence here.
REYES, Pete Pangelinan (Republican) He's intelligent and values education, giving us his intelligent and educated children. He's also been in the Senate a very long time, so knows the ropes. On the other hand, his very experience also counts somewhat against him--we need change. We need a different kind of leadership that depends less on entrenched politics and more on deep thinking and analysis. I'm on the fence here, too.
TORRES, Ralph Anthony Deleon Guerrero (Republican) Aack. He's young, intelligent, and educated--and more caught up in the old-boys network and hardening-of-the-arteries thinking than most of the old-timers. I see nothing positive from his time in the House and nothing that makes me think he's a leader. He's got a well-oiled machine, and there is nothing good I can say about that kind of politics. For me-a definite no.
Mayor of Saipan.
CAMACHO, Antonio Muna (Independent) Old style politician. Pleasant and friendly and smart. But too long out of the loop. Not my choice.
TENORIO, Lino Sablan (Independent) A lackluster career at DPS. Not my choice.
BENAVENTE, Roman Cepeda (Independent) Smart, friendly, and caring. A history of public service. If Angelo weren't in the race, I'd consider him for the job.
SANCHEZ, Jose Deleon Guerrero (Independent) I know little about him. He's a former educator, so I'm guessing he's intelligent, but not my choice.
DEMAPAN, Juan Sablan (Independent) Supports casino gambling in Saipan. Too much baggage of questionable nature. (I couldn't find the link to the Tinian school construction debacle.) A definite no.
TAMAN, Candido Babauta (Independent)Good singer. Opposed the national marine monument. I think he supports Fitial. We need a different kind of voice, imho. No for senate.
TUDELA, Marian Deleon Guerrero (Covenant) Intelligent. Director of Upward Bound; but bound to the Covenant party and Fitial's views. That would be a no for me.
VILLAGOMEZ, Angelo O’Connor (Democrat). Intelligent, educated, and dedicated to environmental concerns. He's got loads of energy and vision. He's done a lot to organize people and protect our environment. This would be a big YES in my book.
FLORES, Donald Glenn (Republican) Intelligent, educated. I sometimes like his letters in the newspapers. But I'm worried that he's going to promote business interests, not human interests. There's a difference. I'm not against business--but I think we need government to be on the side of people, or, at the very least, neutral when it comes to the differences between business interests and human interests and needs.
House-Precinct 5: Vote for 2
MENDIOLA, Joseph Muna (Independent)--I don't know much about this guy. He doesn't seem to have a lot of education or a track record that makes me want to go out and vote for him. Any one else have more details?
DELEON GUERRERO, Frederick Peters (Independent) He's too close to Covenant for me.
QUITUGUA, Daniel Ogo (Covenant)--Not my party. That would be no. And to be clear, I don't usually care what party a candidate is. I'll vote for whomever I think is best. But I see the Covenant party members as lining up behind Fitial's agenda, and I disagree with that so vehemently, I can't support any of these Covenant candidates (or the independents who are Covenant in disguise).
BASA, Ramon Sablan (Covenant)--Not my party.(See note above) That would be no.
BRUNDIDGE Jr., Willie Lee (Democrat)--He's got a job now. I see no reason to want him in the House.
TORRES, Jesse David Jones (Democrat). I love his letters to the editor in the newspapers and his support of community projects. I think he's got the brains, education, energy and values that I want in a Congressman. That would be YES!
DEMAPAN, Jose Sablan (Republican). Did he buy a counterfeit diploma from a Spokane diploma mill? I'm not otherwise sure of his background. DPW-right? I'm hesitant to vote for him.
SANTOS, Rosemond Blanco (Republican) Rosemond is definitely smart and educated. I'm disappointed in her performance this past term. Too many absences from voting sessions. Nothing much I agreed with, except her vote for the budget.
Well, express your opinions here--or at the ballot box where it really counts.
The following are my OPINIONS only.
I've been in Saipan for nearly 25 years (that anniversary comes 11/30). I've voted in every election since I got here.
I hate it when any U.S. citizen who lives here talks as if she has no interest, right, or responsibility to vote in local elections. I hate it even more when they claim ignorance. (These are mostly haoles, like me.) It's important that we exercise this freedom, that we educate ourselves. And it's the lowest form of arrogance and lack of commitment to community that leads eligible voters to slack off and fail to vote. I guess, I feel more disgust toward the non-voters than I do toward even our worst candidate.
I also hear a lot of reasons from various people about what influences their decisions. Some try to guess in advance who is likely to win--they want to be part of the winner's circle. They want to back a winner. I think this is stupid and irrational. This is not a horse-race. It's not a popularity contest. And deciding to vote because everyone else is going that way is not much better than not voting at all. I think every voter should make up his or her own mind and follow his or her own conscience in choosing whom to vote for.
There is a strong pull to vote for family members. I understand this. Family members are people we love, people we know, people to whom we owe family loyalty and devotion and respect. And candidates do need to know they have family support, or they'll never be able to withstand the pressures and temptations of public office. So I don't think this concept should be discounted completely. But I do think it is just one factor to consider and shouldn't be the only factor, or even the most important factor. If all other factors were equal, then I could see choosing the closest family member.
But it's rare that all other factors are equal. What are those factors? This is a difficult list to comprise. I like intelligent and honest candidates; but I also want those who tend to lean in the same political direction that I do (which is toward the liberal side that respects civil rights, promotes equality, relies on education, and protects the environment, and places these considerations above personal wealth, which is often wrapped up in the name of the "economy," and ahead of personal ambition).
So my assessment of some of our candidates for office?
Governor-Lieutenant Governor:
Fitial-Inos. (Covenant) I see Fitial as intelligent but less than honest. He's in favor of shutting off public access to information about the workings of government. He elevates the needs of individual businessmen above the rights of workers. He has an angle with a profit motive for every problem. I don't see him as a leader so much as a profiteer who wants the power and position to increase his own wealth and situation. He would be at the bottom of my list for Governor; and there is nothing about Inos that makes me want to vote for the ticket.
Juan Pan Guerrero-Camacho. (Independent) Juan Pan is another businessman who has been very willing to take from the CNMI government whatever he could. His recruitment deals for his company Paras Enterprises have been riddled with questions, both for public agency deals and private recruitment scandals. His contributions to the Red Cross do not cancel or outweigh his history. I don't see him as friendly toward rights or equality or the environment. Running-mate JJ Camacho is smart and educated and has a public record of voting. He's been very good at sharing information and making the House record accessible, and this is his great contribution. But I disagree with nearly every vote he's made. He's a backer of Fitial's agenda. To me, a vote for this team is the same as a vote for Fitial-Inos. And that would be a no.
Ray Guerrero-Borja. (Independent) Uncle Ray is family. That said, in all honesty, I don't think he's got the imagination or ideas to address the challenges of the office. Recycling his old slogan is an example of how worn-out he seems. Borja is a bright spot on the ticket. I think he's intelligent and capable. But he's not enough. I'd rather see this ticket prevail, though, than either Fitial-Inos or Pan Guerrero-Camacho, despite the extreme unlikelihood of that happening.
Hofschneider-Palacios. (Republican) Heinz has been in the CNMI Legislature a long time and we don't have all that much good to show from his work. Same for Arnold. Heinz has brains, but often fails to listen to other intelligent voices. Arnold cares little for the environment and would just as soon see his own interests take precedence. Despite the weaknesses of this team, though, I think they offer the best of a bad lot. I think Heinz appreciates the need for open government; and both could work hard to balance the extremely divergent interests of our community.
Senator from Saipan We're supposed to vote for two:
CAMACHO, Paul William (Independent) I know very little about this candidate. Most notably missing from his webpage bio is his education. We need smart, educated public officials. Even his experience is a bit thin. I'm not impressed. This is a likely no for me.
CRUZ, Gregorio Sanchez (Independent) Greg has gained notoriety of sorts for his Taotao Tano. I admire his willingness to stick his neck out, to complain, to demand answers, to be a loud mouth. But there's also some question whether his opinions are his own, or whether he's just the puppet. And again, what educational qualifications do we have here? This is a likely no for me.
SABLAN, Christina Marie Elise (Independent) Summa cum laude from College of Santa Fe. A term of experience in the House. The ability to articulate issues and generate discussions on hot issues; the ability to listen as others speak; the ability to open doors and documents for public view; the desire and attention to public rights and the environment. We are so lucky to have Tina as a candidate. I hope she wins by a landslide. YES, YES, YES. (Can I give her both of my votes?)
TEREGEYO, Ana Sablan (Covenant) She's on facebook, but mostly she's from a generation that has retired. I respect Ana Teregeyo and know she's intelligent. I disagree with her politics and even where I don't, I think she's not going to bring the energy and vision we need to the CNMI Senate. For me-a no.
KAIPAT, Jacinta Matagolai (Covenant) She's educated (holding a law degree) and intelligent, and cares about the environment. She's on Facebook and has a unique grasp of both modern technology and the best of our cultural history. But she also supports Governor Fitial's vision of a segregated work-force, with foreign workers consigned to low pay and no rights--a two-tiered system that is a violation of civil liberties and an evil. And she's blind to the problems of this labor system. I can't support her candidacy.
QUITUGUA, Justo Songao (Democrat) He's intelligent and educated, and has been an educator himself. He has experience in the House and has authored bills promoting different kinds of education reform--a mixed bag in my opinion. The good being to promote vocational training in our public schools; the less good to give money to Tony Pellegrino for his private business ventures to do similarly. He failed to support the national marine monument; and he hasn't been much in favor of civil rights. He's a Democrat in name, and we could use a few more of those in our local politics, but I'm on the fence here.
REYES, Pete Pangelinan (Republican) He's intelligent and values education, giving us his intelligent and educated children. He's also been in the Senate a very long time, so knows the ropes. On the other hand, his very experience also counts somewhat against him--we need change. We need a different kind of leadership that depends less on entrenched politics and more on deep thinking and analysis. I'm on the fence here, too.
TORRES, Ralph Anthony Deleon Guerrero (Republican) Aack. He's young, intelligent, and educated--and more caught up in the old-boys network and hardening-of-the-arteries thinking than most of the old-timers. I see nothing positive from his time in the House and nothing that makes me think he's a leader. He's got a well-oiled machine, and there is nothing good I can say about that kind of politics. For me-a definite no.
Mayor of Saipan.
CAMACHO, Antonio Muna (Independent) Old style politician. Pleasant and friendly and smart. But too long out of the loop. Not my choice.
TENORIO, Lino Sablan (Independent) A lackluster career at DPS. Not my choice.
BENAVENTE, Roman Cepeda (Independent) Smart, friendly, and caring. A history of public service. If Angelo weren't in the race, I'd consider him for the job.
SANCHEZ, Jose Deleon Guerrero (Independent) I know little about him. He's a former educator, so I'm guessing he's intelligent, but not my choice.
DEMAPAN, Juan Sablan (Independent) Supports casino gambling in Saipan. Too much baggage of questionable nature. (I couldn't find the link to the Tinian school construction debacle.) A definite no.
TAMAN, Candido Babauta (Independent)Good singer. Opposed the national marine monument. I think he supports Fitial. We need a different kind of voice, imho. No for senate.
TUDELA, Marian Deleon Guerrero (Covenant) Intelligent. Director of Upward Bound; but bound to the Covenant party and Fitial's views. That would be a no for me.
VILLAGOMEZ, Angelo O’Connor (Democrat). Intelligent, educated, and dedicated to environmental concerns. He's got loads of energy and vision. He's done a lot to organize people and protect our environment. This would be a big YES in my book.
FLORES, Donald Glenn (Republican) Intelligent, educated. I sometimes like his letters in the newspapers. But I'm worried that he's going to promote business interests, not human interests. There's a difference. I'm not against business--but I think we need government to be on the side of people, or, at the very least, neutral when it comes to the differences between business interests and human interests and needs.
House-Precinct 5: Vote for 2
MENDIOLA, Joseph Muna (Independent)--I don't know much about this guy. He doesn't seem to have a lot of education or a track record that makes me want to go out and vote for him. Any one else have more details?
DELEON GUERRERO, Frederick Peters (Independent) He's too close to Covenant for me.
QUITUGUA, Daniel Ogo (Covenant)--Not my party. That would be no. And to be clear, I don't usually care what party a candidate is. I'll vote for whomever I think is best. But I see the Covenant party members as lining up behind Fitial's agenda, and I disagree with that so vehemently, I can't support any of these Covenant candidates (or the independents who are Covenant in disguise).
BASA, Ramon Sablan (Covenant)--Not my party.(See note above) That would be no.
BRUNDIDGE Jr., Willie Lee (Democrat)--He's got a job now. I see no reason to want him in the House.
TORRES, Jesse David Jones (Democrat). I love his letters to the editor in the newspapers and his support of community projects. I think he's got the brains, education, energy and values that I want in a Congressman. That would be YES!
DEMAPAN, Jose Sablan (Republican). Did he buy a counterfeit diploma from a Spokane diploma mill? I'm not otherwise sure of his background. DPW-right? I'm hesitant to vote for him.
SANTOS, Rosemond Blanco (Republican) Rosemond is definitely smart and educated. I'm disappointed in her performance this past term. Too many absences from voting sessions. Nothing much I agreed with, except her vote for the budget.
Well, express your opinions here--or at the ballot box where it really counts.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
2009 Humanities Awards
The Governor's 2009 Humanities Awards were given out last night (Friday). The lifetime achievement award was given post-humously to Dr. Rita H. Inos. (I wonder why she never received this during her lifetime.)
The Humanities Teacher award was given to Harold Easton. He teaches at MHS and NMC and is the man behind the success of the NFL, NJFL, PGFC and Thespian organizations in the CNMI.
Congratulations! and a heartfelt thanks.
The Humanities Teacher award was given to Harold Easton. He teaches at MHS and NMC and is the man behind the success of the NFL, NJFL, PGFC and Thespian organizations in the CNMI.
Congratulations! and a heartfelt thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
