My new venture

I've started creating editorial cartoons. Well, I've always done this, but I've started submitting them to the Variety for publication. First one appeared Friday, September 21, 2012 with Zaldy's editorial here.

That very small writing says "Nice job cleaning up, Angel." and the little guys say "He learned it from his mother." and "Ahchoo."

This is essentially based on Angel's job as press secretary, which is more often than not having to excuse the Governor's misdeeds and neglect.  The Governor's contributions to the dung heap are so enormous that sweeping them under rug doesn't adequately hide the mess.  Angel's mom is in the little people's comments from my recollection of her at MLSC years ago, when she worked as our accountant and left in a hurry (an easy out for her) after failing to do a very good job hiding things she shouldn't have done.  Note, I added a lobster bib on Angel because of the lovely photos that had been posted on facebook showing him and Mike Ada and others on one of their many stateside trips chowing down on ginormous crustaceans.

There's also one of my cartoons in today (Monday's) Variety. Not online, though.

Rain, gray skies, mist this morning. I actually used an umbrella. Sun, but with haze now.
____________________

"All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field."
— Albert Einstein

When your head hurts from banging it against the wall of prejudice, personal interest, and the reign of idiocy in the government, you can think of others who have been there, done that, too.

No Budget-Essential Services

The relevant constitutional provision of our CNMI Constitution reads:

If a balanced budget is not approved (by the legislature) before the first day of the fiscal year, no money shall be drawn from the General Fund, provided that certain government services and employees shall remain available as provided by law, in order to deliver services essential to the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the Commonwealth and to protect against damage to and destruction of property.

The exact contours of this provision are now being tested by our current situation. And the limitations and protections of this provision seem to have already been stretched beyond reason and good sense in service of political motives.

1. The Saipan Tribune reports that Attorney General Ed Buckingham has used and is using public funds to hire a private attorney to represent him in the OPA investigation into his use of public office to support federal election (House of Representatives) candidate Joe Camacho. The hire of attorney G. Anthony Long occurred on September 17, 2010 --so predates the constitutional restriction on expenditures of public funds. But now the question becomes whether the continued services of Mr. Long can possibly be considered "essential services" during this government "shut-down." The answer seems obvious--NO! Legal services to cover Mr. Buckingham's ass in the investigation are not vital to "health, safety, and welfare OF THE PEOPLE."

No time that Mr. Long puts in from October 1, 2010 to the enactment of a budget should be billed to the public or paid for with public funds.


2. The Marianas Variety reports that Deputy Police Commissioner Ambrosio Ogumoro told DPS supervisors during work hours in a meeting to have their subordinate police officers bring food to a political gathering for US House candidate Joe Camacho. Almost worse than this political pressure is the report that police officers, while on duty, "delivered picnic tables, cut fish and helped in the preparation" for the political gathering.

Not only is it a violation of law for state government workers to aid in a federal election campaign as part of their state government work, we are in a SHUT-DOWN and only essential services are to be provided and paid for.

Helping on a political campaign is not essential service for the "health, safety, and welfare of the people of the Commonwealth."


We need a full investigation of both of these. We may need a lawsuit challenging expenditure of taxpayer funds in derogation of the Constitution. And for this, we need leaders to take the lead. They must step up and insist on behalf of all of us that the tyranny end; that our rights be protected; and that our government remain and return to democratic principles.

CNMI Political Negotiations-still no budget

October 3, 2010. Still no budget.

2010-Government Shutdown?

After several days of grey skies and rain, it's finally clearing. Hot and humid, as expected.
_____________________________

Although the weather is clearing from the dark skies, there is no light in the forecast for the political atmosphere.

The CNMI is facing a looming disaster--the shutdown of the government.

How did this happen?
Last November 2009, the voters passed an initiative HLI 16-11 to amend the Constitution. You can read some information about the original initiative at the MLSC Day In Court Blog. The pros and cons that were provided for voter education at the time are here.

But the best information is to read the actual HLI 16-11initiative that was approved by the voters. This shows the relevant language that was adopted into our Constitution, the language that is now the governing law of the CNMI.

This amendment requires a balanced budget by October 1 and, in its absence, prohibits funding government operations by continuing resolution. Rather, only "essential services" are to be funded until a balanced budget is passed. Those "essential services" are to be determined "by law." And the most telling provision is that the Legislators' salaries are to be suspended starting October 1 until they pass a balanced budget.

Who is responsible for this fiasco?
The initiative to amend the CNMI Constitution was introduced by Congressmen Diego T. Benavente, Joseph P. Deleon Guerrero, Edward T. Salas, and Ray Yumul.

I don't know who in the House voted for it, but it was passed by the House.
I don't know who in the Senate voted for it, but it was passed by the Senate.

And then it went to the people for a vote in the general election.
I don't know who voted for it among the general population; I only know I didn't vote for it. But it passed.


Why didn't our Legislators pass a balanced budget?
This of course is the big question.
The Legislative highlights on the Senate page was last updated 4/16/2010 (as of this writing) and it shows that Senator Pete Reyes had, by then, introduced a resolution SR 17-12 asking the Governor to convene an economic summit to avoid a government shut-down come October. I have no idea what happened to that resolution.

Other action at the time included a resolution to honor Bishop Tomas Camacho and opposing a proposed casino in Saipan.

The House website hasn't been updated since March 26, 2010 (as of this writing). Nothing on it even mentions budget concerns. There was, however, a standing committee report on a bill to amend the CNMI law about immigration. The report was adopted by the House.

On August 18, the House finally passed a budget bill--one that increased their discretionary spending while dishing out a 16 hour/payday cut to most other government workers. HB 17-96.

There was an instant uproar and silent protests. House Speaker Froilan Tenorio told the Senate it would be okay to change the budget if they increased his leadership account. He also urged them to pass the casino legislation.

On September 6, the Senate voted a budget that amended the House version--cutting discretionary spending and restoring 8 hours of the regular workday to government employees.

On September 14, the House rejected the Senate's amendments of the budget bill.

The House and Senate picked their respective teams for a conference committee, with just 10 days left to resolve the budget crisis. But the Senate walked out of the conference committee efforts because the House negotiating team is insisting on using the need for a budget to get the Senate to approve the casino legislation. They Senate is willing to reconvene, with 5 days left before October 1, provided the House returns in good faith, takes casino legislation off the table, and agrees to open the sessions to the public.


From all of this, I conclude:
1. The House delayed passing a bill until it was very late. The fact that the budget bill is the 96th bill introduced, instead of the first, shows that the House does not have its priorities in order.

2. The House leadership is pushing for casinos in Saipan. They don't care about a balanced budget. They don't care if the people suffer. Someone wants to get some graft and kickback into their pocket. Even the provision to up their discretionary funds and the demand to increase the leadership account are plain abuse of fiscal responsibility. It's all about corruption and greed.

3. The Senate is trying to do the right thing. They have been paying attention, even though appropriation bills must originate in the House. But they can't do it alone.

We're not going to have a budget anytime soon.

So what happens now?

The government operations can only pay for "essential services" as those have been determined by law. Although the Governor wants to be "the law" it seems that the Constitution actually calls for law in the usual sense. So the bill passed by the Senate defining what is "essential services" is another step in the right direction. A House bill has also been introduced, but no action taken on it. Given how irresponsible the House has been in the budget process, it doesn't seem likely it will be be enacted. The Speaker Lang Tenorio is noncommital on the proposals about "essential services", meaning nothing is going to happen.

Another thing about the effect of the constitution, neither the House nor the Senate members should get any salary at all after October 1 until a budget is passed. The Constitution suspends payment to them. Even if they declare themselves "essential services" they can't override the Constitution. It is clear:

"...if the Legislature does not pass a balanced budget by October 1st, the Legislators' salaries shall be suspended until such time that a balanced budget is passed by the Legislature."

This is small comfort to all of the people who will be out of work and without pay. The House and Senate members deserve the lack of payment; no one else does.

What can we do?
It's not too late for the people to do something. We can't write and pass the budget ourselves, but we can demand that our representatives do their jobs.

It is far more responsible to have only 8 hour cuts for workers and reduced discretionary funds for the Legislators than to have 16 hour cuts for workers and an INCREASE in discretionary funds for these politicians.


So: Tell your House members to come to their senses and agree to the Senate amendments. Call them at work; call them at home; visit them personally. Put the pressure on.

Or else, come October 1, it will be a difficult start to FY 2012 for all of us.

Approaching the CNMI's Problems

Hot days. A rainbow this morning in the western sky. A few scattered sulphur butterflies. And a travesty of cut-down trees along Beach Road at MHS. (sigh)
_________________________

The CNMI is in a deep, deep rut. We are facing payless paydays of government employees. The private sector is eating dirt and unable to even get to its knees. And the mood in the communities is bleak.

We have technological problems with water, sewer and utilities. We have a community college on academic probation and facing revocation of its accreditation again. We have a retirement system that has lost millions of dollars and given away perks and double dipping benefits and now can't pay its obligations to its members.

We have increasing crime but a criminal justice system that is riddled with flaws--police who forget about the use of warrants, prosecutors who fail to work with the police to get the evidence and then lose cases, worse yet--settle for puny crimes and miniscule sentences unrelated to the real crime, and worst--dismiss cases or face the court's dismissals instead of prosecuting them.

We have extreme and serious problems and no workable solutions on the table.

Our re-tread legislators peddle the same tired proposals--1) casinos (which have not brought prosperity to Tinian in a decade of operation; have already cost us money in Rota without profit); 2) hitting businesses for more (taking away qualifying certificates, increasing fees); or 3) begging for help from the Federal government, while we continue to strut and profess our indigenous rights and refuse to cooperate with them on immigration and federal enforcement of drug laws.

Most people in the community are impatient and only want money in their pockets (or as Zaldy Dandan reported earlier-the only kind of change people are interested in is the kind that jingles in their pocket).

So if and when elected officials "look" for solutions, they look for short-term, immediate "fixes" which do not address the underlying problems and only tend to delay and worsen the situation. Pension-obligation-bonds are an example. The idea is that we will borrow to "fix" the debt we owe...

Finding long-term solutions means examining what we've done wrong. Some people in the community view this analysis as "unpatriotic," meaning it's anti-CNMI. Others do not have the patience to sift through the details. Still others want to re-write the past and insist that known facts are actually something else. (For example denying the truth that the Department of Interior did consult with the Governor before issuing its report on alien labor.)

And unfortunately, long-term solutions provide no immediate remedy. The people vote out politicians (like Tina Sablan) looking for them, before such proposals can be put into effect or before their effect can be felt. And so we change course, losing ground in the process.

There is a solution. That solution: we need a shared vision of how to approach the problems.

We have spent so much time on thinking of where we want to go, and then we end up arguing about how to get there.

Instead, we need to focus on how we want to act; how we want to build our community; how we think we should engage with one another. We need an ETHIC, a shared ethic.

And that ethic must be based on moral values that support our cultures, all of them in their varied beauty.

We must find the Community Ethic that can nourish all of us, without placing any of us at the expense of others. We are in the same boat, and we will sink together unless we work together to save ourselves. Throwing some off the boat is not going to keep the boat from sinking. Obeying a captain who will share what little wealth is left with only his loyal followers is not going to keep the boat from sinking. Hoping for a miracle is not going to keep the boat from sinking.

God helps those who help themselves. And it is time we help ourselves.

My recommendations for our ethic:
We need an ethic that promotes industry, meaning work. There is value in labor. We need to promote this. We cannot promote the benefits of hard work if we cling to the notion of hand-outs, the gamble, the luck of the draw.

How this ethic might look applied to some of the issues we have before us: Casinos should be out because they promote the idea of easy winnings. Discretionary funds for politicians should be out because they are unrelated to work. Borrowing money (pension obligation bonds) should be off the table because we haven't yet tried to earn our way out of our problems. Immigration benefits should be handed out to those who worked a long time or are working now, but denied to those who got here, did little, and now are hoping for the lucky ticket. ALL government jobs should be civil service--based on competence and merit as demonstrated by competitive exams--and protected from political hiring and firing.

A work ethic includes getting paid on time. It includes a fair wage for work done, commensurate with the skill and level of the work. It includes reasonable profit for businesses and rational restrictions, taxes, and licensing.

A work ethic could re-balance the CNMI and keep the ship afloat.

Another possible ethic: Our ethic could be environmental harmony. We live in a beautiful place. The natural environment is our precious resource. Wasting or harming it is counter-productive to our own physical, psychological and emotional health. We ourselves must insist that everything we do is good for where we live.

We can do simple things like keeping our own yards and streets clean. (and yes--I have room for improvement here myself!) We can learn from Tinian and Rota and look to our elders who were especially neat and clean and handy with a broom. We can be grateful for the end to personal maids because it led us to be lazy about our own efforts at keeping our environment clean. We can return to our roots and make our environment cleaner.

At a local government level, there are many things we can insist on. Kill the rats. Amp up our Zoning Board to focus on environmental concerns and don't license what disturbs the beauty and calm of our islands. Insist that cars and buses have proper mufflers and stop spewing pollution into the air. And thank our current Saipan mayor for properly addressing the dead animal problem we had endured for years.

Our ocean is our legacy. We need to insist that everyone obey the fishing restrictions and respect protected areas. We need to reward the efforts of those in the community who are cleaning up our litter. We need to stop tour guides from encouraging our visitors to disobey regulations like feeding fish at Managaha.

We also should be promoting conservation and working with those outside the CNMI who do so, including federal agencies. We need to push for more action on the Marine Monument. We need to create a co-managed sanctuary with NOAA to get their education and other benefits here.

With an environmental ethic, we can build on programs in our community like CREES, and encourage our students to study science. We can promote eco-tourism and demote ideas like casinos. We can develop green business ventures. There is potential to save us from shipwreck and live in harmony with the world about us.

There are other worthy ethics we could embrace. Kilili has been touting the value of education and critical thinking--critical meaning careful evaluation and judgment, not carping and negativism. (To my knowledge, he's the only political leader in generations who has approached our problems with a stated goal for a community ethic.)

This is a good value and one that could be a worthy Community Ethic. A commitment to education as an ethic can include promoting vocational education (and work); it can strengthen our basic institutions with reliance on facts and information; it can replace politics with reason. There is a chance to repair our ship with learning and knowledge.

Whatever ethic we choose, our ethic should direct us, and come before politics and greed and personal agendas.

Family ties
In the past, we have confused politics with our love of our family. Strong family loyalty and the ties of kinship are also an ethic. But we have gotten confused by this ethic. We have embraced teen pregnancies in the name of family, when this is not good for our teen children who are having babies or for the babies born to them. We have allowed our little children to stand on street corners and beg for money in the name of family--for politicians, for school organizations, for personal needs. We have overspent our personal budgets, digging ourselves into debt in the name of family obligations from funerals to birthdays. We have turned a blind eye to nepotism in government jobs because of our acceptance of "family first." We have even called on family to give us jobs, expecting ties of kinship to overbalance other considerations like education, experience, competence. We have voted family members into political office despite their poor past performances and lack of leadership skills. When we have so twisted our value in family that our practice no longer actually serves the benefit of the family, we are doing something wrong.

And our community is now in peril because we have failed to think through our actions and decisions. We have brought ourselves to this mess.

We need to re-think our ethic when it comes to family and how we practice this ethic. Family is an important value in our society and one that underlies all cultures. We should work for our families, but not at the expense of other values. We should ensure our children's safety and education. We should share our religious beliefs with our children and families. We should protect and enjoy our family units. But we should not distort our loyalty to family into a corruption that destroys our other ethics to hard work, the environment, education, and other worthy ethics like honesty and mutual respect.

In this time of strife and difficulty, we need to think harder. We need to decide. We need--not a plan of action, but--a shared value of HOW we want to build our future. And then we need to begin by letting those values and ethics direct our choices.

David Tanaka Diaz-update

The weather, the world-more of the same. The ocean was a study in light and dark this morning, with patches of brigh turquoise and strecthes of indeterminable gray/purple/shadow, and in between pacific blue.
______________________________________

As if hearing Wendy Doromal's question, the Marianas Variety apparently tried to track down the information about the release of David Tanaka Diaz. In fact, he was paroled.

Some interesting bits:

1. Diaz's appeal challenged the court's sentencing. The CNMI Supreme Court, in its October 2003 opinion, said that he could be sentenced to either 25 years or more of jail OR a fine. The Supreme Court wasn't sure the trial court realized that it could avoid jail time in sentencing and just order a fine. So it remanded.

2. The sentencing STATUTE 6 CMC sec. 2141(b)(1)(b) (amended in 1991 by P.L. 7-42) specifically says the sentence shall not be subject to suspension.

Any person that violates subsection (a) of this section with respect to
(1) A substance classified in Schedules I or II which is a narcotic drug or methamphetaminehydrochloride shall be sentenced for a first offense to a term of imprisonment for a term of not less than 25 years, a fine of not more than $10,000, or both and the term of imprisonment shall not be subject to suspension, probation, or parole...

3. The Supreme Court, among other things, held that the language of this statute meant that the original sentence, which included 5 years suspended sentence after the 25 years mandatory imprisonment, was not authorized. The sentence, whatever the term of imprisonment, could not be subject to suspension, probation or parole.

4. On remand, the Superior Court issued a 25 year sentence of imprisonment, not subject to suspension, probation, or parole.

5. Obviously, by statute and by court order, that sentence is NOT SUBJECT TO SUSPENSION, PROBATION OR PAROLE.

6. The Attorney General, Ed Buckingham, is the legal counsel for the Board of Parole, according to the Marianas Variety.

7. The Board of Parole granted a parole to David Tanaka Diaz, despite having no authority to do so. (EDIT: This is an assumption. DOC says that David Tanaka Diaz was released on "parole"-so it appears that it means a typical parole. It could be linguistic gamesmanship, however, with the AG or DOC meaning something else, as if any release from DOC would be a parole. The legal definition of parole, from Black's Law Dictionary, however, talks of parole in criminal law as a "conditional" release." So without seeing the actual document granting his release, it seems that he was granted parole on conditions by the Board of Parole.)

8. The Attorney General, Ed Buckingham, seems to also be the legal counsel for the Department of Corrections. (I say this based on the AG's role in massage-gate.)

9. The DOC, knowing that the Board of Parole had no authority, knowing the terms of imprisonment set by law and court order, knowing 25 years has not elapsed since his imprisonment and the sentence has not been satisfied, released David Tanaka Diaz on March 12, 2010. [EDIT: We know now that the DOC did have authority to release Diaz based on parole, because the Governor commuted the 25 years/non-parolable sentence.]

10. CONCLUSION: We have put the crooks in charge of the prison. We have a breakdown of law and order.

Or we just have some very deceitful, lying responders to inquiries about the basis for Diaz's release.

This is the third incident involving DOC in the past couple of months--the Chinese federal detainee-masseuse taken to the Governor in the dead of night by Dolores San Nicolas to massage him; Mr. Aldan, husband to the same woman-now former DOC chief- Dolores San Nicolas, in prison but noncompliant with the terms of his plea but getting weekend releases and the AG making excuses for his gun which has not been returned; and a two-time convicted ice dealer who got caught with the largest amount of the drug in CNMI history now released contrary to statutory law and the court ordered sentence for his crime [EDIT, but legal as the Governor commuted the sentence].

This is really bad.

Short Takes

The tangentangen is full of brown, crackling, dried seed pods. Breadfruit trees are laden with huge ripe fruits. The nights are still cool and comfortable for sleeping, but the days have become hot and close--the kind of heat that leeches the energy out of you and makes you want to take a nap.
__________________________________________

Immigration -- There may be a court challenge to the CNMI's recent enactment, P.L. 17-1. If you are an alien in the CNMI or an employer of foreign workers in the CNMI, and you want to join forces in challenging the law, you might see a lawyer now. Low income persons can apply for help at MLSC. Others with middle or more income could check private lawyers like Mark Hanson, Rob Torres, Steve Woodruff, Colin Thompson, Richard Pierce (or any attorney of your choice).

CNMI politics--Still as disruptive as ever. The AG's office seems to be an arm of the Governor's Office, rather than an office serving the interests of the people. I now favor an independently elected AG. I worried that this would only make the office more political; but it now seems to be so political that "more" is impossible. I worried that legal work is not well-understood by the community and the opinions publicly stated would often lead to unconstitutional and unfair results; but the office is being used for unconstitutional and unfair results in the hands of the Governor, without accountability, so the people may be a better choice! I realize that the people re-elected the Governor, so there is little likelihood of real improvement with an elected AG; but it is remotely possible that such election would provide a measure of independence that is currently not present, and that would be healthy.

The CNMI budget--We're going to see the new CNMI Constitutional provision in play this year, and it won't be pretty. Governor Fitial will have a proposed budget by April 1. But the pressure on the Legislature to pass a budget by October 1 may force concessions no one likes.

Some ideas for what our CNMI Legislature could be focusing on now:
1. We have too many government employees--and the cuts should be at the top first, where expense is greatest. Constitutional protections may apply to those in office, but if our CNMI Congress would pass legislation now that lowers these salaries, we will at least see savings in the future. Do it!
2. They could change to a part-time Legislature. And eliminate the municipal councils. We don't need so much government. We can't afford so much government.
3. They could LEGISLATE a list of essential public services, so that the Governor cannot unilaterally decide who gets money and who doesn't based on his own preferences, all under the guise of what is essential, if and when the budget doesn't pass. No more continuing resolution.

We want a rational process, not unmitigated and unrestricted politics.

Community--The SSHS Manta Ray Band concerts on 3/26 and 3/27 were a success. Great performances, reasonably good attendance, successful fundraising. Just one small complaint: fundraising should be transparent. When you've set a specific goal ($140,000) for your trip to Carnegie Hall, you should be telling and showing exactly how close you are to the goal, on a regular basis. You shouldn't dodge specific questions like 'how much more do you need to reach your goal?'with vague assertions like 'we're close.'

Out of the Frying Pan...

Tuesday evening, about 7 PM-beautiful red crescent moon. Later last night-glorious stars in deep black sky studded with clouds. More cadena de amor shrouding trees and vegetation in the wilder parts of Saipan.

________________________________
So Governor Fitial has decided that Dolores San Nicolas Aldan should no longer be the head of the Department of Corrections. Instead, she will be a special assistant on political affairs. And the Governor has nominated Ray Mafnas to the DOC post.

Well, I don't know why we're now calling relationships with "masseuse therapists" political affairs--just plain old affairs seems more appropriate. Why are we wasting money keeping Dolores San Nicolas Aldan on the government payroll? What price loyalty? or is that silence?

But the real problem is appointing Ray Mafnas to any post with this much power.

Mafnas was most recently "senior policy adviser" -another term for muscle, I think. Whenever Fitial wants something checked out--to bring someone into line?--he calls on Ray Mafnas.

Being on hand when the Governor met with DPS protesters wanting a raise.

Checking out why Jose Itibus didn't show up at the swearing in.

Even enforcing a ban on smoking and chewing betelnut at public places.


Mafnas is a man who wields his power with a heavy hand.

Thought to be behind the ouster of Clyde Norita from DPS.

Wanting to control all government employee transfers.

I suppose being the governor's muscle may be experience in "corrections." No question he has some degree in criminal justice and has previously filled in at both DOC and DPS. Still, I think this is a bad appointment.

Political payback or just a thin clique from which to draw. What a shame for us.

Just When It's About to Clear...

Rain, gray skies, and very cool temps all week; the ocean has been slate gray, too. Today, there's some blue and green in the water, the sun is starting to glare through the clouds, and the rain has stopped (although it was still cool this morning).

_______________________
If Governor Fitial had only kept his mouth shut one more day, the story of Chinese Take-Out / Massage-gate would have been off the front page and possibly not even in the news at all. (Well, except for the Tribune, which seems to be running its stories days late, now telling us today they "learned" about Cheng's legitimate job at Yu Yu Spa--They probably learned about it from reading Wendy's Blog!) But the Governor is keeping the story alive and fresh, and he says now that he did not "order" the "release" of the federal detainee, Qingmei Cheng.

This statement sounds like the semantics game that President Clinton tried (and lost) when he said he didn't have "sex" with his intern. As if a blow job was not sex.

And for Fitial, as if a "request" to an employee who "serves at the governor's pleasure" and can be sacked at any time by you, and who knows you will not hesitate to terminate her employment, is anything other than an order.

It always makes me nervous when the Governor throws out a smelly bone and the media hounds go chasing after it; I wonder whether that is to distract the media and public from something else, something worse.

_______________________

It's also quite clear this (massage-gate) incident is not an isolated incident, either from the Governor's side or from the Department of Corrections side.

The Governor previously rescued this same "masseuse" from arrest for loitering, making this at least the second time she's been brought by police/correction officials to the governor's mansion to give him a massage.

And DOC's Dolores San Nicolas has (allegedly) at least once before ignored a court order about detention of a person with court-ordered conditions. She allowed her husband, after the court sentenced him to jail without release, to visit the crime scene ostensibly to retrieve a gun (!), and that place happened to be the home of his victim.


_______________________
Dolores San Nicolas has her hands more than full. Wally Deleon Guerrero died in his cell at DOC, an apparent suicide. Wally was being held on domestic violence charges.

Condolences to Alice Guerrero and family.

And now to the political side of this tragedy: why doesn't DOC has sufficient measures in place to prevent this?

And will the next "apparent suicide" be Qingmei Cheng?

DOC does not sound like a safe place.

_____________________________

2 Days Down, 4 Years 363 Days to Go...

Governor Fitial has been in office on his new term for 2 days. And today's news is staggering--both entertaining and awful.

The Variety reports that Governor Fitial had DPS bring over a federally-detained prisoner, held at DOC by federal court order because she was deemed a flight risk. Why did she visit Governor Fitial? To give him a massage.

I wondered why the CNMI'S First Lady was looking so angry and why Governor Fitial looked like he was stone-walling in this Inauguration Day photo in the Trib by Haidee Eugenio:


Now we can guess!


Okay--so you already know. The comments on the Variety site and on Wendy's blog are great (and numerous).

But just in case those forums aren't enough for you to vent your feelings, feel free to comment here, too.

Some thoughts:
1. The feds really do need to get their own detention facility. The CNMI DOC is not safe, secure, or free from influence and pressure.

2. I always thought Governor Fitial was smart. I don't like him as a Governor; I disagree with his policies, politics, and priorities, but I thought him intelligent.

3. Was this the stupid mistake that a smart person can make? Was this done because he's in pain and really does depend on this massage therapy? Was it a stupid weakness and desire for some relationship? Or was this an excuse to meet with this woman for some other reason? Is he involved in her legal entanglements? Or worse, involved with her in some illegal activity?

4. The Governor seems to be surrounded by suspicious and criminal or corrupt people: his former lieutenant governor Tim Villagomez is in federal prison for corruption related to the utilities company; his former driver was just sentenced on a federal charge related to ice/methamphetamine; and now his masseuse has been arrested for attempting illegal entry into Guam.

5. We need information. Suspicions are poison. Some of us will believe the worst of Governor Fitial (despite Joaquin Romolor's pleasant letter). Some of us will defend him, no matter what (and probably because we're depending on him for a paycheck or favor). But no matter which side we're on, we need information so that we can be honest, make informed opinions.

and that gets me to this question...

6. Why didn't the Tribune report on this matter? At least as hard news, to the extent that the Federal Court asked for a report from the AG on why the governor did this, or what happened, etc. The Trib has its bent in favor of Fitial, but it usually at least includes the real news.

7. And one last comment. The federal government's motion language, as reported on Wendy's blog, seems mild. They want to "determine whether any prejudice was caused thereby." I guess they're letting the facts speak for themselves.

It is always interesting in Saipan; news is entertainment! Politics is side-splitting funny.

Too bad we need to laugh to keep from crying.

"Where Is Our Great Wall" said

This excellent comment was buried in one of the threads, and I think it deserves a lot more light of day.

I agree with you Jane regarding the romantisizing of our recent past. I left this island nearly 20 years ago and just recently returned.

I don't even see anything close to the Great Wall or the Pyramids (other than the empty GIG that was once a thriving disco that rivaled anything in the region). The La Fiesta was not dependent on cheap labor and has been empty for years while we had access to cheap labor.

What I did see upon returning has been eye opening and far from anything I would revel in and consider great development and a prosperous economy. I found destroyed reefs and barren lagoons (in comparison to 20+ years ago). I found empty shells of 30 plus garment warehouses. I found empty strip malls. I discovered that around 70% of those I grew up with and went to school out here with no longer live here. They have families elsewhere. I saw that nearly 90% of the waitstaff, front desk clerks, bartenders,etc were guest workers (I was a waiter 25 years ago and my pals were front desk and housekeeping). I noticed that all the Mom and Pop stores that had once been owned by me and my friends Moms and Pops were now owned by foreign investors. Diego's Mart, Pop's Store, Morgans Mini Mart, Carmen Safeway, Tenda Store, Aldan's Gas Station, Farmers Market, etc. Same with the bars and restaurants like Ship Ashore, House of Chang, Chamorro Village, Town & Country, Chamorro House, etc are all replaced with foreign owned businesses. I noticed the streets that used to be filled with Japanese Tourist were now empty. The golf courses designed 20 years ago by Jack Nicolas were now unkempt. The hotels that used to average 90% occupancy now ran at around 50%. The Jets that used to fly between here and Guam are now prop plans. Direct flights to Japan that used to fly in and out 3 times a day down to 2 twice a week.

Where is our great wall? We had none. 30 years ago we could have built something great.

We had geographic edge with Japan only 2 hours away. We had great resorts and golf courses that were maintained and rivaled those in other areas of the pacific. We had relationships with agents and airlines that secured set routes and put us int he position to be the HUB for the Pacific region. We had locally run businesses and local workers at all levels that kept the money in our economy and didn't funnel it all out. We had a solid foundation birthed of the Covenant to maintain all of this and grow to be prosperous.

What happened?

We got greedy and we got led by some terribly short sighted leaders.

Our downfall is not to blamed on federalization of immigration. It is blamed on our own doing. We embraced garment. We spent millions on lobbyist. We exploited foreign labor and used guest workers to replace local labor rather than filling gaps and instead replaced our local workforce. We pulled in foreign businesses at the expense of local entrepreneurship. We doled out public land to foreign investors instead of catering to local investors. Our leaders did this because they could negotiate kickbacks and become middlemen in the schemes. Do land swaps and make millions overnight.

3 days ago the federal government took control of immigration in the CNMI; 27 years ago we destroyed this economy.

December 1, 2009 2:11 PM

I like this comment, not because it starts out by agreeing with me, but because of the specifics. It makes me sad, though, to contemplate the lost opportunities. Still hoping that--yes, we can--make it right.

Printer Ribbon

We can send Howard Willens to Washington, D.C. the minute we hear that the Court has dismissed the initial 2 counts of the case fighting federalization of our CNMI immigration.

But we are helpless to obtain printer ribbon to issue permits to the people here trying to renew their entry permits.

For about 2 weeks now, our office has been hearing how CNMI Immigration doesn't yet have the renewal permits ready because they're still waiting on printer ribbon. Yeah. Right.

Five More Years... and other news...and some thoughts.

1. Fitial is being re-elected Governor of the CNMI. He's ahead by 500+ votes, and it seems unlikely (although not impossible) that the absentee ballots will change the outcome of the run-off election.

My previous post on the elections included these:
2009-11-02 The candidates
2009-11-19 On the Spoils System


2. Fitial's lawsuit has been dismissed. It challenged the federalization of the CNMI's immigration, claiming the Consolidated Natural Resources Act violated the Covenant by infringing the CNMI's right of self-government.

Some of my previous posts on this subject, including analysis of the merits of the lawsuit, are here:
2008-12-17 A brief recap of the pending motions
2009-03-11 On the amicus brief


I want to say bad news (Fitial's re-election), good news (dismissal of the federalization lawsuit), but I am reminded of the Chinese story about tao.

What I see as good is that we had an election and we will have a Governor chosen by more than 50% of the people.

What I see as good is that we have a system of justice where anyone can make their claim and have a judge review it, based on written laws and principles.

Who knows? Perhaps it will take 5 more years of Benigno Fitial for us to learn a bit more about the spoils system and what its harms are.

We will have the same 5 years in transition to U.S. immigration. We'll see how it unfolds.

Has the Spoils System Spoiled the CNMI?

"...to the victor belong the spoils..."
William L. Marcy

The CNMI electorate has its eyes on the coming run-off gubernatorial election, set for November 23, 2009. But before we vote, I think we need to step back and take a longer view of issues, of where we've been and where we're going.

I look back on the elections I've participated in--every one since 1985--and see a disturbing trend. Party politics has something to do with this, but not everything. Politicians switch parties enough to make me think that it is not the parties that decide the course of the government, but the politicians themselves.

The trend I see is away from a government that has room for selection and advancement based on merit and toward a government that rewards campaign supporters. It seems less likely now that we will, for example, have another personal secretary who serves for decades successive governors of different parties or different factions within the parties. It seems less likely now that we will have continuity among any of the upper- or even mid-level management government officials in any government office or department.

We have a small pool of talent to begin with, because of our size, and the practice of our various political winners drawing their political appointees and new hires from among their supporters means that only a portion of our small talent pool is available to any one administration.

When a political party comes to power, its leaders tend to place many of their faithful followers into important public offices. The use of public offices as rewards for political party work is known as the "Spoils System."
U.S. History.com

The Spoils System has been seen around the world and throughout time. It has been problematic in the U.S. at times, too, especially in the 19th century, when the U.S. fell far behind other nations in civil service standards of ability and government administration. It has been addressed in large part in the federal government by the Civil Service laws.

In the CNMI, we use the Spoils System. Although we have a civil service system, we have so many jobs of all kinds that are "contract" or "excepted service" that our civil service system does not protect us against the Spoils System.

One of the first political expressions I heard when I got here was the saying: "Live by the sword, die by the sword." It was applied to the employee who had a political job in one administration and then lost it in the next. The person who made the comment was rather amused about the gamesmanship of politics.

The Spoils System in the CNMI is reinforced with the immediate profit of close family members being among the rewarded. They then vote again for their meal ticket.

What is wrong with this concept? Why wouldn't you vote for the politician who is going to give you something back, something like a job for you or your family? What is the harm in using the Spoils System?

I've got some thoughts on that subject.

* The Spoils System narrows the talent pool so that we don't have enough qualified individuals in jobs that are important. What do you do when the loyal supporter isn't getting the job done? Do you replace him with the most qualified person? Or do you ignore the problem and wait until he returns to work? Do you turn a blind eye to the repeated warnings of qualified personnel about a critical problem in an essential service? Or do you do something? The Spoils Systems puts loyalty above competence and quality of job performance. If you are a person who needs someone in the government to do a good job, you might prefer the merit system.

* The Spoils System changes the focus of politicians from addressing issues to keeping their supporters happy. If you're a politician, what do you do when the government's revenues are dwindling. Do you increase your government workforce by 1,000 workers? Or do you find a way to restrain the size of government to fit more closely to the budget? If you're in the Spoils System, you hire more workers to reward them and because you're going to need their support in the election. If you have a system based on merit, you restrain the size of the workforce, and make sure you have the best workforce you can get.

*The Spoils System makes it easier to cross the line into illegal kickbacks and other criminal activity. Do you purchase, at government expense, what isn't needed so that your family has a lucrative contract because you have power and position? Do you think your job, connections to the Governor, or family name will protect you while you traffic ice or coerce a bribe?

*The Spoils System adds a coercive element to government employment, and stifles free and open public debate on issues of importance. What do you do if you're a political appointee and there is an issue about your department. Do you support those who protest and rally? Or do you follow the administration's line, and try to stop the protest, despite the merits and your own opinion, because keeping your job depends on your loyalty? Do you show up for a legislative oversight session or worry about what might happen if your testimony casts a shadow on your boss?


When we vote on Monday, November 23, 2009, we can take the short view of what is going to get us "the most"--which candidate has promised us a job or has "helped" us out financially. Or we can take the long view, and ask which candidate is going to use merit and not the Spoils System when he gets elected?

For me, it's a matter of degree. I see that what we presently have with the Fitial Administration is a very strong Spoils System. I'm voting against that. I'm hoping that Heinz Hofschneider will be better. He's a politician. He has, no doubt, paid back some political debts at time. But he seems to be much less inured to the Spoils Systems and much more likely to listen and consider the merits of any proposal.

I hope he gets the message, if elected, that the voters really do want change, do want honest government, do deserve a government that fosters open access to information and decision-making, public debate, and the best qualified employees in essential jobs.

If he doesn't get elected, I hope everyone is ready to live with the decline in government services and the problems that the Spoils System will continue to bring.

Angleo Endoreses Heinz for Governor.

You can read the entire post at Angelo's blog:

I am voting for Heinz Hofschneider in the gubernatorial runoff election. I fully endorse his candidacy and ask that you vote for him on November 23.

While Ben Fitial has been a supporter of Beautify CNMI, a campaign I hold very close to my heart, I cannot in good conscience vote for the man that refused to meet with concerned citizens for nearly two years concerning another very important issue, ocean conservation.

Instead of meeting with us to hear what we had to say, instead of engaging us to understand our intentions, instead of hearing our pleas to just listen, he ordered his administration to carry out a campaign appealing to the worst side of our local people. And this was not the only island issue in which he did this. And we were not the only targets of his vindictiveness.

My experience with Heinz Hofschneider was the reverse. He took the time to listen to us. He made a point to educate himself on the subject. He sought out experts that knew more about the subject than himself. And after careful consideration he made his decision.

Heinz is the type of man I want leading our people. I humbly ask you to support his bid as our next governor.

I like this endorsement because it gives specific facts and opinions, and I agree with the values expressed.

Voting on Initiatives--one by one-#3.

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.

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.

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.

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.