HISTORY, yet again, is overlooked, at a most critical CNMI juncture. Patently illogical rhetoric, with race-hate overtones, being a most unfortunate consequence. And proponents of this nonsense, anew, ignoring the facts in lieu of pretextual modern-day myth.
“No Federalization Without Consideration” being, perhaps, a catchy, touchy-feely, slogan among some, omits consideration of irrefutable historical background. A background, in turn, leading to the CNMI’s international reputation — not only among former Japanese investors but worldwide — as a place where “A Deal Is Never A Deal.”
A local columnist recently alluded to the Article XII nonsense, unnecessarily litigated for 10 years during the 1980’s-1990’s, in describing the manner by which CNMI folks squandered Japanese investment/interest in the CNMI. Though erroneously placing blame on “legal eagles” -- when this blame lies squarely with indigenous CNMI judiciary members who failed to stem these baseless lawsuits via summary judgment at the outset, as well as greedy CNMI landowners seeking two bites at the prospective windfall apple — the columnist recognized the stigma of duplicity, resulting from the Article XII quagmire, as to equitably negotiated business and contractual dealings in the CNMI.
And now, some propose to ignore a similar deal: The Covenant. And seek justification for this tact by disregard and omission of fact, after fact, after fact.
NEWSFLASH, Jose U. Garrido. The Covenant is not a “Treaty” (though you’ve claimed it’s one so as to equate those you term “Chamorros” with Native Americans who economically benefit from treaties, and with Hawaiian Movement groups aiming for similarly-race-based-entitlement). Nor does the Covenant represent the will “indirectly” of “the Chamorros of Guam” Only the U.S. Senate, upon a 2/3 vote, may ratify a U.S. treaty, which did not occur respecting the Covenant. Rather, the Covenant is a bilaterally negotiated, binding, agreement, codified into law by the U.S. Congress. With no representation as to Guamanians who — prior to/throughout the Covenant negotiations, flatly rejected unification of the NMI with Guam.
In this vein, it should also be recalled that in no manner was the Covenant foisted upon the CNMI — which, like the Marshalls/Palau (now independent republics) and the FSM (freely associated), was given 3 distinct choices: (1) free association; (2) independence; (3) commonwealth status. Rather the Covenant, including each and every one of the terms/provisions within it, was intensely negotiated, with excruciating attention to detail, by extraordinarily informed and knowledgeable individuals. Just ask the CNMI’s seemingly de facto CNMI governor, Howard Willens, who prides himself on having zealously aided the CNMI’s negotiations culminating with the finished product, the Covenant itself.
So adamant were these pro-Covenant voices among the elected Saipan/Tinian/Rota indigenous representatives, that at one point the Rota delegates formally threatened to secede from the CNMI if the Covenant negotiations failed — former CNMI Lt. Gov./Senator/Rota Mayor Benjamin T. Manglona will confirm this today, as he did to me in 1986. As well as the fact that it was the U.S. itself — not the CNMI’s negotiation team — which conceived and insisted upon the Covenant provisions restricting land alienation to those of NMI descent (as later incorporated into Article XII of the Commonwealth Constitution).
This overwhelming desire, among the vast majority of the CNMI’s indigenous populace, was in fact documented within the Covenant itself, via language conveniently overlooked by today’s CNMI/Guam race-hate-mongers bent on fictionally re-writing history. Have a gander at the Preamble to the Covenant, at paragraph 4, 1st sentence, for instance. It reads: ”Whereas, for over twenty years, the people of the Northern Mariana Islands, through public petition and referendum, have clearly expressed their desire for political union with the United States.”
NEWSFLASH, Eric Atalig. Neither those in the CNMI, nor those on Guam, do in fact “contribute to the federal tax” (as you’ve previously written) —income taxes paid by CNMI residents remain exclusively within, for exclusive use by, the CNMI (with generous rebates), while those on Guam remain similarly on Guam. Meanwhile, CNMI and Guam residents have for decades received more per capita federal expenditures (via taxes paid by U.S. citizens within the U.S. itself) and more per capita federal grants/benefits (read “Post Office,” “Food Stamps,” “CIP Funds,” “Highway Funds,” “U.S. Judiciary,” “FAA,” “DPS Vehicles,” etc. etc.) than any of the 50 U.S. states themselves. Which, in turn, is one of many good reasons that folks residing in the CNMI/Guam, including former statesiders, do not vote in U.S. presidential elections — though, simultaneously, those from the CNMI/Guam living within the 50 states are fully entitled to so vote. Wanna swap things around — pay U.S. taxes, real estate taxes, sales taxes, with exponentially reduced federal aid/grants, etc. in exchange for presidential voting rights? You’ve got my vote.
NEWSFLASH, Glenn H. “Amaga” Manglona. The terms in the Covenant, contrary to your contentions, expressly authorize the U.S. to “unilaterally impose the federal minimum wage” upon, and to assume immigration control over, the CNMI, as particularly appropriate when the CNMI’s ostensible “leaders” have so miserably, shamelessly, and despairingly failed the local populace in this regard in lieu of personal gain for those “leaders” themselves…and, of course, the garmently endowed handlers for whom they function as rubber-stamp-wielding-proxies..
And there already has occurred “consideration” so as to justify current federalization intent — this “consideration” by way of extensive and mutual U.S.-CNMI consultation -- i.e., the years’-long pre-Covenant negotiations, as well as subsequent 902 consultations over the past 20 years.
Yet you seemingly would subvert and ignore this knowing, informed, mutually negotiated, bilaterally consensual Covenant agreement, 20 years after-the-fact? Maintaining, as with Article XII, that the Covenant deal is somehow NOT a legally binding and equitably negotiated deal?!
NEWSFLASH, Danny Aquino Jr. The bemused curiosity becomes heightened hilarity as you and others — most vociferously Mr. Garrido — seek affinity with a culture so very distinct from and unrelated to your own culture, which you both ignore in the process
Do you not share your “Aquino” surname, as well as closest genetic links, and inherent cultural/physical traits, with former Philippine President Corazon Aquino and her countrymen? Ditto the “Garrido” surname origins. So why the race-hate toward your ancestral homeland, the Philippines, in favor of Hawaiian-wanna-be-ism? Why the pretense? Where’s the pride at your Tagalog heritage?
You must or should be aware, from recent DNA testing on both ancient “indigenous Chamorro” skeletal remains, and on living “indigenous Chamorro” persons within the CNMI, of the 2006 scientific finding that “distinctive patterning of maternally inherited (mitochondrial) DNA lines…[with] more affinities to Northeast and Southeast Asian than to Pacific Islander populations” has been revealed among the CNMI’s “indigenous Chamorro” peoples. Eighty-eight percent of those “indigenous Chamorro” persons from Guam, and the CNMI genetically proven beyond dispute to lack maternal genes shared with Pacific Islanders from Hawaii, Samoa, Tonga, etc. As uttered by a visiting Japanese geneticist, amid indignation as to similar results previously on Guam: “Peptide bond no legend; peptide bond no lie.”
So why this vitriolic animosity toward Dekada folks who, like their cousins — the CNMI’s “indigenous Chamorro” populace just a few short years ago — now seek U.S. permanent/citizenship status having toiled for years as the wholly disenfranchised majority of the CNM private workforce? Particularly where, as is an absolute given, they’ll most certainly depart the CNMI immediately, for Guam or the U.S., should this status be conferred?
Of equal chortle: why this feigned pretense by you and others — Mr. Garrido being a prime example — that fixation on the Hawaiian Kingdom is somehow warranted or persuasive? Even as to those, e.g., who never arrived on Guam until the early 1900’s, bear Filipino/Mexican/Spanish surnames, but now affect “indigenous Chamorro” fervor? When even a casual observer knows, as documented by history, that the Hawaiian Kingdom was itself the short-lived product of blatant imperialism, with murderous conquest, lasting a mere 83 years from 1810 to 1893.
Surely, you know that Kamehameha I, born in 1758 and raised by his uncle Kalaniopuu, incited massive civil war on the Big Island of Hawaii during 1782, after learning that Kalaniopuu’s rule had rightfully been left to Kalaniopuu’s natural son Kiwalo? That Kamehameha I then stole Kiwalo’s birthright. And thereafter forcibly conquered Maui and Molokai, before slaughtering thousands more in his 1795 invasion of Oahu? All the while — and on to Kauai following Kaumualii’s 1810 submission — maintaining a royal monopoly of trade, seizing/re-distributing lands, and killing his enemies until his 1819 death? Da kine imperialism, nei?
And so most who read your racially hostile, mean-spirited, anti “non-indigenous” tirades — beyond laughter at the sheer inanity of these rants — surmise, of course, that you/others are motivated primarily by an agenda of self-interest, economic and otherwise. That interest, of course, being desire to obtain race-based economic-benefits mirroring those conferred upon so-called “Native Americans” not by a negotiated Covenant, but rather by a bona fide U.S. treaty ratified by the U.S. Senate. For your stance would likely change were so-called “indigenous rights” to carry substantial obligations and/or economic detriment — like the notion of real estate taxes being imposed solely upon CNMI landowners who, of course, are exclusively those of so-called NMI descent. This of course dovetails with several like-minded, hypocritical, patterns and practices of post-Covenant years — one such hypocrisy being the indignant expectation of entitlement to minority preferential treatment at U.S. universities/institutions while, on return to the CNMI, clamoring incessantly for entitlement to “locals-first” preferential treatment….like spoiled children.
Why not embrace your true, genetically indisputable, cultural routes and roots — your Filipino ancestry and heritage? .
In any event, the CNMI should not now squeal. The CNMI made a deal. The Covenant. For consideration. With extensive consultation and complete understanding.
The now-departed Japanese investors expected their deals to be honored within the CNMI and, if not, to be protected by the CNMI judiciary, which failed those investors and, in the process, many others —leading many to characterize the CNMI as a place “Where Dreams Become Nightmares.”
The U.S., likewise, expects the CNMI to merely honor its mutually consensual obligations made explicit in the Covenant deal. The CNMI has extraordinarily benefited these many years from this very same deal while miserably failing its own people and others — time, and time and time again.
Repudiate the deal? If so, perhaps show some immediate resolve. Burn your U.S. passports! Renounce your U.S. citizenship! Relinquish the U.S. currency! Vacate U.S. homes, universities and employment! And gear up for “self-determination” as the CNMI populace sees fit.
Or perhaps, as some have suggested, the U.S. will simply assign its Covenant rights to Beijing.
Mahalo nui loa & si yuus maase,

BRUCE L. JORGENSEN
Peshawar, Pakistan