By Gemma Q. Casas
Variety News Staff

REPRESENTATIVE Stanley T. Torres yesterday criticized the administration’s “political maneuver” to ensure that Speaker Oscar M. Babauta’s office benefited from his reprogrammed funds.
The Superior Court recommended that the amount taken away from Torres’s original appropriation by virtue of the governor’s reprogramming authority be returned to the lawmaker.
Torres, Ind.-Saipan, is also questioning Attorney General Matthew Gregory’s credibility in connection with his petition at the Superior Court.
“The attorney general is currently appealing this order to the Supreme Court, and it is mostly based upon the embarrassment of the Attorney General’s Office, because they admitted that mistakes were made and now they are being scolded by the governor,” said Torres in a privileged speech during the House session yesterday.
“The issues on appeal are frankly two issues: whether the attorney general is an idiot or a liar,” he added.
Press Secretary Charles P. Reyes Jr. quickly came to Gregory’s defense saying the lawmaker should have used more appropriate language to express his feelings.
“Although we continue to respect Rep. Stanley T. Torres, I think we can reasonably question the appropriateness of the language he chooses to employ in this case. It seems unbecoming of an elected representative of the people,” Reyes told Variety.
“Rather than resort to personal attacks or ad hominem fallacies, we urge him to focus on the specific facts and arguments relating to the case, which would bolster his credibility,” Reyes added.
In March 2006, Torres asked the Superior Court to issue a permanent injunction and a declaratory judgment that the governor’s decision to reprogram funds allotted to the Legislature was unconstitutional and a violation of the separation of powers doctrine.
In May, the governor, through the Attorney General’s Office, filed a motion to dismiss the second cause of action.
Torres did not object, and the case is now limited to the declaratory judgment on whether the governor has the authority to reduce the quarterly allotments of the members of the House of Representatives under Public Law 15-1.
P.L. 15-1 grants the governor “unlimited authority to reprogram funds for Fiscal Year 2006 that are available under continuing resolution, Public Law 13-24 and other appropriations acts.”
Torres said the governor may have usurped the Legislature’s authority because his reprogramming powers spared the other two independent branches of the government.
During subsequent court hearings, Assistant Attorney General Anthony Welch, who represented the governor in the case, admitted that mistakes were made by the administration in the improper taking of Torres’s legislative budget.
“As a result, funds were transferred from the administration to the speaker’s office to settle this matter. It is no secret that this was a political maneuver to give the funds to the speaker, instead of transferring the funds to my account,” Torres said.
He added, “The point was made and the case was successfully won for the Legislature. It taught the governor a lesson that he can’t just take everyone’s funds for his own political gain, like hiring hundreds of non-essential employees and wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars on worthless consultants for his own party’s better times, but for the rest of us it’s bitter times.”
Torres said at issue now is the AG’s “foolish accusations” that the lawmaker provided the judge with a fake settlement.
“There was no fake agreement given to the court. It was an order based upon the oral submissions and indications given in court by the assistant attorney general and my attorney. Is Attorney General Gregory now accusing the judge of knowingly signing a false document?” Torres asked.
Superior Court Associate Judge Kenneth L. Govendo heard the case.