Are we there yet?
THE last time the CNMI found itself in an economic sinkhole, the then-newly elected governor, who promised “Better Times” as a candidate, had to remind the Legislature that “the Commonwealth is facing an unsustainable economic emergency…. I regret to say that the nature and extent of these financial problems are such that there is no simple or painless solution.”
In a report to U.S. House Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, the U.S. Government Accountability Office stated that the CNMI had to implement “ ‘austerity holidays’ consisting of biweekly furloughs, during which government employees are not paid and many government operations are closed. This measure was taken to help alleviate the financial crisis by saving millions of dollars in both personnel and operational costs. The measure declared one unpaid holiday per pay period for the remainder of fiscal years 2006 and 2007, reducing the government’s normal pay period to 72 hours every 2 weeks.” In addition, the CNMI government suspended its employer contributions to the Retirement Fund and increased the governor’s authority to reprogram funds. The GAO said these and other similar measures “are immediate and dramatic, and are indicative of severe financial problems that will likely call for long-term solutions.” The GAO also noted that “several factors constrain the CNMI’s economic potential, including the lack of diversification, scarce natural resources, small domestic markets, limited infrastructure, and shortages of skilled labor.”
Those were the days of rolling power outages; CUC’s inability to pay its fuel supplier; retirees worrying about their pension; businesses downsizing or shutting down; work-hour cuts; layoffs; people leaving the islands; and the Commonwealth Health Center struggling “to stock medical supplies and recruit healthcare workers” while threatened with the possible termination of its CMS certification — and major funding source.
In an “unprecedented move,” the CNMI’s Washington representative asked the U.S. Congress to appropriate $140 million (worth about $210 million today) for the operations of the Commonwealth government. “I hope that no one expects to get all of this,” the Washington representative said at the time. “They [CNMI officials] should certainly not be planning to spend any of it. We will be lucky if we get some assistance.” He was right. There would be no federal bailout.
Eventually, the CNMI economy came out of a coma only because 1) the tourism industry finally recovered; and 2) a new major investor came in to do business in the Commonwealth.
Until those two things happen again, the CNMI government must find ways to reduce its gargantuan costs, and not inflict more hardship on already struggling businesses by imposing new or higher fees and/or taxes.
Right on
THE ongoing and spirited discussions regarding House Bill 23-33 or the Bail Reform Act show why lawmaker should always conduct public hearings and seek comments from stakeholders before acting on legislation.
Perhaps the most important attitude a lawmaker must have when introducing a bill is the willingness to hear why it could be a bad idea. Elected officials and policymakers must remember that history has repeatedly shown that good intentions do not necessarily result in good outcomes, but may even create truly bad ones. Lawmakers should make it a point to know the actual results of previous well-intentioned laws, many of which were supported by “experts.”
The Legislature may be a lawmaking body, but it is not obligated to pass just any law. To paraphrase a wise man, governance should also consist of stopping bad — meaning most —ideas.
