I cannot believe that none of you scolded your colleague for using such offensive language. The thing is, Tina brushed it off, as she has thicker skin than anyone I know. Of course, your colleague said that by bitching, he meant complaining. Call it what you want. It is still deplorable. What’s next? Will it be acceptable to use four-letter expletives during your House sessions?
Tina can handle her own battles, and she certainly doesn’t need me or anyone else defending her. That is not my point. My point is that you all must remember that debating and reasoning is an integral part of your job. You must fight for us, but you must use reason and logic rather than anger and vulgarity.
Let me remind you that an overwhelming majority of you supported the Aggreko contract (only Reps Tina Sablan, Heinz Hofscheider, Ed Salas, Joe Camacho, Rosemond Santos, and Frank Dela Cruz voted against it, while Ralph Torres and Ray Yumul were absent and did not vote). I was up there when you were voting on the Aggreko contract, and I testified against it. While we are enjoying 24-hour power once again, my question to you is, at whose expense are we enjoying this 24-hour power? As we are now finding out, Aggreko may not be compliant with EPA’s clean air standards, which could result in huge fines from EPA. So why wasn’t this looked in to before Aggreko was declared the only viable solution to solve our power crisis? Did you not hear any of us when we said that we must explore other options on the table? Where is your due diligence? Why was Telesource Tinian completely ignored? The fact is, did any of you even sit down and talk with Telesource? Did you not know that they were prepared to ship down 10 megawatts of power that is currently sitting idle in Tinian, which would have ultimately saved us millions of dollars? Did you not hear Dr. Tom Arkle, when he stated that the CNMI could have purchased 20 megawatts of Caterpillar engines at the mere cost of $40,000 per month? Instead, we are paying $504,000 per month, just for renting Aggreko’s engines that we will never own! And now, Dr. Arkle recently found out that we could have purchased the same type of Aggreko engines for less than half of what we are paying to rent them. Furthermore, these engines would have been brand new, and compliant with EPA standards. Again, where is your due diligence?
In light of this and other matters, it is obvious that Tina is thinking, not just complaining. She wanted all of you to look in to other options. The fact that all of you did not do your homework has resulted in millions of dollars that we have basically thrown away, which seems to be the norm when it comes to local government spending. From funding fishing derbies to baseball fields to leasing cars and cellular phones and paying for junkets through big slush funds, the CNMI government is notorious for its failure in prioritizing government spending. “Spend first, ask questions later” should be your new motto. So tell me, are we any closer to fixing CUC’s engines? No. Have you figured out where we are going to get the money to pay for the repair and rehabilitation of our old shoddy power plant engines? No. So what does that mean? Most likely, the one-year agreement with Aggreko will easily turn in to a year and a half or two…or maybe even three. We are blowing money like a poker addict in a poker parlor on a payday. In the meantime, Tina has preached for an honest and open government, better governance, less spending, etc. Is this what Tina’s colleague considers complaining?
Again, Tina can fight her own battles, and she doesn’t need anyone coming to her defense. But I want it to be known that this type of offensive language used during House sessions must end. I have been called a “rabble rouser” by one of your colleagues and got a good laugh out of it, given the source (talk about the teapot calling the kettle black). But using the word “bitching” is not a laughing matter. Whether your colleague wants to dress it up or not is beside the point. An inappropriate word was used, and if he had any sense of dignity, he would issue an apology to Tina. Anything less shows his arrogance, his complete lack of humility, and that he is out of touch with his constituents.
All of you like to toss the word “respect” around. Tell me, is it respectful to use the word “bitching” and to yell at a fellow lawmaker? Is that your idea of respect? Let me tell all of you something, and I want you to listen carefully. I will give you respect, but you must also give me respect. Respect is a two-way street. You are PUBLIC SERVANTS, elected by your constituents to serve our best interests. Whose interest is gained by using the words “bitching?” Whose interest is gained when you believe in working together without questioning bad decision-making? Whose interest do you serve when you spend money on a fishing derby when PSS classrooms are falling apart and students are sitting on the floor because of overcrowded classrooms? Anyone with decent marketing skills could put together a fishing derby with zero government spending, as the money could easily be generated by corporate sponsors and tournament fees. Again, where are your priorities? Where is your due diligence?
In the meantime, you have recently passed a bill that prioritizes the creation of a Web site for CUC, so that customers can pay their bills online and avoid long lines (I smell a sole-source contract on the horizon). This is a priority? Are you kidding me? Have you ever asked why prepaid meters are sitting in boxes and are not being used? All low-income homes should have prepaid meters so that they won’t ever be disconnected from CUC. They will avoid disconnection fees and it will help them in becoming more responsible with their power consumption, because they will actually see what is being used, similar to prepaid cellular phones. Shouldn’t you consider this a greater priority than a website for CUC? As far as long lines are concerned, that all boils down to empowering your employees, proper customer service training, and a more efficient system in dealing with customers. That doesn’t cost a lot of money, but it does require a lot of common sense. For the love of God, you all need to get your priorities straight.
By the way, how much of our taxpayers’ money was wasted when you discussed Harry Blalock’s “Food for Thought” radio commentary for an entire hour? Don’t you all have better things to do? Why can’t that same energy be put in to fixing CUC? It is this type of madness that has upset your constituents, and it is why the tides are changing and people are calling for change. Pot fabot, tell your colleagues that if they are so offended by what Harry has to say, all they have to do is turn the dial. It is that simple! In the meantime, I will continue to listen to Harry’s radio commentary, and I don’t care if I agree or disagree with him. That is not the point. Harry gets people talking about the issues, and if anything, you should be commending him instead of trying to have him censured or declared persona non grata. What is better? A person who speaks out on issues, or a person who remains silent and pretends everything is just fine and dandy? Sadly, I am almost certain that many of you prefer the latter.
We have a lot of pressing problems on our hands, and I am glad that Tina has been speaking out on the issues affecting all of us. You do not have to agree with Tina, but you should certainly hear her out and debate and reason with her. That is a part of due diligence. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that Tina is offered an apology, and I sincerely hope that NO ONE uses such foul and offensive language from this day forward.
Thank you for hearing me out.
ED PROPST
Advocate for Change
