I saw former Senator Cing’s advertisement selling the idea that a Democratic leadership in the U.S. Congress means that a Democratic delegate will be beneficial to the CNMI. While the Democrats are in control of both houses of Congress the underlying fact is that there are “NO GUARANTEES” given the history of the Congress that a Democrat delegate will do a better job than an Independent or Republican candidate.
The incumbent Republican candidate Pete A. continues to say he is an adamant supporter of federalization of immigration and labor and takes pride in being a negotiator of the Covenant. We are now questioning Mr. Pete A.: Where in the Covenant did it say that our local Department of Labor was to be given up and why didn’t you fight for the workers who now will be affected? Quite frankly even the island of Guam controls their Department of Labor “LOCALLY.”
Mr. Cing, you did not inform the voters that there are about 257 LAWYERS combined in both houses of the U.S. Congress. I believe that Mr. Juan Tudela Lizama would be a far better candidate pursuant to this fact.
In 1994, the case Michel vs. Anderson was filed in federal court to take away the rights of delegates from insular territories in participating and voting in the committee as a whole. Luckily the U.S. Supreme Court held that suppressing the rights of the delegates was unconstitutional.
By the way, Mr. Pete A., where was the language to provide economic relief for the CNMI in the economic bailout that was passed by Congress? $192 million in tax rebates were provided to the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico while $30 million was provided to American Samoa.
It’s interesting because compared to those three territories the U.S. Congress knows that the CNMI is in far worse shape economically especially after the damaging federal takeover legislation that they enacted.
CRIS RIVERA
Honolulu, Hawaii
