Third stage of grief
FOLLOWING a series of fuel and electricity price hikes, many of us have quickly gone through the first two stages of grief — denial and anger — and are now at the next level: legislation.
In the House of Talk, er, Representatives, two members have introduced a bill that they hope would provide funding “to offset the increase in the FAC,” or the Fuel Adjustment Charge. According to CUC, the FAC is one of two components that make up the electric kWh rate and is used to purchase fuel for the power plants. Fuel prices had increased significantly, and so did the FAC. (The second component of CUC’s electric kWh rate is the base rate which is used to fund operations, projects, and debt service. The base rate has not been increased since 2014.)
Finally, in any case, actual “action” in the House of Representatives, and not just another meeting, another hearing or another speech about how everyone is suffering (including lawmakers who get an earful from irate constituents).
The problem, as usual, is funding — the lack of it, to be precise, and so here’s a bill to “tap” an existing source of funding: the liquid fuel tax collections.
A public hearing should be conducted to discuss the bill, and CUC and Department of Finance officials should provide their comments and answers to the following questions:
How much is it, the government’s annual liquid fuel tax collections?
Is the amount enough to “mitigate the adverse effects” of the FAC hike?
What offices, agencies or services are funded by the liquid fuel tax collections? Let’s rephrase the question. Which offices, agencies or services would lose some or most of their funding if this bill becomes law?
The bill also declares that “Commonwealth law already exempts CUC from paying the Liquid Fuel Tax so the FAC for fuel used for power generation that CUC applies to its ratepayers already violates the intent and spirit of the exemption when CUC assesses the FAC to its customers. See Title 4 section 1403 (c).”
What exactly do the bill’s authors mean?
If CUC is not exempted from the liquid fuel tax who do you think would end up paying for it?
As for “the intent and spirit of the exemption,” this apparently refers to Title 4 section 1403 (c):
“The liquid fuel tax imposed by subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to sales of liquid fuel to the Commonwealth Utilities Corporation for the purpose of power generation; provided, that the Commonwealth Utilities Corporation complies with the requirements of 4 CMC § 8141(h).”
4 CMC § 8141(h) states that “Residential consumers may be given up to one year to pay in full any outstanding balance in their accounts.” We believe “may” is the operative word in that sentence, but what a deal! Up to one year to pay what you owe! Government should “run like a business” indeed.
Incidentally, when will lawmakers talk about the government’s outstanding utility bills?
Why sometimes silence is golden
THEN and now, the state of the economy will determine the government’s financial condition — and ability to meet its many (so many) obligations.
Still, amid global uncertainty, there have been positive developments for the local economy. These include the entry of a new domestic airline; the ongoing South Korea-Saipan flight service; and, soon, the resumption of direct flights from Japan.
Politicians can talk nonstop about how they “care for the suffering people,” but speeches can neither fund medical referrals nor government payroll; they certainly can’t pay retirees or buy fuel for CUC.
What the CNMI needs to do is to generate more local revenue not by imposing counterproductive (if not ruinous) new fees, taxes and restrictions, but through the revival of the tourism industry and the overall improvement of the local economy.
Easier said than done?
Why didn’t you say do when you were still running for office?
