Stick to the subject
THE controversy over the date and venue of the governor’s State of the Commonwealth Address is a distraction from the truly major issue that candidates for office should talk about, publicly, before voters cast their ballots. We are referring to the across-the-board government austerity measures that are likely to be implemented once ARPA funding is gone.
Now and then, a politician will mention the looming “fiscal cliff,” but not whether s/he has a plan to address it. As we all know, the CNMI government is the islands’ largest employer. And most, if not almost all, of its employees are voters. Their jobs and their livelihood are directly linked to the government’s financial condition. But even though the early-voting period for the three senatorial districts is about to start, it seems that most candidates would rather talk about something else. Of course.
Voters, it’s up to you to ask the candidates about it. In the name of “transparency,” candidates, for their part, should disclose their preferred cost-cutting proposals. Would these include furloughs, paycuts, tax/fee hikes — all of the above? Who would be furloughed? How many? How much are the paycuts? Who would pay more in terms of taxes and/or fees, and by how much? What about the retirees’ 25% benefit?
Or do the candidates believe that painful cuts could be avoided? How?
We’re all ears.
Once upon a time
IN his first State of the Commonwealth Address, which was delivered at the Mt. Carmel auditorium in January 1983, the then-Republican governor mentioned the problems he had inherited from his Democratic predecessor, the accomplishments of his administration, and the goals he had set for the year.
In their official response, the Democrats said the SOCA “was one-sided, long on generalities and short on particulars.” They said the CNMI’s “problems are serious and no matter how rosy a picture is painted, the truth of the matter is that many of the problems are still with us and may grow worse in the years ahead without bipartisan concerted effort at finding solutions.” These problems included…the Retirement Fund. “The political dice [have] been cast and there is no point in accusing the First Legislature for creating a program that has become a drain in our budget,” said the Democrats. “[T]here is [a] need for imagination, for bold, new approaches to government and development. The ones we know no longer work and will lead us to bankruptcy. We must move away from the MORE GOVERNMENT philosophy to the LESS GOVERNMENT philosophy, from GOVERNMENT AS THE EMPLOYER OF FIRST RESORT to the GOVERNMENT AS EMPLOYER OF LAST RESORT thinking.”
In short, the Democrats added, “as a people, we should begin to learn to stand on our own two feet, as individuals and as private organizations, and not depend on the government for everything.”
Yes, all that from the Democrats.
Those were the days indeed.
