The new rubber-stampers
THE Senate was doing its job when it did not rubber-stamp an administration proposal that was rubber-stamped by the House of Representatives in a heartbeat. House Bill 23-104 would take away over $5 million from CEDA so elected officials can continue paying a spending item — the retirees’ 25% benefit — that the CNMI government, clearly, can no longer afford.
The House passed the bill without asking questions about the funding source, among other pertinent details. Once again, moreover, no public hearing was conducted. No committee report was drawn up. CEDA, a semi-autonomous government entity, wasn’t even invited to comment on the day the bill was passed, which was on the day it was introduced. Incidentally, one of CEDA’s mandates is “to be proactive in the pursuit of industries and investments that will strengthen the CNMI economy.” No one among the House members asked how H.B. 23-104 could possibly “help” CEDA meet that mandate. The bill’s original version also stated that the secretary of Finance shall repay CEDA — “subject to the availability of funds.” Which could mean never.
One House member correctly pointed out that the actual problem is the CNMI government’s overspending ways, and that H.B. 23-104 was a “Band-Aid” measure good at least until Aug. 31, 2024 only. But he voted for its passage anyway.
Who used to complain loudly about legislation whose passage was “rubber-stamped” and “fast-tracked” in the House? The former minority bloc members, who are now in leadership positions. Today their complaint is that the Senate won’t rubber-stamp and fast-track legislation they say is “urgent.” But urgent to whom? To their political careers in this election year?
Check and balance
WE thank and commend the four senators who voted against the adoption of a committee report endorsing yet another money-grab measure, House Bill 23-7, which would “ensure that all tobacco products are properly taxed.” Unlike the imported betel nut and lime tax hike measure, the original version of H.B. 23-7 did not include an obligatory (and meaningless) paean to public health. It wanted to “increase revenues,” period. It stated that the CNMI government “has lost significant tax revenue”…by not imposing taxes. In other words, other people’s money can be seized by this broke but still overspending government whenever it says so.
Happily for the CNMI, it has a bicameral legislature.
We hope that a majority of the senators will continue to act as a check and balance to the House of Rubber-Stampers, especially when it comes to “revenue generating” measures that are likely to cause more harm than good in this economy.
Cash only
IPI was told that the CNMI government “will not entertain any proposal unless IPI makes some type of payment, upfront.” Right on. That is how it should be. IPI, of course, can pursue litigation, but it should realize that it is a (costly) fallacy to continue spending scant resources (time, money or effort) on a project that is going nowhere. The more rational choice is to abandon it.
IPI should now go gentle into the good night.
As for the CNMI government, the question now is what should be done with IPI’s unfinished hotel-casino in Garapan? Would it be like what the former Plumeria hotel, the La Fiesta mall or Mariana Resort have become? These structures, however, are somewhat “out of the way,” and not right smack in the middle of the tourism district.
Surely, the CNMI government — with its several departments, divisions, bureaus, agencies, offices and programs — could come with a list of possible answers.
