But what did they expect to hear from politicians — and U.S. lawmakers are politicians, too — who know how to say what their audience wants to hear? It would have been interesting if, say, Taotao Tano met with the visitors to relay the indigenous people’s concerns. What do you think the U.S. lawmakers would tell their fellow U.S. citizens worried about being overrun by foreigners in their own homeland?
Based on the media reports, the visitors never said anything remotely specific. They made no assurances. They said they were “touched” and “moved,” and that they take their responsibilities “seriously,” and were hoping that “justice” would prevail. But what do they mean, these statements?
They mean exactly what you want them to mean. Words, however, are not acts of Congress.
I’m not belittling the efforts made by the people behind Sunday’s rally and other similar events. And I appreciate the generosity and kindness of U.S. citizens and other local residents who have shown solidarity with guest workers who are only seeking to improve their and their families’ lives.
But as I’ve pointed out before, they’re doing it the wrong way. Their “strategy” is to depict a tragic picture of the guest workers’ stay in the CNMI — how “unfair” and “un-American” it is. They want to go over the heads of the local people and the CNMI government to tug some federal hearts and voila! — how green is the card.
They cited the example of the guest workers of the U.S. Virgin Islands whose immigration status was improved by the feds, through legislation, in 1982. They did not mention, however, that the U.S. Virgin Islands Nonimmigrant Alien Adjustment Act of 1981 was introduced by the territory’s delegate to Congress, Ron de Lugo. He sponsored the bill that was also backed by the governor and legislators of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Clearly, the people of the territory, at the very least, did not oppose the measure. “I feel very deeply,” their congressman said, “that the [legislation] represents the wishes of a majority of the people of the U.S. Virgin Islands.”
De Lugo reminded his colleagues in D.C. that the territory’s guest workers came from the neighboring islands. “There had existed for centuries a mostly unrestricted flow of residents between the islands. This was especially true of the people of the former Danish West Indies and the nearby British Virgin Islands. There was hardly a U.S. Virgin Islander without close family relationships on other islands of the eastern Caribbean.”
These were the nonresidents whose immigration status was upgraded by the feds with the consent and approval of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
As I’ve said before, the U.S. Congress, as seen by its recent actions, will have to consult with the CNMI government and the local people before it approves legislation that will profoundly and forever change this commonwealth. Improving the immigration status of thousands of foreigners — who comprise about half of the total population — has serious consequences for the U.S. citizens of these islands. The locals will be outnumbered. They will lose, first, their political dominance and then their culture. They will be a minority in their homeland — precisely what they wanted to avoid when they ratified their Covenant with the U.S.
The U.S. Congress and the White House will have to listen to the CNMI’s concerns, and agree that these are valid.
The best solution was the one offered by Interior — nonimmigrant status, ala FAS citizens, for qualified guest workers. But that consolation prize didn’t materialize because of the opposition of the CNMI government, which was backed by some elected officials of Guam and Hawaii. Moreover, U.S. unions, historically, are opposed to the influx of foreign labor because it depresses wages and takes away jobs from American workers. (U.S. unions were among the champions of Philippine independence during the pre-war period.)
Hence, my main point — guest workers and their allies need the support of the CNMI government and the local people. But by constantly denouncing the labor and immigration system that brought them here and allowed them to have U.S. citizen children, the guest worker groups have only antagonized the local people and their government.
Indeed, the vast majority of the local people are either indifferent or annoyed with the “plight” of their guest workers who, some believe, are “disrespectful ingrates.”
“If their conditions are so bad,” say the local people, “and if they feel that there is no fairness in the CNMI, then why are they still here? Why do they want to stay in a place that, according to them, mistreats guest workers? They are trying to improve their status — which is understandable — but not at the local people’s expense!”
Now guess what the local people and their elected officials will tell the feds if the U.S. Congress actually considers legislation to improve the immigration status of CNMI guest workers.
The visiting U.S. lawmakers, in any case, promised nothing specific. Immigration is a most contentious issue in the U.S. and the guest workers do not have the support of the majority of the local people, which means that CNMI elected officials will not stick their heads out for nonvoters.
Hope, of course, springs eternal, but if I were a betting man I wouldn’t put my money on it.
Send hate mail to [email protected] or [email protected]
