Take it easy
NO one among the China hawks is saying — not yet anyway — that Chinese tourists should not be allowed to visit the CNMI. What they demand is for these tourists to get a U.S. visa like their compatriots who want to visit the States or Guam. To be sure, the U.S. government has legitimate national security concerns, and these were discussed in the 902 talks with the first Trump administration in 2019, resulting in the creation of the EVS-TAP program. Among other things, EVS-TAP requires an electronic pre-vetting of travelers before they arrive in the CNMI.
Why can’t we see how that works first, and then, after a year or so, review its implementation and make further adjustments?
As with the immigration issues facing the U.S., the CNMI should not be conflated with the questionable — from the U.S. perspective — diplomatic directions being taken by certain independent Pacific Island nations.
To begin with, the CNMI is U.S. territory. The local people are American citizens, several of whom are proud U.S. servicemembers or veterans. The U.S. Attorney’s Office, the FBI, CBP, ICE, HSI, USCIS and the U.S. military all have a presence here. The U.S. government oversees and controls CNMI immigration. The CNMI does not have authority over foreign affairs. It wasn’t the CNMI that delayed the implementation of the law banning China-owned TikTok or extended a “largely unprecedented” invitation to China’s dictator for a U.S. presidential inauguration.
To quote the CNMI delegate in her remarks during a recent U.S. House hearing, “We are on the same team. We agree that we must all do our part to address [national security] threats.”
That being said
PERHAPS more CNMI officials, the governor among them, should have private conversations with the owners or executives of the islands’ (remaining) businesses, especially those located in the tourism districts. Most if not almost all of them are non-political and are generally supportive of the CNMI government, regardless of who is in charge. Many are wondering whether tourism will pick up enough for them to remain afloat. They know that, prior to the pandemic, the CNMI had three tourism markets: South Korea, China, and Japan. But today, there is only one viable market left, and it is on shaky ground. Ask these businesspeople, and many of them would say that they want to see more tourists (i.e., customers) from everywhere, if possible, including U.S. military personnel.
What they want is to remain in business — to continue being taxpayers and employers in their home island or a place they call home. What they hope from CNMI leaders is, at the very least, an assurance that the business community’s concerns are being heard, and that their government is actually taking action, rather than questioning their allegiance or integrity.
Positively Orwellian
SO, if no one calls the governor’s request a “bailout,” nobody in Congress would realize that providing financial assistance to a failing entity to prevent its collapse is, in fact, a…bailout?
(When DFS Saipan announced that it was shutting down because “the circumstances around the current landscape have made it unsustainable to continue,” the administration called it a “strategy to streamline global operations.”)
In any case, no amount of Orwellian word-twisting will change the sad reality that the governor is seeking a federally funded rescue operation.
According to the administration, it is merely requesting the “repurposing” of unused PUA and Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation funds that were allotted for the CNMI. First of all, what a surprise! In addition to the ARPA funds that were “all gone” but are now “recovered,” it turns out that the CNMI also had $414 million (!) in unused PUA/FPUC funds. Why wasn’t this mentioned before?
We have also learned that a year ago, the governor sought permission from USDOL to use the funds “for relief from [economic] challenges,” but was told that federal law “only permits the use of these appropriated funds for the purposes intended — payment of PUA and FPUC benefits for the weeks of unemployment covered by the programs. These funds may not be used for any other purpose.” USDOL also reminded the governor that as part of the PUA/FPUC agreement that it signed, the CNMI “must also perform…duties and functions…including return of unused funds.”
Hence, the governor’s request that the CNMI delegate introduce legislation to “repurpose” those funds. In other words, they are no longer CNMI funds, nor are the 702 funds, which, according to the Covenant, are subject to congressional discretion. Hence, the governor’s request to obtain a larger amount of those funds.
Now if the CNMI were “entitled” to these FUA/FPUC or 702 funds, why do we need to ask the U.S. to give them to us? Why do we need to go through the Byzantine legislative process of the federal government? Why? Because they are federal funds, collected from federal taxpayers. That’s why.
