Let the Games Begin! (Or continue...)

April 28, 2011

After a town hall to discuss CNMI issues, including the merits of a bill that was already introduced earlier this month, two high level CNMI politicians, Governor Fitial and Congressman Gregorio (Kilili) Sablan, are exchanging barbs concerning H.R. 1466, the CNMI-only immigration bill.

The phrase, "good luck" is being used sarcastically by both elected officials. The Saipan Tribune reported:
Fitial said he wishes Sablan “good luck” on his H.R. 1466 which he said he would want amended, while Sablan also wished Fitial “good luck” in amending his bill.

“That bill will never fly, or will never be considered by the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress is not stupid to enact a new law when they already have an existing law that would address those issues,” Fitial told reporters in an interview at his newly renovated office on Capital Hill.

But the governor also said he will offer an amendment to the bill, specifically removing the retroactive date of May 8, 2008 in connection with the fourth group of people covered in Sablan's bill.

This fourth group is the immediate relatives-such as parents of U.S. citizens regardless of the age of the U.S. citizens as of May 8, 2008-and who have been in the CNMI until the bill's enactment into law.

“In other words, it will be prospective, not retroactive,” he said.

Initially, Fitial said his amendment is “only to chastise the author” of the bill, which turned out to be a joke. He then proceeded to his proposed amendment.

“My amendment is to make sure that that act, if it is ever enacted, will be effective on the date it is enacted. In other words, anybody before that date is not entitled to (the proposed status),” Fitial said.
I would have thought the governor would have embraced this legislation. It contains everything he supports: continued disenfranchisement of the majority of the adult population of the CNMI; no green  cards or pathway to citizen for those who worked in the CNMI for years and even decades; no mention of the theft of wages or reparations; the continuation of the dysfunctional, undemocratic CNMI system under the federal label; no loss of power for the corrupt elite; the retention of the problematic two-tiered society; and no political, social or economic advancement for the nonresident workers.  In fact, if I didn't know who wrote it, I would have thought it was drafted by the Fitial Administration.

There is too much rhetoric, and too little fact in this discussion. Who in Washington, DC ever said that the subject of less than 18,000 LEGAL nonresident workers was a "toxic" subject? What is wrong that those in positions of power cannot distinguish between legal and illegal nonresidents or aliens?  Are we to believe every person who has been elected is incapable of making this simple distinction? This is extremely hard to believe.  Again people LEGAL, NOT ILLEGAL. School children can understand the difference, but we are to believe that politicians in Washington, DC cannot? Pathetic.

Other statements are also conflicting and confusing.  Congressman Sablan stated that H.R. 1466 would provide security and stability for nonresidents with families and has expressed his concern with "keeping families together." Of course, he means only certain nonresident worker families that have a U.S. citizen among its members. All other families of nonresident workers are excluded.

Yesterday Congressman Sablan was quoted in the Saipan Tribune as saying that "there would be no mass deportation of workers":
“Workers will be fine,” he told reporters yesterday. “DHS will have no reason to send everybody home.”
Good luck is indeed needed, but not to pass a faulty, discriminatory bill that promotes disenfranchisement, and the perpetuation of a two-tiered society. Good luck is needed to ensure that the hardworking long-term LEGAL nonresidents of the CNMI are granted green cards with a pathway to citizenship.

Countdown

April 27, 2011

Endeavour launch, photo by NASA















The launch of a space shuttle is something fairly routine in Central Florida. We have witnessed shuttle launches from many locations in Orlando, including our yard. Nighttime launches leave a trail of fire that lights up the sky with an orange glow. While daytime launches are less spectacular, the trail of fire and exhaust is still visible from Orlando, miles from the launch site. Very cool.

Friday's launch of Endeavour is special because President Obama, First Lady Michelle, and daughters Malia and Sasha are attending the launch at the Kennedy Space Center. Also attending is  Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Arizona) who is recovering from injuries after being shot in the head in January while attending a public meeting in her home district.  Giffords arrived in Central Florida earlier today.  It is her first trip away from the rehabilitation center in Texas where she has been under going therapy for months.

Rep. Gifford's husband, astronaut Mark Kelly is the commander of the mission.

Forty other members of Congress and 250 staff members are also attending the launch, which will be one of the last of the shuttle launches, and the final launch for the Endeavour.  Up to 750,000 Florida residents and tourists are expected to brave traffic on the coast for a close-up view.

We may be there too this time, since it may be our last chance to watch a shuttle launch from up close. The bad thing about trying to attend a shuttle launch is that there is no guarantee that the shuttle will actually launch.  I took my classes to view one years ago, and it was postponed due to technical problems.  Still, we had a great day exploring the exhibits at the Kennedy Space Center.

Everyone said that you can feel the earth shake and hear a tremendous roar when the shuttle takes off. We'll see!

Of Interest: News From the CNMI

April 27, 2011

Juvenile Detention Center Now Under DOC

The troubled Juvenile Detention Center that was under the Department of Community and Cultural Affairs is now under the CNMI Department of Corrections.  Governor Fitial issued a 3-page executive order to detail the transfer.

It seems like a logical move.

In recent years the center has been involved in lawsuits for violating laws related to

Recently JDC guard Tyrone Fitial was accused of sexually assaulting three female children who were detained at the center.  He pleaded guiltyto the charge of enticement of a minor and he will be sentenced in a few months.

The question remains have the ongoing problems been resolved? Has a school teacher been assigned to teach at the center as is required by law?

Go Green

If a "compromise cannot be reached" over the erection of the ugly power poles in the historical Marpi tourist site, Rep. Stanley Torres suggested painting them green,  Whoa...how would that solve the problem?

The poles are not just an eyesore that scars a pristine tourist and historical site, but erecting them must have meant trees had to be removed.  Furthermore, they are truly unnecessary.  Wires could have been placed underground or alternative energy sources such a solar or wind could have been used to bring power to the cemeteries in the area.

I live in a small community in the City of Orlando and we have underground wires for electricity and telephone.  Not only does it look great, but when Hurricane Charlie and three other hurricanes slammed into Central Florida one after another in 2004, the neighborhoods with overhead wires and poles had no electricity for weeks. The time and cost to replace poles and wires was enormous.

We lost every grandfather oak tree (two that were over six feet in diameter) that fell magically like match sticks away from our house, but we never lost power or phone service.

It seems illogical to erect overhead power lines on a typhoon-prone island where surely they will face destruction.  Check out this photo of huge power poles that fell in Hurricane Charlie. The photo, taken of Lake Margaret Drive, is only one street away from our street:


Think how much it will cost to replace the poles on Marpi after a typhoon and how the beauty of the region and money could be saved by putting lines underground.

Police Brutality

Former Saipan police officer, Frankie Pangelinan who pepper sprayed two victims in their eyes wants more time to "prepare for his trial." Meanwhile the former police officer Jesse Dubrall, who severely beat an innocent Chinese worker has still not been charged.

Someone Should Tell the Donald: "YOU'RE FIRED!"

April 27, 2011

It is probably hard to count how many conservative Republican officials and hate radio and television talk show hosts have profited off of the lie that President Obama is not qualified to be President because he was not born in the United States.  Despite the President and his staffers denying the charges and producing a copy of his birth certificate, these crazies kept promoting the lie.

Today the President, responded to the lies by producing a copy of his certificate.

A transcript of his remarks was released by the White House website:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 27, 2011
Remarks by the President

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

9:48 A.M. PDT

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Now, let me just comment, first of all, on the fact that I can't get the networks to break in on all kinds of other discussions -- (laughter.) I was just back there listening to Chuck -- he was saying, it’s amazing that he’s not going to be talking about national security. I would not have the networks breaking in if I was talking about that, Chuck, and you know it.

Q Wrong channel. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: As many of you have been briefed, we provided additional information today about the site of my birth. Now, this issue has been going on for two, two and a half years now. I think it started during the campaign. And I have to say that over the last two and a half years I have watched with bemusement, I've been puzzled at the degree to which this thing just kept on going. We've had every official in Hawaii, Democrat and Republican, every news outlet that has investigated this, confirm that, yes, in fact, I was born in Hawaii, August 4, 1961, in Kapiolani Hospital.

We've posted the certification that is given by the state of Hawaii on the Internet for everybody to see. People have provided affidavits that they, in fact, have seen this birth certificate. And yet this thing just keeps on going.

Now, normally I would not comment on something like this, because obviously there’s a lot of stuff swirling in the press on at any given day and I've got other things to do. But two weeks ago, when the Republican House had put forward a budget that will have huge consequences potentially to the country, and when I gave a speech about my budget and how I felt that we needed to invest in education and infrastructure and making sure that we had a strong safety net for our seniors even as we were closing the deficit, during that entire week the dominant news story wasn’t about these huge, monumental choices that we're going to have to make as a nation. It was about my birth certificate. And that was true on most of the news outlets that were represented here.

And so I just want to make a larger point here. We've got some enormous challenges out there. There are a lot of folks out there who are still looking for work. Everybody is still suffering under high gas prices. We're going to have to make a series of very difficult decisions about how we invest in our future but also get a hold of our deficit and our debt -- how do we do that in a balanced way.

And this is going to generate huge and serious debates, important debates. And there are going to be some fierce disagreements -- and that’s good. That’s how democracy is supposed to work. And I am confident that the American people and America’s political leaders can come together in a bipartisan way and solve these problems. We always have.

But we’re not going to be able to do it if we are distracted. We’re not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other. We’re not going to be able to do it if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts. We’re not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers.

We live in a serious time right now and we have the potential to deal with the issues that we confront in a way that will make our kids and our grandkids and our great grandkids proud. And I have every confidence that America in the 21st century is going to be able to come out on top just like we always have. But we’re going to have to get serious to do it.

I know that there’s going to be a segment of people for which, no matter what we put out, this issue will not be put to rest. But I’m speaking to the vast majority of the American people, as well as to the press. We do not have time for this kind of silliness. We’ve got better stuff to do. I’ve got better stuff to do. We’ve got big problems to solve. And I’m confident we can solve them, but we’re going to have to focus on them -- not on this.

Thanks very much, everybody.

END
9:54 A.M. EDT

Crazy man, Donald Trump spoke to the press saying how proud he was of himself because he was the one who got the President to show his birth certificate. What an idiot! He wasted the President's time, lied to the American people and the press, and made himself look like a fool. Something to be proud of? Uh, no.

What ridiculous rumor or conspiracy theory will they toss out next to detract the American public and elected officials from important issues?

Some Thoughts on Status

April 25, 2011

H.R. 1466

Congressman Sablan's bill, H.R. 1466 has yet to be reviewed by the Fitial Administration according to his press secretary, Angel Demapan. That is unbelievable. For an Administration so opinionated and anti-worker that they sponsored rallies and motorcades, against federalization and status, we should believe that no one read the bill. Really? Well, here is the link to the bill. It's very short and can be read in less than 10 minutes.

I am sure that the governor and others have read the proposed legislation.  More likely they have not commented because they have to wait for Deanne Seimer to ghost write their response to it, and she is currently very busy attacking the Federal Ombudsman's Office.

I discussed the bill with some colleagues to try to get a neutral perspective, and some of their comments were enlightening.

One person questioned, "How can a bill provide status for those who produce U.S. citizen children? What about people who are infertile or medically unable to have children? Why are they being punished for not having children?"

Another colleague agreed it was improper to propose a sub-class that promoted disenfranchisement for long-term workers who would not be able to vote or travel to the U.S. without a visa. They asked if the logic was to try to keep the workers in the islands to work, but not to advance as full citizens.

They also agreed with the comparison to apartheid since there are voting and travel restrictions.

Apartheid:

a·part·heid (-pärtht, -ht)
n.
1. An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites.
2. A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.
3. The condition of being separated from others; segregation.

The crime of apartheid as defined by international law includes in part this statement: "Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups.

It is my belief that this sub-class, (FAS-type status) more resembles the principles of segregation and an apartheid-type status than democratic American principles. (See also this post.)

An in-depth analysis on CNMI immigration status for legal long-term workers by Robert J. Misulich stands as another important voice in urging the United States Congress to right the wrongs of the flawed CNRA that excluded the provision for permanent status for the long-term CNMI guest workers.

Rob Misulich, a J.D. Candidate at the University of Washington, wrote an article for the Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal Association entitled, A Lesser-Known Immigration Crisis: Federal Immigration Law in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. It was published in January 2011. This well-researched and well-written article analyzes the provisions of CNRA, and actions and inactions of Congress and the DHS. It makes a strong and clear argument for Congress to pass additional legislation granting permanent resident status to long-term CNMI guest workers.

Read it here:



Political Status of Guam and CNMI
Then there is the question of political status of the CNMI and Guam that is always up for review by elected officials including CNMI's Rep. Stanley Torres and Guam's self-determination supporter, Senator Judy Guthertz.

In March 2011, Rep. Torres introduced House Bill 17-7 that proposed to "create a commission that will revisit the Covenant and look at an 'alternative' political and economic status for the islands."

Guthertz introduced a bill in Guam calling for a non-binding plebiscite on reunification of the CNMI and Guam.

The Guam Senator said that Rep. Joseph Palacios wanted to introduce similar legislation in the CNMI, according to the Marianas Variety.

Some CNMI officials views were reported in the Saipan Tribune.

It is interesting that both Guam and CNMI officials' discussions center on the residents' opinions, and omit that such a discussion should include the views of those who fund both the CNMI and Guam -- the American taxpayers.

Fitial's Imprisoned Friend Scanlon Ordered To Pay Restitution

April 23, 2011

Michael Scanlon, Jack Abramoff's side-kick who often visited the CNMI when he wasn't ripping off Indian tribes, is in the minimum security Pensacola Florida Federal Prison Camp. The felon will be behind bars for 20 month after being found guilty of bribing a U.S. Congressman and defrauding Indian tribes. He will be released in September 2012.

Scanlon was former Rep. Tom DeLay's chief of staff. DeLay (R-TX), also a felon, is awaiting sentencing after being found guilty.

Yesterday Scanlon was hit with another blow when U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that the crook must pay restitution to Greenburg Taurig and may not keep any proceeds he acquired from criminal activity.  The felon was ordered to pay the lobbying firm $17.7 million. The money was paid by the firm to clients that Scanlon and Abramoff defrauded. Scanlon fought in the courts to keep the money, but Greenberg's attorneys claimed that the firm knew nothing of their schemes.

Scanlon took the millions he made by defrauding innocent victims and invested it in lucrative real estate ventures. He is now a very wealthy man. Among his property holdings is a luxury hilltop property in St. Barts, a beachside house in Rehobath Beach, Delaware and several other real estate investments in Florida where he lives. A reporter from the Delaware News Journal blew the story on his lavish lifestyle, exposing that while he was working as a lifeguard making a little more than minimum wage, he was dropping millions on mansions and other property. TPM Muckraker reported:
Scanlon and a corporation he controls bought 10 properties for $18.7 million from May 2001 through January 2005 -- and paid $12.2 million in cash for them, Barrish reported. The properties included an oceanfront 7,000 square-foot mansion previously owned by a member of the du Pont family, two properties in Rehoboth Beach and two in Henlopen Acres. He also bought four properties in Georgetown, Del. -- two homes, a downtown office-apartment complex and an office park of U.S. 113.
Scanlon has been selling off properties he bought with the money he stole from clients in order to pay the millions he owes in  restitution.

Fitial and Scanlon

The story of how Governor Fitial ended up stealing the speakership is documented from the Halls of Congress to national newspapers and magazines to television and radio shows. It was also told in the Saipan Tribune. It involves felons Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay and Michael Scanlon, Fitial's "friends."

One source clearly outlines the story. That source is Rep. George Miller (D-CA) who has helped to expose the corruption and abuses in the CNMI for decades. In May 2005, Rep. Miller sent a letter to former California Richard Pombo (R-Abramoff) who was the Chair of the House Resources Committee. Rep. Miller asked for an investigation of the wrong doings in the CNMI. The letter succinctly details the scheme to steal the speakership (emphasis added):
Recent media reports have uncovered information about suspected wrongdoings by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, his associates, and clients in the CNMI. This new information adds additional weight to my request of April 14, 2005 that you begin a thorough investigation of the matter by the Committee on Resources which has jurisdiction over territorial affairs. Your staff asked for documents associated with my request, and on April 22 I provided 428 pages of evidentiary materials related to my initial request to you.In my April 14 letter to you, (please note that it was in fact April 14 and not April 12 as stated in your letter to me of May 9), I wrote that in 1999, two men associated with then-Majority Whip Tom DeLay - Ed Buckham, a one-time chief of staff who later became the head of ARMPAC, and Mike Scanlon, a DeLay spokesman - were reportedly involved in an effort to influence the election of the Speaker to the CNMI House of Representatives. I have since learned of additional evidence to suggest these two men may have traded political favors to sway the election in favor of a candidate most likely to renew a contract with lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

In 1999, Mr. Abramoff s contract with the CNMI government was suspended, with no clear prospect of renewal.' At the same time, an Abramoff supporter, Mr. Benigno Fitial, was a candidate for Speaker of the CNMI's House of Representatives. Mr. Fitial, however, was two votes behind his opponent, Mr. Heinz S. Hofschneider, according to press reports of a letter signed by 10 out of the 12 CNMI Republican House members in support of Mr. Hofschneider, including Representative Alejo Mendiola and Representative Norman S. Palacios. These 10 Republican legislators were enough to secure Mr. Hofschneider the election. New reports by the Los Angeles Times and Marianas Variety confirm that in 1999 Mr. Fitial did indeed meet with Mr. Buckham and Mr. Scanlon - who was still on Mr. DeLay's payroll at the time. At the meeting, Mr. Fitial recommended that the two men meet with Representatives Mendiola and Palacios, both of whom had signed the letter in support of Mr. Hofschneider, to encourage them to switch their votes for speaker.

When Mr. Scanlon and Mr. Buckham met with the two legislators, they reportedly promised to help secure money for local projects in exchange for their votes for Mr. Fitial, including federal resources for repairing a breakwater on the island of Tinian, a priority for Mr. Palacios. They were successful, and Mr. Fitial was elected Speaker. Mr. Abramoff s contract was subsequently renewed.

The following year, Congress passed one appropriations bill in October that included $150,000 for the breakwater restoration project in Mr. Palacios' district and another appropriations bill in May that listed funding for an airport repaving project in Rota in the committee report as a priority for discretionary grants. The Rota project was located on the island that Mr. Mendiola represented.

Mr. DeLay was a member of the conference committee on the bill that included the breakwater project, as well as a member of the subcommittee that approved the transportation project. His aide, Mr. Scanlon, was on the appropriations committee payroll when he traveled to the Mariana Islands with Mr. Buckham to secure Mr. Fitial's election as speaker.

This new information makes it even more imperative that you launch a bipartisan and thorough investigation into potential unethical and illegal behavior by Mr. Abramoff and others with respect to U.S. territorial matters, including whether there was inappropriate congressional interference into CNMI elections. As you may already be aware, both the CNMI legislature and Governor Babauta's office have publicly stated that they have no objection to such a congressional investigation.
Congressman Miller outlined the relationship between Tom DeLay, Scanlon, Buckham, Abramoff and Fitial. Omitted from his narrative was the fact that Abramoff also sent lobbyist Neil Volz to the CNMI in January 2000 to ensure Fitial's election and to secure his lobbying contract with the CNMI government. Volz was the former chief of staff for former Rep. Bob Ney who was convicted and served jail time for Abramoff-related crimes.

How intertwined was the lobbyist work with the CNMI infrastructure projects on Rota? A March 12, 2002 Saipan Tribune article entitled, "Rota mayor seeks aid of US officials on airport project" claims (emphasis added):
Rota Mayor Benjamin T. Manglona urged federal officials to extend necessary assistance for the rapid completion of the Rota airport improvement project, which is seen to alleviate the economic situation of the island.

Citing economic growth and a potential contributing partner of the Commonwealth, Manglona provided US Rep. Mike Scanlon and US Department of Transportation Airports District Officer Daniel S. Matsumoto a draft copy of the Rota International Airport Runway Extension analysis.
Just for the record, Mike Scanlon was a former congressional staffer and lobbyist, not a member of Congress. He left his position as with Rep. Tom DeLay in March 2000. It's not surprising that lines got blurred between members of the U.S. Congress and the lobbyists. If you read the billing records, memos and indictments it does appear that the lobbyists controlled some members of Congress.

TPM Muckraker also covered the scandal (links added):
DeLay staffer Michael Scanlon and former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham (then a lobbyist with Alexander Strategy Group) traveled to Saipan in December 1999 armed with federal incentives to convince two members of the commonwealth legislature, Alejo Mendiola and Norman S. Palacios, to change their votes for Speaker and elect Benigno Fitial. Fitial was expected to reinstate Abramoff's expired lobbying contract. (A Ney staffer followed in January 2000.)

Fitial e-mailed top Marianas officials on June 30, 2000 pressuring them hire Abramoff: "Please urge Teno [the island's governor] to execute the agreement as we will continue to encounter problems...if the contract is not executed. We need P & G [Abramoff's law firm] to help save our economy...Please help!!"
At the end of that July, the Marianas House passed a resolution urging the Governor to rehire Abramoff. A few days later, Abramoff and Preston Gates were hired for $100,000 a month. This contract went with Abramoff to Greenberg Traurig and continued until a new governor took office in 2002.
December 16, 1999 Saipan Tribune article reported:
Both Mr. Mendiola, who was re-elected in the last Nov. 6 polls, and Mr. Palacios initially threw their support behind Mr. Hofschneider’s bid for the top House post during a caucus held by GOP members last month, along with seven others.

Their withdrawal ended weeks of speculations on whom they were finally supporting in the speakership battle that began immediately after the elections. Current House Speaker Diego T. Benavente decided to step down to give way to Mr. Hofschneider, who has been eyeing the post since 1997.
After the alliance was formed, Fitial became speaker, Mendiola won the vice-speaker position and Palacios was awarded the chair of the Federal and Foreign Relations Committee.

In April 2000, Fitial led a delegation of 12 CNMI lawmakers to Washington, DC. According to the Saipan Tribune the delegation led by House Speaker Fitial met with many of Abramoff's foot soldiers:
Meanwhile, the delegation is nearing to the end of its week-long visit to Washington with a "busier" schedule, according to Vice Speaker Alejo M. Mendiola.

Meetings are planned with key members of Congress, including House Majority Whip Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), Reps. George Radanovich (R-CA), Bob Schaffer (R-CO), Jim Hansen (R-Utah) and Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA).

Today, CNMI legislators are expected to hold discussion with congressional groups like the Western Caucus, Americans for Tax Reform and the Traditional Values Coalition.

On Tuesday, they met with Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyoming), a ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee which has oversight of the insular areas.

Mr. Fitial said they had discussed with him the conditions in the CNMI and the efforts the government is undertaking to boost the local economy, including labor and business reforms.

Mr. Thomas voted in favor of the Senate proposal seeking full extension of the federal immigration laws to the Northern Marianas, whose passage in the lower house is still uncertain as the CNMI has lobbied for its disapproval due to devastating impact on the island’s economy.

"We can tell that... he would be considering [our situation] and he would be supportive of our cause," said Mr. Fitial.
Aside from these policy-makers, the delegation also met with the editorial board of Washington Times, led by Helle Bering, in its headquarters.
All of the meetings were arranged by the Abramoff team. While Abramoff was not representing the CNMI government as a lobbyist, he was under contract representing their agenda through The Western Pacific Economic Council and Tan-owned industries who had hired him.

In October 2000, Rota Rep. Alejo Mendiola and Tinian Rep. Norman Palacios announced that that trip (orchestrated by Abramoff-Fitial) was a success. The Tribune Article reported:
Vice Speaker Alejo M. Mendiola, Jr. (R-Rota) and Rep. Norman S. Palacios (R-Tinian) announced yesterday that Rota and Tinian will benefit from the two special projects inserted in the Energy and Water appropriations bill signed into law Oct. 27 by President Clinton. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will begin the first phase of work to repair and improve ports on Tinian and Rota.

"There’s no question that each of these projects is sorely needed," said Rep. Palacios. "We asked Congress for help in advancing the needed appropriations when we were in Washington earlier this year. This is the result, which we owe to the advocacy of our friends in the House and Senate and to Speaker Ben Fitial, who led what-looking back on it-was a very successful delegation visit."

"Thanks to Speaker Benigno R. Fitial and our friends in Congress, we can remove the barrier to the resumption of flights, and allow Rota to take a major step forward in the expansion of our airport facilities," said Mr. Mendiola.
The new members of the alliance travelled quite a bit too. Fitial and Mendiola travelled together to the Annual Speaker's Conference in Tennessee in September 2000. In October the duo announced that they would be hosting an educator from Seattle Washington to discuss a new pilot program there. In October 2000 a delegation including Fitial, Mendiola, Palacios, other members of the legislature, and Governor Pedro Tenorio took a trip to Japan to recruit tourists and investors. Also on the trip were representatives from the business community: Saipan Chamber of Commerce Lynn Knight, HANMI President Ron Sablan, Strategic Economic Development Council Chair Scott Bowman, Aviation Committee Chair Bob Jones and MVA Board Chair Dave M. Sablan and Managing Director Perry Tenorio.

In January 2001, Governor Pedro P. Tenorio, Speaker Fitial, Vice Speaker Alejo M. Mendiola, Federal and Foreign Relations Committee chair Rep. Norman S. Palacios and Health and Welfare Committee chair Rep. Malua T. Peter flew again to Washington, DC this time for President Bush's Inauguration. It was during this time in DC that Abramoff arranged the photo of Fitial and President Bush.

In 2001 Fitial passed a House Resolution supporting continuing the contract of his friend Jack Abramoff. Governor Pedro Tenorio renewed the contract in July 2001.

The Fitial-Inos-Tan-Abramoff ties reach far back in time --as far back as the 1996. Jack Abramoff, his loyal members of Congress, CNMI officials, right-wing think tank representatives, and garment magnates did not just connect in Washington and in the CNMI. The 1996 Republican Convention held in San Diego, California from August 12th to the 15th was another gathering place where friendships would be forged and seeds would be sown.

Abramoff hosted Saipan garment magnate Willie Tan, his company executive, Benigno Fitial (former speaker of the CNMI House and present governor), and another Tan executive, Eloy Inos (currently lt. governor) at the convention.

Willie Tan, owner of Tan Holdings also was an Abramoff client, and he was a labor violator. He was charged with the largest labor settlement with the U.S. Dept. of Labor in U.S. history, paying $9 million in back wages to cheated workers. He also paid $76,000 in OSHA violations and pledged $1.3 million in factory renovations. Over the years many more labor cases would be filed against the company, including a case filed September 2008 against Tan Holdings by the EEOC.

It appears that the three CNMI visitors had a busy schedule at the GOP convention. Abramoff billed the CNMI for five days of meetings, meals, introductions to conservative members of Congress, and parties. Strategies were developed including plans to recruit still more potential CNMI-backers for junkets to the CNMI. From the billing records (emphasis added):
8/10/96 PP [Patrick Pizella] 2.70 Dinner meeting with W. Tan, E. Inos and B. Fitial re: CNMI issues—minimum wage , immigration and upcoming congressional elections and CNMI legislation; discussion re: upcoming trips of journalists and think tank representatives to CNMI and visits to Tan Holdings factory.
8/11/96 PP [Patrick Pizella] 4:30 Participate in event sponsored by Sen. Santorum's “FIGHT PAC” with W. Tan, E. Inos, B. Fitial and Senator Jim Jeffords (R-VT); follow-up luncheon/discussion with staff director of Senate Energy committee- G. Renkes; introduction of B. Fitial to Cong. Dan Burton (R-IN).
8/13/96 JA [Jack Abramoff] 4.00 Meetings at the Republican National Convention regarding Congressional Conservative Movement and Republican Party support for CNMI
8/13/96 JB [ Jonathan Blank ] 8:00 Meet with Saipan officials.
8/14/96 JA [Jack Abramoff] 4.00 Meetings at the Republican National Convention regarding Congressional Conservative Movement and Republican party support for CNMI
8/14/96 JA [Jack Abramoff] 8:00 Meet with Saipan officials.
8/15/96 JB [ Jonathan Blank ] 8:00 Meet with Saipan officials.
The CNMI government was billed a total of 39 hours for those meetings.

In exchange for all of the opportunities to network and gather support, John Pangelinian, Publisher of the Tan owned newspaper, The Saipan Tribune, made two $5,000 contributions to Santorum's Fight PAC in August 2006.

Fitial, Inos and Tan were the recipients of the infamous July 30, 1997 Secret Memo sent by Abramoff to outline their schemes to halt federalization. The plan included planting editorials and newspaper articles written by the lobbying team, writing speeches for members of Congress to read on the floor of the House, penning "Dear Colleague" letters, manipulating congressional hearings, defunding the Office of Insular Affairs, and getting "enemies" of the CNMI (federalization supporters) fired.

The Fitial-Inos-Tan-Abramoff connection lasted for many years and it continued even after Abramoff was indicted. In 2006, Fitial even sent a letter of support to the judge on behalf of close friend, Jack Abramoff, as a plea for leniency. From the letter:
With all that has been said and written about Jack Abramoff, I want you to know that to this day, despite his current difficulties, I continue to regard Jack as a close personal friend.
Three months before Fitial penned the letter to the judge proclaiming his friendship, he publicly denounced Abramoff and demanded that the estimated $11 million that the CNMI had spent on lobbying be returned to the CNMI by the lobbying firms. From the Saipan Tribune:
“Mr. Abramoff's criminal convictions appear to be negatively refocusing attention upon the Commonwealth. For years, the Commonwealth has diligently focused on reforming its labor system by cracking down on abuses and corruption,” the governor said.

“The scandal caused by Abramoff's actions has erased this progress by prompting some in U.S. Congress to declare that the Commonwealth maintains its unique status within the federal system as a result of Mr. Abramoff's acts of bribery and corruption,” he added.

Fitial said the lobby firms' association with Abramoff has put the CNMI in a bad position. The CNMI Attorney General's Office will also subpoena both lobby firms for records related to its dealings with the CNMI government, the governor said
Why would Fitial denounce Abramoff in January 2006 and write a letter to the judge proclaiming how great he was in March 2006? Maybe he feared Abramoff was going to rat him out and wrote the letter at Abramoff's request.

On February 15, 2007, the Marianas Variety reported that four FBI agents from the US arrived on Saipan to find out just what happened when Fitial became Speaker during the 12th Legislature. The paper reported:
Then-Reps. Norman S. Palacios and Alejo M. Mendiola had said they would support then-Rep. Heinz S. Hofschneider for the speakership but ended up voting for Fitial.
Palacios and Mendiola were persuaded by then-U.S. House Majority Whip Tom DeLay’s staffer Michael Scanlon and former chief of staff Ed Buckham to support Fitial.
Abramoff was one of DeLay’s closest friends.
After Fitial became speaker, the cash-strapped CNMI government renewed Abramoff’s contract.
It was DeLay who blocked congressional bills that would have federalized CNMI labor and immigration laws which the local garment industry also opposed.
Fitial, a former garment executive, has described Abramoff as his close friend.
It is a shame that so many officials, including Fitial, were not prosecuted for their criminal actions in the Abramoff scandal. Those who were not prosecuted continue their corrupt ways to the detriment  of the communities which they serve as "leaders."

Wishing you all a very blessed 
                       and joyous Easter!                                        
Easter 1958
Easter egg hunt 2011

Sablan Introduces Immigration Bill

April 21, 2011

Photo by W. L. Doromal ©2010
U.S. Congressional Delegate Gregorio (Kilili) Sablan introduced H.R. 1466 on April 8, 2011. The bill appears to have good intentions in that it seeks to provide some stability for certain foreigners during the transition period of federalization of immigration laws.  Still, I have several serious reservations about the legislation.

The bill only recognizes four specific groups as qualifying for upgraded status:
(I) was born in the Northern Mariana Islands between January 1, 1974, and January 9, 1978;
(II) was, on May 8, 2008, a permanent resident as that term is defined in section 4303 of Title 3 of the Northern Mariana Islands Commonwealth Code in effect on May 8, 2008;
(III) is the spouse or child, as defined in section 101(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(b)(1)), of an alien described in subclauses (I) or (II); or
(IV) was, on May 8, 2008, an immediate relative, as that term is defined in section 4303 of Title 3 of the Northern Mariana Islands Commonwealth Code in effect on May 8, 2008, of a United States citizen, not withstanding the age of the United States citizen, and continues to be such an immediate relative on the date of the application described under subparagraph (A).
Any immigration bill related to the long-term nonresident workers in the CNMI should address ALL of the long-term foreigner workers, not just selected groups. I agree with the upgrading of status for the CNMI permanent residents and those born in the CNMI January 1, 1974, and January 9, 1978, but object to the restrictions and selectiveness in the category of long-term foreign workers. Omitting certain categories of equally qualifying workers because of their marital status or reproductive status is discriminatory and perhaps unconstitutional. Is the delegate saying that people who are married or people who have U.S. citizen children are in some way more qualified to work and live permanently in the CNMI than foreigners who have lived and worked there the same length of time or longer and are single, or have foreign children or no children? I find that disturbing and unjust.

The legislation allows those selected-only nonresidents who resided in the CNMI as of November 28, 2009 to qualify for the improved status. If the legislation passes it would mean that even an alien who was in the CNMI even for a limited time would receive improved status and a person who has legally lived and worked in the CNMI for 30 years, but has no U.S. citizen spouse or children will be overlooked. That is plain wrong.

Another concern I have is the CNMI-only provision.  I interpret the CNRA as attempting to align the CNMI with U.S. immigration laws.  I believe it is unwise to provide special classification for certain territories and states and view this as a step backwards that conflicts with the intent of the law.

The proposed legislation would allow selected-only long-term workers to remain in the CNMI under a CNMI-residency status, but would prohibit travel to the United States.  It is as if the long-term workers will be bound to the islands to benefit the CNMI, in that the needed workforce will be ensured, but the workers will remain under a restricted status that would not apply in another place on U.S. soil.  The law recognizes that this status would cease if and when the alien's status is adjusted to permanent U.S. residency (green card) under the U.S. immigration laws.

I am certain that some will also note that some classes of nonresidents listed in this bill (those married to an IR and those with U.S. citizen children) would eventually qualify to become permanent residents.  Those married to IRs qualify to get green cards by completing the application process if they meet the income and other requirements. Because the CNMI has low minimum wage the fees should be waived.

I will submit a statement to the committee regarding my concerns and making recommendations for revisions.

Much Ado

April 20, 2011

Just what is the Fitial Administration up to now? Isn't it ironic that they can never completely answer an Open Government Act request, but have been very busy filing Freedom of Information Act requests to acquire documents that they were told months ago were no longer in existence?

The Marianas Variety reports that the Ombudsman's Office shredded the original documents that aliens completed when they registered there in December 2009 and January 2010. Of course, this is not news. We knew this last year. Kaipat was complaining about the registration before it happened and complaining to the press in September 2010, claiming that the registration was "fraud."

In May 2010 Governor Fitial's sent an extremely disingenuous seven-page letter with two appendices to Secretary Salazar attacking the DOI report and asking to have it withdrawn.  Some of the arguments within the letter and appendices were outright lies, others manipulated facts, and still others were unjustified attacks. The appendices, which appear to be written by DOL "volunteer" Deanne Siemer, made outlandish and nonfactual statements.  Many of the baseless statements echoed the same unfounded arguments used by the CNMI DOL and Siemer to support their dysfunctional system in previous letters and reports.

In a letter dated July 22, 2010, Secretary Salazar responded that the report fulfilled its obligation under the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 and it will not be withdrawn. He also noted:
As the Department entered upon this endeavor, the cooperation of your administration was sought by the Office of Insular Affairs, but denied. Thereafter, Department officials began to gather the information requested by the Congress by several means, which were utilized in the Report. In addition, the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Insular Affairs personally consulted with you on this Report before it was submitted for clearance.
Read the letter:



The Fitial Administration complained about the fact that documents were shredded in their 2010 DOL Annual Report that was written by Siemer and Kaipat. (Read my previous post, 2010 Labor report: More Lies, here.)

It is a joke that the Fitial Administration, including former deputy secretary of the Department of Labor Cinta Kaipat and DOL, complain that they couldn't get documents when they refused to share any CNMI data and statistics with the federal government for decades. In fact, the registration had to be conducted to meet the mandate of the CNRA because the CNMI government either refused to share the documents or withheld them hoping that it would delay the report and takeover.

Why would the CNMI government need this information? The ombudsman provided detailed charts that broke down the statistics to the specifics that were required by the CNRA.  That was the purpose of the registration; it was not conducted to please the Fitial Administration. The Fitial Administration incorrectly labeled the alien registration as an official census.

Both the DOL and CNMI Immigration claimed that they had accurate records of all foreigners in the CNMI.  At least this claim was made when it served their anti-federalization agenda. This was one argument in their anti-federalization lawsuit. They claimed that their system was so good, why have the federal government takeover?

Why would an ombudsman who is charged with assisting, protecting and representing the foreign workers give sensitive information to a government that has systematically abused them for decades? Why would the ombudsman turn over documents to officials that have publicly shouted hateful remarks to aliens; sponsored anti-alien rallies and motorcades on the CNMI's dime; and enacted oppressive laws?

What federal government law states that sensitive and privileged information that could be used to harm individuals has to be released? Physicians don't release medical records; attorneys don't release their privileged files. The ombudsman is an attorney and is acting as such to the office's clients, the foreigners in the CNMI.

Governor Fitial, Kaipat, Siemer and several attorneys slammed the ombudsman's registration and urged foreigners not to register.  They have never stopped complaining about it over a year later! In December 2009, CNMI officials and others who supported umbrella permits advised workers not to register with the ombudsman, creating confusion and division among workers and advocates.

This serves as another example of the Fitial Administration engaging in unethical behavior, and senseless accusations. If the CNMI officials had cooperated with the Federal Government in the first place and tuned over their statistics and data as they should have, then the ombudsman's tally would not have been necessary. The constant whining and complaints is getting old. Move on.

The Games Continue...

April 19, 2011

DOL Dismisses Cases

The CNMI Department of Labor ( DOL) announced that it has closed 403 appeals cases filed by foreign workers.

Closed? Doesn’t it mean dismissed, or is ignoring, or is pretending they are not there? What determines “closure” of cases? They got sick of issuing hearing dates?

The affected workers have "15 days from April 18th to appeal the decision." I guess the notices are published in newspapers, but not on the DOL website for some reason?

Anyone with an outstanding case, especially those who were victims of wage theft by criminal employers should appeal. It would be helpful if an attorney could file a class action to prevent the routine dismissal of cases. In fact, why hasn't the U.S. DOJ investigated why the DOL has routinely ignored employer violations to the detriment of the foreign workers? This is not something new in the CNMI.

Guard Pleads Guilty

As reported previously here, Tyron Fitial, the juvenile detention center guard who abused his office by allegedly sexually assaulting 3 female children, has plead guilty to enticement of a minor. He will be sentenced on July 21, 2011.

I hope he cooperates with the federal law enforcement officials, and may he be sentenced to the maximum time in federal prison.

 You can read the plea agreement here:



Misplaced Outrage?


Guam Governor Eddie Calvo expressed outrage that a delegation of U.S. Senators stopped to refuel in Guam on their way to Hong Kong and he wasn't invited to greet them. He issued a statement that sounded like a whine. It said in part:
Here is yet another compelling reason the Guam Legislature, Lt. Gov. Tenorio and I are working together to call for a vote of self-determination. We cannot continue on as a colony of the United States. We should either be a part of the U.S., with voting membership in the House and Senate and the right to vote for President, or we should govern ourselves. This is a message we will share with U.S. Senators Jim Webb and Carl Levin when they visit with us next week. At least these gentlemen have the consideration and decency to meet with their fellow Americans in Guam.
(Read the entire statement here.)

Of course, CNMI officials weighed in to express their views saying that the oversight was a "snub."

Seriously? The plane stopped on Guam only to refuel for a very short time. The island's own U.S. Delegate Madeleine Bordallo knew about the visit.

Snubbed? Doubtful. More likely that the so-called snub is another complaint by discontent officials that are calling to "re-examine" the political relationship between the U.S. and the CNMI and/or Guam. By all means re-examine.

Death Threat Results in Arrest

April 19, 2011

Rabby Syed at CNMI Senate Hearing, Photo by Itos Feliciano
An arrest has been made in the case of the 22-year-old man who made gruesome death threats against worker advocate Rabby Syed and his family in February 2011. Joaquin H. Tenorio was charged with assault and battery and disturbing the peace.  His hearing will be May 9, 2011.

The death threat was made against the worker leader and his family after the United Workers Movement rally in support of green cards and a pathway to citizenship for long term foreign workers. Because the caller disagreed with nonresidents fighting for their political and social rights, fighting to be lifted out of indentured servitude, fighting to be treated as humans rather than as labor units, and fighting for respect and dignity, he threatened an innocent person and his family causing them much suffering.

The threat was made from a phone traced to the terrorist's aunt's house. In the conversation he threatened to chop off Rabby's hands and feet, and to kill his family. Rabby put the call on speaker phone and a witness also heard and verified the threat.  She took the phone and spoke to the terrorist in Chammoro.  He hung up.

Later the caller and his aunt called Rabby to convince him not to pursue legal action, attempting to apologize away the threat. That call was taped and revealed disturbing information about the incident and motive.

The action taken by the CNMI Office of the Attorney General is a positive sign that the local law enforcement is doing their job.  Many cases committed against foreign workers or their advocates have historically been ignored and never prosecuted, so it is a welcome sign that this case was investigated and an arrest has been made.

Still the racist and poisonous attitude perpetuated by officials and leaders must stop. There is a climate of anti-worker sentiment in the CNMI community that is supported by the current Administration, elected leaders and people in the community who possess power and money.

The Marianas Variety and Saipan Tribune both published the story of the threat.  Comments on the Marianas Variety story revealed a racist and mean-spirited attitude that is poisoning the community and fueling a xenophobic attitude. Some commenters excused the person who threatened to dismember and kill another human being and his family, and then suggested that Rabby made up this story!  This shows the depth of the hatred in the CNMI community. It is a sad commentary. (Read about it here.)

Hopefully, the arrest will serve as a warning to others that such senseless and harmful actions will result in consequences.

Fight for Preservation

April 16, 2011

A temporary victory to preserve the natural beauty of Marpi, a historic and scenic landmark, was issued by Superior Court Associate Judge Kenneth Govendo.

The Friends of Marpi filed a lawsuit to stop the construction of huge power poles that are supposedly being erected to provide power to a public cemetery and Veteran's Cemetery in the area. Judge Govendo issued a restraining order until April 29th when an evidentiary hearing will be held.

The defendants in the lawsuit are the CNMI government, Coastal Resources Management, CRM director Rita Chong, Department of Community and Cultural Affairs, Historic Preservation Office, Office of the Governor, Capital Improvements Projects Office, CIP director Virginia Villagomez, CUC, and Department of Community and Cultural Affairs Secretary Melvin Faisao.

The Friends of Marpi group includes members Ruth Tighe, Tina Sablan, Glen Hunter, and Suzy Kindle. They are represented by attorney David Banes. A petition to stop the construction of the poles was launched on March 29, 2011.

The lawsuit stated that the CNMI government installed power poles in the area recognized as a U.S. national historic landmark without conducting a public hearing.

CNMI AG Buckingham refused to comment except to say that such "cases are best tried in a courtroom and not in the media," according to the Saipan Tribune.

The Saipan Tribune reported that an alternative power source was not considered even though the Marianas Visitors Authority opposed the construction. Underground wires, wind or solar generated power could be used as alternatives. Proposals by concerned citizens, including Ruth Tighe and Tina Sablan were ignored or dismissed.

Marpi is a scenic and much-visited tourist area that includes Banzai and Suicide Cliffs, World War II memorials, the Grotto, and views of Bird Island. It is breathtakingly gorgeous, and one of less than 2,500 sites designated as a National Historic Landmark. I am surprised that the project, funded by Capital Improvement Project funds, was approved.

It seems ridiculous the scar such a beautiful area with unsightly power poles when there are so many alternatives. This action is the perfect example of the message in the song, Take Paradise and Put up a Parking Lot.

It is suggested that the power poles are a sign that development in the pristine area is sure to follow. Tina Sablan was quoted by the Marianas Variety as stating that the poles are a sign of future commercialization of the area:
“The more we learn about the power pole project currently underway in Marpi, the more we are convinced that it is about so much more than just electrifying a few lights and water pumps for the public cemetery."
Sign the petition to oppose the construction HERE.

Final Form I-9 Rule Released

April 15, 2011

There is a rumor that the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Transitional Worker Program Final Rule has been issued. It has not been issued. 

A final rule with changes to Form I-9, which is a form used in all of the United States for hiring was issued yesterday, Friday April 14th.

The rule is intended to improve the integrity of the Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9 process.

The USCIS stated in their press release:
The main changes made by the interim rule and adopted by the final rule include: prohibiting employers from accepting expired documents; revising the list of acceptable documents by removing outdated documents and making technical amendments; and adding documentation applicable to certain citizens of the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

Employers must complete Form I-9 for all newly hired employees to verify their identity and authorization to work in the United States. The list of acceptable documents that employees may present to verify their identity and employment authorization is divided into three sections: List A documents, which show identity and employment authorization; List B documents, which show identity only; and List C documents, which show employment authorization only.
The rule gives examples of what documentation an employer can use to verify employment eligibility including documents specific to the CNMI.

Questions and Answers for CNMI Employers and Employees Regarding the Form I-9 from the USCIS Handbook:
Questions about the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)
The following questions and answers apply to employers and employees located in the CNMI only. 
Q. What is Form I-9 CNMI?
A. Form I-9 CNMI is a version of Form I-9 designated for use only in the CNMI by CNMI employers for their new hires on or after November 28, 2009. Form I-9 CNMI allows for the use of several types of employment authorization documentation that are unique to the CNMI, in addition to those acceptable in other parts of the United States. Form I-9 CNMI requirements apply to ALL new employees hired on or after November 28, 2009, regardless of citizenship.

Q. Do I need to complete Form I-9 CNMI for my current employees?
A. You only need to complete Form I-9 CNMI for employees hired on or after November 28, 2009. You should not complete Form I-9 CNMI for any employees already working for you on November 27, 2009, even if you assign them new job responsibilities within your company.

To obtain Forms I-9 CNMI, call the USCIS Forms Request Line toll-free at (800) 870-3676 or download Forms I-9 CNMI at www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9_cnmi.pdf For more information on federal immigration law in the CNMI, go to www.uscis.gov/CNMI.

Q. What documentation may be used to complete Form I-9 CNMI?
A. In addition to the acceptable documentation generally provided for Form I-9 use, the following documents may be used on or before November 27, 2011 as evidence of identity and employment authorization to satisfy Form I-9 CNMI requirements: 
• An unexpired foreign passport and an Alien Entry Permit with red band issued to the individual by the CNMI Office of the Attorney General, Division of Immigration, before November 28, 2009 as long as the period of employment authorization has not yet expired;
• An unexpired foreign passport and Temporary Work Authorization Letter (including an umbrella permit as discussed further below) issued by the CNMI Department of Labor before November 28, 2009, and containing the name and photograph of the individual, as long as the period of employment authorization has not yet expired and the proposed employment is not in conflict with any restrictions or limitations identified on the Temporary Work Authorization Letter; or
• An unexpired foreign passport and a permanent resident card issued by the CNMI government.

Q. Is an umbrella permit acceptable documentationof employment authorization for Form I-9 CNMI?
A. An umbrella permit is the common name for several types of Transition Conditional permits issued by the CNMI Department of Labor (CNMI DOL) or the CNMI Department of Commerce. To be evidence of employment authorization for Form I-9 CNMI, an umbrella permit must state on its face that it authorizes employment. The CNMI government widely issued umbrella permits shortly before the November 28, 2009, transition to federal immigration law. DHS is currently aware of the following types of umbrella permits:
• Category 240K Foreign National Worker Permit, which authorizes the permit holder to work for any private sector employer in the CNMI until November 27, 2011.
• Category 240D Immediate Relative Permit (immediate relative of U.S. citizen), which authorizes the permit holder to work for any employer in the CNMI until November 27, 2011.
• Category 240G, 240N, 240O Investment and Business Permit, which authorizes the permit holder to work for any employer in the CNMI until November 27, 2011.
• Category 240H Foreign Student, which authorizes the permit holder to work for any
employer in the CNMI until November 27, 2011.
• Category 240B CNMI Government Permit, which authorizes the permit holder to work for the CNMI government until November 27, 2011.
• Category 240E Immediate Relative Permit (immediate relative of sponsoring alien), which does not provide for employment authorization and, therefore, is not an acceptable document for Form I-9 CNMI. Holders of this permit are not authorized to work in the CNMI unless they have another basis for employment authorization. 
Umbrella permits have the seal of the CNMI DOL at the upper right. The letterheads vary: CNMI DOL (for Category 240K); CNMI Department of Commerce (for categories 240G, 240N, 240O, and 240H); or CNMI Division of Immigration (for categories 240D and 240E). The umbrella permit must contain the employee’s name and photograph. 
Employees who present an umbrella permit for Form I-9 CNMI must also present an unexpired foreign passport. These two documents are considered List A documentation of identity and employment authorization. 
Q. As an employer, may I demand that my new employee present his or her umbrella permit when completing Form I-9 CNMI?
A. No. The employee may present any acceptable document or document combination, as described in the Form I-9 CNMI instructions. The documents must reasonably appear on their face to be genuine and to relate to the individual. Employers who require employees to present specific Form I-9 CNMI documents may be committing an unfair immigration-related employment practice under section 274B of the INA, which may result in fines and penalties, as well as possible back pay for victims of discrimination.
For more information on employment discrimination, please see Part 4. 
Q. My employee’s umbrella permit has two dates. Which one controls the length of that employee’s employment authorization?
A. Holders of umbrella permits authorizing employment may work until November 27, 2011, even if the permit contains two dates. Umbrella permits contain a date with the legend “Next filing date to avoid revocation.” They also state that the permit is without effect after November 27, 2011. If these two dates are different, the holder of the umbrella permit is authorized to work in the CNMI until November 27, 2011. When completing Form I-9 CNMI, if an employee changes employers, the date Nov. 27, 2011 should be used as the expiration date for employment authorization in Section 1 of the form and as the document expiration date in Section 2 of the form.

Q. As a CNMI employer, do I need to obtain CNMI DOL approval to hire an umbrella permit holder?
A. No. Federal law does not require you to obtain CNMI DOL approval to hire an individual with an umbrella permit in the CNMI. Your new employee must fully complete Section 1 of the Form I-9 CNMI no later than the date that he or she begins work, and you must examine the employee’s documentation and complete Section 2 of the Form I-9 within three business days after the date the employee begins work. 
Q. What should my employee do if his or her umbrella permit has been lost, stolen, or damaged?
A. DHS cannot replace an umbrella permit for that employee. That employee should contact the CNMI DOL regarding its procedures for replacement of umbrella permits that have been lost, stolen, or damaged. Under Form I-9 CNMI procedures, a receipt for an application for the replacement document is acceptable evidence of employment authorization for a period of up to 90 days. The employee must present the replacement document within that time period.
The Form I-9 CNMI Employment Eligibility Verification

President Obama's Deficit Plan Revealed

April 13, 2011

Photo by AP
President Obama revealed his plan to reduce the federal deficit in a speech he made this afternoon at George Washington University. After months of crazy budget battles, it was refreshing to hear a sane voice.

The President highlighted the contrast between his plan and the Republican plan that would "lead to a fundamentally different America than the one that we've known."

I was struck by the fact that he recognized the class war fueled by the Republican Party.  He criticized the Republicans for their plan to give the rich tax cuts on the backs of the poor and middle class:
"The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.

The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know."
Here is the text of the speech:

Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery

The Country We Believe In

The George Washington University

Washington, D.C.

April 13, 2011

As Prepared for Delivery—

Good afternoon. It’s great to be back at GW. I want you to know that one of the reasons I kept the government open was so I could be here today with all of you. I wanted to make sure you had one more excuse to skip class. You’re welcome.

Of course, what we’ve been debating here in Washington for the last few weeks will affect your lives in ways that are potentially profound. This debate over budgets and deficits is about more than just numbers on a page, more than just cutting and spending. It’s about the kind of future we want. It’s about the kind of country we believe in. And that’s what I want to talk about today.

From our first days as a nation, we have put our faith in free markets and free enterprise as the engine of America’s wealth and prosperity. More than citizens of any other country, we are rugged individualists, a self-reliant people with a healthy skepticism of too much government.

But there has always been another thread running throughout our history – a belief that we are all connected; and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation. We believe, in the words of our first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, that through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves. And so we’ve built a strong military to keep us secure, and public schools and universities to educate our citizens. We’ve laid down railroads and highways to facilitate travel and commerce. We’ve supported the work of scientists and researchers whose discoveries have saved lives, unleashed repeated technological revolutions, and led to countless new jobs and entire industries. Each of us has benefitted from these investments, and we are a more prosperous country as a result.

Part of this American belief that we are all connected also expresses itself in a conviction that each one of us deserves some basic measure of security. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, hard times or bad luck, a crippling illness or a layoff, may strike any one of us. “There but for the grace of God go I,” we say to ourselves, and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities. We are a better country because of these commitments. I’ll go further – we would not be a great country without those commitments.

For much of the last century, our nation found a way to afford these investments and priorities with the taxes paid by its citizens. As a country that values fairness, wealthier individuals have traditionally born a greater share of this burden than the middle class or those less fortunate. This is not because we begrudge those who’ve done well – we rightly celebrate their success. Rather, it is a basic reflection of our belief that those who have benefitted most from our way of life can afford to give a bit more back. Moreover, this belief has not hindered the success of those at the top of the income scale, who continue to do better and better with each passing year.

Now, at certain times – particularly during periods of war or recession – our nation has had to borrow money to pay for some of our priorities. And as most families understand, a little credit card debt isn’t going to hurt if it’s temporary.

But as far back as the 1980s, America started amassing debt at more alarming levels, and our leaders began to realize that a larger challenge was on the horizon. They knew that eventually, the Baby Boom generation would retire, which meant a much bigger portion of our citizens would be relying on programs like Medicare, Social Security, and possibly Medicaid. Like parents with young children who know they have to start saving for the college years, America had to start borrowing less and saving more to prepare for the retirement of an entire generation.

To meet this challenge, our leaders came together three times during the 1990s to reduce our nation’s deficit. They forged historic agreements that required tough decisions made by the first President Bush and President Clinton; by Democratic Congresses and a Republican Congress. All three agreements asked for shared responsibility and shared sacrifice, but they largely protected the middle class, our commitments to seniors, and key investments in our future.

As a result of these bipartisan efforts, America’s finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers.

But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program – but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts – tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.

To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our national checkbook, consider this: in the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.

Of course, that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more. In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pockets. It was the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.

So that’s how our fiscal challenge was created. This is how we got here. And now that our economic recovery is gaining strength, Democrats and Republicans must come together and restore the fiscal responsibility that served us so well in the 1990s. We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit, and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt. And we have to do it in a way that protects the recovery, and protects the investments we need to grow, create jobs, and win the future.

Now, before I get into how we can achieve this goal, some of you might be wondering, “Why is this so important? Why does this matter to me?”

Here’s why. Even after our economy recovers, our government will still be on track to spend more money than it takes in throughout this decade and beyond. That means we’ll have to keep borrowing more from countries like China. And that means more of your tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on all the loans we keep taking out. By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion. Just the interest payments.

Then, as the Baby Boomers start to retire and health care costs continue to rise, the situation will get even worse. By 2025, the amount of taxes we currently pay will only be enough to finance our health care programs, Social Security, and the interest we owe on our debt. That’s it. Every other national priority – education, transportation, even national security – will have to be paid for with borrowed money.

Ultimately, all this rising debt will cost us jobs and damage our economy. It will prevent us from making the investments we need to win the future. We won’t be able to afford good schools, new research, or the repair of roads and bridges – all the things that will create new jobs and businesses here in America. Businesses will be less likely to invest and open up shop in a country that seems unwilling or unable to balance its books. And if our creditors start worrying that we may be unable to pay back our debts, it could drive up interest rates for everyone who borrows money – making it harder for businesses to expand and hire, or families to take out a mortgage.

The good news is, this doesn’t have to be our future. This doesn’t have to be the country we leave to our children. We can solve this problem. We came together as Democrats and Republicans to meet this challenge before, and we can do it again.

But that starts by being honest about what’s causing our deficit. You see, most Americans tend to dislike government spending in the abstract, but they like the stuff it buys. Most of us, regardless of party affiliation, believe that we should have a strong military and a strong defense. Most Americans believe we should invest in education and medical research. Most Americans think we should protect commitments like Social Security and Medicare. And without even looking at a poll, my finely honed political skills tell me that almost no one believes they should be paying higher taxes.

Because all this spending is popular with both Republicans and Democrats alike, and because nobody wants to pay higher taxes, politicians are often eager to feed the impression that solving the problem is just a matter of eliminating waste and abuse –that tackling the deficit issue won’t require tough choices. Or they suggest that we can somehow close our entire deficit by eliminating things like foreign aid, even though foreign aid makes up about 1% of our entire budget.

So here’s the truth. Around two-thirds of our budget is spent on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and national security. Programs like unemployment insurance, student loans, veterans’ benefits, and tax credits for working families take up another 20%. What’s left, after interest on the debt, is just 12 percent for everything else. That’s 12 percent for all of our other national priorities like education and clean energy; medical research and transportation; food safety and keeping our air and water clean.

Up until now, the cuts proposed by a lot of folks in Washington have focused almost exclusively on that 12%. But cuts to that 12% alone won’t solve the problem. So any serious plan to tackle our deficit will require us to put everything on the table, and take on excess spending wherever it exists in the budget. A serious plan doesn’t require us to balance our budget overnight – in fact, economists think that with the economy just starting to grow again, we will need a phased-in approach – but it does require tough decisions and support from leaders in both parties. And above all, it will require us to choose a vision of the America we want to see five and ten and twenty years down the road.

One vision has been championed by Republicans in the House of Representatives and embraced by several of their party’s presidential candidates. It’s a plan that aims to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, and one that addresses the challenge of Medicare and Medicaid in the years after that.

Those are both worthy goals for us to achieve. But the way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we’ve known throughout most of our history.

A 70% cut to clean energy. A 25% cut in education. A 30% cut in transportation. Cuts in college Pell Grants that will grow to more than $1,000 per year. That’s what they’re proposing. These aren’t the kind of cuts you make when you’re trying to get rid of some waste or find extra savings in the budget. These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed. These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in. And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.

It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them. Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities. South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science. Brazil is investing billions in new infrastructure and can run half their cars not on high-priced gasoline, but biofuels. And yet, we are presented with a vision that says the United States of America – the greatest nation on Earth – can’t afford any of this.

It’s a vision that says America can’t afford to keep the promise we’ve made to care for our seniors. It says that ten years from now, if you’re a 65 year old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today. It says instead of guaranteed health care, you will get a voucher. And if that voucher isn’t worth enough to buy insurance, tough luck – you’re on your own. Put simply, it ends Medicare as we know it.

This is a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit. And who are those 50 million Americans? Many are someone’s grandparents who wouldn’t be able afford nursing home care without Medicaid. Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome. Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.

Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.

The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know.

The America I know is generous and compassionate; a land of opportunity and optimism. We take responsibility for ourselves and each other; for the country we want and the future we share. We are the nation that built a railroad across a continent and brought light to communities shrouded in darkness. We sent a generation to college on the GI bill and saved millions of seniors from poverty with Social Security and Medicare. We have led the world in scientific research and technological breakthroughs that have transformed millions of lives.

This is who we are. This is the America I know. We don’t have to choose between a future of spiraling debt and one where we forfeit investments in our people and our country. To meet our fiscal challenge, we will need to make reforms. We will all need to make sacrifices. But we do not have to sacrifice the America we believe in. And as long as I’m President, we won’t.

Today, I’m proposing a more balanced approach to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years. It’s an approach that borrows from the recommendations of the bipartisan Fiscal Commission I appointed last year, and builds on the roughly $1 trillion in deficit reduction I already proposed in my 2012 budget. It’s an approach that puts every kind of spending on the table, but one that protects the middle-class, our promise to seniors, and our investments in the future.

The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years. We will make the tough cuts necessary to achieve these savings, including in programs I care about, but I will not sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs. We’ll invest in medical research and clean energy technology. We’ll invest in new roads and airports and broadband access. We will invest in education and job training. We will do what we need to compete and we will win the future.

The second step in our approach is to find additional savings in our defense budget. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than protecting our national security, and I will never accept cuts that compromise our ability to defend our homeland or America’s interests around the world. But as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, has said, the greatest long-term threat to America’s national security is America’s debt.

Just as we must find more savings in domestic programs, we must do the same in defense. Over the last two years, Secretary Gates has courageously taken on wasteful spending, saving $400 billion in current and future spending. I believe we can do that again. We need to not only eliminate waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness, but conduct a fundamental review of America’s missions, capabilities, and our role in a changing world. I intend to work with Secretary Gates and the Joint Chiefs on this review, and I will make specific decisions about spending after it’s complete.

The third step in our approach is to further reduce health care spending in our budget. Here, the difference with the House Republican plan could not be clearer: their plan lowers the government’s health care bills by asking seniors and poor families to pay them instead. Our approach lowers the government’s health care bills by reducing the cost of health care itself.

Already, the reforms we passed in the health care law will reduce our deficit by $1 trillion. My approach would build on these reforms. We will reduce wasteful subsidies and erroneous payments. We will cut spending on prescription drugs by using Medicare’s purchasing power to drive greater efficiency and speed generic brands of medicine onto the market. We will work with governors of both parties to demand more efficiency and accountability from Medicaid. We will change the way we pay for health care – not by procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services seniors need.

Now, we believe the reforms we’ve proposed to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid will enable us to keep these commitments to our citizens while saving us $500 billion by 2023, and an additional one trillion dollars in the decade after that. And if we’re wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare.

But let me be absolutely clear: I will preserve these health care programs as a promise we make to each other in this society. I will not allow Medicare to become a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance industry, with a shrinking benefit to pay for rising costs. I will not tell families with children who have disabilities that they have to fend for themselves. We will reform these programs, but we will not abandon the fundamental commitment this country has kept for generations.

That includes, by the way, our commitment to Social Security. While Social Security is not the cause of our deficit, it faces real long-term challenges in a country that is growing older. As I said in the State of the Union, both parties should work together now to strengthen Social Security for future generations. But we must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.

The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code. In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans. But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.

Beyond that, the tax code is also loaded up with spending on things like itemized deductions. And while I agree with the goals of many of these deductions, like homeownership or charitable giving, we cannot ignore the fact that they provide millionaires an average tax break of $75,000 while doing nothing for the typical middle-class family that doesn’t itemize.

My budget calls for limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2% of Americans – a reform that would reduce the deficit by $320 billion over ten years. But to reduce the deficit, I believe we should go further. That’s why I’m calling on Congress to reform our individual tax code so that it is fair and simple – so that the amount of taxes you pay isn’t determined by what kind of accountant you can afford. I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the Fiscal Commission’s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there is enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit. And as I called for in the State of the Union, we should reform our corporate tax code as well, to make our businesses and our economy more competitive.

This is my approach to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next twelve years. It’s an approach that achieves about $2 trillion in spending cuts across the budget. It will lower our interest payments on the debt by $1 trillion. It calls for tax reform to cut about $1 trillion in spending from the tax code. And it achieves these goals while protecting the middle class, our commitment to seniors, and our investments in the future.

In the coming years, if the recovery speeds up and our economy grows faster than our current projections, we can make even greater progress than I have pledged here. But just to hold Washington – and me – accountable and make sure that the debt burden continues to decline, my plan includes a debt failsafe. If, by 2014, our debt is not projected to fall as a share of the economy – or if Congress has failed to act – my plan will require us to come together and make up the additional savings with more spending cuts and more spending reductions in the tax code. That should be an incentive for us to act boldly now, instead of kicking our problems further down the road.

So this is our vision for America – a vision where we live within our means while still investing in our future; where everyone makes sacrifices but no one bears all the burden; where we provide a basic measure of security for our citizens and rising opportunity for our children.

Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach. Some will argue we shouldn’t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans. It’s just an article of faith for them. I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don’t need another tax cut. Warren Buffett doesn’t need another tax cut. Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. Or by cutting kids from Head Start. Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn’t be here without. That some of you wouldn’t be here without. And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me. They want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them. Washington just hasn’t asked them to.

Others will say that we shouldn’t even talk about cutting spending until the economy is fully recovered. I’m sympathetic to this view, which is one of the reasons I supported the payroll tax cuts we passed in December. It’s also why we have to use a scalpel and not a machete to reduce the deficit – so that we can keep making the investments that create jobs. But doing nothing on the deficit is just not an option. Our debt has grown so large that we could do real damage to the economy if we don’t begin a process now to get our fiscal house in order.

Finally, there are those who believe we shouldn’t make any reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security out of a fear that any talk of change to these programs will usher in the sort of radical steps that House Republicans have proposed. I understand these fears. But I guarantee that if we don’t make any changes at all, we won’t be able to keep our commitments to a retiring generation that will live longer and face higher health care costs than those who came before.

Indeed, to those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.

Of course, there are those who will simply say that there’s no way we can come together and agree on a solution to this challenge. They’ll say the politics of this city are just too broken; that the choices are just too hard; that the parties are just too far apart. And after a few years in this job, I certainly have some sympathy for this view.

But I also know that we’ve come together and met big challenges before. Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill came together to save Social Security for future generations. The first President Bush and a Democratic Congress came together to reduce the deficit. President Clinton and a Republican Congress battled each other ferociously and still found a way to balance the budget. In the last few months, both parties have come together to pass historic tax relief and spending cuts. And I know there are Republicans and Democrats in Congress who want to see a balanced approach to deficit reduction.

I believe we can and must come together again. This morning, I met with Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress to discuss the approach I laid out today. And in early May, the Vice President will begin regular meetings with leaders in both parties with the aim of reaching a final agreement on a plan to reduce the deficit by the end of June.

I don’t expect the details in any final agreement to look exactly like the approach I laid out today. I’m eager to hear other ideas from all ends of the political spectrum. And though I’m sure the criticism of what I’ve said here today will be fierce in some quarters, and my critique of the House Republican approach has been strong, Americans deserve and will demand that we all bridge our differences, and find common ground.

This larger debate we’re having, about the size and role of government, has been with us since our founding days. And during moments of great challenge and change, like the one we’re living through now, the debate gets sharper and more vigorous. That’s a good thing. As a country that prizes both our individual freedom and our obligations to one another, this is one of the most important debates we can have.

But no matter what we argue or where we stand, we’ve always held certain beliefs as Americans. We believe that in order to preserve our own freedoms and pursue our own happiness, we can’t just think about ourselves. We have to think about the country that made those liberties possible. We have to think about our fellow citizens with whom we share a community. And we have to think about what’s required to preserve the American Dream for future generations.

This sense of responsibility – to each other and to our country – this isn’t a partisan feeling. It isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea. It’s patriotism.

The other day I received a letter from a man in Florida. He started off by telling me he didn’t vote for me and he hasn’t always agreed with me. But even though he’s worried about our economy and the state of our politics, he said,

“I still believe. I believe in that great country that my grandfather told me about. I believe that somewhere lost in this quagmire of petty bickering on every news station, the ‘American Dream’ is still alive…

We need to use our dollars here rebuilding, refurbishing and restoring all that our ancestors struggled to create and maintain…We as a people must do this together, no matter the color of the state one comes from or the side of the aisle one might sit on.”

I still believe as well. And I know that if we can come together, and uphold our responsibilities to one another and to this larger enterprise that is America, we will keep the dream of our founding alive in our time, and pass on to our children the country we believe in. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

###