Our immigration woes

The United States was founded by immigrants, people who were not, originally, from America. Even the Native Americans, the Algonquin, the Winnebago, the Apache, the Navajo, the Hopi, did not discover America.

Historians say that these people we called Native Americans, came from Asia via the Bering Strait. Even the name “America” was given to the land by the Italians honoring Americus Vespucci. I say they were all migrants.

Even our indigenous Chamoru came from Asia, so I was told. Immigration. Emigration. Migrant. Emigrant. What are these related words and definitions that got us fuming against the United States for coming here and snatching our immigration system from us?

So I ask what is emigration? Well, emigration is that group of people leaving their native country to settle in a new country. And what is immigration? Immigration is a group of people arriving in a country foreign to them.

And what is migrant? Migrants are people moving periodically from one region to another in search of work. Why do people leaving their country, like leaving Nepal to come to Saipan, Hawaii, mainland U.S.A, etc.? I guess the motivating force for immigration was privation and persecution. To escape adverse conditions in their country of origin. To look for a better quality of life, or to join their families already settled elsewhere.

Immigration has always been difficult. People leave their properties, absorb enormous travel expenses, leave the old job and friends, etc. At the new found place, they also find it a bit difficult. Look for a job, an abode, be a migrant worker, face racism, learn the new language, etc.

That’s why South Americans leave their homes to go to U.S. in search of better wages and other better opportunities than what they left behind. I would assume that’s why the CWs find it hard to leave Saipan which can be a stepping stone to a better life on Guam, Hawaii, or the mainland. In Hawaii and Fremont, California, alone, there are more than 100,000 Filipinos working in like Walmart, J.C. Pennys, Starbuck, etc. In Fremont once, a Filipino was elected mayor of that city.

Now Donald Trump’s campaign plank, immigration, is to prevent illegal entries through strict immigration guidelines, including banning entries of travelers from several Muslim countries. The high Rio Grande wall, stretching from San Diego to Brownsville is to ascertain security along the U.S. southern border, thus, preventing thousands undocumented workers from “stealing” jobs from ordinary Americans. Some people are just merciless and unforgiving.

Sounds idealistic but in the 21st century, economies around the world are inter-dependent on each other. This includes a major factor in any economy, people. Most companies that employ people do understand about economics. It’s a do-or-die scenario. They will always find ways to reduce their costs, add overheads that drive up prices, while reducing the company’s profits. This is the essence behind maintaining a sensible workforce with manageable wages. Not too long ago, our garment industry knew that by using cheap labor from China ($3.05/hour), they were able to not only export to the U.S., but compete and beat garment companies in the U.S. who were paying their employees a lot more than $3.05/hour. The retail outlets and garment companies saved on their costs and made a killing in profits. This unfortunately led to the uproar by the garment industry in the mainland U.S.A., which got congressional attention and the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 became reality. In reality, the garment industry here competed with the garment industry in the mainland by putting up products here, which were a lot cheaper than those in the mainland. This resulted in demonstrations in Seattle and San Francisco in front of the big-named retail outlets selling garments made here.

WTO was also a target of the demonstration. At one of the demonstrations in Seattle, U.S. Congressman G. Miller from Concord was in the frontline supporting the demonstration. So the domino effect sets the downfall of our greatest economic source, the garment industry. Complaints about contract workers mistreatments, labor law abuses, overstay, immigration law abuses, fenced-in of employees compound, including the detention and rape of a Filipina on Rota for about three weeks, against her will, all funneled in to give U.S. Congress and certain federal government agencies reasons to intrude into our Commonwealth and to take control of the immigration functions.

All these complaints about abuses, left and right, accumulated, and we lost control of our immigration system. The garment industry on Saipan was no longer viable and as it drew down we stood by and watched, helpless and quiet. What followed were abandoned buildings and lost revenues as our economy bottomed out. Fast forward to the present date. We are now at the mercy of the federal government because it controls our immigration. These labor abuses and immigration rules and laws violation are not new. They have existed since before 1990s. At that time, newly-elected governor Froilan Tenorio and Washington delegate John N. Babauta appeared before the Senate Sub-Committee on Mineral Resources Development and Production, chaired by Sen. Dan Akaka of Hawaii, and tried to defend the CNMI against a multitude of accusations of abuses and violations. Sub-committee Chairman Akaka told the two CNMI officials that if the promised reform failed, then the committee would go in and take over the immigration function.

I ask now, have we stopped abuses of employees, which we were being accused of committing? I cannot ask about the immigration reform progress because it’s gone. The U.S. did come and did take over the immigration function. And I ask why did the U.S. do that? Immigration function is ours. We told the U.S. we were keeping it. Now, look at what’s happening. We are being forced to contend with the CW program’s bureaucratic application process, its caps and the 2019 scheduled termination date of the program. What does that mean? Unless the federal government softens its view and caves in to return the immigration function, and the CW program, all of the CW1 workers and their CW2 family members will leave, thousands of them, breaking up families in the process. However, remember that children born here of alien workers are U.S. citizens, and their alien parents become Immediate Relative. So the familial integrity remains because of their change of circumstances. These IRs don’t have to leave. That issue was clarified before Sen. Akaka’s subcommittee back in 1990s, and by GAO and DOJ. Now, if there is a wholesale exit of CWs, many local projects may not be finished or even get off the ground. Much of life that locals now take for granted may disappear—trash collection, bottled water delivery, restaurant F&B, nurses, and CUC-CWs and other services, down to zero, unless they can be replaced now.

Economy-wise, people contribute directly to our economy through income taxes, and indirectly when they go shopping, pay for gas, pay CUC, medical treatment, etc. Just like anywhere else, whenever a substantial number of consumers leaves, revenues decline, the revenue source is gone. Operations downsize, employees may get their walking papers. There may be an immediate drops in revenue which means payroll may be missed, slow services, and the millions (billion plus dollars is more like it) will not be paid while the liabilities skyrocket with interest. End result—missed payroll means substantial bankruptcies on loans, and foreclosure notices issued and “Ripos” visit by financial lending institutions. Bankruptcy? We may not be able to avoid it. So, how do we prevent these from happening? First, let’s try and take the immigration system back. The system belongs to us, even today. How so? We never let it go. We did not include that in the political status negotiation. We told the U.S. negotiators we wanted to retain “immigration,” and the U.S. negotiators agreed and both houses of the U.S. Congress were made aware of it, and they agreed. Froilan Tenorio’s and John N. Babauta’s persuasions were good enough. So, immigration was not on the negotiation table. That’s why our Covenant does not show anything to the contrary. So, in all seriousness, the immigration system is ours ab initio.

Now, on the CW progress, let’s hope that the U.S. Congress acts favorably on Kilili’s bill to increase the CW program cap from 12,998 to 15,000. Bad news though—Kilili’s bill was for FY 2017. It should ask for a longer than 12-month period, and a higher cap with explicit language for an extension of the CW program itself. We should also ask Congress to repeal S.2739 of U.S. Public Law 110-229. Congress has total jurisdiction on immigration. The Executive Branch agencies are just enforcers. So we should approach the proper congressional committee and sub-committee and present our best persuasive reasons for asking the return of our immigration system. Governor Froilan Tenorio and Washington delegate John N. Babauta, in the 1990s, did that, and subcommittee chairman Sen. Dan Akaka was pleased, and we retained immigration, exclusively. However, should that fail, we should ask the District Court to review and certify the constitutionality of S. 2739 of PL 110-229. Is that all right? And, is it all right with you if we hold on to the CWs for the time being, until something better comes along? Think about it, Saipanese.

Rudolfo M. Sablan
Garapan