The superficial quota imposition

For all that policy-makers have leveled against the apparel industry in recent years via the imposition of quotas (number of workers), it goes without saying that most have no inkling about the workings of economics and the reality that the much maligned industry has provided the local coffer when tourism went south.

While policy-makers, in their infinite wisdom, braved such ill-conceive measure, it simultaneously approved the so-called Free Trade Zone hardly wary that the effect would still be the same–more guest workers–if other manufacturing industries are established here.

We say one thing while doing the exact opposite. We display our great sense of inconsistency ignorantly promoting policy instability as a new found forte to our detriment.

Perhaps policy-makers need refresher courses on the “Consequence of Public Policies”, specifically, whether decision on quota imposition is consistent with, i.e., the proposed Free Trade Zone that would effectively compromise quota capping. It’s the same self-defeating attempt the only difference being the introduction of a new concept–FTZ

Why impose a cap against an industry that has proven itself sturdy a contributor to the local coffer when nothing else works? Such reactionary measure had previous policy-makers co-opting with our detractors. Even President Clinton now trumpets the free enterprise system as he takes his agenda to the state level. It’s a matter of articulating with clarity our rights to our economic freedom definitely in short supply in previous legislatures.

Test of money and mouth

If previous policy-makers are true to their words about reducing the number of workers in the private sector, then they should have had equal agility to impose an annual quota on the number of public sector employees who should be taken off the public payroll. Such quota need not be premised on available resources on any given fiscal year. It should equally be based strictly on quota, i.e., 500 less public sector employees every year for the next ten years.

The quota to reduce the number of public sector employees ought to significantly benefit taxpayers by spending additional funds on programs geared to enhancing the lot of the majority who deserve more than just mediocrity in the services they receive from royal flunkies in the public sector. It may be unprecedented a move, but one that should augur well with pronouncements by politicians and bureaucrats who promise to improve the livelihood of the majority. It’s a measure challenging every politician to put his mouth where his money is, so to speak.

The blind quota imposition runs against the grain of the free enterprise system. It’s an area that needs overhauling in that recent policies have done nothing but kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Well, it’s a case of missed opportunities for fear of the wraths of detractors who are equally fighting tooth and nail to protect, i.e., Congressman George Miller’s California garment industry.

But then we must be tolerant of the vacuous bully pulpit approach of our detractors who refer to the loss of “American Jobs” in California while totally neglecting that their very efforts would annihilate “American Jobs” on this side of the Pacific. Is this why some of our previous legislative leaders have been groping for answers?

Yes, when people are hurting in their family pocketbooks they’ll definitely turn to leadership for help and hope of brighter tomorrows. We have failed them royally in this regard. Thanks to Speaker Benigno Fitial and the new coalition of leadership for bringing back hope into our beaten faces.

If you will, the recent election included subtle messages of discontentment which shouldn’t be taken lightly by politicians and bureaucrats. Friends, even the mute have forcibly learned to talk and speak their mind in bold fashion, too. They demand far more than fickle dreams of more of helplessness from their public officials. Si Yuus Maase`!