Human rights as facade for unions

California Congressman George Miller did the cotton-ball “slam” job against Speaker Benigno R. Fitial but failed royally to “dunk” it. Here are reasons why:

1. Miller hails from the capital of garment manufacturing, California, and must protect his constituency’s interest.

2. He’s successfully employed “human rights” as a facade to destroy the Pacific’s Little David and liberalization of trade between the US and developing countries.

3. He must perform the “Dog and Pony Show” for monied textile labor unions who bankrolled his political career. Well, it’s election time, again, right?

4. He consistently argues that the import quota and tariff exemptions allow for the exploitation of foreign workers that undercut US jobs in the textile industry. At best, this argument is perceptual, at worse, unfounded.

5, His big labor unions will pay for the mobilization of about 10,000 members to rally in Washington against granting permanent normal trade relations to China.

Miller’s grand hypocrisy is in his claim as a staunch human rights advocate. Let’s critically dissect Miller’s apparent knee-jerk commitment on human rights.

If Miller succeeds in ruining one of two major economic sectors here in the midst of downward spiral in tourism, human beings, however foreigners, would effectively be denied the opportunity to earn decent wage three to ten times higher than wages they would have earned in their home country.

In the process, Miller would have denied more than 3,000 US Citizens working in non-garment jobs in our apparel industry the opportunity to bring home the bacon, so to speak. He blindly chooses to ruin the quality of life of islanders attached to this sector (all US Citizens now, sir) in favor of his constituency. Understood, sir! But such greed and warped application of American Values will in no way “enhance and enrich” the livelihood of US Citizens in these remote islands.

It’s time, Mr. Miller, that you steer clear of your adolescency and allow the NMI and the federal government some room for constructive engagement. This is the dosage needed today to rebuild the eroded confidence in our Mother Country as a result of constant browbeating from your likes and that of a “smorgasbord of save-the-turtles activists, anarchists, egalitarians, Luddites and Marxists”. That our country has been swimming in the sea of economic good times is more the reason to be able to see issues from the lenses of the downtrodden. Perhaps the Wall Street Journal’s editorial of 11 April crystallizes all that detractors have undertaken against developing countries:

“Trade needs a leader. It needs a President. It’s got Bill Clinton….But Mr. Clinton and his Vice President and his New York Senate candidate all have a big labor constituency.
We suppose Mr. Clinton thinks his legacy as a trade liberalizer is intact, but if he doesn’t have the gumption to step forward and defend a deal for the people of Africa and the Caribbean, (claimed constantly by the Clinton milieu as spiritual constituents), then we have to face up to the deeper reality expressed by California Democrat Cal Dooley.
Mr. Dooley said that if the Democrats ‘can’t lead on a policy of economic engagement and trade, we can’t lead the country.’ We’d amend that: not so much can’t, but won’t”.

Congressman Miller, we ask for nothing less than the opportunity to be granted our rights to economic freedom so inked under the Covenant Agreement. Our dissenting views on federalization is obvious–economic ruination.
This is far removed from the use of American Values that would net this group of US Citizens the exact opposite that such values encourage–enhancement and enrichment of our livelihood. And this is where you have failed to dunk the ball of human rights for you have consistently used it as a facade to move your egregious and capricious agenda. Si Yuus Maase!