Who would benefit the most from H.B. 14-154?

The deadline for the passage of a budget for the next fiscal year has come and gone but the Legislature and the Executive Branch are still at it, flogging a dead horse on the argument that there is no law stopping them from passing the spending plan beyond the statutory deadline. Well and good, but this also begs the question: At this point in time, isn’t this moot and academic? We are already 15 days into the new fiscal year, the entire government has shifted to continuing resolution as demanded by law, and I had it on good authority that most government agencies, in fact, prefer going into continuing resolution as it would give them far higher budgets for this fiscal year than the ones being allocated for them under the $212 million level currently under study at the House of Representatives. Yes, the governor is projecting new revenue streams arising from two “revenue-enhancement” measures he recently enacted but I’m sure that can be adequately handled with the submission of a supplemental budget request. There is no law stopping him from doing that.

True, good housekeeping practices demand an annual budget that would guide the government on how it appropriates projected revenues for the entire year but the Legislature had five months—FIVE—to work on the passage of the spending plan. Under the law, the governor submits a proposed budget in April. Between that and September—the end of the fiscal year—the governor is given another chance in June to submit a revised budget if he or she thinks there are going to be substantial changes in the projected revenues. Since then, what has the Legislature been doing all these months? Watching its navel gather lint? The statutory deadline was put in place in the first place so lawmakers would have a timetable in which to work on the budget. If they cannot keep to it, what was the point in putting in a deadline in the first place? One cannot, therefore, foist on people the argument about adhering to good housekeeping practices because good housekeeping practices demand that budgets be made and passed on time. At this point, our lawmakers are merely trying to shut the barn door after the horse has already bolted.

* * *

Then, again, what else is new? The CNMI government hadn’t had a budget since 2002, when the Legislature passed the fiscal year 2003 budget, set at $213 million. Even then, the 2003 budget was a rarity, passed primarily because of a predominantly Republican Executive and Legislative branches and they were under more pressure to put on a show of solidarity. The feat wasn’t repeated in the 2004 budget and the CNMI government has been on continuing resolution since then. At the same time, before the 2003 budget, the government didn’t have a spending plan in place since 1998, wracked by infighting among the House, Senate, and the Governor’s Office on how to divvy up the rapidly drying resources. A previous Saipan Tribune editorial said it best: “The budget gridlock has become as perennial as the wild grass outside the two chambers.”

* * *

Speaking of fast drying revenue streams, one cannot help but view with suspicion a bill currently pending at the House of Representatives that seeks to strip boards of their powers and make the executive director an appointive position by the governor. The bill would apply to all government boards and commissions, including semi-autonomous agencies. This is a very dangerous bill as it would vest the governor with too much power.

House Bill 14-154, titled Public Corporation Act of 2004, aims to convert the function of the boards of public corporations, authorities, and commissions to that of an advisory body. It seeks to vest the management and operations of such entities to designated executives who shall be appointed by the governor (instead of the board) with the consent of the Senate.

The bill, authored by former Commonwealth Utilities Corp. executive director Rep. Timothy Villagomez, removes the board’s function as a governing body responsible for the direction and operation of the affairs and business of the NMI Retirement Fund, Marianas Public Lands Authority, Commonwealth Ports Authority, Marianas Visitors Authority, CUC, Northern Marianas Housing Authority, and Commonwealth Telecommunications Commission.

This is not the first time that this type of bill came up. I distinctly remember a previous Legislature mulling the same measure. Then as now, it appears that this bill is not so much about power but more about the millions of dollars locked up in investments by the Retirement Fund and the MPLA. I don’t have the figures for the MPLA’s investments but, as of August this year, the Retirement Fund has managed to grow its investments to a whopping $364,293,000.

With the government faced with a ballooning deficit and shortfall in collections, it has apparently cast a moist eye on these investments of the Retirement Fund and the MPLA, with a view toward cashing in a portion of it to tide the government over. That is the only logical explanation behind this measure. It’s the only possible answer to the question central to any whodunit: Who would benefit the most from this? In the case of H.B. 14-154, it is apparent that nobody else would benefit the most from it than the governor, giving him near limitless authority to do whatever he wants with these millions. And that is something everyone should be wary about. Boards and commissions are part and parcel of the government’s checks and balances to make sure that abuses of power are kept in check. By doing away with this mechanism, these investments, which are intended for present and future beneficiaries, would be placed in jeopardy. It is therefore in everyone’s best interest to oppose H.B. 14-154 and do so by making their voices heard at the Legislature.

(The views expressed are strictly that of the author. Vallejera is the editor of the Saipan Tribune.)