Working both sides of the aisle will benefit NMI

This is in response to Ruth Tighe’s Nov. 10 “On My Mind” column. Your commentary on political parties bears response. You seem to imply that the affiliation of the CNMI Republican Party with its national counterpart somehow will make it more difficult for CNMI to work with both sides in Washington now that Democrats “came out ahead in the U.S. mainland elections” (by which I think you meant [I]stateside[/I] elections—assuming you did not intend to exclude Hawaii). I will concede a case could be made that CNMI issues were directly responsible for the Republican loss of the U.S. Senate in that the margin of defeat of U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) arguably was attributable to his ties to Jack Abramoff. The disgraced lobbyist’s generous funding for Burns’s campaign and lobbying of Burns and his staff on behalf of his CNMI client proved to be a decisive issue in the campaign. Had Burns not lost by a razor thin difference of fewer than 4,000 votes (0.7%), Republicans would still control the Senate in the next Congress.

However, no serious political observer in Washington would believe CNMI’s national political party ties will have anything to do with whatever actions Congress might contemplate next year. It is important to remember that any of the real or imagined abuses over which Congress has expressed concern occurred well before CNMI Republicans affiliated with the Republican National Committee in 2004. Moreover, the current CNMI administration, which is lead by the Covenant Party, has no ties to any national political party. Therefore, under your formulation, Covenant leaders should have maximum freedom of political action to work with both parties in Washington.

However, your thesis is built on a faulty premise and betrays a lack of understanding how Washington operates. When elections are over, people of both parties work together on all but a few of the most highly publicized issues and some compromise is necessary on almost every piece of contentious legislation that is enacted into law.

The fact is that, before and after RNC affiliation, former governor Juan N. Babauta (R-MP), for example, made it a point to maintain close relations with U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA). Miller is one of the CNMI’s harshest critics, is a close ally of the incoming speaker of the House of Representatives, soon will become the powerful chairman of the committee that has jurisdictional control over such issues as minimum wage and already has signaled his intention to include CNMI in a minimum wage package at the top of the new majority’s agenda.

Among other key Democrats, Babauta also maintained a similarly close relationship with Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) in the Senate, who will be a key voice on island issues in that chamber. Indeed, as Resident Representative, Babauta even made personal campaign contributions to some congressional Democrats, much to Jack Abramoff’s annoyance. However, no member of Congress refused to see Babauta because he was a Republican or because of his contributions.

For his part, Resident Representative Pete A. Tenorio (R-MP) also has made a bipartisan approach the linchpin of his strategy in Washington. Indeed, early in his first term he resisted the temptation to engage Jack Abramoff in favor of hiring another lobbying firm, Podesta/Mattoon, which has prided itself on its bipartisan work on Capitol Hill on behalf of its clients. The name partners are a prominent Democrat and Republican and both parties are well represented among the associates at the firm.

There is no reason to believe this philosophy will change with the change of majority parties. As I wrote once before in reaction to a column you penned several years ago, if CNMI politicians wanted to be perceived as truly unaffiliated, then they should never have adopted the names of the stateside national parties. Political leaders in Washington could be excused for believing they were working with political allies all that time when they were dealing with CNMI Republicans and Democrats. Surely no member of Congress made an effort to call the national GOP or Democrat headquarters to check on the status of CNMI’s affiliation. It was just assumed, affiliated or not, these were fellow Republicans and Democrats.

You have made the same error yourself in your column in characterizing the beliefs of the local parties and their stateside (not mainland) “counterparts.” With all due respect, if there “wasn’t that much similarity,” then calling them “counterparts” would be a misnomer, would it not? Therefore, it seems to me your campaign is misdirected. You should be arguing for the parties to change their names as an indication of non-affiliation.

However, as you know, I believe that approach would ill serve the CNMI. If anything, I would encourage the local Democrats to affiliate with the Democratic National Committee to complement GOP efforts and, indeed, I did just that when I was with Sen. Luis Crisostimo (D-MP) last year at a conference, where I introduced him to prominent Democrats from other islands whose parties were affiliated with DNC.

Republicans may have lost control of Congress but they are no more irrelevant than Bill Clinton was when Democrats lost control in 1994. Come January, it still will take 60 votes for most controversial legislation to pass the Senate, which means Democrats will need to lure nine Republicans to their side, assuming they can hold all their own members. And President Bush still holds the veto pen, a powerful deterrent to unnegotiated legislation since neither side has anywhere near enough votes to override a veto.

The midterm voting is over and on Nov. 8 the presidential election cycle began. What makes this cycle different for CNMI is that, for the first time ever, Washington politicians have been dialing Saipan. Ask Liling Reyes, Dave Sablan and Marylou Ada, CNMI’s three RNC members, and they will tell you that already they have been invited to a private dinner with Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) in January and have received a Christmas card from Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). Both men, of course, are prospective candidates for the Republican nomination for president. Furthermore, President Bush’s recommended choice to head the Republican National Committee, Mike Duncan, has called them seeking their votes for chairman at the January RNC meeting. And it is not even December yet.

Every call, every meeting, every dinner represents an opportunity for CNMI political leaders to build awareness of CNMI’s federal issues. This election cycle is particularly unusual because it marks the first time since 1928 that neither political party has a sitting president or vice president seeking his party’s nomination. So both nominations are wide open and presidential campaigns, at least on the Republican side, now are or soon will be falling all over themselves calling Saipan for support.

This phenomenon can be expected only to continue and increase until such time as one candidate has secured enough delegate votes (CNMI has nine GOP convention votes—same as Guam) to be nominated. Members of Congress are but one phone call away, if not directly then through the national committee members of his or her state, again, at least on the GOP side. And no one need pay $100,000 per month for this access. For the first time, CNMI political leaders have a genuine vehicle to make their own case.

So, Ruth, it is difficult to see how the CNMI GOP’s nationally affiliation has “backfired.” Ironically, I think you said it best yourself when you quoted Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo (D-GU) as commenting that, “To the extent that Guam has friends on both sides of the aisle, our agenda will make progress.” The congresswoman, who this rock-ribbed Republican has considered a friend and ally for many years, has been so successful during this now-closing Republican era in Congress, that she has been elected without opposition her last two terms. Her success in the Republican-run House has come despite her not only being a Democrat and a member of the Democratic National Committee but being the senior member of DNC for many years before retiring from that position at the last national convention. Having a Democrat congresswoman and a Republican governor certainly will not hurt Guam’s federal agenda over the next two years, because they will continue working as “Team Guam.”

Working together as “Team CNMI” will also be the key to the Commonwealth’s success over the next two years in Washington, where all sides always will have to reach common ground now that the election smoke is clearing. Republicans with ties to Washington will be a key component of that team.