‘Bill an option to stabilize NMI workforce’

Representatives Edward Salas and Christina Sablan said yesterday that a bill granting improved immigration status to long-time guest workers presents an option that could help stabilize the CNMI’s workforce during the federalization transition period.

This developed as Salas and Sablan, vice-chair and member of the House’s Judiciary and Governmental Operations Committee respectively, appealed to their colleagues to support the recall of the legislation and place it on the bill calendar.

Reps. Salas, Sablan, Victor Hocog, and Heinz Hofschneider had introduced House Bill 16-86 to grant improved immigration status to long-time alien workers. The bill proposes to allow eligible nonresident workers to live and work at will in the Commonwealth.

Public hearings were held on Rota, Saipan, and Tinian where written and oral testimonies were accepted. Public comments were also entertained.

But in a House session on July 31, JGO chair Rep. Rosemond Santos’ committee recommended that the bill be shelved. Reps. Santos, Joseph Reyes, and Edwin Aldan signed the report.

The JGO Committee agreed that the proposal will benefit the CNMI, but noted that the federal immigration law will supersede and pre-empt all CNMI laws related to the entry and removal of foreign workers.

Salas and Sablan, in their Monday’s letter to House members, appealed to lawmakers to reject the JGO report and instead support the recall of the bill from the committee.

The two lawmakers said the report was drafted and signed by Santos and two JGO committee members “outside of a properly assembled committee meeting to review and adopt the report.”

Salas and Sablan pointed out that members of the Legislature should at least be given the opportunity to fully and thoughtfully debate the pressing labor and immigration issues raised by the bill.

Lawmakers, they said, should be given a chance to offer amendments and improve the legislation if that is the course of action the body wishes to pursue, and to vote on this measure in a timely manner.

The CNMI retains local control over immigration until June 9, 2009, the earliest date at which U.S. Public Law 110-229 (federalization) would take effect.

Salas and Sablan noted that the federal government may recognize resident foreign national status that is granted to eligible foreign workers if it is granted prior to that date.

“The federal government is unlikely to recognize any local legislation bearing on immigration that is enacted after that date,” the two said.

Salas and Sablan said this is a critical time for the CNMI as the new federal immigration regulations are presently being drafted.

The two said that in briefings with federal officials, legislators have expressed deep concern about the impacts the new federal law may have on the stability of the local workforce and on the economy. They said lawmakers also expressed interest in participating in the development of the new federal immigration program in collaboration with federal officials.

Salas and Sablan said that pursuant to Mason’s Manual of Legislative Procedure, the JGO report is not a proper and valid committee report and that it should not be placed on the calendar.

The two said the report recommends the filing of House Bill 16-86 despite findings that the proposed eligibility requirements for resident foreign national status are reasonable and that the proposed resident foreign national program would benefit the CNMI.

Salas and Sablan said the report omits critical and valuable information received during these public hearings and a comment period that lasted over six weeks—including testimony that addressed the report’s main argument that the bill would be moot as a result of the federalization law.