In search of backbones

The CNMI House of Representatives recently failed to override the governor’s veto of the budget, after initially passing the budget with 18 yes votes and only 1 no vote. The failure of the Legislature to fulfill the most basic of its duties—to provide a budget for the operation of the government—is the fault of the six House members who failed to vote for the override. Their failure is inexcusable.

Those who failed to support the override: Republicans Joseph James Norita Camacho and Stanley T. Torres; Democrat Justo S. Quitugua; Covenant Edwin P. Aldan, Oscar M. Babauta, and Raymond D. Palacios; and Independent Victor B. Hocog. David M. Apatang was absent.

Here’s what I want to say to each of these elected officials.

Rep. Joseph Camacho: Although you gave no excuse on the record in the House, you explained your reasons on your website and in a letter in the newspapers. Basically, you say your change of mind on the budget relates to separation of powers, because the budget contains a provision that requires legislative approval of any and all new Executive Branch hires. You say you originally voted for the budget because this provision can be viewed as merely ministerial (an administrative function), but now that the governor says it violates the Constitution, you “must” respect the governor’s interpretation.

Nonsense. You know, as a lawyer yourself, that it is the court’s role, not the governor’s, to determine constitutionality of laws. Legislators have no constitutional duty to kowtow to a governor’s interpretation of a law they passed.

This is a lame excuse.

Also, the budget as passed—HB 16-213—contains at Sec. 801 a “severability” clause, basically saying that if any provision is unconstitutional, that provision shall be severed from the law and the rest remain in effect.

You should have voted to override the veto. Then we would have a budget. If the hiring provision is challenged and the court rules it unconstitutional, we still have a budget and the constitution is upheld by severing the provision from the rest of the law.

Nor do I believe the constitutionality of the hiring clause is the real reason you voted against overriding the budget veto. Immediately after the vote on the budget veto, you supported passage of H.B. 16-212, which also contains a provision requiring legislative approval of Executive and Judicial branch new hires.

Stop trying to confuse the electorate with make-believe justifications. This is nothing but a lame excuse and a poor one at that. Be honest with us.

Rep. Stanley Torres: After the vote, you told the media, “I was not ready to vote yet because I just got in when they had a roll call. I would have voted yes to the override.” Why were you late? You needed to be ready and present from the start. You’ve been a member of the House for many, many years and know how things operate. This is nothing but a lame excuse.

Rep. Justo Quitugua: What does it mean to be a member of the Democrat party? What possible explanation could you reasonably give for voting against the veto override? You gave none because there is none.

Rep. Edwin P. Aldan and Rep. Raymond Palacios: I understand that you voted, this time, with your party. Party politics are important to help bring about fruitful debate. But Representative Palacios, you originally supported this budget. Representative Aldan, you didn’t even vote on it the first time. It’s time to put party politics aside and enact a budget. Stop the delay tactics. Do what is right for the CNMI, not what your Covenant party tells you to do.

Rep. Oscar M. Babauta: You voted against the budget when it first passed because, you said, you support Governor Fitial’s call for austerity Fridays. Presumably you object to the override for the same reason. You said, when questioned about your reason for voting against the override, that you recommended that the House of Representatives “move on” to more pressing concerns.

There are no more pressing concerns. We need a budget immediately. We need to stop discretionary spending, stop uncontrolled deficit spending, stop irresponsible-no account-needed spending. We need the Legislature deciding what priorities are for our limited funds.

Your support of austerity Fridays is a sham to hide the fact that you really support our current governor having unlimited power. A budget, even without austerity Fridays, puts in more fiscal controls and restraints than the phantom austerity Fridays you pretend to hold out for.

Rep. Victor B. Hocog: You voted against the budget veto override because the governor telephoned you threatening to furlough contractual workers, especially on Rota and Tinian.

Where is your backbone? Stand up to the governor and vote for what is right. The CNMI needs a budget. You are concerned about contractual employees on Rota. Why does the CNMI have so many government employees who are not civil service? Why do we have so many ordinary citizens in political appointments and contractual jobs that are subject to political pressure tactics? Is this the only way you can elected, but having political patronage that we pay for? We cannot be hostages to our leaders. And you, as a “leader” should not be bowing to political pressure and caving in to threats of job losses when you actually supported this budget to begin with.

Rep. David Apatang: Why did you miss this session? I understand that you may be sick. I hope you get well soon. Your constituents need you.

And now, we still need a budget. We need a budget to make sure that our Legislature is setting the priorities for what our government does. We need a budget to make sure that there are fiscal restraints and responsible financial controls in place. We need a budget by the Legislature as part of the constitutional system of checks and balances on executive power. This is the real constitutional issue.

The failure of these elected officials to make sure we have a budget puts our CNMI at risk of very real political chaos. Their failure is inexcusable.