On Bill Stewart’s political dissertation

My basic intent is to encourage the Fund to present the entire picture—forest over the trees—so that we probe and understand the apparent hierarchical roots of neglect that led to the financial debacle or what’s now an established legacy of bankruptcy of the program. I wasn’t interested in anybody’s political career. I wanted real rock solid solutions or answers.

But Mr. Bill Stewart, an old fart from the former Trust Territory Government (and I don’t know how he became a member of the Fund) decided to add fuel to fire with his disoriented dissertation making my views the issue over the substantive concerns raised in my original letter. May I reiterate—letter—and not anywhere near Mr. Stewart’s meandering gobbledygook that led to nowhere. His deflection of the issues didn’t assist anyone. How sad that he saw my views as fodder for criticism rather than converging to offer something constructive for the benefit of all. It is really very unbecoming for an alleged economist of stature to engage in total redundancy! But then, there’s a positive side to it: I had the longest yawn of my life!

He deserves his dues (whatever that may be) for providing a perfect glorification of all that went wrong with what’s now a precarious posture of the Fund. In fact, he added color to his longish dissertation by intoning the longest rendition of “Going Around in Circles”. The only thing we agreed upon is our earnest desire to see the financial viability of the Fund. But he needs to buckle down and present the real picture over his perceptual concoction only he understands. He engaged in a tangent, convinced he’s politically correct. But we know better, sir, what can happen to people in a discipline known for being an imperfect science!

But then it is typical of any writer who no longer has anything of substance to offer to resort to baseless arguments to deflect attention from the real issues at hand. He admitted to having written over 50 op-eds on this matter. Obviously, nobody heeded them as they were trash we can do without. Furthermore, it was and still is his responsibility to make his presentation brief, clear and simple. Such an approach would have made it home to the trustees. It never did and it never will either. So much for his longish and useless, if not diabolical, dissertations!

Now, there’s an article in the April 21st edition of the paper about the planned trip to San Francisco of four trustees and several staff members of the Fund. It involves expenditure of scarce Fund money upwards of $26,000. I would agree if the trip were limited to permanent staff of the program. After all, they almost always outlast trustees who leave after their term. Whatever the staff secures from the seminar, training or conference prepares them for implementation of their newly acquired skills where appropriate. Call the impending junket wasteful expenditure of scarce Fund money!

In contrast, Mr. Tony S. Muna offered a simple explanation of the establishment of the two plans so designed to slow down the quick bankruptcy of the Fund. It was a lucid piece of explanation that offered an opportunity to understand their dual purposes. I fail to see this in Mr. Stewart’s meandering and disoriented dissertation. Muna succeeded while Steward took stewardship of a failed dissertation. Have a nice day, sir!
[I][B] John S. DelRosario Jr.[/B] As Gonno, Saipan[/I]