CNMI: US Senate to revise Federalisation Bill
Updated
The Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas played host to a delegation from the US Administration and Department of Insular Affairs last week for a public debate on the US-proposed Federalisation Bill, taking control of immigration and labour laws away from the CNMI. Outside the well-attended hearings, a group of migrant workers protested against the Governor, Benigno Fitial's opposition to the Bill.
Presenter: Myra Mortensen
Speakers: Gemma Cassas, Saipan correspondent
CASAS: They were in support of H.R. 3079 because it would benefit them somehow if the immigration system is federalised in the CNMI about eight-thousand of them may be given the non-immigrant status. If that status is granted they could freely travel, work and study anywhere in the US and its possession, just like citizens of the freely associated states.
MORTENSEN: Who else took part in the conference?
CASAS: There were a group of local officials who strongly opposed the bill and then there are the federal officials who were for the bill because of security concerns on how the island administration is handling its borders and immigration system.
MORTENSEN: Does the US administration believe then that the CNMI is not effectively handling border control?
CASAS: I believe so, according to Mr David Cohen, the US deputy assistant secretary for insular affairs, there are indications that the CNMI is not able to effectively administer its immigration system, using as basis some of the cases that were brought to their attention like human smuggling, human trafficking and the likes.
MORTENSEN: I understand that as a result of these discussions, this public debate the US administration is actually going to submit a revised version of the bill?
CASAS: Yes what he will do is revise S. 1634 which is the Northern Mariana Islands Covenant Implementation Act, it's a separate bill from H.R. 3079. Now H.R. 3079 is somewhat like S. 1634, the only difference is that the latter has a provision which grants an unvoting delegate for the CNMI in the US Congress.
If the CNMI is granted an unvoting delegate in the US Congress it would be with the CNMI's other US insular areas who have somebody who can push for their legislation and other issues.
Right now the CNMI only has a Washington representative which is a position held by Mr P. A. Tenorio. He has no power to push for bills.
MORTENSEN: Is he allowed to participate in committee or not?
CASAS: He's allowed as an observer but not actually to participate, just like representatives, residents, and other non-voting delegates.
MORTENSEN: How many members of the actual public came to attend this debate?
CASAS: Authorities were estimating that were thousands of them, although the figures weren't really exact.
MORTENSEN: So this was really quite a big thing for the CNMI?
CASAS: Indeed it is, because it has so many impacts not only on the lives of the migrant workers, but the government as well and the indigenous people.
MORTENSEN: And of those thousands who came how would you assess their reaction? Were they in favour of it or against the new bill?
CASAS: There were a lot of locals who were silently sympathising with the contention of the US government that the CNMI immigration system should be federalised.
They think that if this is done it would improve the quality of their lives because as it is right now the investors confidence is not really that strong for the CNMI because of so many problems with regards to labour and immigration issues.
MORTENSEN: So how are they going to resolve this? Is the US just going to impose it or is there going to be some sort of democratic process within the CNMI?
CASAS: Right now they're going through the democratic process, they've heard the bills at the committee level and now they're revising it to include some of those concerns that were raised by both the local government and other parties involved.
The question now is whether this bill would really push through as they had planned.
MORTENSEN: Well I suppose the danger of revision is that it might be a harsher bill?
CASAS: That's a possibility. I asked Mr Cohen whether the non immigrant provision, which is the most significant and controversial portion of both bills whether that would stay or not and he said the US government believes that it should stay because the federal authorities believe that the US government has the moral authority to protect the interests of the migrant workers who over the years have driven the tourism and garment-based economy of the island.
MORTENSEN: And what's the Governor's reaction been to this public debate? He can't have been too pleased?
CASAS: Yes,indeed he is not too pleased with that and he refers to those protected migrant workers as illegals without really verifying whether all of them are really illegals. In his statement sparked some more questions on the members of the US House of Committee on Insular Affairs like if those are illegals why weren't authorities arresting them?
