By Del Benson
Election laws — are they relevant, or are they not? Well, it seems like they aren’t relevant here.
Let me tell you three stories.
The first is about a parent whose child did something wrong. The parent got upset and threatened: “You’ll never leave this house again. You’re grounded. You’re going to get in trouble when your dad gets home. Our family never does that, and you’ve embarrassed us, and what you did was horrible, and you are not allowed to do that again…” — unless you choose to.
The second is about the United States Constitution’s provision on immigration and labor. One word changed everything: “may.” Congress may take over immigration and labor. Well, they didn’t just “may” — they did it. So what kind of provision is that, if it only says they may do something?
The third story is about Lawrence Camacho — a good man, running for governor, no qualms, no problems. And this isn’t really about him; it’s about his candidacy qualification. He’s been in the military, he lived in Guam, he was a professor at UOG, and he has a house in Guam. Then he moved to Saipan to be Commissioner of Education, and then he decided to run for governor —good step first. But the problem is the provision that allows him to run: the word “intent.” If you intend to move back, you qualify, even if you’re working elsewhere. My argument is — why even have a residency requirement if you’re going to carve out a clause that lets people out of it? This has nothing to do with Lawrence personally. It’s about the fact that everybody can use this loophole: “I intend to move back. I intend…” Even though you’ve lived in the mainland for 20 or 30 years, have a house there, everything — and then you decide to run for governor here, and say your intent was always to move back, even though you never met the residency requirement. So why even have it?
I looked at the flimsy challenges against Kelli Tenorio’s run for mayor from the Northern Marianas. Why is it even a question? Out of 178 people, how many have actually been up there? How many have qualified, and how hard are you really pushing this? Come on, let’s be real.
And speaking of eligibility — how many of the challengers are even eligible themselves? What makes you a resident? Now they’ve changed it from a 45-day residency requirement. How many people have actually been up there? Kelli been going back and forth as the lifeblood of that the island for decades, and she’ll keep it up.
Now, precincts. We’ve got precincts where people don’t even live, and they still vote in them — was that 10%, or whatever the number was? So what’s the point of a precinct at all?
And what about people on the mainland — our biggest critics, who want to tell us how to run everything, but aren’t here to feel the pain of power costs or the daily struggles of the island, and have no plans to come back? Why are they voting here? They shouldn’t. They’re not qualified. You’re supposed to be a resident here, and your domicile is supposed to be here. Say what you want — that’s fine, freedom of speech isn’t the question. But come back and try to fix it yourself. Otherwise, you sound just like stateside people telling us how to do everything.
To be clear, I have no fault with anyone who moves to the states — there are more opportunities, you can make more money, that’s totally understandable. But our island is in a mess, so why not contribute instead of just tearing it down? Why not help bring investors here? Why not do something to make it better instead of sitting back and complaining about everything that’s being done? There have been many for the mainland help with typhoon relief…thanks you. Bbb
What if we returned to village councils instead of precincts? Then you’d have a village representative who could actually oversee their village, and people could come together and volunteer on real issues, instead of assuming the government or the precinct’s legislators will handle everything. Make it personal — it’s your neighborhood. If there’s a pothole and the government is slow to fix it, get some shovels, fill it with coral, and make it permanent. Bring people together at the village level to beautify the village.
I think if people got more involved at the village level — through real volunteerism, because you’re doing it for the right reason, putting your money and your effort together for the good of the community rather than for a paycheck — that would be far more effective, operating under the mayor’s office. It would give more people a real chance to serve their community through village councils, instead of dumping everything on one or two representatives and asking, “What are you going to do for the precinct?”
The question really ought to be turned around: you, the people who live in the precinct, are the village — what are you doing about it? Why does it always fall on the government? I think this is where people can become more unified — working with neighbors, working with neighboring villages, to make their areas beautiful. Samoa does this. Their villages are clean, neat, organized, and cared for. Here, we always look to someone else to take care of it. Let’s come together.
If we’re not going to follow the guidelines for the election, then let’s just get rid of the rules. Let’s legitimize ourselves instead of playing this game.
The views expressed are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of NMI News Service.
