Job Entitlement

At what point did the people of the CNMI begin to believe that they were entitled to Government Jobs?

Most recently the entire Immigration staff and their valiant leader Grey headed up to the Legislature to voice their concerns. They met with members of the House and asked the Representatives, "What are they going to do about the situation they are in?" They stated that no one from the legislature went to their offices to assist them.

In true form, a few of the legislators had already drafted out a Bill mandating a lateral transfer of all 68 immigration personnel.

Is it just me or does this just scream - STUPIDITY!

Our government is currently struggling with depleted revenues. We are in a state where we need to be downsizing government. The federalization of immigration can be looked at as a step in that direction. No longer will local funds be required to run this section. What our legislature could not do (downsize) has been done for us. And rather than looking at this as a positive step the same legislature is now going to turn around and force the Government to hire all 68 individuals and maintain our current spending level. Why?

Simple. They want their votes. At what cost? At what point will our public servants come to grips with the stark reality of our times. We are broke. We need to quit with our old ways and begin to trim down the size of government. We need to make some tough calls and downsize. No one likes this fact. It is a tough pill to swallow but it must be done and be done quickly.

The Washington Reps office was affected by the federalization of immigration. The staff from Pete's office will be out of a job earlier than expected. Should our government also guarantee a lateral transfer of all of his staffers? When a department head decides to cut costs and layoff employees, should the affect employees also be afforded this luxury?

And while we are handing out government jobs, why relegate this mentality to the public sector? Blockbuster just closed with little to no warning given to their staff. Should we offer gov't jobs to all of their displaced workers? Carmen Safeway just closed up shop, what about giving all of their workers jobs in the government?

What on earth are our legislators doing? This is not a time to play Santa Claus and drum up votes by dishing out jobs for which taxpayers must ante up the cash to pay for. Times are tough everywhere. No one is ENTITILED to a job. When businesses close workers have to go about finding a new place of employment. The same should apply for Government Jobs. Pete's staffers and the immigration workers need to begin scouting for jobs. Sign up for welfare in the midterm and unemployment benefits if need be. But get out there and find a job with the rest of us that are out here working our hind parts off to bring home the bacon.

What is even more disturbing is that the immigration jobs are not gone. The Federal government is in the midst of hiring individuals to fill the same slots (only difference is that they will be funded by the federal government not the CNMI government) unlike the private sector jobs that have completely vanished upon the business closures. I hope that some of the individuals displaced from the private sector along with the immigration workers are making every attempt possible to qualify for the federal immigration positions.

I could go on and on about this but let me instead sum it up in very simple terms for our elected representatives:

The time has come for you to grow a spine, to look at the state of the commonwealth and do what is right for all of the people of the CNMI. To pass a budget that is fiscally sound and deals with the realities of our trying times. Do we have to cut government jobs? YES. Do it. You may believe that by passing that law for the lateral transfer that you garnered yourselves the 68 votes along with their family members. I hope you realize what it truly cost you in terms of votes. You have lost mine and at least 10000 other voters that see right through your cowardly act. You may want to pass a new bill that guarantees a transfer for all of you legislators that voted yes to this bill because come 2009 you will also be out of a job.

Oh! In that case go ahead. I'll bend over.

WTF?

How stupid does this sitting Governor think the public is. He is now saying that a compromise can be reached. The point isn't what types of gambling tables are available at the La Fiesta, heck at this point it really isn't even about gambling in general (haven't we been down this road before? Is that Bruce in the rear view mirror?).

This is about the principle of the matter. We are the public. We deserve more than this shit. We all went to the polls in November and decided that for one reason or another did not want to pass the gambling initiative that was put on the ballot. I don't know why the public said "no". Neither does anyone else.

Wake up you sleeping self made giants on the hill! Call a damn public hearing. Talk to the people that you are supposed to be REPRESENTING (hence the title REPRESENTATIVE).

Perhaps the public will embrace this new bill. Perhaps they will even ask for a wider range of gaming tables. Perhaps they will ask to just kill poker in general. Perhaps they will ask to move all the poker and any other gaming device under the sum up to the Fiesta.

The point is you don't f$#!@!@ know. Stop with the shit headed games. Stop treating the public like a bunch of idiots.

We are not as naive as you folks on the hill are.

[Reference is to this article: http://www.saipantribune.com/newsstory.aspx?newsID=75103&cat=1 ]

A Math Lesson For Greg Cruz : TTT = KKK

Not Enough Time in the Day to Bitch!

I am swapped with things I would like to look into. I am looking over the newly enacted Labor Law of 2007. This is an eyeful.

I am also trying to figure out the regulations and laws pertaining to the absentee voting process in the CNMI. I have found so many discrepancies in the laws it is mind boggling that they had passed originally. Here is an example:

1 CMC § 6213(a) is amended to read as follows:
“(a) To be counted, an absentee ballot shall be postmarked not later than 10 days from the date of election and be received by the Commission not later than seven days after 12:00 noon on the date of election. If the Commission is using a post office box for the receipt of absentee ballots, it shall remove all absentee ballots contained in the box on and no later than fourteen days after 12:00 noon on the election date and such ballots shall be deemed to have been received within the deadline.

(1) Commencing with the date absentee ballots are first sent out until seven days after the 12:00 noon on the date of election, no less than two persons shall go to the post office, one of whom shall be designated by the Commission chairperson and the other of whom shall be designated by the Executive Director, to collect absentee ballots.

(2) The reply envelopes shall not be opened but shall be marked as provided in subsection (b) and deposited in a locked ballot box until processed by the Commission pursuant to subsections (c) through (h) seven days after the election.”

c. 1 CMC § 6213(h) is amended to read as follows:
“(h) The returned envelopes marked 'OK', together with the application attached, shall be delivered by the Commission to the accounting and tabulation committee seven days after on the day of the election, to be tabulated by the accounting and tabulation committee.”

There are so many things that scream "WTF" in this one section of the amended code.

I also wanted to look into who qualifies to receive and submit an absentee vote. How are the absentee ballots cross-checked to determine that the voter did not physically vote at a polling location on the day of the election and then also submit an absentee ballot (what precautionary measures are in place?). I have first hand accounts of voters who went to the polling places on Saturday and their names were not manually crossed off the computer print out listing. I fear that the names of absentee voters also appeared on these lists. What would stop someone from voting physically and then also mailing in an absentee ballot. A simple check would be to ensure that every individual that entered the polls on Saturday had their name crossed out on the computer generated listing (and initialed by the voter. As I did). Then when you receive the 1000 or so absentee ballots simply cross check the print out and determine if the person already voted on Saturday at a physical location. Not rocket science, however if the names were not being crossed of then it throws a major wrench into any cross checking procedure.

I am also still trying my best to stay on top of the Federal Senate and House Bills regarding CNMI immigration.

So much to do and so little time.