Unheard No More!

GUEST WORKER NEWS

2009-11-10T08:34:00.005+10:00

November 5, 2009

The United Worker Movement NMI will set up a support center to assist guest workers in submitting comments on the recently released rules from DHS. The center will be held at the Fiestang Pinoy by Juvy Restaurant across Saipan Grand Hotel on Beach Road, Susupe on the following Fridays from 6:00 p.m -10:00 p.m:

November 13

November 20

November 27

The center will have computers, with translators to assist in different languages like Tagalog, Chinese, Bangladeshi, Korean, Sri Lankan, Nepalese, and Hindi.

From the Saipan Tribune:

The group said it plans to facilitate the submission of comments by centralizing the receipt of all comments and submitting them to the Department of Homeland Security.

“We have a lot of concerns regarding the transitional worker program for the CNMI that we need to bring to the Department of Homeland Security's attention. We have a very small time to submit comments on the rules and regulation of this program. We are asking all brothers and sisters to come up with their comments [and] concerns before Nov. 25, 2009,” the group said in a statement.

The United Workers Movement NMI-an umbrella group composed of Pilcowa, Dekada and other worker's leaders-will be setting up a support center that will help alien workers who want to give comments on the transitional worker program.

_____________________

The guest workers may not be able to vote, but they can comment. Be sure to post your comment before the deadline. There are a few comments already posted on the Regulations Website. Most are from guest workers.

Here is a comment that Malou submitted that has not been posted yet:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Department of Homeland Security
111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 3008
Washington, DC 20528-2060

RE: Docket Number-USCIS-2008-0038

Thank you for the giving me the chance to participate in this comment process for Transitional Workers Program for the CNMI in accordance to provisions of Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008.

Under III-A&F, the section concerning hiring abroad of workers. At present, according to the Department of Labor, CNMI, there are about 13,000 holders of CNMI permit and more or less 3,000 whose CNMI permits are on process, not to mention the foreign workers who are holding temporary permit and some still waiting for their unclaimed wages and unsettled labor cases.

Please be it known to you that some CNMI Permit holders do not have job for quite some time now due to different reasons and circumstances. May I therefore recommend that bringing in more workers under CW-1 status abroad should be deleted in this regulations? Utilize and/or prioritize foreign workers who are on-islands if no available U.S. citizens for job vacancy. By opening your door in hiring abroad, I can see more schemes and scams in bringing in new workers. Likewise, this maybe another way to squeeze money from foreign workers who want to work in U.S. soil and this would add up to human trafficking cases in CNMI which some are not yet resolved. Also, this could give a sort of protection or security on the part of long term guest workers. Under this section also, the CNMI must not increase the total number of alien workers present in CNMI and should reduced the number of grants of CW-1 status.

Under III-D, Petitioning Procedures-It would be easier and cheaper for the employer to petition more than one worker on the same form as long as employees are all working for the same period of time and in same location regardless of the occupational category as long as the employees to be petitioned are already in CNMI. With this, the employers could easily transfer all their employees that are ineligible under INA qualifications that are currently holding CNMI permits. And consequently will result in more orderly transition in phasing out the CNMI’s nonresident contract worker program.

Under III-F-Lawful Presence and Travel-As the rule states: CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant may leave the CNMI and return, BUT must have appropriate visa for readmission. The rule should allow holders of CW-1 and CW-2 to leave and re-enter CNMI without obtaining another visa from country of origin since these permits would be issued by Department of Homeland Security.

Since the DHS allowed the foreign workers to work and stay in CNMI up to the validity of their permit, then it should be therefore acceptable on your Department to use this permit to leave and re-enter CNMI. It is clearly stated in the permit issued by Division of Immigration, CNMI that this is an “ENTRY PERMIT”. I suggest that DHS could just give a sort of a visa waiver provided that any foreign workers who wish to travel with CNMI Entry Permit must notify 2 weeks in advance your office here in Saipan, CNMI about their travel and you could just require them to submit additional requirements like: CNMI Entry Permit that still valid for 90 days; valid passport; airline ticket to show itinerary and country where the foreign workers and his/her dependent will be travelling.

If visa waiver became possible for Chinese and Russians nationals, how could it be impossible to give the same kind to aliens workers who came in legally and have worked and lived here some more than decades?=

To reduce CW-1 permits holder yearly and to zero out the aliens workers by December 31, 2014, may I therefore recommend that an IMPROVED STATUS for long term guest workers, who became and still significant part of the CNMI economy and have been an important part of this community be recognized by giving them a more permanent status.

If the DHS/USCIS was able to create a special visa like E-2 CNMI Only, CW-1 CNMI Only, visa waiver for Chinese and Russians, I do believe you can also create another type of status not under INA, which maybe called PRC-CNMI Only. PRC-CNMI Only will stand for Permanent Resident Cardholder-CNMI only for a period of 3 years and after 3 years those that who have shown to be lawful and productive resident of CNMI may adjust his/her status to a U.S. citizen. Need a petitioner? Then let our U.S. citizen friends and relatives be our own petitioner.

In conclusion, the proposed rule should change the hiring abroad of additional foreign workers; permitting the foreign workers to travel with the CNMI Entry Permit with Visa Waiver and how to easily and orderly manner the employers can transit their employees and to provide a more permanent status for long term guest workers.

Sincerely yours,

Maria Lourdes H. Berueco

_____________________________

If you stop by to make a comment, please also sign the new petition requesting status!

If you can't make it to the meeting you can send in your comments.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: You may submit comments directly to USCIS by e-mail at rfs.regs@dhs.gov. Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 on your correspondence. This mailing address may be used for paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. Contact Telephone Number is (202) 272 8377.

Judge to Rule on Fitial's Anti-Federal Lawsuit Before November 28th

2009-11-10T06:05:00.006+10:00

November 9, 2009

A minute entry was issued by Judge Paul Friedman in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia regarding a conference phone call held between the judge, the CNMI and U.S. attorneys held on Friday, November 6, 2009. The order reads:

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Paul L. Friedman: Telephone Conference held on the record 11/6/2009. Defendant's response to [56] Supplemental Motion for Preliminary Injunction due by 11/13/2009. Reply due by close of business 11/18/2009. Motion Hearing set for 11/23/2009 @ 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 29A before Judge Paul L. Friedman.

The Saipan Tribune quotes Governor Fitial’s “special counsel”, Howard Willens as saying that Judge Friedman said he would issued an opinion on the lawsuit before November 28, 2009.

From the Tribune:

Willens said that Friedman told both CNMI and Justice counsels that he was working on his opinion on the Commonwealth's earlier motion seeking a preliminary injunction of selected provisions of the Consolidated Natural Resources Act and the Justice's motion to dismiss the federalization lawsuit.

The CNMI, through counsel Jenner & Block law firm, filed on Nov. 2, 2009, a memorandum in support of the motion for a preliminary injunction that seeks to stop the implementation and enforcement of the DHS regulations that were promulgated on Oct. 27, 2009.

See this previous post for more information on recent action involving the lawsuit and the sidebar linkfor all of the posts and links to court documents.

Election News

2009-11-09T07:45:00.010+10:00

November 8, 2009

The Saipan Tribune reported that 85 percent of the total number of registered voters cast ballots yesterday. That is a remarkably high number of voters as compared to the low turnout of voters that stateside elections draw. Last year's national election drew only 56.8 percent of the registered voters nation-wide.

One way to look at the governor's race was how the Marianas Variety put it: "Sixty-four percent of the voters wanted change."

The Saipan Tribune quoted candidate Heinz Hofschneider as saying, “I am confident that people will not repeat the same mistake in potentially going for another four years of difficulties and hardships. Our team is also confident that we are reaching over to Juan Pan's and Kumoi's supporters because they will realize that we have the visions that they saw in both of them. They will come around and support us.

The Saipan Tribune quoted Fitial as saying, "“I think we stand a better and greater chance to win the runoff because I am closer to Juan Pan and Kumoi.”

The Variety also explains the run-off procedure:

The commission should also certify the winning candidates on or before Tuesday, Nov. 17.

After the certification process, the commission must schedule a runoff 14 days between the two gubernatorial teams with the highest number of votes.

Assistant Attorney General Meaghan Hassel-Shearer said registered voters for this year’s general elections who failed to vote can still do so during the runoff.

“The important things for the public to be aware of: One, if you registered for this election but you didn’t vote you’re still registered for the runoff. So we want to make sure that everyone votes. Secondly, if a runoff occurs and they’re not going to be on island and they know that, they need to come down to the multi-purpose center and fill up an emergency ballot request,” she said.

The runoff changes the rule for the absentee ballots.

“Instead of having to be here on the day of the election, they get to be postmarked on the day of the election and we pick them up 14 days after the election,” she added.

With 14 more days after the runoff before the absentee votes are counted, Hassel-Shearer said the new governor-elect won’t be known until mid-next month.

The Republicans won all of the major races on Tinian. Races for the legislature were won by 13 Republicans, 7 Covenant Party members, and 6 independent candidates.

The most expensive votes

It was reported that the CNMI Election Commission paid $10,000 for a helicopter to fly poll workers and a police officer to Agrihan to get the votes of four residents. The helicopter left at 8:30 a.m. and returned with the votes at 3:30p.m. yesterday.

The Saipan Tribune reported:

In an interview with Saipan Tribune yesterday, Election Board chair Frances M. Sablan confirmed that they hired a helicopter to fly to Agrihan and get the votes of four residents there.

“That is a tradition and at the same time our obligation to make sure that we get all the votes,” Sablan said.

She said two designated poll workers were aboard the helicopter.

When asked for the exact cost of hiring the helicopter, Sablan said she is not aware of the specific amount but that it was around the $10,000 figure.

The four votes cost $2,500 each. There has to be a more cost effective way for these residents to vote!

Reaction to Election

The Saipan Writer expressed disbelief with the election results and suggested that the United Nations oversee the run-off. Some phone calls and email I received expressed the same sentiments suggesting that the results could not be valid. It should be noted that none had any evidence of voter fraud.

I am not sure if the United Nations would monitor the elections as was suggested, but the U.S. Attorney Office monitored the elections in the states at many localities last year, including some in the state of Florida. I also know that the Carter Center monitors elections.

Update: Jim Benedetto from the Office of the U.S. Attorney General commented below that the elections were, in fact, monitored by the Office of the Attorney General.

Run-Off Election Scheduled

The run-off between the teams of Republican candidates Heinz Hofschneider and Arnold Palacios and the incumbent Covenant party candidates, Benigno Fitial and Eloy Inos has been scheduled for Monday, November 23, 2009.

Right now the race is on to lure those voters who cast ballots for the two losing teams. Heinz Hofschneider said that every team that ran against the incumbents, Fital and Inos, ran on the platform of change. The Marianas Variety reported:

Hofschneider noted that the two independent gubernatorial candidates, former Sens. Juan T. Guerrero and Ramon S. Deleon Guerrero, as well as their running-mates, also campaigned on a platform of change.

“I’m appealing to them and also to their supporters to come and help bring the change we have been advocating,” said Hofschneider who stayed until Sunday dawn with his supporters at his campaign headquarters in As Lito.

Hofschneider said the election results show that the people are clamoring for change.

The turnout, he added, showed how serious the voters are in exercising their democratic powers to deal with the present problems the commonwealth is facing today, which include the situation with the hospital, the utility and the Department of Public Safety.

The commonwealth’s credibility, he added, is at its lowest.
He said the GOP, like the two independent gubernatorial candidates, is also concerned about the worsening economy.

“Now all those who are for change must come together so we can address these problems with a new and better vision,” he added.

All Initiatives Failed to Pass

2009-11-08T22:47:00.017+10:00

November 9, 2009

"When government begins closing doors, it selectively controls information rightfully belonging to the people." -- Judge Damon Keith, U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

UPDATED - On Saturday (Orlando time, Sunday Saipan time) I was told that all of the CNMI initiatives had passed. Later that evening I was told they did not. Then another person said that they actually had passed and we did the math figuring it was two-thirds of those who voted for the initiative that was the amount needed for the initiative to pass. I said once again that the OGA initiative passed. Finally, today it was reported today that none of the initiatives passed! It seems that the two-thirds required yes votes is based not on the total amount of votes for an initiative, but on the total number of votes cast in the entire election which was 13,784.

Regardless, congratulations to Tina for her hard work in trying to get the Open Government Act extended to the CNMI Legislature.

Transparency in government is essential to ensure accountability and to allow all citizens to have access to information. We are, of course, the people who fund our government and we have a right to know what officials are doing with our tax dollars.

Withholding of information, back door deals, and hidden agendas have no place in a democratic system. When the people are allowed access they can voice their opinions based on facts and help move forward positive change. Public feedback is essential if we are to improve our local, state, and national communities. Open government allows the people to be collaborative participants with their elected leaders. It promotes public trust.

We always hear the positive acts that government agencies and institutions are doing in their carefully worded press releases, speeches and reports. Yet, it is the Open Government Act that allows us to know when our officials are not doing the right thing so we can demand correction.

Hopefully, this issue will be brought before the voters again.

The Open Government Act states: "The people of the Commonwealth do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created."

The Initiative called for applying the Open Government Act to the legislature. Here is the question that was on the ballot: "Open Government Act of 2007: Do you approve of the popular initiative entitled the "Open Government Act of 2007," to amend 1 CMC §9913 to read as follows: "§9913. Legislative Branch: Applicability. The Commonwealth Legislature, including all Commonwealth legislators and the Legislative Bureau, shall be subject to 1 CMC §9901, et seq. The respective rules and procedures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Legislative Bureau shall be in compliance with this Chapter."

From Tina Sablan's Open Forum website:

The Open Government Act used to apply to the legislature when it was first enacted during the 8th legislature, but the 9th legislature quickly amended the law to exempt the legislature – and the legislature has remained exempt ever since.
Applying the Open Government Act to the legislature will mean simple but critical changes in the way the legislature conducts its business. The legislature would be required to issue public notice with agendas for its sessions and meetings, for example, and agendas could not change as quickly and as dramatically as they often do today. In addition, citizens would have the right to request public records of their legislators, and to expect those records to be provided within 10 days of the request.

Apply the Open Government Act to the U.S. Congress

I would like to see the Open Government Act applied to the U.S. Congress. I am sure that others have noticed that in the U.S. today, without money (and I mean lots of money) running for public office is not a viable option. When our forefathers founded our country anyone who was devoted to public service had the opportunity to run for office and commit to serving their constituents. Candidates used to be judged by their commitment, intelligence, ideals and platforms, but over the years, political campaigns have become big business, with money as a controlling element. Today political candidates need very deep pockets or wealthy and connected backers. As a result, the poor and middle class in America today are represented by predominately wealthy people who have never walked in our shoes.

There are currently 237 members of Congress who are millionaires. The Huffington Post reported that U.S. Senators' median worth is at $1.79 million and House members' current median income is $622,254. I am considered middle class and with the meager income I earn as a public school teacher, I would need to work for over 11 years to earn as much money as the House members' median income. It is not surprising that these elected officials do not seem to understand what it is like to spend 20 percent or more of your income on health care costs, or what is is like to live pay check to pay check. Well-funded special interest groups and lobbies can push forward their agendas, while the average citizen has to fight to be heard to a body of people who may not even relate to the average person's situation. For these reasons open government is even more important.

Even communicating with elected officials and agencies can be a challenge. I have sent hundreds of letters to elected and appointed officials regarding the foreign contract workers and related issues over the last two decades. More often than not, I have received no response. Worse than that are the form letter responses that I have received, which are totally unrelated to the original letters that I wrote. Over the years I have also walked the halls of congressional office buildings and been told in a few offices that if I am not a resident of their state they do not have time to speak to me. I am paying the salaries of every member of the U.S. Congress and every staffer and not just the ones from my state! Americans should have access to all government offices and information.

The CNMI Open Government Act Initiative received 6, 597 yes votes and 3,047 no votes to meet the required two-thirds majority needed to pass.

Tina has done more in the short span of time that she has been in office than some other legislators who have been in office for years. I am referring to both CNMI legislators and U.S. legislators when i make that statement.

Read her entire statement on the Open Government Act Initiative to understand her commitment to a transparent government and determination to improve the system. Here is just an excerpt:

The Open Government Act (Public Law 8-41) is one of the most powerful tools we have for holding our government accountable for its actions and for keeping informed about the decisions that our public officials make in our names and with our taxpayer dollars. The Act requires government agencies to conduct their meetings openly, to make public records available for inspection, and to respond to requests for information within 10 days. No ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, order, or directive may be adopted except at a meeting that is open to the public, and for which notice has been given and an agenda established. Exceptions are made for emergency meetings and executive sessions that are reasonably and publicly justified, and there are provisions in place to protect whistleblowers and certain personal records.

The opening lines to the Open Government Act are striking: “The Legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this Commonwealth exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business.”

Her integrity, commitment to transparency in government, and dedication to improving the CNMI for all people who call the islands their home should stand as an model for other elected officials.

CNMI Election Results: Heinz and Arnold Top Vote Getters!

2009-11-07T19:33:00.030+10:00

November 7, 2009

A very close governor's race resulted in no candidate getting over 50% of the vote so a run-off will be scheduled between the top two teams: Republican candidates Heinz Hofschneider and Arnold Palacios who earned the top votes with 4,900 votes, and the incumbent Covenant party candidates of Benigno Fitial and Eloy Inos who came in second with 4,892 votes. Juan Pan Guerrero and Joseph Camacho came in third with 2,643 votes and Ramon Deleon Guerrero and David Borja coming in last with 1,101 votes.

Fitial was quoted earlier by the Saipan Tribune as saying the 18-35 age group will deliver the votes for him.

Representative Christina Sablan lost her bid for a Senate seat in the race with eight candidates. Republicans Pete Reyes and Ralph Torres have captured the two Saipan Senate seats.

This is sad news for the residents and especially for the nonresidents in the CNMI. Tina is one of the few CNMI officials who advocated for status for the foreign workers. She supported minimum wage and federalization. She has also been a tireless advocate for open government. Unlike some other legislators, Rep. Sablan Tina represents everyone who calls the CNMI their home regardless of their status or lack of political rights.

Tina held no campaign rallies and did not solicit campaign donations. She held dignified, intimate "Thursdays with Tina" meetings where she spoke and listened to her constituents.

]Tina is a brilliant and inspiring leader and hopefully she will run for office again.

____________________

There are a reported 16,146 registered voters in the CNMI, including 2,030 absentee votes. It appears that an estimated 13,500 people voted.

Here are some unofficial winners:

Saipan results:

Mayor - Donald Flores (R)

Senate - Ralph Torres (R) Pete Reyes (R)

House - Precinct 1: Digeo Benavente (R), Froilan Tenorio (C), Joseph DeLeon Guerrero (R), Antonio Sablan (R), Joseph Palacios (R), Eliceo Cabrero (R) Precinct 2: Ramon Palacios (C), Rafael Demapan (C) Precinct 3: Ramon Tebuteb (R), Ray Yumul (R), Francisco Dela Cruz (R), Felicidad Ogumoro (C), Edmund Villagomez (C), Stanley Torres (I) Precinct 4: Sylvestre Ilguel (C), George Camacho (I) Precinct 5: Frederick Deleon Guerrero (I), Ramon Basa (C)

Municipal Council - Eric Diaz, Ramon Camacho

Rota results:

Mayor - Melchor A. Mendiola (I)

Senate - Jovita Taimanao (I) Juan M. Ayuyu (I)

House - Rep. - Terisita Santos (I)

Municipal Council - Arvin Ogo (I) George Hocog (I), Prudencio Manglona, Jr. (I)

Tinian results:

Mayor - Ramon Dela Cruz (R)

Senate - Francisco Cruz (R), Jude Hofschneider (R)

House - Rep. - Trenton Conner (R)

Municipal Council - Esteven Cabrera, Patrick Manglona, Joseph Cruz

Republicans had a clean sweep on Tinian defeating all Covenant candidates.

Northern Islands results:

Mayor - Tobias Aldan (I)

Aldan beat the Covenant candidate, Ramona Rebuenog by one vote.

Initiatives:

Question House Legislative Initiative 15-3: Do you approve of House Legislative Initiative 15-3 to amend Article XV, Section 1(c) and (e) of the Constitution of the Northern Mariana Islands to one member being a high school student?

House Legislative Initiative 16-11 Do you approve of Senate Legislative Initiative 16-11 to amend Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution of the Northern Mariana Islands to hold regular general elections only in even-numbered years?

Open Government Act of 2007: Do you approve of the popular initiative entitled the "Open Government Act of 2007," to amend 1 CMC §9913 to read as follows: "§9913. Legislative Branch: Applicability. The Commonwealth Legislature, including all Commonwealth legislators and the Legislative Bureau, shall be subject to 1 CMC §9901, et seq. The respective rules and procedures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Legislative Bureau shall be in compliance with this Chapter."

Do you approve of House Legislative Initiative 16-11 to amend Article III, Section 9(a) of the Constitution of the Northern Mariana Islands to prohibit the withdrawal of any funds from the General Fund except by appropriations made by law Article XV, Section 2(a) of the Constitution of the Northern Mariana Islands?

CNMI Election

2009-11-07T10:18:00.013+10:00

November 6, 2009

Today is election day! You can listen to the election coverage live on Magic 100 Radio. Earlier NMC instructor Frank Sobolewski gave some input on the election from a political scientist's view. Polls opened at 7:00 a.m. and will remain open until 7:00 p.m. Long lines were reported at some polling places.

Election Poll Controversy

There seems to have been quite the uproar over the election poll conducted by Jay Solly of Marianas Consulting. The Saipan Tribune said that Bridge Capital fired Solly's girlfriend, Lily Nguyen, for "improper use of company resources" because Mr. Solly used their home phone to conduct the survey. Apparently the home phone is provided by Bridge Capital.

From the Tribune:

Marianas Consulting principal consultant Jay Solly, who conducted the phone survey, claimed Gov. Benigno R. Fitial and the Covenant Party pressured the company to terminating her employment.

Solly said the survey was done scientifically and the poll's methodology was within the guidelines of the American Association of Public Opinion Researchers.

“We're not trying to become political enemies of anybody and unfortunately that is what has become of the day for us and unfortunate for their campaign, having done 26 races over 14 years, that's a huge distraction for them. I'm sorry I caused that distraction but when they've attacked me, that requires a response for all to be understood,” Solly said in an interview yesterday afternoon.

He said he stands by the survey results. Marianas Consulting did not provide the Saipan Tribune a copy of the results for Friday's publication.

“We're getting onto this business where they're unhappy with the results. .This is effectively a retaliatory firing because they're unhappy that the employee has a significant other who produced a poll unfavorable to the current administration,” said Solly.

He added, “Why is it that the governor thinks he can call the company and say heads must roll and they do? Can someone answer that? That's a question to be asked.

Solly was also interviewed on KSPN2. Watch the interview here.

A Bridge Capital spokesperson claimed that Ms. Nguyen was terminated before they received a call from the governor.

Ms. Nguyen gave a different view:

Nguyen said there were no costs incurred by the use of her home phone.

Bridge Capital provided housing and home phone to Nguyen at Anak's Condominium. Nguyen lives with her significant other, Solly.

Solly made the phone calls from Oct. 29 to Nov. 4.

A statement from Bridge Capital office manager John R. Mulder also confirmed that “some of the calls were apparently made from a residential telephone assigned to one of our employees.”

“These calls were not authorized by Bridge Capital, we were unaware they were being made, and the employee was absolutely not permitted to conduct a private business from the residence,” said Mulder.

Bridge Capital said “the employee has been terminated.”

Nguyen said at about 10:55am yesterday, she was in her office and Pipes asked her “simple questions” such as “Is Solly your boyfriend?” and “Does Jay work for Marianas Consulting which did this poll?” to which she answered “yes” to both.

Nguyen quoted Pipes as saying, “We're receiving some pushback from the governor.”

Five minutes later, she said, Mulder asked her, “Do you know what's this all about,” to which she said “yes.

Nguyen said Mulder asked her to leave the premises immediately.

Mr. Solly runs Marianas Consulting, a "strategy, government and public affairs consulting firm" on Saipan.

Bridge Capital has been involved in gambling and setting up casinos in various locales. The company will be establishing video gambling center at the vacant La Fiesta Mall. The owners, Shawn Scott and John K. Baldwin are controversial in the Virgin Islands and in the U.S.

From the Washington Post:

Bridge Capital is owned by Shawn Scott and John K. Baldwin, Las Vegas entrepreneurs who have tried for years to qualify for a license to operate a big-time gambling venture. They have had little luck, public records show. Scott, whose properties have received financial support from Baldwin, has been denied or failed to obtain gambling licenses in five states where regulators found evidence of financial mismanagement, irregular accounting practices and hidden partnerships.

TPM Muckraker details the connections of Baldwin, Abramoff, Julius Kaplan and others.

See this previous post on this controversy.

Workers to Set Up Support Center

2009-11-06T10:37:00.004+10:00

November 5, 2009

The United Worker Movement NMI will set up a support center to assist guest workers in submitting comments on the recently released rules from DHS. The center will be held on Sunday November 8th from 8:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m. at the Fiestang Pinoy by Juvy Restaurant across Saipan Grand Hotel on Beach Road, Susupe.

The center will have computers, with translators to assist in different languages like Tagalog, Chinese, Bangladeshi, Korean, Sri Lankan, Nepalese, and Hindi according to the Saipan Tribune.

From the Saipan Tribune:

The group said it plans to facilitate the submission of comments by centralizing the receipt of all comments and submitting them to the Department of Homeland Security.

“We have a lot of concerns regarding the transitional worker program for the CNMI that we need to bring to the Department of Homeland Security's attention. We have a very small time to submit comments on the rules and regulation of this program. We are asking all brothers and sisters to come up with their comments [and] concerns before Nov. 25, 2009,” the group said in a statement.

The United Workers Movement NMI-an umbrella group composed of Pilcowa, Dekada and other worker's leaders-will be setting up a support center that will help alien workers who want to give comments on the transitional worker program.

Pre-Election Survey Shows 25 Percent Approval Rating for Governor

2009-11-06T08:44:00.007+10:00

November 5, 2009

One day before the CNMI elections the Marianas Variety reports that Governor Benigno Fitial has a dismal 25 percent approval rating. The survey was conducted by Marianas Consulting, a strategy, government and public affairs consulting firm based on Saipan.

The Marianas Consulting Group is headed by Jay (Jaredt) Solly who worked for the House Ways and Mean Committee, as an executive staff assistant for Florida Governor Jeb Bush and as field director for the Republican Party in Broward County, FL.

More than 54 percent of those surveyed said that the CNMI government is headed in the wrong direction.

From the Variety:

The survey also showed that Rep. Heinz S. Hofschneider was the top gubernatorial choice of 29 percent of the respondents, followed by former Sen. Juan T. Guerrero with 20 percent, the governor 15 percent and former Sen. Ramon S. Deleon Guerrero 7 percent. 22 percent remained undecided.

...The population that was sampled was 225 of the 13,308 registered voters on Saipan with a 5.5 percent margin of error.

“The lack of voter optimism mirrors the entire population sampled, with 52 percent believing the CNMI is heading in the wrong direction, with only 25 percent approving the job Governor Fitial is doing, 26 percent approving the job the Commonwealth Legislature is doing, and 23 percent approving the job Saipan Mayor Juan Tudela is doing,” said Solly in a statement.

CNMI PL 16-43 states that if none of the candidates among the governor-lieutenant governor teams gets 50 percent plus one vote or more there will be a run-off election. A run-off is almost a certainty. In the 2005 election Fital won with less than 30% of the vote, meaning that 70% of the voters voted for another candidate.

CNMI guest workers are asking their U.S. citizen children to think of them when they cast their ballots. In a letter to the editor, Malou Berueco said:

Your parents are aliens here in your own home. Our supporters are many; some just remain silent just like you. But we, your parents as aliens here in the CNMI, have something the opposers do not own: our own U.S. citizen children! You have a voice in this coming election. Let our voice be heard through you. Make them hear us and make it loud.

The CNMI guest workers and nonresidents, even those who have lived in the CNMI for 20 or more years, are disenfranchised indentured servants. They pay taxes, but cannot vote, which I consider totally un-American. The guest workers and non-residents are hoping that candidates who respect them and support status will be elected.

Ruth Tighe gave an analysis of the initiatives in a letter to the editor and Micronesian Legal Services attorney, Jane Mack, gave an analysis of the initiatives and reviewed the election choices of the candidates on her web-site Saipan Writer.

Who will you vote for and why?

No Umbrella for Cheated Workers

2009-11-06T08:19:00.004+10:00

November 5, 2009

A few days after the Fitial Administration filed documents with the District of Columbia District Court singing the praises of the wonderful CNMI labor system, an attorney has alleged that ex-garment workers with outstanding wages were denied umbrella permits.

The Saipan Tribune reported that the CNMI DOL refused to issue umbrella permits to former Rifu garment factory workers who are suing are owed back wages. Attorney Robert Meyers said 11 of the 40 garment workers that he represents were refused permits. He explained that an insurance company appealed to the DOL and lost the appeal and also "failed to file a timely appeal in the Superior Court."

From the Saipan Tribune:

Myers said he filed an order in aid of judgment with Labor to enforce and collect the unpaid wage awards because they were now final and unreviewable, both administratively and judicially. Myers said Labor, however, ignored him and his filing.

Later, he said, the insurance company sued Labor in federal court. “DOL is saying that the fed suit has nothing to do with the Rifu case, which is also false,” he said.

Myers said Labor thinks the Rifu case is done and the employees have no status and will be sent home despite having unpaid wage awards.

Labor reportedly told him it will use funds from its trust fund to “voluntarily” repatriate these workers.

Myers questioned why Labor would allow a waiver for those on the overstayers' list (and with no case or claim pending) but not for those whose names shouldn't even be on the list and who have claims or cases pending.

“Clearly, the administration is doing something which is completely different,” he said.

The article also states that Attorney Meyers requested help for DOL Attorney Eli Golab with "the issuance of umbrella permits, removal of names from the overstayers' list, issuance of memorandums for temporary work, and to register the unpaid wages claims." He also informed Federal Ombudsman Pamela Brown about the situation:

Myers told Brown that it seems more and more that Labor is trying to get rid of his clients by closing them off from their due process rights.

Myers said he is hoping that the challenges may be easily cured without having to go to the courts.

He noted that even nonresident workers who are overstayers with no case or claim pending may file a waiver request to get umbrella permits.

“If so, then why is it that those with valid claims or cases pending in either the court or labor system having lawful status cannot likewise get the umbrella permit-albeit via waiver [if necessary],” he told the ombudswoman.

Myers said Labor's counsel stated that Labor requires an order from the court directing the issuance of “umbrella permits.”

Myers said he responded that there is no authority giving Labor the power to require a court order to issue umbrella permits.

“While the protocol mentions such court orders, it is just that-merely protocol. It is neither law nor regulation,” he asserted.

This umbrella certainly will never cover everyone. It will be interesting to see what happens with these permits after the election.

Anti-Federalization Lawsuit: Status Conference Called

2009-11-06T07:49:00.004+10:00

November 5, 2009

Today the CNMI filed more documents in the District Court of the District of Columbia. Judge Paul Friedman has called a status conference for Friday November 6, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. The Order from the Judge states, "A status conference via conference call is scheduled at 4:00 p.m on Friday, November 6, 2009. The parties are instructed to initiate and organize the conference call."

Also, today Fitial's "special counsel" Howard Willens and Jenner and Block attorneys filed a Plaintiffs Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to Address Effect of Issuance of Regulations. The document contains the same distortions presented in earlier documents filed in the last week.

PL 110-229 is scheduled to take effect in 21 days on November 28, 2009.

See this post, Fitial Lawsuit: Amended Complaint Does Not Present A True Picture, for related news.

Fitial Lawsuit: Amended Complaint Does Not Present a True Picture

2009-11-04T12:21:00.010+10:00

November 3, 2009

The governor's office filed an Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief yesterday in the District Court for the District of Columbia through it's Washington D.C.-based law firm of Jenner and Block. But don't worry, they ask for the Court to award them attorney fees. How else would a government with no money pay for a lawsuit? Who knows how much they still owe Jenner and Block.

The 31-page document contains some interesting statements:

"The large and stable workforce formed by these foreign workers is critical to the economy developed by the CNMI. Because the islands are so remote, it has proved difficult to attract U.S. citizen workers to the islands, particularly for unskilled or short-term employment. As a result, the U.S. citizen population of the CNMI is small, consisting of only about 30,000 people, including children. Under the immigration and labor regime set up by the CNMI, foreign workers today make up a full two-thirds of the CNMI’s working population. To address issues that had existed in the past, local CNMI labor laws currently provide extensive protections for these foreign workers while they are employed in the Commonwealth."

Extensive protections? Please explain why there are $6.1 million in unpaid judgments that were issued by the CNMI Department of Labor that the cheated workers are still waiting to receive if there are extensive protections. Why in the last year have there been huge settlements in EEOC lawsuits against the governor's former employer and friend, Willie Tan, if there are extensive protections? Why is there a lawsuit against the bonding companies and the CNMI DOL for failing to pay when employers have defaulted on monetary judgments? Why have there recently been over 20 new cases of human trafficking if there are extensive protections? Why does the CNMI have a disproportionate number of cases of labor abuses, huge labor settlements, and human trafficking for its small population if there are extensive protections?

The document claims:

One, P.L. 110-229 provides that two years after the transition period begins aliens lawfully admitted by the CNMI may be subject to removal by the United States Department of Homeland Security as “illegal entrants and immigration violators.” P.L. 110-229 further provides that by the conclusion of the Act’s transition period in 2014 the number of foreign workers in the Commonwealth who are not otherwise authorized to remain in the CNMI by federal law must be reduced to zero. The only aliens entitled to stay in the CNMI beyond that time would be those who qualify for a visa under federal immigration laws and those who have the right to remain in the CNMI under pre-existing U.S. treaties or compacts. Because most of the CNMI’s foreign workers are not covered by pre-existing treaties or compacts and would not be eligible for work visas under the narrow and specialized classifications of the federal immigration laws, the effect of P.L. 110-229 will be to devastate the employment base and local economy of the CNMI, rendering the islands almost wholly dependent upon voluntary assistance from the United States.

Not quite true. The law provides for a report including a recommendation to the U.S. Congress to grant the foreign workers permanent status. Of course, what is absent in this motion is the fact that the governor had the status provision removed form the original bill, and has testified that he opposed status for the workers.

Then there is this view of the federal program:

Two, the statute requires that upon the commencement of the transition period Homeland Security shall take over the administration of all foreign workers previously admitted by the CNMI who are not otherwise authorized to remain in the CNMI by federal law. The law provides that DHS shall administer a local permit system, determining which local businesses and individual employers may employ a foreign worker, and which may not. This local labor permitting scheme run by Homeland Security for foreign workers lawfully admitted by the CNMI over the past 20 years is the antithesis of local self-governance, as guaranteed to the Commonwealth.

The rules will help to curb abuses which have continued for decades. The rules will provide more protection to categories of foreign workers who may not be allowed to work in businesses or categories where abuses have flourished. I am assuming that they are talking about the domestic workers, the "cultural dancers" (strippers) and bar girls. These businesses still can hire local residents.

This statement was a little surprising:

Congress was clear regarding why it took these actions. Congress determined that choices the CNMI had made in utilizing foreign workers were not in the best interests of its own people. Thus, “first” among concerns identified by Congress was that the CNMI’s “extensive use of imported labor” was not sufficiently “creating private sector opportunities for local residents.” S. Rep. 110-324, at 3 (Apr. 10, 2008). This kind of paternalistic oversight of the well-being of CNMI residents, resulting from actions taken by the CNMI’s local elected officials, is fundamentally at odds with the principles of autonomy and self-governance legally guaranteed to the Commonwealth and its people when they chose a unique, voluntary affiliation with the United States.

Tell that to the hundreds of unemployed local residents who left the islands because they could not find work or to those who remain and are still unemployed.

In seeking relief the governor claims:

In this action, the CNMI seeks declaratory and injunctive relief on its claim that P.L. 110-229 violates core provisions of the Covenant governing the fundamental relationship between the United States and the Commonwealth. In addition, because the CNMI had no right to participate in the federal political process by which its rights to autonomy were abrogated, P.L. 110-229 violates constitutional limitations on the power of Congress and requires special scrutiny by this Court. Finally, if left unchecked, P.L. 110-229’s forced removal of two-thirds of CNMI’s existing employment base and its projected devastation of the local economy by 50i or more would violate constitutional rights of due process and equal protection of CNMI’s people, employers, and property owners.

In fact, there is a political process that allows participation by the CNMI government. There are formal talks, hearings, and the government is allowed to comment on the rules.

The fact that the Fitial administration is being untruthful to the Court is disturbing. When the administration fails to reveal important facts such as the fact that the administration was the cause for the removal of the grandfathering provision; the fact that the governor testified against granting permanent status to the foreign workers, which would help to stabilize the workforce; and the fact that the administration's main goal is to maintain control of the broken local system to ensure cheap disposable foreign laborers who have no political and social rights, it is being untruthful.

Throughout the motion the attorneys underscore the argument that PL 110-229 violates the Covenant. Yet, in his testimony at the February 2007 Senate Hearing, Ambassador F. Haydn Williams testified that it was time for the U.S. to impose federal regulations. Ambassador Williams was the President's Personal Representative for the negotiation of the CNMI Covenant. He has a totally different view than that which is expressed by Governor Fitial, his shadows Howard Willens and Deanne Siemer, and other anti-federalization fighters as is portrayed in this lawsuit. From his testimony:

I was the President's Personal Representative for the negotiation of the CNMI Covenant, and seeing the Covenant through the House and the Senate. Frequent visits in the '80s and '90s kept my interest alive along with my efforts to win congressional support for the American Memorial Park in Saipan, and the building of the American Memorial to our war dead in the battles of Saipan, Tinian, and the Philippine Sea.

My message is a simple one. It is time for the Congress to take a critical across-the-board look at the current situation in the CNMI in the best interests of the citizens of the CNMI and the broader interests of the U.S. This Committee is aware that the CNMI today is in dire straits and has turned to Washington for help. In your CNMI oversight hearings, I believe, Mr. Chairman, that it is in everyone's interest to focus in particular on the CNMI's immigration policies and the control of its borders.

In addressing this matter a brief look back at the Covenant negotiations may be useful -- to remember the times, the context and the spirit in which the talks were conducted -- namely the long held desire of the NMI to become a permanent part of America. The two preeminent issues were, U.S. sovereignty, and the rights to internal self-government. Once these two matters were agreed to in principle, the negotiations turned to other questions including what Federal laws would apply to the new Commonwealth.

The Marianas delegation was especially concerned about U.S. immigration laws. They were worried about their island culture, their Chamorro and Carolinian heritage being overwhelmed by an influx from Asia. They wanted protection from this happening, and also from the threat of war refugees entering the NMI from South East Asia. They proposed that immigration control be in their hands to enable them to restrict the numbers entering the NMI.

The U.S. could not accept this proposal, but agreed that in a transition period before the end of the Trusteeship and the coming into force of U.S. sovereignty, the new Commonwealth would be given transitional responsibility for immigration. Under Section 503 of the Covenant, Congress retained the ultimate authority to make U.S. immigration laws applicable to the CNMI following termination of the Trusteeship. It was anticipated at the time, that such action would be taken quickly, given the known attitude of some leading key members of Congress on the immigration question regarding territories.

When the Covenant was approved, it was expected that the Trusteeship would come to an end in a couple of years, once the Compacts of Free Association with the other Districts were concluded. But those negotiations lingered on and on. Instead of two, it was 10 years before final U.N. Security Council action terminated the Trusteeship for the Marianas. This far longer than expected interim period enabled largely non-indigenous entrepreneurs to take advantage of the Covenant's trade privileges, and its wage and immigration exemptions to establish their presence in the CNMI, and to begin the importation of large numbers of low-paid alien workers for their enterprises.

It was during this transition period that local political and interested business opposition to any Federal implementation of section 503 became institutionalized. It was committed to blocking, with the help of hired Washington lobbyists, any Federal action on minimum wages and immigration.

The subsequent story of the serious social, economic, and environmental impact of the CNMI's labor and immigration policies over the past 30 years on the life in the CNMI, the consequences of encouraging a population growth of some 500 percent, and turning the indigenous citizens of the Commonwealth into a small minority, has been well documented.

Three Administrations, beginning with President Reagan, have all voiced deep concern over these developments. This Committee too has recognized the need for remedial action. In 2000, the CNMI Covenant Implementation Act, authored by Senators Murkowski and Akaka, called for the extension of U.S. immigration laws to the CNMI with proper transitional measures and exemptions. The Act was passed unanimously by the Senate. Regretfully, this Senate initiative died in the House without even a hearing, for reasons that are now well known.

Of course, Ambassador Williams was speaking of the work of lobbyist Jack Abramoff hired by the CNMI government and garment manufacturers to kill the bill in the House when he said, "...for reasons that are now well known."

Ambassador Williams was deeply involved in the Covenant negotiations, yet he supports federalization and sees no conflict. This lawsuit appears to be truly a last desperate attempt to maintain the broken system and nothing else.

The motion contends that PL 15-108 was a reform law that "implemented a new program designed to protect foreign guest workers in the Commonwealth." Yet, they fail to note the continuation of cheated workers, scams, and incidences of human trafficking. This is the claim that may sound fine on the surface:

The program provides for an individual face-to-face orientation for each arriving worker in his or her own language; standard contract forms specifying terms and conditions of employment for foreign workers; full medical coverage; bonding of employers of foreign workers to ensure full payment of wages and overtime; mediation and early dispute resolution for foreign workers; a low-cost and speedy administrative adjudication of disputes; and fully-funded repatriation back to the home country when employment ends.

They again fail to note that they created an umbrella permit that asks the foreign workers to sign an agreement that in some circumstances relieves their employers of the contractual responsibilities of repatriation and medical care! They also failed to note that DOL does nothing to help a cheated workers collect their monetary judgments from administrative orders issued by DOL. They neglect to state that there are few consequences for unscrupulous employers under this oh-so-fair system. Furthermore, many of the workers have reported that their employers told them that if they want to be renewed they have to agree to pay for many of these so-called benefits including their own contract renewal fees, required medical exams, health care costs, and other expenses.

Here is a direct slap in the face to the foreign workers:

The Commonwealth values its foreign guest workers. The Commonwealth’s guest workers are deeply enmeshed in the Commonwealth’s economy and society. About 8,000 of these workers have lived in the CNMI for more than five years. Some have lived there for more than 15 years. Foreign guest workers are employed by hotels, banks, restaurants, factories, and individual employers. Many of these workers have children born in the CNMI, who are citizens of the United States. These foreign workers form the backbone of the Commonwealth’s economy and are an essential component of the Commonwealth’s community.

Yes, they value them so much that the governor told them he would have them all deported, he testified against any status for them, and he lobbied successfully to have the grandfathering provision removed! They valued them so much that they created PL15-108 that called for them to exit the CNMI every two years.

The document continues:

Although some of its provisions address immigration issues, P.L. 110-229 is not merely an immigration law. Rather, it broadly preempts local labor laws regulating the continued employment of foreign workers in the CNMI; it imposes an unprecedented federal guest worker program on the Commonwealth; and it supplants local decision-making with respect to economic development by entrusting control over the Commonwealth’s economy to a web of federal bureaucracy. No other community in the United States is subject to such massive federal intrusion into matters of local concern.

This is also not true. There is no locality in the U.S. mainland where the local government maintains control of foreign laborers. Where in the states does a local government control alien labor?

Another slap to the nonresidents:

The Commonwealth is populated by American citizens who seek to be treated as equal members in the American community, not reduced to a status of economic vassalage. The CNMI has provided more soldiers per capita to the United States military than nearly any other State or Territory in the Nation.

How many of those soldiers are children of the nonresidents and foreign contract workers? The CNMI can also claim more cases of human trafficking per capita.

Yet, another slap to the foreign workers:

P.L. 110-229 will not only severely damage the Commonwealth’s economy, it will also rend its social fabric. The 24,000 foreign workers and their families in the Commonwealth make up roughly 40% of the Commonwealth’s total population. Many of these people have lived in the Commonwealth for over a decade. Moreover, the families of foreign workers include thousands of U.S. citizen children. Under the provisions of P.L. 110-229, these children’s parents are subject to expulsion from the Commonwealth over the next several years, even if they otherwise could have remained gainfully employed in the Commonwealth. When required to leave, these parents will be forced either to separate from their children and find another home for them in the Commonwealth, or to take these U.S. citizen children away from their home country and the incalculable opportunities and benefits of growing up in the United States. In short, the societal, familial, and personal damage that will be caused by P.L. 110-229 is as severe as its economic impact.

How DARE they present that statement to the Court? Well, thanks for quoting my argument almost to the word, but it was this very administration that is the cause of the uncertainty and danger for the foreign workers and their families by lobbying successfully to remove the status provision and by refusing to request status for these people that they pretend to care about! How outrageous!

As far as the line about "no other city, county, or state in America is subject to such extensive federal restrictions upon such a large proportion of its private-sector labor force", are these people serious? It was the CNMI government who when negotiating the Covenant said that they wanted to maintain control of their labor and immigration so that they would not become a minority in their own islands. What did the CNMI government turn around and do, but bring in so many foreign workers that the indigenous people became a minority in a very short period of time. Additionally, there is also no other city, county, or state in American that has the high proportion of hideous labor abuses and such a high proportion of foreign contract workers.

What follows in the motion is meaningless because there is a solution that is in the hands of the very administration that is fighting federalization that is not addressed in this motion. The Fitial Administration can call upon the U.S. Congress to grant permanent status to the foreign workers and nonresidents so their argument is not valid.

Why not just tell the truth, which is that this administration wants a guest worker program where they can ensure that the workers remain permanently voiceless, disenfranchised and indentured and totally under their ill-intentioned control? Why not admit that they are suing to keep the broken local system so that they can set the rules and adjust them to benefit employers and businesses?

The document asks for the following relief:

...that the Court find that injunctive relief is appropriate to prevent Defendants from acting in violation of the Covenant; that the Court enter a permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from directly or indirectly by use of any means or instrumentalities enforcing P.L. 110-229 as challenged herein; that the Court find that the Department of Homeland Security promulgated the Interim Permit Rule in a manner that violates the Administrative Procedure Act and that the regulations therefore are invalid; that the Court award the Commonwealth attorneys’ fees and costs in accordance with law; that the Court grant the Commonwealth such other and further relief as the Court deems necessary or appropriate.

I have never read such a piece of arrogant, disingenuous propaganda with so many twisted omitted and distorted facts.

Fitial's Attorneys File Supplemental Motion

2009-11-03T11:33:00.010+10:00

November 2, 2009

Cha-ching! More money for Jenner and Block! Governor Fitial's attorneys filed a supplemental motion for a preliminary injunction today in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia.

It seems deceitful that the same administration that fought to have the grandfathering provision removed from the federal legislation presents an argument that it is concerned about the guest workers' status. As if their successful efforts to remove the status provision from the law had nothing to to with the workers' status and the CNMI's ability to retain a skilled work force after 2014.

The motion claims that DHS can't do their job:

Nor does the Act allow the Commonwealth to have a voice in, let alone determine, how best to handle local employment issues during the transition period while a declining number of the resident workers remain. The Act directs the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), immediately upon the effective date of the statute, to supplant the local government’s responsibilities for managing those foreign workers with DHS regulations addressing the myriad discretionary decisions associated with governance of a local workforce and economy, an area over which DHS has no particular agency expertise.

Although the administration complains about the rules, the administration refused to cooperate with the federal government, choosing to sue them instead of working cooperatively with them to establish the rules. From the motion:

The new regulations prescribe the terms and conditions of employment that must be followed. The new regulations determine whether and how household domestic workers may be employed. The new regulations provide that DHS will determine the extent to which the number of transitional workers will be reduced annually, based solely upon the agency’s assessment of economic conditions in the Commonwealth. With regard to these and countless other determinations made in the new regulations, DHS has set forth rules unilaterally without affording any of the persons affected prior notice or opportunity to comment.

The rules actually do call upon the public for comments.

The motion continues:

Enjoining the new regulations will protect the CNMI and its residents from being unduly injured by having to comply with procedurally invalid rules, and will cause no harmful consequences. Under the terms of the Act, foreign workers may remain in the Commonwealth lawfully pursuant to CNMI permits for up to two years following the effective date of the statute. Section 702(a) [section 6(e)(1)]. As a result, no worker will be rendered “without status” upon the effective date of the Act. In addition, the rules ultimately issued will benefit from exposure to the salutary effects of notice and public comment.

What they should have written is this: "As a pre-election political ploy, just last month we created the umbrella permit allowing almost every foreigner to remain in the CNMI until November 27, 2011."

What could happen if Fitial were to win an injunction or the anti-federalization lawsuit? Could the U.S. Congress then write and pass legislation that applies the same immigration law to the CNMI that exists in the U.S. with no special provisions or transition considerations? Could the U.S. Congress write a law that provides U.S. citizenship to all nonresidents in the CNMI effective on the date of passage? Could individual states demand local control over the foreign contract workers in their specific states?

You Can't Make This Stuff Up!

2009-11-03T05:53:00.007+10:00

November 2, 2009

"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." -Mohandas Gandhi

Can a person be more audacious? The same administration that worked to have the grandfathering provision removed from the federal law and that penned PL15-108 that proposed the guest workers must leave every two years now claims that the federal rule concerning maids is "not just against women but against foreign workers."

The Saipan Tribune reported CNMI DOL Deputy Secretary Kaipat as saying:

“The no-maids provisions discriminate against women on several grounds. First, it has the effect of forcing our women to stay home and take care of the household instead of working.”

Firstly, there is not a "no-maids provision" in the rules. The rules states that a domestic workers can receive CW-1 transitional worker status under the federal guest worker program, but they must be sponsored by an eligible employer doing business in CNMI.

Since when are women forced to stay at home to take care of the household instead of working? I do not know one family in the mainland who has a live-in maid (or any kind of maid) even though both parents work outside of the home. They bring their young children to a day care, have a relative or trusted neighbor watch their children in their homes, enroll their children in before and after school programs, or make other arrangements. The allegation of discrimination is ridiculous!

I do agree with this statement she made:

"Women do not want to entrust their homes and their children to some employee of a company. They want the household help that they have had for years and the people that they trust."

This is not just the case for domestic helpers, but for every category of foreign worker. All employers would like to keep the "help that they have had for years and the people that they trust." If Governor Fitial, and the anti-federalization supporters including Cinta Kaipat had not worked to have the grandfathering provision removed from the federal legislation it would not be an issue today. That provision would have ensured that the employers could have had the same skilled, dedicated and hardworking employees that they renewed year after year after year.

The story continues:

"The drafters of this federal statute were all men, Kaipat said. They apparently did not care about the rights of women to be in the workplace, and they did not understand the important part that women play in the workforce here in the Commonwealth. "

Is she serious? Was there a list of authors of the rules? Were they actually all men? Is she really suggesting that the drafters of the rules are sexist? That they don't understand the importance of women in the work force in the CNMI? The women in the mainland don't have maids. Maybe we should march on Washington! This is absurd!

Kaipat had the nerve to state:

“The no-maids policy also discriminates against some of our longest-staying foreign workers. Women who have been on our islands taking care of our children and our elderly since the 1980s do not deserve this back-of-the-hand treatment. The foreign workers who help our children and elderly are valued employees. They have long-standing relationships with our families and with our Commonwealth. They have done nothing to deserve this harsh result.”

Again, the "no-maids" policy does not exist, although the hiring procedures have changed.

Any "back-of-the-hand treatment" was given by the Fitial Administration and backers who lobbied to get the grandfathering provision removed. It would have provided security for not just for the domestic helpers, but for all of the guest workers and their employers. It would have eliminated uncertainty and hardship for thousands. You just cannot make such a selfishly motivated move and then blame someone else for it. If Governor Fitial and Kaipat are truly concerned for the guest workers and their employers, they would recommend to the U.S. Congress that they immediately grant the foreign contract workers and nonresidents in the CNMI U.S. status.

UPDATE Read Jane's post, Bullshit Feminism on Kaipat's latest jive.

Fitial Administration Needs to Admit That Its Refusal to Support Status for Foreign Workers Jeopardizes the CNMI Workforce

2009-11-02T00:07:00.012+10:00

November 1, 2009

The Fitial Administration successfully campaigned to have the grandfathering provision removed from the federal legislation and now may finally need to admit that this action will adversely impact the CNMI workforce. Although the governor and the anti-federalization followers continue to put forth their own spin, propaganda and excuses, the bottom line in the debate about the federalization of the CNMI is that eventually, in order to maintain a stable and skilled work force, U.S. status must be granted to the foreign workers and nonresidents. The Fitial Administration will have to accept responsibility for rejecting the idea of granting U.S. status to the foreign workers and nonresidents, and thus jeopardizing the economy and future workforce.

Furthermore, the administration has accepted no blame for that move that will result in the loss of the workforce if it is not reversed. The administration was aware that PL 110-229 would reduce the workforce to zero, because Fitial's special attorneys were the ones educating the public on this provision of the law. At the same time that they complained about losing the workforce, they were preparing testimony and statements objecting to U.S. status for any of the workers which would have ensured that the workforce remained!

On Friday, October 30, 2009, the governor filed a supplemental memorandum in his anti-federalization case being heard before Judge Paul Friedman in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia. The document was not endorsed by the Office of the Attorney General, but rather by the governor's "special legal counsel", Howard Willens, (husband of Deanne Siemer, the governor's "volunteer") and the governor's highly -paid Washington DC-based law firm of Jenner and Block.

The governor's lawsuit was funded without approval of the CNMI Legislature and has already exceeded the estimated cost of $400,000. This latest action will add more to the cost for the cash-strapped government that is proposing austerity measures. Cha-ching!

The memorandum notes that the complaint is "ripe" now that the rules have been issued:

Now that the Interim Rules have been issued, Defendants’ own theory dictates that the CNMI’s injury is no longer “speculative” and that its complaint is undeniably ripe.

The memorandum complains that the federal government will have control over the local labor system. From the document:

Second, the Interim Rules demonstrate that the Commonwealth accurately portrayed the Act’s consequences upon the CNMI, and that these consequences far exceed the bounds of Congress’s authority to regulate the CNMI under the Covenant. The Interim Permit Rule creates a scheme for issuing new CNMI-only transitional worker permits (“CW permits”) to foreign workers in the CNMI. See 74 Fed. Reg. 55,094, 55,096. Under the rule, DHS ! and not the CNMI shall decide which employers shall obtain CW permits for which workers. Id. at 55,098. DHS, and not the CNMI, will decide which businesses are “eligible” and “legitimate” employers. Id. at 55,097. DHS, and not the CNMI, will decide whether a worker may change employers. Id. at 55,099. DHS, and not the CNMI, will deem domestic workers ineligible for CW permits unless they are employed through a placement agency rather than directly by families. Id. at 55,097. DHS, and not the CNMI, may stop issuing CW permits entirely to workers in the waitressing and hospitality industries. Id. Finally, on some unannounced schedule that DHS will unilaterally set, DHS will start dropping the number of CW permits it chooses to issue. Id. at 55,100. By the end of the transition period December 31, 2014 “existing grants of CW status will automatically terminate, and no new grants of CW status will be made.” Id. at 55,096.

All of the rules issued by DHS follow what was written in PL 110-229.

As pointed out previously by the U.S. defense team, the Federal government's interest in applying immigration and naturalization law to the commonwealth outweighs the CNMI's interest over internal affairs. They cited the Senate Report on the CNRA, the testimonies of Ambassador F. Haydn Williams, Delegate Donna Christensen, David Cohen, and others. (see this post.)

The Fitial Administration's memorandum contends that because the rules were released 31 days before the effective date, that the Administrative Procedure Act was violated.

However, DHS, one agency being sued by the Fitial Administration, addressed this issue clearly in the rules stating (emphasis added):

V. Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) provides that an agency may dispense with notice and comment rulemaking procedures when an agency, for ‘‘good cause,’’ finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). For reasons discussed below, DHS finds that prepromulgation notice and comment for this rule would be impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.

Although Congress provided DHS with twelve months (now eighteen months under the extended transition date) to conduct and conclude the rulemaking actions necessary to implement the requirements of the CNRA, this timeframe is a relatively short timeframe to conduct a thorough review of the CNMI’s immigration system and develop the complex regulatory scheme necessary to ensure a smooth transition of the CNMI to the U.S. federal immigration system and thus avoid potential adverse impacts on the CNMI economy and aliens currently residing lawfully in the CNMI. Further, in developing these regulations, DHS required sufficient time to engage in the necessary consultations with the CNMI government, Departments of State and Interior and other required stakeholders. Under the APA, an agency is authorized to forego notice and comment in emergency situations, or where ‘‘the delay created by the notice and comment requirements would result in serious damage to important interests.’’ Woods Psychiatric Institute v. United States, 20 Cl. Ct. 324, 333 (Cl. Ct. 1990) aff’d 925 F.2d 1454 (Fed. Cir. 1991); also National Fed’n of Fed. Employees v. National Treasury Employees Union, 671 F.2d 607, 611 (D.C. Cir. 1982). ‘‘[W]hen there is a lack of specific and immediate guidance from the agency that would create confusion, economic harm, and disruption, not only to the participants of the program, who are forced to rely on antiquated standards, but would also extend to consumers in general, the good cause exception is a proper solution to ameliorate this expected harm.’’ Woods, 20 Cl. Ct. at 333. Under the CNRA, the transition will begin on November 28, 2009, even if regulations to guide the CNMI are not yet in place. Thus, the failure to have an effective interim regulation in place by the beginning of the transition period would serve only to harm the CNMI and aliens residing in the CNMI following the transition. This would have an adverse impact on the CNMI economy in direct contrast to congressional intent under the CNRA and would be contrary to an important public interest. Although DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) to issue this rule as an interim rule, DHS nevertheless invites written comments on this interim rule and will consider those comments in the development of a final rule in this action.

The problem with their request is that the law, PL 110-229 states that the CNMI can have the stable workforce at any time. The administration merely needs to request status for the foreign workers and non-residents, as the CNRA allows. It seems that it would be in the best interest of the foreign contract workers, the businesses, and entire community to request permanent U.S. status for the foreign contract workers. This would ensure a stable and skilled workforce, save the costs of running a guest worker program, and spare employers from the permit fees. Yet, clearly, this administration is more concerned with retaining political power and keeping control over their dysfunctional system of disenfranchised, cheaply paid foreign workers than in looking at a long-term solution. The CNMI local system has allowed for the abuse and cheating of foreign workers, stifled the economy, ruined the reputation of the CNMI and U.S., and has stolen jobs from local residents over the years.

It was the Fitial Administration that refused and continues to refuse to support U.S. status for the nonresidents as documented by testimony, public statements and the fact that they lobbied successfully to have the provision removed from the original bill. All they have to do is to submit a request to the U.S. Departments of Interior and Homeland Security and U.S. Congress to immediately recommend that nonresidents be given U.S. citizenship, and they will have the work force they claim is being taken away! It happened in the Virgin Islands; it can happen in the CNMI. The Fitial Administration stands as a block to that practical move.

The U.S. defense team can present the Court with the provision in the CNRA calling for the federal government to make a recommendation concerning status by May 10, 2010 in consultation with the governor to refute the notion that the legislation will result in a loss of two-thirds of the work force. From the CNRA:

The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Governor of the Commonwealth, shall report to the Congress not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of the Northern Mariana Islands Immigration, Security, and Labor Act. The report shall include the number of aliens residing in the Commonwealth; a description of the legal status (under Federal law) of such aliens; in five year increments, the number of years each alien has been residing in the Commonwealth; the current and future requirements for the Commonwealth economy of an alien workforce; and recommendations to the Congress related to granting alien workers lawfully present in the Commonwealth on the date of the enactment of such Act United States citizenship or some other permanent legal status.

There is no valid argument that the workforce will be lost when the law provides for it to remain by providing a specific provision to address this issue. The only thing that would be lost is the broken system that was meant to be replaced.

The Defense team can also make available to the Court the reply from the DHS responding to questions posed after the May 19, 2009 hearing addresses several aspects of the transition and implementation of the CNRA.

Question: Is making long-term workers in the CNMI eligible for green cards an option under review by the Secretary?

Response: Although there is no statutory provision in either the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (CNRA) or the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) that would currently allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide immigrant status to long-term workers in the CNMI (other than those provisions for employer or family sponsored immigration generally applicable in the United States under the INA), the Secretary of Homeland Security understands that Congress considers addressing the issue of long-term status for such individuals to remain a legislative option. Specifically, the CNRA requires that the Secretary of the Interior consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security on a future report that includes “…such recommendations to Congress, as the Secretary may deem appropriate, related to whether or not the Congress should consider permitting lawfully admitted guest workers lawfully residing in the Commonwealth on such enactment date to apply for long-term status under the immigration and nationality laws of the United States.” Section 6(h)(5) of Public Law 94-241, as added by sec. 702(a) of Public Law 110-229. The Secretary of Homeland Security recognizes and will consider the operational, law-enforcement, humanitarian, and equitable arguments inherent in making a recommendation regarding immigrant status for such individuals during the consultation process with the Secretary of the Interior.

This is a classic case of wanting one's cake and wanting to eat it too.

Yet Another Typhoon Lashes the Philippines

2009-11-01T23:31:00.004+10:00

AP Photo: Santa Cruz, south of Manila

November 1, 2009

Typhoon Mirinae (Santi) has hit Luzon leaving 14 people dead and many missing. The typhoon brought over three more inches of rain to the already water-drenched city of Manila.

This is the fourth major storm to hit Luzon since September. Some flooded areas are not expected to drain until after Christmas, and water-borne diseases are taking a toll on the island nation.

The New York Times reports that the typhoon had sustained winds of 93 miles per hour gusting to 115. The typhoone hit northeast of Manila but caused a wide range of destruction from Rizal Province to Cavite Province where the typhoon exited with a tornado.

The New York Times reported:

Before the typhoon hit, millions of Filipinos had boarded buses heading to their home provinces for All Saints Day, when people visit cemeteries to pay respects to dead relatives.

Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro expressed fear that floods and congestion might trap visitors at graveyards, where people traditionally spend a day or even a night, but few heeded his call to scrap commemorations.

Here is a video showing the destruction of Mirinae:

Filipino musicians are sponsoring a concert in Orlando to raise money for the typhoon victims.

If you want to contribute to the vcitims please send donations to the Philippine National Red Cross. They accept online donations.

USCIS Meeting at American Memorial Park

2009-10-30T21:38:00.007+10:00

October 30, 2009

Guest workers and others gathered at the American Memorial Park today to listen to DHS and USCIS officials explain the new transitional rules and answer questions.

The main concerns were the travel restrictions, costs of CW-1 permits for employers who just paid expensive fees to the CNMI government for the 2-year permits, and confusion on status.

More later...

Here are some photos of the event contributed by photographer Itos Feliciano:

Meetings with USCIS at American Memorial Park and Garapan Mosque

2009-10-30T08:44:00.006+10:00

October 29, 2009

USCIS: MEETING AT MOSQUE
Janna Evans, regional lead for community relations of the USCIS Western Region will visit the Saipan Muslim community at Garpapan mosque at 2:00 p. m. this afternoon, Friday, October 30, 2009 (Saipan time) to discuss the new rules, and answer questions. Rabby Syed will translate.

USCIS: MEETING AT AMERICAN MEMORIAL PARK

Janna Evans, regional lead for community relations of the USCIS Western Region will be hosting a meeting at the American Memorial Park today October, 30, 2009 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. (Saipan time). She will explain the new USCIS transitional guest worker regulations that will go into effect in 29 days on November 28, 2009. According to the Marianas Variety, information about the regulations have been prepared in four languages: Filipino, English, Japanese and Chinese. The Korean translation is still in progress.

Asylum and Other CNMI Alien Worker Regulations Posted October 28, 2009

2009-10-30T06:02:00.010+10:00

October 29, 2009

Additional regulations were posted on October 28, 2009 on the federal registry.

Here are the links to the regulations that were posted on October 27, 2009 and related documents:

Docket File for CNMI Transitional Guest Worker Program (USCIS-2008-0039): rules posted on 11/27/09 Summarized and discussed in these previous posts:

DHS Regulation on Guest Worker Program Released
Questions and Answers on the CNMI Transitional Guest Worker Program
Response to New Transitional GW Rules

The Docket File for the rules also contains a 13-page Petition for CNMI-only worker. (Here is another link to the Petition for CNMI-only worker, in case you can not access it with the other link.)

________________________

The following document was posted on October 28, 2009:

Application of Immigration Regulations to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (USCIS 2008-0039 0001): rules posted on 11/28/09

Summary:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are implementing conforming amendments to their respective regulations to comply with the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (CNRA). The CNRA extends the immigration laws of the United States to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). This rule amends the regulations governing: asylum and credible fear of persecution determinations; references to the geographical ‘‘United States’’ and its territories and possessions; alien classifications authorized for employment; documentation acceptable for Employment Eligibility Verification; employment of unauthorized aliens; and adjustment of status of immediate relatives admitted under the Guam- CNMI Visa Waiver Program. Additionally, this rule makes a technical change to correct a citation error in the regulations governing the Visa Waiver Program and the regulations governing asylum and withholding of removal. The purpose of this rule is to ensure that the regulations apply to persons and entities arriving in or physically present in the CNMI to the extent authorized by the CNRA.

Because the regulations under this rule are governed by both the DOJ and DHS, the rule is posted twice in the Federal Register, under both the Department of Homeland Security's USCIS and the Department of Justice's Executive Office for Immigration Review. According to the Saipan Tribune, Marie Thérèse Sebrechts, USCIS regional media manager, told CNMI legislators that DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and Attorney General Eric Holder are jointly proposing conforming amendments to their respective regulations in this one rulemaking document.

Asylum Precluded During Transition

The regulations follow the provision in the CNRA precluding asylum in the CNMI during the transitional period. From the rule:

While most U.S. immigration benefits will become available to aliens in the CNMI on the transition program effective date, the CNRA precludes the availability of asylum under section 208 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1158, on the transition program effective date and throughout the transition period to aliens physically present in or arriving in the CNMI. Sec. 6(a)(7) of Public Law 94–241, as added by sec. 702(a) of Public Law 110–229. Asylum is a discretionary benefit that may be granted to aliens who establish that they have been persecuted or have a well founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. INA sections 101(a)(42) and 208(b), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42) and 1158(b). There are certain exceptions that limit the eligibility for aliens to apply for asylum, including a limitation stating that an alien must file his or her application for asylum within one year after the date of last arrival in the United States. INA sec. 208(a)(2)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(2)(B). Aliens granted asylum can seek lawful permanent resident (LPR) status in the United States by applying for adjustment of status no earlier than one year after being granted asylum. INA sec. 209(b), 8 U.S.C. 1159(b).

The CNRA, however, does not preclude the granting of two related forms of protection from removal in the CNMI during the transition period: withholding of removal under section 241(b)(3) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1231(b)(3), and withholding or deferral of removal under the regulations implementing Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture.

Some Rules Regarding Employment

Under the new rules, employers in the CNMI will be subject to the same prohibitions as other employers in the United States against knowingly employing aliens who are not authorized to work in the United States. The rule states, "These employers also will be subject to the same responsibilities as other employers in the United States for taking steps to ensure that their workforce is authorized for employment."

In other words, the employers may not hire illegal aliens or workers who are not authorized to work in the CNMI or they could be subject to civil and criminal penalties.

Employers will also be subject to the anti-discrimination provisions in the INA and the civil documents fraud provisions of the INA. From the rules:

In addition, upon the transition program effective date, employers and other entities in the CNMI will be subject to the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA, which make itunlawful for a person or any other entity to discriminate on the basis of citizenship status or national origin in the hiring, employment eligibility verification process, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee of an individual.

Further, upon the transition program effective date, individuals in the CNMI will be subject to the civil document fraud provisions of the INA (in addition to criminal penalties for U.S. immigration related document fraud already applicable under title 18 of the U.S. Code), which generally make it unlawful for any person or entity to use fraudulent documents for various purposes under the INA.

Employment Authorization Documentation
Form I-9 CNMI Employment Eligibility Verification must be completed to ensure that employers do not hire an alien who is not eligible for employment in the United States. (Here is another link to the I-9 form in case you can not access it with the other link.)

The form was created specifically for the CNMI and allows for employers to verify eligibilty of the employee with CNMI-specific documentation that is evidence of eligibility for employment. All employees (U.S. citizens and noncitizens) hired in the CNMI after November 27, 2009 will be required to complete the form. The rule states:

On Form I–9, a newly-hired employee must attest that he or she is a U.S. citizen or national, LPR [Legal Permanent Resident], or an alien otherwise authorized to work in the United States. The employee then must present a document from List A or a combination of documents from List B and C designated by statute or regulation and listed on Form I–9 as acceptable for establishing identity and employment authorization to his or her employer. The employer must examine the documents, record the document information on Form I–9, and attest that the documents appear both to be genuine and to relate to the individual presenting them.

The foreign contract workers who are presently working in the CNMI will be allowed to remain in the CNMI until the expiration of their employment contract or for as long as two years which ever is shorter. The rule states:

The Covenant Act amended by the CNRA contains a ‘‘grandfather clause’’ allowing alien workers in the CNMI lawfully present and authorized to be employed in the CNMI on the transition program effective date to be considered work authorized in the CNMI until their employment authorization expires under CNMI law, or for two years, whichever is shorter. Therefore, employers who employ such aliens in the CNMI will not be in violation of the prohibition against knowingly hiring or continuing to employ an unauthorized alien, so long as the employment is consistent with the CNMI authorization. This rule will allow aliens with unrestricted work authorization in the CNMI under the grandfather clause discussed above to present to their employers CNMI-specific documents in order to meet employment verification requirements.

The rule states that the employers of the foreign contract workers who are presently continuing their authorized employment in the CNMI will not be required to complete a Form I-9 CNMI (emphasis added):

Employers continuing the employment of aliens with CNMI work authorization under the grandfather clause will not be required to complete a Form I–9 CNMI for these employees on the transition program effective date because the Form I–9 requirements apply only to hiring on or after the transition program effective date, and not continuing employment. Unless they are permitted to change employers under their CNMI work authorization, most aliens with employer-specific CNMI work authorization will need to continue their employment with the same employer on or after the transition program effective date to be deemed employment-authorized under the grandfather clause. As provided in 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(24), employees who are authorized by the CNMI as of the transition program effective date to change employers may do so, whether the approval to change is employer specific or in the form of unrestricted work authorization. For aliens with unrestricted CNMI work authorization or who are permitted to change employers, Forms I–9 CNMI will need to be completed for hires on or after the transition program effective date.

The rule states that the following CNMI documents are evidence of work authorization: an Alien Entry Permit (with a red band), a Temporary Work Authorization, and permanent CNMI resident cards.

Concerning the cards with red bands, the rules state:

CNMI Public Law 15–108 Sec. 4925. It is DHS’ understanding that cards provided to immediate relatives, aliens given refugee protection, or others with unrestricted work authorization have red bands, and cards provided to aliens authorized to work with a specific employer have blue bands. For this reason, the rule specifies that only red-banded Alien Permit Cards would be acceptable.

Concerning the TWAs for a worker who has an outstanding labor complaint the rule states:

CNMI Public Law 15–108 Sec. 4947(f) provides that a ‘‘* * * hearing officer may authorize a foreign national worker to be employed in the Commonwealth on a temporary basis pending a hearing with respect to a labor complaint. A temporary work authorization shall end two (2) business days after the hearing officer’s order is issued.’’

Concerning the CNMI permanent residents the rules states:

Under Northern Mariana Islands Public Law 5–11 Sec. 4, which became effective April 1, 1977, the Resident Commissioner (the highest executive authority of the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands at the time appointed by the Secretary of the Interior) was authorized to issue permanent identification cards to persons granted permanent residence status pursuant to the provisions of Northern Mariana Islands Public Law 5–11. Northern Mariana Islands Public Law 5–11,however, was repealed in 1981 by CNMI Public Law 2–17. Public Law 2–17, Sec. 2 preserved the rights and status of persons who were granted or applied for permanent residency status pursuant to prior Northern Mariana Islands Public Law 5–11.

According to the rule, these documents provide identity and work authorization during the two-year period starting from the transition program effective date.

Umbrella permits issued to foreign guest workers would be recognized according to one guest worker who asked the question directly to a USCIS official. However, the umbrella permit is not listed as "recognized" document on the Form I-9 CNMI.

It is also not clear whether the umbrella permits that were distributed to foreign investors, foreign students, and others who were not brought into the CNMI for employment purposes, will be recognized for employment by the federal government. Were the umbrella permits issued to these categories of foreigners merely meant to allow these categories of nonresidents to remain in the CNMI for the two year maximum length of time?

Missing from Regulations: Employer's Qualifications to Hire Foreign Workers

Conspicuously absent from the rules that have been released this week are any specific rules regulating the eligibility qualifications required for an employer to hire a foreign worker. I understand that this rule will come from the U.S. Department of Labor. Employers should be qualified to hire foreign workers only if they meet certain income requirements, criminal background checks, and similar qualifications.

Some Concerns:

I wonder why the USCIS is requiring CW-1 permits to be processed in California. Obviously, that would delay the processing of the permits. I think of the guest workers' complaints about EEOC and the lengthy time table for response and action because the EEOC Office is located off-island. The delay in having a satellite office could pose a problem for employers and the guest workers.

Could it be that they are they having an established USCIS office handle the permits because they assume that the program is too temporary to set deep roots in the CNMI? Maybe they will wait until after May 10, 2009 to see what recommendation for the guest workers' status is made before setting up an office in the CNMI. If the nonresidents were to be grant U.S. citizenship, there would be no need for the office.

Many guest workers have expressed alarm at the exit and entry requirements set by the rules. From the questions and answers provided by USCIS:

Q. Can people with CW status travel outside the CNMI?
A. Once status is obtained, the CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant may leave CNMI but they must have the appropriate visa to re-enter. If the CW-1 or CW-2 status is obtained in CNMI (not the Consular post abroad) the nonimmigrant will have the legal status, but this is not a visa valid for travel to and admission into CNMI. If the CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant departs CNMI, he or she must obtain a visa from a U.S. embassy or consulate to return to CNMI, unless alternative arrangements have been specifically approved by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Q. How does one obtain the visa for re-entry?
A. Someone who has obtained CW-1 or CW-2 status in CNMI (not at a Consular post abroad) who needs to leave CNMI for whatever reason will need to get a visa from the State Department to re-enter CNMI. Usually this is done at the U.S. Embassy or a U.S. Consulate via a locally managed appointment system. If, for example, someone with CW-1 status plans to visit family in the Philippines, he/she would need to make an appointment with the U.S. Embassy in Manila to get the CW visa while they are in the Philippines. They would need to travel with documents to show the State Department officer during their interview and be prepared to wait at least a few days for the visa to be issued. Each U.S. Embassy and Consulate abroad has a different appointment system. To learn more about the U.S. Embassy or Consulate you may need to visit, travelers should go to: http://www.usembassy.gov/. Visa wait times for each Consular post abroad are posted at: http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/wait/tempvisitors_wait.php.

Although in cases of emergencies the guest workers could apply for parole, there is wide scale concern over this provision.

Rachel Maddow Questions Tim Phillips about CNMI

2009-10-29T11:18:00.004+10:00

October 28, 2009

Last week MSNBC's Rachel Maddow went after Tim Phillips' lobbying tactics, the fake grass roots group Americans for Prosperity, and working with Jack Abramoff's pal Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed. She called him a "parasite lobbyist" who gets fat off of fear mongering. In the segment she also blasts him for promoting the propaganda about the CNMI's former labor policies and abuses in garment factories.

Umbrella Permits: for "everyone"

2009-10-29T03:19:00.008+10:00

October 28, 2009

Department of Labor's "volunteer", Deanne Siemer and Director Barry Hirshbein announced that the CNMI government will extend umbrella permits to "everyone." Umbrella permits will be given to immediate relatives, foreign investors and foreign students who are in the CNMI. The permits will allow the nonresidents to remain legally in the CNMI during the first two years of the transition period which on November 28, 2009, which is just 29 days from now.

The Marianas Variety reported that Siemer announced that those listed on the "overstayer's list" can't get the umbrella permit, but they can request a "waiver" from the Division of Immigration. She also stated that those who are not on the overstayer's list can also file a request letter with the Labor Administration. Though vague, this implies that any foreigner, whether their status is legal or not, qualifies for CNMI umbrella permit status.

Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens (240D) and aliens (240E) also qualify for the permits regardless of what paperwork they currently hold. Siemer, spokesperson for the Fitial Administration, claims that the administration "wants to keep families together." She also was quoted as saying, The government is not is the business of splitting families."

Yet, this does not reflect the governor's public statements and testimony. At the August 2007 hearing, the governor remarked in his testimony, "Most of the people you saw outside are illegals. We are processing them for prosecution and deportation."

In his May 19, 2009 testimony the Saipan Tribune quoted the governor's remarks :

In his testimony, Fitial categorically stated that guest workers should not be given a permanent status because they are just here to work.

The umbrella permits will provide temporary security. Of course, if this administration was truly concerned about the guest workers and their families they would support a pathway to U.S. citizenship for all nonresidents.

Numbers of Foreigners

In reports from the administration and DOL a claim was made that there were no accurate records or data on the number of foreigners, yet statements made to the press in recent days indicate otherwise.

In July 2009, the Saipan Tribune reported that DOL had no clue how many foreign workers were present in the CNMI:

Labor deputy secretary Cinta Kaipat, in her latest interim progress report submitted to the Fitial administration, admitted that Labor doesn't have factual data on the number of nonresident workers and immediate relatives in the CNMI.

In June 2009, Rep. Tina Sablan called DOL's lack of basic data and evasiveness a "cause for concern." From the Marianas Variety:

A lawmaker is frustrated with the Department of Labor’s failure to provide basic data regarding the number of foreign workers in the CNMI.

Rep. Tina Sablan, Ind.-Saipan, said she wrote to Labor early this month and what the department sent her was a “non-reply” that only “raises more questions.”

Labor officials, she said, “told me that they do not track the number of people present in the CNMI, or even the number of active permits. They have repeatedly said they only count permit transactions, not people. They have also said that Labor does not have the manpower or the financial resources to track the numbers of people, despite the fact that they apparently have no trouble tracking transactions, and also despite the significant increases in fees. Now they are trying to claim that they are not even required by CNMI law to report on the actual numbers of foreign workers (or any other types of permit-holders, for that matter) and to shift attention and the burden of responsibility to the U.S. Census Bureau and to our U.S. delegate” in Congress.

Sablan said this is yet another sign that “yeah, absolutely we cannot monitor our borders effectively — we don’t even know how many people are here; that’s pretty basic.”

She wants to know “how Labor was able to establish the total number of alien workers present in the CNMI when U.S. Public Law 110-229 [the federalization law] was signed last year. How did officials establish the cap on the number of foreign workers, which was required by that federal law? How are they now able to ensure that the CNMI does not exceed that cap? And how were they able to prepare their 2007 Annual Report, which actually does appear to document the numbers of people in each of the different permit categories in 2007?”

The Fitial administration estimates that the CNMI still has 16,000 guest workers.

Sablan said she was told that the Labor Information Data System, or LIDS, was transferred from the Division of Immigration’s control to the Department of Labor a few months ago.

“Could that change have anything to do with this sudden inability to provide basic data on the number of people holding permits in the commonwealth?” she asked.

“Either we are not keeping the data at all, or the data have been inaccurate all this time, or the Department of Labor is simply withholding the data. The bottom-line is this: our lack of basic data and Labor’s continuing evasiveness are cause for serious concern.”

However, today it was reported that not only will the CNMI DOL take on the task of issuing permits for foreign workers, but for all foreigners in the CNMI. From the Saipan Tribune:

Department of Labor deputy secretary Barry Hirshbein and special counsel Deanne Siemer said yesterday that the Commerce Department will separately issue the “umbrella permit” to foreign students, foreign investors and long-term businesses as well as permits for ministers and missionaries-all categories excluded from the 240K permits for foreign workers.

Although Labor will print the umbrella permits for Commerce, Hirshbein said this is separate from the initial 13,000 permits Labor will print.

He said another 3,000 permits may be printed for 240K holders.

The Department of Labor that previously claimed it had no clue how to determine data on aliens, now has the capability of printing umbrella permits for all foreigners based on their data.

How many foreigners are there in the CNMI? At the May 19, 2009 Oversight Hearing, Chamber President Jim Arenovski stated that there are approximately 18,000. At the same hearing the Governor said 16,000. One year earlier in May 2008, the Fitial Administration reported that there were 22,417 workers in the CNMI. In September 2008, the Department of Labor stated 16,755 were present in the CNMI. This figure was quoted on page 4 of the Declaration of Jacinta Kaipat (Part 1) submitted to back the anti-federalization federal court case. DOL's 2008 Annual Report said that 22,917 permits had been issued in 2008.

Maybe the number of umbrella permits that are issued, will help to determine an accurate figure of the foreigners in each category.

Somali Pirates: The hostage situation comes to an end

2009-10-28T14:16:00.009+10:00

The MV Irene was captured by Somali pirates in April 2009

October 28, 2009

Marianas Variety reporter, Gemma Casas, continues the surreal story of her brother, Joven (Bob) Casas and the 22 member crew of the MV Irene. It was captured in the Gulf of Aden in April 2009 and released in September 2009:

The Somali pirates were wide awake even at night. Khat or what they call Qaat-Qaat kept them alert 24 hours a day to keep the hostages of the MV Irene at bay.

Khat is a flowering plant native to tropical East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. It contains cathione, an amphetamine-like stimulant that causes excitement, loss of appetite and euphoria.
In 1980, the World Health Organization classified Khat as a drug of abuse that can produce mild to moderate psychological dependence.

The pirates had an abundant supply of Khat from Kenya. They chewed its fresh leaves, smoked the dried ones or mixed it with hot drinks. If prayers and faith in God kept the MV Irene crew going, the pirates had Khat. My brother Joven, an electrician at the ship who doesn’t smoke or drink, said the pirates had unusual agility, presence of mind and physical strength and attributed it to Khat.

“They were always awake even at night. They told us it’s because of Qaat-Qaat,” he said. Khat remained on the pirates’ diet even when fasting during the Holy Muslim month of Ramadan. This bolstered fear among the crew as its abuse could alter the pirates’ behavior and make them even more violent.

My brother, who had earlier been threatened by the pirates that they would cut his head off, learned to use his observation more keenly and to be wary of nonverbal cues that the pirates practiced to protect himself against any physical harm. Sign language and codes are an important part of the pirates’ operations because their enemies — international law enforcers who are armed with sophisticated weapons and equipment — could attack at any given time.

Just like any organization, the pirates who held the MV Irene hostage also operated in hierarchy. Foot soldiers have burned marks on their chest while commanders have theirs hidden in their bodies. This reminds me of cows marked for their quality before being sold to markets, and the old slave trade practice in Africa that led to the mass migration of thousands of Africans to the Americas and Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries.

During their five months of captivity, the MV Irene crew survived with a bowl of porridge each at least once a day and water from their ship’s air conditioning unit. Some days, the pirates allowed them to fish but only to confiscate their catch later for themselves.

The pirates’ whose village is within reach from where the MV Irene was docked would sometimes bring goats to the ship.
They feasted on the animal’s meat while the crew content themselves with its feet, mixed with their porridge.

With limited water available on the ship, hygiene was an issue among the crew. There’s no full bath over the entire period that they were held hostage.

The crew kept themselves preoccupied doing their usual tasks on the ship under the constant watch of the pirates. With hardly anything to eat and having undergone extreme threats of violence following their captivity, the crew’s physical appearance quickly changed. Most of them started to look emaciated and were hardly recognized by their families when they returned home on Sept. 28 to the Philippines. My mother, who also returned home to our country that same month from Canada, said my brother’s hair had grown such that he looked like someone from the 1970s — the Afro look — when she saw him for the first time after the hostage-crisis. As the only son in the family, my brother is deeply attached to my mother.

My sister-in-law also did not recognize my brother because he lost so much weight and had grown beard. Their reunion quickly turned into a tearful but a happy gathering. Each one is grateful for the second chance to see each other again after a long absence.

Life goes on for the 22 crew members of the MV Irene after the hostage. Each one is trying to heal the scars and the trauma of their sad experience aboard the ship with the pirates.

New terror stronghold
The pirates, meanwhile, have resumed active pursuit of new foreign ships to be captured for ransom with the monsoon season over.

Life is cheap in Somalia. The country’s life expectancy rate from birth is only 36 years for males and 38 for women. If one doesn’t die early from guns, he does from diseases or famine.

The Pirates pose with the hostages of the MV Irene in this photo

The pirates see the growing sea piracy business in Somalia as a lifeline to feed themselves and their families. They are modern-day slaves to cheap wages. As my brother had pointed out, the pirates took all their belongings and even wanted to take him to their village to fix their radios, giving impression they didn’t have the money to buy new ones.

Some fishermen reportedly introduced Somalia to international sea piracy fueled by an ideology. It later became a lucrative source of livelihood for them and business for some wealthy Muslims who financed their operations until the ransom is paid.
Unofficial estimates put at about $150 million the ransom paid to the pirates last year. Payment is made in cash leaving no paper trail to link big time Muslim financiers supporting the pirates’ operations. Portions of the ransom are believed to have been or being used to finance terror activities worldwide.

Somalia remains one of the poorest countries in the world with an annual gross domestic product of $600 per capita as of 2008. Zimbabwe is the lowest with an annual GDP of $200 per capita. Somalia’s growing problem with lawlessness and poverty is alarming. The country is being transformed into a stronghold of terrorists.

The hostage drama in Somalia has left me more unanswered questions.
The International Maritime Bureau, a nonprofit organization helping fight sea piracy, reported the number of ships attacked globally this year by the pirates doubled. Pirates boarded a total of 78 foreign vessels worldwide as of August this year. 75 of them were fired upon and 31 were hijacked with some 561 crew taken hostage. 19 were injured, seven kidnapped, six killed and at least eight still missing.

Most of the vessels were attacked while crossing the Gulf of Aden near Somalia. The pirates are heavily armed with guns and knives and sophisticated telecommunication gadgets like satellite phones In January, Somali pirates hijacked Sirius Star, a giant Saudi oil tanker. A $20 million ransom was reportedly paid for its release — the pirates’ single biggest loot so far.

Somalia and most African nations’ lands maybe barren but they have untapped natural gas reserves and possibly oil which the world needs. So far, 17 African countries are producing and exporting oil worldwide with Nigeria leading the list. Oil is a contentious issue in the poverty-stricken continent where hundreds of thousands die every year because of famine and chaos despite their land’s rich natural resources.

And their story goes on.

--------------------------

Joven sent a message to those who signed the petition and campaigned for the release of the hostages. You can read it on the Liberate Pirate Hostages website:

Liberate Pirate Hostages on Facebook

US Military: Filipino hostages are still alive
Campaign to Free Hostages From Pirates
Photo of Pirates with the Crew of the MV Irene
Free the crew of the MV Irene
Sign Petition to Free Crew of MV Irene

Free Hostages From MV Irene EM

Responsibility missing in human export equation

Response to New Transitional GW Rules

2009-10-28T05:16:00.009+10:00

October 27, 2009

Response to the newly released transitional guest worker regulations has been predictably mixed. Many have questions about the new rules, and some object to specific provisions. On this site some objected to the change in domestic helpers. Others expressed concern over the exit and re-entry requirement.

The Marianas Variety headline read, "It's not a friendly system" quoting the reaction of one attorney who wishes to remain anonymous. The anonymous attorney added, “Imagine people looking back with nostalgia on the ‘good old days’ under the commonwealth system!”

It is not likely that a thousand or more cheated foreign contract workers will look longingly back in time and wish to be reunited with a former employer who owes them back wages or unpaid judgments.

Personnel from the USCIS Office will answer questions on the new program on Thursday at the Garapan Street Market and on Friday, October 30th at the American Memorial Park outdoor amphitheater from 5pm to 7pm. Technical experts will be available to anwer questions. The presentation will be in English, and informational materials in English, Tagalog, Korean, Chinese, and Japanese will also be distributed.

Some questions guest workers and others have raised are:

1. Will the wages be the CNMI federal minimum wage or will CNMI wage apply?

2. Will employers have to honor a 40-hour work week or can they hire an employee for less than a full-time position? (Concern is that currently employers are cutting workers' hours to maintain a profit and the workers are struggling to survive.)

3. Will employers have to provide any benefits or will we have to shoulder our own health care costs?

4. If there is an emergency and we apply for parole to exit and reenter the CNMI, how long will it take to get the travel papers?

5. If an employer is not paying us fairly, can we get a new employer?

6. How many employers can we work for at the same time?

7. Who pays the fees?

8. How many years do we have to work under the federal system before we can apply for a green card? Can only H-1 or H-2 workers apply or can CW-1 and CW-2 workers apply? If they are eligible to apply do they have to have their employers petition them or can they apply for themselves?

9. What is the household income to apply for a CW-2?

10. CW-2 is this only for married couples or for common-law couples who have children?

I am sure that there are many more questions, and I encourage the guest workers and others who are affected by the rules to attend a session Thursday or Friday to learn more.

Here is the news release from the USCIS:

WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today posted an interim final rule in the Federal Register that creates a Transitional Worker visa classification in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). The CNMI-Only Transitional Worker Program is one of several initiatives that implements the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008 (CNRA), which expands U.S. immigration law in the CNMI.

Although U.S. immigration law applies to the CNMI beginning on November 28, a transition period will begin on that date during which time temporary measures will be carried out to allow for an orderly transition from the CNMI’s permit system to U.S. immigration law. This will give foreign workers time to identify an appropriate visa classification according to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

A “transitional worker” under CNRA is defined as an alien worker who is currently ineligible for another classification under INA and who performs services or labor for an employer in CNMI. The Transitional Worker Visa category is a new nonimmigrant visa classification under INA using the admission code CW-1 for the principal transitional worker and CW-2 for dependents.

The CNMI-Only Transitional Worker Program will be available to two groups of nonresidents: (1) those who are lawfully present in the CNMI and (2) those who are abroad.

Non-residents living in CNMI may be classified as CW-1 nonimmigrants if, during the transition period, they:
1. Will enter or stay in CNMI to work in an occupational category that needs alien workers to supplement the resident workforce;
2. Are petitioned for by an employer;
3. Live in CNMI;
4. Are lawfully present in CNMI; and
5. Are not otherwise inadmissible to the United States.

CNMI employers may also use the CW-1 program to obtain eligible workers coming to CNMI from abroad.

The transition period begins on November 28, 2009 and ends on December 31, 2014. The CW classification is valid for the duration of the transition period. At the end of the transition period, the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker Program will cease to exist and the transitional workers who held this status must change to another nonimmigrant or immigrant status under INA to stay in CNMI lawfully.

Under the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker program, employers may file a petition for a transitional worker with USCIS using Form I-129CW, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker in CNMI. This new form was modeled after the existing Form I-129. The fee for Form I-129CW would be $320, the same amount charged for the I-129 and an $80 biometrics fee. In addition, the CNRA mandates a “CNMI education funding fee” of $150 per beneficiary per year which cannot be waived.

Due to unique circumstances in CNMI, the I-129CW fee may be waived in extraordinary situations where an employer can demonstrate an inability to pay the fee and still pay the employee’s wage. With some restrictions, employers may file for multiple beneficiaries on the same I-129CW. Employers must conduct legitimate business and may not engage directly or indirectly in prostitution, trafficking in minors, or any other activity that is illegal under federal or CNMI law.

Under the interim final rule, the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker program includes all occupational categories being used in CNMI now. Also, for the first year, the numerical limits for CW-1 status are based on the CNMI government’s own estimate of the nonresident worker population, which is 22,417. After the first year, the numerical limit will decrease, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

The CW visa classification is valid only in the CNMI and provides no basis for travel to any other part of the United States, including Guam. Once status is obtained, the CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant may leave the CNMI and return, but must have the appropriate visa for readmission.

The public is encouraged to submit comments on this rulemaking by Nov. 29, 2009. Comments should be identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 and submitted one of the following ways:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
• E-mail: rfs.regs@dhs.gov. Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 in the subject line.
• Mail: Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 on your correspondence.

Questions and Answers on the CNMI Transitional Guest Worker Program

2009-10-27T19:52:00.003+10:00

October 27, 2009

The USCIS made this great summary of the new transitional guest worker program!. From the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

Questions and Answers on Transitional Worker Program for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)

Q. Who qualifies for the CNMI-only Transitional Worker status in CNMI?
A. USCIS has established a transitional worker program for foreign nationals to live and work in CNMI. Foreign nationals who are eligible for an INA-based nonimmigrant status would not be eligible. Short term visitors for business or pleasure are not eligible to obtain CW classification because such individuals are not part of the foreign work force that is the subject of this interim rule.

Q. What is the legal basis for the CNMI-only Transition Worker program?
A. Section 6(d) of Pub. L. 94-241, as amended by CNRA, directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a transition program to assist CNMI employers to obtain necessary workers who are not otherwise eligible under U.S. immigration laws during the transition period.

Q. What is the purpose of the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker Program?
A. The CNMI-only Transitional Worker Program will allow foreign nationals who are not eligible for another INA-based employment authorized nonimmigrant status to perform work in CNMI during the transition period. Thus, the purpose of the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker visa is to offer a lawful U.S. immigration status to those foreign nationals who are not currently eligible for any other kind of immigrant or nonimmigrant visa. During the transition period, it is expected that these transitional workers will find a suitable, long-term alternative to their CNMI-Only Transitional Worker status by obtaining status under an INA-based visa category, or departing CNMI.

Q. What happens to foreign workers in CNMI on November 28, 2009?
A. When Federal immigration law takes effect in CNMI on November 28, 2009, foreign workers who have a valid CNMI employment authorization may remain, live and work in CNMI for up to two years, or for the duration of their CNMI-based status, whichever occurs first. Before the expiration of that limited time period, they must obtain either CNMI-Only Transitional Worker status, or some other lawful U.S. immigration status to lawfully work and reside in CNMI and to travel between CNMI and another U.S. or foreign destination. If they leave CNMI for any reason, they must have a valid U.S. immigration visa to re-enter. Foreign workers who do NOT have a CNMI work contract could risk becoming “unlawful” if another U.S. immigration status is not obtained.

Q. What is the admission code for this visa classification be?
A. This new nonimmigrant visa classification will use the admission code CW-1 for the principal transitional worker and CW-2 for dependents.

Q. What does this mean for foreign residents who have been living and working in CNMI?
A. For those foreign workers who are not eligible for another kind of U.S. immigration status, the transitional worker visa is a critically important alternative. It could potentially give thousands of foreign workers a temporary status while they determine an appropriate long-term immigration status for themselves and their families.

Q. What are the timeframes of the transition period?
A. Although U.S. immigration laws apply fully to CNMI, there will be a transition period during which temporary measures will be carried out to allow for an orderly transition from CNMI’s permit system to Federal immigration law and give foreign non-resident workers time to identify an appropriate long-term INA-based visa classification. The transition period begins on November 28, 2009 and will end on December 31, 2014. The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with appropriate federal agencies and the Governor of CNMI, may extend the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker program for additional periods of up to five years. No decision on any extension has been made at this time.

Q. What are the requirements for the new CNMI Transitional Worker visa or status?
A. Under the CNMI-Only Transitional Worker program, there are requirements for both employers and workers.

Requirements for Employers—Employers must be engaged in legitimate business and may not engage directly or indirectly in prostitution, trafficking in minors, or any other activity that is illegal under Federal or CNMI law. The employer also bears the responsibility of filing the necessary petition and paying the requisite fees to employ transitional workers.

Requirements for Workers — Under the interim final rule, foreign workers may be classified as CW-1 nonimmigrants if, during the transition period, they:
1. will enter or stay in CNMI to work in an occupational category that needs alien workers to supplement the resident workforce;
2. are petitioned for by an employer;
3. live in CNMI;
4. are lawfully present in CNMI; and
5. are not otherwise inadmissible to the United States.

Q. What does a worker need to do to get this visa or status?
A. The foreign national worker must meet the criteria noted in the answer above and find an employer willing to sponsor him/her. The responsibility for applying rests with the employer. Employers may file a petition for a transitional worker with USCIS using Form I-129CW, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker in the CNMI. (This new form was modeled after the existing Form I-129.)

Q. What does the worker’s spouse and/or child need to get CW-2 status?
A. To accompany or follow to join, the derivative CW-2 nonimmigrant may file an application for extension of nonimmigrant stay on Form I-539 in accordance with the form instructions. The CW-2 status extension may not be approved until approval of the CW-1 extension petition. The filing fee is $300.

Q. How does someone obtain CW status?
A. Once the I-129CW petition is approved, the beneficiary and eligible family members may apply for CW-1, or CW-2 status. Since foreign nationals present in CNMI will not have given biometric information to the Federal government before, and thus not have had required security checks conducted, biometrics will be required. The fee to collect biometrics is $80. A fee waiver is available if applicants can show inability to pay for both the Form I-129CW and biometric fees.

Aliens who are abroad will need to apply for a CW-1 or CW-2 visa at a U.S. consulate. When applicants apply overseas, USCIS will not require biometrics, however biometrics may be required by the Department of State.

Q. Which groups can apply for the Transitional Worker Program?
A. The transitional worker program will be available to two groups of foreign workers: (1) those who are lawfully present in the CNMI and (2) those who are abroad.

Q. Can people with CW status travel outside the CNMI?
A. Once status is obtained, the CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant may leave CNMI but they must have the appropriate visa to re-enter. If the CW-1 or CW-2 status is obtained in CNMI (not the Consular post abroad) the nonimmigrant will have the legal status, but this is not a visa valid for travel to and admission into CNMI. If the CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant departs CNMI, he or she must obtain a visa from a U.S. embassy or consulate to return to CNMI, unless alternative arrangements have been specifically approved by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Q. How does one obtain the visa for re-entry?
A. Someone who has obtained CW-1 or CW-2 status in CNMI (not at a Consular post abroad) who needs to leave CNMI for whatever reason will need to get a visa from the State Department to re-enter CNMI. Usually this is done at the U.S. Embassy or a U.S. Consulate via a locally managed appointment system. If, for example, someone with CW-1 status plans to visit family in the Philippines, he/she would need to make an appointment with the U.S. Embassy in Manila to get the CW visa while they are in the Philippines. They would need to travel with documents to show the State Department officer during their interview and be prepared to wait at least a few days for the visa to be issued. Each U.S. Embassy and Consulate abroad has a different appointment system. To learn more about the U.S. Embassy or Consulate you may need to visit, travelers should go to: http://www.usembassy.gov/. Visa wait times for each Consular post abroad are posted at: http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/wait/tempvisitors_wait.php.

Q. Can people with CW status travel elsewhere within the United States?
A. No. The CW visa classification is valid only in CNMI and does not permit travel to any other part of the United States, including Guam. However, if someone with CW status qualifies for another kind of nonimmigrant or immigrant visa, or a visa waiver program, he or she may travel elsewhere in the United States and the CW status would not prevent that.

Q. How much does it cost to apply for this visa?
A. The fee for Form I-129CW will be $320, the same amount charged for the I-129. In addition, Public Law 110-229 mandates a “CNMI education funding fee” of $150 per beneficiary per year which is mandatory and cannot be waived. Lastly, there would be a fee of $80 to collect biometrics (fingerprints and photos) and run necessary background checks. This expense could be borne by the applicant or the employer.

Q. Are fee waivers available?
A. Normally there is no fee waiver in employment-based cases. However, due to unique circumstances in CNMI, the I-129CW fee may be waived in extraordinary situations where an employer can demonstrate an inability to pay the fee. However, given the inherent inconsistency between sponsoring an alien for work and being unable to pay the fee required for that sponsorship, the situations warranting a fee waiver are expected to be extremely limited. There is a fee waiver for the $80 biometrics fee if applicants can show an inability to pay.

Q. Can an employer petition for more than one worker on the same form?
A. Yes, with some restrictions, employers may file for multiple beneficiaries on the same I-129CW. If the employees are all working in the same occupational category, for the same time period and in the same location, the employer may name as many employees on the petition as he/she wants. Unnamed beneficiaries are not allowed under this program.

Q. When can employers begin filing for workers?
A. The interim final rule stipulates that employers may not file for a worker more than six months before the date the employer needs that employee’s services (i.e. if an employer needs a worker’s services on January 1, the employer may submit a petition for the worker no earlier than July 1). The rule states that petitions may be filed before November 28, 2009, but USCIS will not grant CW-1 status before that date.

Q. What forms are needed to apply for this visa?
A. Employers may file a petition for a transitional worker with USCIS using Form I-129CW, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker in CNMI. (This new form was modeled after the existing Form I-129.)

Q. How does the employer file the Form I-129CW Petition?
A. By mail to the USCIS California Service Center. Please follow the instructions on the form.

Q. What happens to CW-1 transitional workers at the end of the transition period?
A. The transition period ends on December 31, 2014. The CW classification will exist for the duration of the transition period. CNMI-Only Transitional Worker status will be granted initially for 1 year and is renewable throughout the transition period in 1-year increments. At the end of the transition period, the Transitional Worker Program will cease to exist and the transitional workers who held this status must change to another nonimmigrant or immigrant status under the INA if they wish to stay in CNMI lawfully. The U.S. Department of Labor may extend the availability of the CNMI Transitional Worker Program beyond 2014, but no decision on any extension has been made at this time.

Q. What occupational categories would be allowed?
A. Under the rule, the Transitional Worker program includes MOST occupational categories being used in CNMI now. Domestic household workers employed directly by private residents will not be eligible for CW-1 status. However, domestic workers employed through a “legitimate business” for placement in individual households could be eligible.

Q. Which CNMI employers are eligible to petition for transitional workers?
A. To be eligible to petition for a CW-1 nonimmigrant worker, an employer must: be engaged in legitimate business; consider all available United States workers for the positions being filled by the CW-1 worker; offer terms and conditions of employment which are consistent with the nature of the occupation, activity, and industry in CNMI; and comply with all Federal and Commonwealth requirements relating to employment, including nondiscrimination, occupational safety, and minimum wage requirements. Legitimate business means a real, active, and operating commercial or entrepreneurial undertaking which produces services or goods for profit, or is a governmental, charitable or other validly recognized nonprofit entity. The business must meet applicable legal requirements for doing business in CNMI. A business will not be considered legitimate if it engages directly or indirectly in prostitution, trafficking in minors, or any other activity that is illegal under Federal or CNMI law.

Q. Can domestic workers receive CW-1 transitional worker status under this program?
A. Yes, but they must be sponsored by an eligible employer doing business in CNMI as described above.

Q. What does a CNMI employer need to demonstrate in its petition for a transitional worker?
A. A petition must be accompanied by evidence demonstrating the petitioner meets the definition of eligible employer, and must attest that: qualified United States workers are not available to fill the position; the employer is doing business as defined in the rule; the employer is a legitimate business as defined in the rule; the worker has the qualifications for the position (including an occupational license, if required for the occupation); the worker, if present in CNMI, is lawfully present in CNMI; the position is not temporary or seasonal employment, and the petitioner does not reasonably believe it to qualify for any other nonimmigrant worker classification; and the position falls within the list of acceptable occupational categories

Q. How many transitional worker visas will be available?
A. For the first year, the numerical limit for CW-1 status will be based on CNMI government’s own estimate of the foreign worker population, which is 22,417. The CNRA requires that the number be reduced on an annual basis to zero by the end of the transition period. Therefore, after the first year, the numerical limit will drop, but that number has not yet been determined.

Q. What about spouses and dependents? Can they travel and work?
A. The law allows spouses and minor children of someone in CW-1 nonimmigrant status admission into CNMI as accompanying or following to join the principal CW worker. The rule would adopt the INA’s definition of “child” for immigration purposes (other than naturalization in section 101(b)) adding a requirement that the child be under 18 years of age since the statute refers to “minor children” rather than “children.” Employment is not authorized for spouses and children of CW-1 nonimmigrants.

Q. Can CW-1 nonimmigrants change status or adjust status?
A. The law allows workers in the CW classification to change to another nonimmigrant status or to adjust status to lawful permanent resident (get a green card) throughout the transition period if they are eligible. The rule allows an alien to be present in, or come to, CNMI for a temporary period as a CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant and, at the same time, seek to become a lawful permanent resident of the United States, as long as the alien intends to depart voluntarily at the end of the alien’s authorized nonimmigrant stay. For purposes of qualifying for CW-1 or CW-2 classification, the alien is not required to maintain a residence abroad, and dual immigrant and nonimmigrant intent is allowed.

Q. I am a foreign worker in CNMI. Can I apply directly for CW status without my employer’s approval?
A. No, CW status is based upon an employer in CNMI needing your services. Your current or prospective employer must sponsor you by filing a Form I-129CW petition. After that petition is approved, you and your eligible family members can obtain CW status based on the approved petition.

Q. If I obtain CW status, will that lead to U.S. lawful permanent resident (“green card”) status?
A. No, not directly. However, as a CW nonimmigrant you are not barred from obtaining lawful permanent residence if otherwise eligible as a family- or employment-based immigrant.

Q. How long does a grant of CW-1 status last?
A. One year. A CW-1 nonimmigrant in good standing may obtain additional one-year extensions if his or her employer files a petition asking for the extension, subject to availability under the numerical cap.

Q. How long does a grant of CW-2 status for a derivative family member last?
A. The same length of stay as the CW-1 principal, except that a CW-2 child’s length of stay ends on his or her 18th birthday, if sooner.

Q. Can a CW-1 worker change jobs in CNMI and keep the CW-1 status?
A. Yes, but the new employer would have to file the Form I-129CW petition for the worker’s new position before the worker can be employed there. CW-1 transitional workers are only authorized to work for the employer that has petitioned for them.

Q. I am a CW nonimmigrant who obtained status in CNMI. I need to travel abroad and return on very short notice because of a sudden family emergency. Can I do that without a visa?
A. Normally a visa will be expected for the readmission of a CW nonimmigrant returning to CNMI. In emergency situations, however, it may be possible for DHS to give prior permission to travel and return without a visa. Please consult with the USCIS office in Saipan.

Q. As a CW nonimmigrant, may I travel to or from the CNMI using flight arrangements that transit through the Guam airport?
A. No. CW visas and status are authorized for travel to, and presence in CNMI only. You may not travel to any other U.S. place, even in brief transit, without an appropriate other visa or documentation authorizing that visit.

Q. How can I or my company submit comments on the rule?
A. USCIS encourages public comment on this rulemaking. Comments must be received by Nov. 25, 2009. Comments should be identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 and submitted one of the following ways:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
• E-mail: rfs.regs@dhs.gov. Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 in the subject line.
• Mail: Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 on your correspondence.
– USCIS –

DHS REGULATIONS ON GUEST WORKERS RELEASED

2009-10-27T04:48:00.015+10:00

October 26, 2009

Today the Regulations for the CNMI transitional guest worker program were released as an interim rule. DHS is soliciting comments for 30 days.

The summary states that the program was "intended to provide for an orderly transition from the CNMI permit system to the U.S. federal immigration system under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA or Act)."

From the act:

A CW transitional worker is an alien worker who is ineligible for another classification under the INA and who performs services or labor for an employer in the CNMI. The CNRA imposes a five-year transition period before the INA requirements become fully applicable in the CNMI. The new CW classification will be in effect for the duration of that transition period, unless extended by the Secretary of Labor. The rule also establishes employment authorization incident to CW status.

The local CNMI labor system will continue until this program will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. on November 28, 2009 (CNMI time).

Number of CW-Permits
The background section of the regulations notes that "since 1978 the CNMI admitted a substantial number of foreign workers through an immigration system that provides a permit program for foreigners entering the CNMI, such as visitors, investors, and workers. Foreign workers under this program constitute a majority of the CNMI labor force. Such workers outnumber U.S. citizens and other local residents in most industries central to the CNMI’s economy."

In fact, it is noted that the Fitial Administration gave the estimate of 22,417 workers in the CNMI as of May 2008. This will be the maximum number of permits allowed for the first year during the transition period. This figure, considered bloated by many, is far greater than the actual number of guest workers that would be needed to fill jobs under the current economic conditions.

Each year the number of foreign workers will be reduced. The document states, "DHS will assess and reduce the number of grants of CW-1 status annually based, in part, on the economic conditions in the CNMI, consultation with the government of the CNMI and other Federal government agencies, and employment opportunities available for the resident workforce."

The following is the DHS' estimations of guest workers, businesses affected by the rule, and number of immediate relatives who will apply for another CW status category:

As of November 28, 2009, the beginning of the transition period and the implementation date for this regulation, we estimate that 17,583 foreign workers and 1,176 businesses in the CNMI will be subject to the rule. Based on the available data, we estimate that approximately 2,090 of these workers may qualify for a nonimmigrant work visa available under the INA, and at least 950 private domestic household and other ineligible workers will not be eligible for CW status, leaving 14,543 foreign workers eligible for CW status. In addition, we estimate that approximately 2,100 spouses and dependent children of foreign workers will apply for admission under a second CW status category.

Page 27 of the regulations addresses the out of status workers:

The current number of out-of-status foreign workers is 1,000. The CNMI government estimates that 1,000 out-of-status foreign workers were present in the CNMI as of August 2008. The CNMI government’s established cap of 22,417 CNMI foreign work permits is sufficient to allow employers to bring all of these workers into lawful status prior to the beginning of the transition period.

The regulations show four alternatives to the program and state that "alternative one" was the chosen alternative. It reads:

Only aliens lawfully present in the CNMI may qualify for CW status. An employer petitioner can name more than one worker or “beneficiary” on a single Form I-129CW petition if the beneficiaries will be working in the same eligible occupational category, for the same period of time, and in the same location. CW status is valid for a period of 1 year.

Transitional workers can change or adjust their categories under the rules, and qualifications for CW-1 permits are liberal:

DHS envisions scenarios wherein certain professionals may not initially be eligible for H-1B status due to Federal licensing or other requirements, and believes that it is an appropriate use of the transitional worker program to allow such aliens time during the transition period to seek to satisfy such requirements. This rule does not exempt such aliens in occupations requiring licensure from complying with existing local licensure requirements.

Permits are obtained from the USCIS Office.

Status
It seems that it would be in the best interest of the foreign contract workers, the businesses, and entire community to request permanent U.S. status for the foreign contract workers. This would ensure a stable and skilled workforce, save the costs of running a guest worker program, and spare employers from the permit fees.

The rules say this about status:

The transitional worker program implemented under this rule is intended to provide for an orderly transition for those workers from the CNMI permit system to the U.S. federal immigration system under the INA, and to mitigate potential harm to the CNMI economy as employers adjust their hiring practices and as foreign workers obtain U.S. immigrant or nonimmigrant status.

Section 702(a) of the CNRA further states that transitional workers may apply to USCIS during the transition period for a change of status to another nonimmigrant classification or to adjust status to an immigrant classification in accordance with the INA.

On page 22, the rules say this about changing status:

Change or Adjustment of Status.
Section 702(a) of the CNRA allows workers in the CW classification to change to another nonimmigrant status or to adjust to lawful permanent resident status throughout the transition period, if eligible. Section 6(d)(1) of Public Law 94-241, as added by sec. 702(a) of Public Law 110-229. The rule provides that an alien may legitimately be present in, or come to, the CNMI for a temporary period as a CW-1 or CW-2 nonimmigrant and, at the same time, lawfully seek to become a permanent resident of the United States provided the alien intends to depart voluntarily at the end of the alien’s authorized nonimmigrant stay. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(19). For purposes of qualifying for CW-1 or CW-2 classification, the alien is not required to maintain a residence abroad, and dual immigrant and nonimmigrant intent is allowed. See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(19).

Legitimate businesses and categories of businesses:

As required under section 702(a) of the CNRA, DHS will not consider a business legitimate if it engages directly or indirectly in prostitution, trafficking in minors, or any other activity that is illegal under Federal or local CNMI law. Section 6(d)(5)(A) of Public Law 94-241, as added by sec. 702(a) of Public Law 110-229. The CNRA provides that the determination of whether a business is legitimate will be made by the Secretary of Homeland Security in the Secretary’s sole discretion.

Accordingly, this rule defines legitimate business to mean “a real, active, and operating commercial or entrepreneurial undertaking which produces services or goods for profit, or is a governmental, charitable or other validly recognized nonprofit entity.” See 8 CFR 214.2(w)(1)(v). The business must meet applicable legal requirements for doing business in the CNMI and will not be considered legitimate if it engages directly or indirectly in prostitution, trafficking in minors, or any other activity that is illegal under Federal or CNMI law.

In addition to requiring eligible employers to be engaged in legitimate business, this rule further establishes that eligible employers must consider all available U.S. workers for positions being filled by CW-1 workers; offer terms and conditions of employment which are consistent with the nature of the occupation, activity, and industry in the CNMI; and comply with all Federal and CNMI requirements relating to employment; including, but not limited to, nondiscrimination, occupational safety, and minimum wage requirements.

Categories of Businesses
The DHS lists nine occupational categories of businesses which can hire CW-1 nonresident workers:
• Professional, technical, or management occupation;
• Clerical and sales occupation;
• Service occupation;
• Agricultural, fisheries, forestry, and related occupation;
• Processing occupation;
• Machine trade occupation;
• Benchwork occupation;
• Structural work occupation; and
• Miscellaneous occupation.

Domestic helpers will need to be hired from a "legitimate business" for placement in households and could not be hired by individuals.

Petition and Fees

The rules require employers to file a petition with USCIS to request a CW-1 permit under a special form, called the I-129CW (“Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker in the CNMI”), for CW petitions. It will provide separate instructions for the application form for requesting CW transitional workers.

The fee to process the I-29CW is $320. There is also a supplementary CNMI education funding fee of $150 per worker per year which is mandatory, and cannot be waived. This funds vocational education in the CNMI.

The rules state that the fee may be waived for employers who are unable to pay. I disagree with any fee waivers. If an employer cannot come up with the money to pay the fees, then they also may not be able to pay the worker.

Employers who terminate an employee before the end of their contract must pay for their repatriation.

The rule states, "after consideration of all the evidence submitted, USCIS will issue an approval of the petition on a Form I-797, Notice of Action, or in another form as USCIS may prescribe." It also states that the USCIS may allow permit to be filed before November 28, 2009.

Status for spouses and minor children

From the rules:

"Once the Form I-129CW petition is approved, the beneficiary will receive CW-1 status, and eligible family members may apply for CW-2 status for the spouse and dependents, as appropriate.

Biometrics
Aliens who are abroad will need to apply for a CW-1 or CW-2 visa at a U.S. consulate. Aliens present in the CNMI must apply for status using Form I-129CW, and shall be required to provide biometrics along with an initial application for CW-1 or CW-2 status. From the rules:

Aliens present in the CNMI will not have previously supplied biometric information to the Federal government; therefore, because the federal government will not have conducted the attendant security checks on those aliens, USCIS will require aliens in the CNMI to provide biometrics. The applicable biometrics fee is $80.

Transfers between employers are allowed during the transition period. The rules state that "an employer may request, and USCIS will permit, a transfer within an alien’s occupational category or another occupational category that the Secretary of Homeland Security has determined requires alien workers."

Concern over categories susceptible to human trafficking, forced prostitution and exploitation
The DHS is inviting comments on categories that have high incidences of exploitation and abuses:

The rule does not exclude any specific type of employment from the occupational
categories permissible for CW-1 workers. However, there are three occupational categories – dancing, domestic workers, and hospitality workers – about which DHS has particular concern.

DHS notes that women seeking employment as exotic dancers in the CNMI have been particularly prone to sexual exploitation and other abuse. See, e.g., Senate Hearing 110-50, Conditions in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (Feb. 8, 2007) (testimony of Lauri Bennett Ogumoro and Sister Mary Stella Mangona). In a discussion between DHS officials and advocates for exploited women in Saipan in July 2008, the advocates identified so called “cultural dancing” as a common front occupation used to import women into the CNMI for the purposes of prostitution, in addition to the category of domestic work.

Additionally, waitressing and other club and restaurant hospitality work also are known paths for exploitation and abuse. See, e.g., United States v. Liu, 538 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 2008). DHS is considering excluding some or all of these occupations from eligibility for CW status. DHS also is concerned about the economic effects of blanket exclusions of all dancers, domestic workers or hospitality service workers.

Human Rights

I am glad that the rules mentioned human rights:

The intended benefits of the rule include improvements in national and homeland security and protection of human rights. First, implementation of the rule assures that the admission of nonimmigrants to the CNMI is consistent with existing Federal laws and practices intended to secure and control the borders of the United States and its territories. Second, the rule would help protect foreign workers in the CNMI from abuses such as human trafficking and other illicit activity.

The reason I advocated for federalization for over a decade was primarily for protection of the guest workers against civil, labor and human rights abuses.

This is a really quick review. I will edit and add as I read and welcome comments and corrections of my interpretation of the rules from attorneys!

I definitely will be submitting comments.

To Comment:

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: You may submit comments directly to USCIS by e-mail at rfs.regs@dhs.gov. Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0038 on your correspondence. This mailing address may be used for paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529-2210. Contact Telephone Number is (202) 272 8377.

Message to the Guest Workers of the CNMI

2009-10-25T19:09:00.008+10:00

October 25, 2009

"Our struggle is not easy. Those who oppose our cause are rich and powerful and they have many allies in high places. We are poor. Our allies are few. But we have something the rich do not own. We have our bodies and spirits and the justice of our cause as our weapons."

-Cesar Chavez

Dear Friends:

By next week the regulations for the transitional federal guest worker program should be released, and in 33 days the Consolidated Natural Resources Act will take effect in the CNMI. It is a time of excitement, anticipation and uncertainty for the foreign contract workers and nonresidents. It takes a significant amount of faith to continue on a path when you cannot see what is around the corner. The fact that so many of the guest workers have scarified to stay on that path and remain in the CNMI is a testament to your faith. It demonstrates your love for the Northern Marianas, which has become your home. Your steadfastness sends a message to the U.S. government as an appeal for status. Your continuing struggle to remain in the CNMI supports your belief that the path ultimately will lead to U.S. citizenship.

A federal official has informed me that signing the umbrella permits should not jeopardize your contractual rights. Any provisions that could conflict with labor law most likely would not be recognized after November 28, 2009. Therefore, there should be no harm in signing the permits and it could ensure that you remain in the CNMI for the maximum length of time. Of course, the decision of whether or not to sign a permit should ultimately be your own.

When the governor and those wishing to maintain the broken labor system successfully removed the grandfathering provision from the federal legislation it changed much of the original intent of the law. It placed a heavy burden on those nonresidents who have worked and lived in the CNMI for years. We know that under PL 110-229, by May 2010, the U.S. Department of Interior in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security and the governor of the CNMI will be required to make a recommendation to the U.S. Congress concerning the status of the foreign workers.

Will you wait for someone else to determine your fate? When you joined the unity march, your voices were heard in Washington, DC. When you signed petitions, your words reached the desks of many U.S. officials. When you wrote letters to federal officials, you put a face on issues that officials who are thousands of miles from the CNMI may not have otherwise fully understood. When your U.S. citizen children appealed to federal officials it had an impact on their views.

You do not have to sit silently and allow someone else to map out the direction of your future and the future of your children. You can take action now to tell federal officials about your individual situations and your significant contributions to the CNMI community. You can ask them directly to support green cards for all of the foreign contract workers and nonresidents who are in the CNMI. You can talk to your resident friends and relatives and ask them to cast votes in the upcoming election for people who truly have your best interests at heart.

Those who support a just and democratic guest worker program in the CNMI and in the mainland, are those who support opportunities where foreign workers and immigrants have control over their destiny and the destiny of their families. They embrace the words of President Barack Obama: "In America, no dream is beyond your grasp if you reach for it, and fight for it, and work for it." Speak out and stand firm for social justice and for political rights for yourselves and your children. I will be at your side fighting with you and I will continue to bring your voices to Washington, DC as your make the final stretch of your journey to gain political and social rights for every guest worker and nonresident who lives and works in the CNMI and has made the islands their home.

With best wishes to you all,

Wendy