Monday, March 30, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
BREAKING NEWS: Former Guam Speaker Dies
Written by Patti Arroyo, Pacific News Center - Guam, Saipan, CNMI, Asia-Pacific
Thursday, 26 March 2009 06:06
Guam - His role in the quest for self-governance was crucial to calling attention to Guam’s fight to gain control from U.S. Navy rule. The famed Guam Congress walkout took place 60 years ago this month, and today Guam remembers Carlos P. Taitano, one of the assemblymen who led the charge.
Taitano passed away at his Los Angeles, California home on March 25th.
A news release says the former Guam speaker died peacefully, surrounded by his children Linda, Carl and Tyrone.
It was Carlos P. Taitano, a young assemblyman in the Guam Congress that reported to the media that they had walked out of meetings in defiance of the U.S. military rule over Guam, in effect leading to the signing of the Organic Act.
Carlos Pangilinen Taitano, dead at the age of 92.
Funeral arrangements are pending.
Thursday, 26 March 2009 06:06
Guam - His role in the quest for self-governance was crucial to calling attention to Guam’s fight to gain control from U.S. Navy rule. The famed Guam Congress walkout took place 60 years ago this month, and today Guam remembers Carlos P. Taitano, one of the assemblymen who led the charge.
Taitano passed away at his Los Angeles, California home on March 25th.
A news release says the former Guam speaker died peacefully, surrounded by his children Linda, Carl and Tyrone.
It was Carlos P. Taitano, a young assemblyman in the Guam Congress that reported to the media that they had walked out of meetings in defiance of the U.S. military rule over Guam, in effect leading to the signing of the Organic Act.
Carlos Pangilinen Taitano, dead at the age of 92.
Funeral arrangements are pending.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
France to Compensate Nuclear Test Victims
FRANCE TO FINALLY COMPENSATE NUCLEAR TEST VICTIMS
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hjfYconL8ljXKcBLGNurBnKienbw
PARIS (AFP/Pacific Media Watch): France said Tuesday it will compensate victims of nuclear testing carried out in French Polynesia and Algeria, after decades of denying its responsibility.
An initial sum of 10 million euros (US$14 million) has been set aside for military and civilian staff as well as local populations who fell ill from radiation exposure, Defence Minister Herve Morin said.
Some 150,000 civilian and military personnel took part in the 210 nuclear tests carried out in the Algerian Sahara desert and the Pacific between 1960 and 1996.
"It's time for France to be true to its conscience," Morin told Le Figaro newspaper.
The move was welcomed by French veterans who had been waging a long campaign for the state to recognise its responsibility toward ageing and sick staff of its nuclear programme.
"This is a step forward that we are greeting with satisfaction," said Michel Leger, president of the Association of Veterans of Nuclear Tests (AVEN).
Leger recalled he was "wearing shorts and a hat, lying on the ground without protective eyewear, arms folded over my eyes" when an above-ground test took place 40 km (25 miles) away, in southern Algeria in the early 1960s.
"Afterwards, there was no medical checkup," said Leger, who now suffers from cardiovascular illnesses.
One of the world's five declared nuclear powers, France carried out 17 nuclear tests in Algeria in the early 1960s including four atmospheric trials.
The first test code-named "Gerboise Bleue" (Blue Gerbil) took place on February 13, 1960 in Reggane, southern Algeria, some 15 years after the United States ushered in the age of nuclear weapons with its test in New Mexico.
Over four decades, 193 tests were carried out at the French Polynesian islands of Moruroa and at Fangataufa until 1996 when president Jacques Chirac declared an end to the programme.
Retired sailor Serge Vauley recounted that his crew was told to stand on the deck of the Foch aircraft carrier to "admire France's firepower" when the mushroom cloud from a test rose up to the Pacific sky.
Vauley, now 64 and one of the victims seeking compensation, suffers from respiratory problems and described having "holes the size of my fist" in his lungs, Le Figaro reported.
Refusing to acknowledge a direct link between the nuclear tests and the veteran's illnesses, the French government had long argued that it had done everything possible to minimize risks to personnel during testing.
Morin told a news conference that France feared recognition of the ravages caused to its personnel would have weakened its nuclear programme during the Cold War.
By offering compensation, the government was hoping to avoid long, drawn-out litigation, he said. About a dozen veterans have won minor damages in lawsuits brought against the state.
A bill is expected to be presented to parliament next month that will set up a nine-member commission of physicians, led by a magistrate, who will examine individual claims for compensation.
Veterans expressed concern however that the defence minister would have the final say on awarding compensation instead of the independent commission.
They also said it remained unclear how the government would go about compensating native populations.
"These populations will have to prove that they lived there when the tests occurred," said Patrice Bauveret, of the veterans' group.
The government is also lifting the veil of secrecy surrounding its nuclear programme as it considers the compensation claims.
The military archives of the nuclear programme have been opened and are being examined by two experts who are to submit a report in December on the environmental impact of the tests.
A separate health study is under way of 30,000 personnel who took part in the trials that could help support claims presented to the government.
* Comment on this item www.pacificmediacentre.blogspot.com
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hjfYconL8ljXKcBLGNurBnKienbw
PARIS (AFP/Pacific Media Watch): France said Tuesday it will compensate victims of nuclear testing carried out in French Polynesia and Algeria, after decades of denying its responsibility.
An initial sum of 10 million euros (US$14 million) has been set aside for military and civilian staff as well as local populations who fell ill from radiation exposure, Defence Minister Herve Morin said.
Some 150,000 civilian and military personnel took part in the 210 nuclear tests carried out in the Algerian Sahara desert and the Pacific between 1960 and 1996.
"It's time for France to be true to its conscience," Morin told Le Figaro newspaper.
The move was welcomed by French veterans who had been waging a long campaign for the state to recognise its responsibility toward ageing and sick staff of its nuclear programme.
"This is a step forward that we are greeting with satisfaction," said Michel Leger, president of the Association of Veterans of Nuclear Tests (AVEN).
Leger recalled he was "wearing shorts and a hat, lying on the ground without protective eyewear, arms folded over my eyes" when an above-ground test took place 40 km (25 miles) away, in southern Algeria in the early 1960s.
"Afterwards, there was no medical checkup," said Leger, who now suffers from cardiovascular illnesses.
One of the world's five declared nuclear powers, France carried out 17 nuclear tests in Algeria in the early 1960s including four atmospheric trials.
The first test code-named "Gerboise Bleue" (Blue Gerbil) took place on February 13, 1960 in Reggane, southern Algeria, some 15 years after the United States ushered in the age of nuclear weapons with its test in New Mexico.
Over four decades, 193 tests were carried out at the French Polynesian islands of Moruroa and at Fangataufa until 1996 when president Jacques Chirac declared an end to the programme.
Retired sailor Serge Vauley recounted that his crew was told to stand on the deck of the Foch aircraft carrier to "admire France's firepower" when the mushroom cloud from a test rose up to the Pacific sky.
Vauley, now 64 and one of the victims seeking compensation, suffers from respiratory problems and described having "holes the size of my fist" in his lungs, Le Figaro reported.
Refusing to acknowledge a direct link between the nuclear tests and the veteran's illnesses, the French government had long argued that it had done everything possible to minimize risks to personnel during testing.
Morin told a news conference that France feared recognition of the ravages caused to its personnel would have weakened its nuclear programme during the Cold War.
By offering compensation, the government was hoping to avoid long, drawn-out litigation, he said. About a dozen veterans have won minor damages in lawsuits brought against the state.
A bill is expected to be presented to parliament next month that will set up a nine-member commission of physicians, led by a magistrate, who will examine individual claims for compensation.
Veterans expressed concern however that the defence minister would have the final say on awarding compensation instead of the independent commission.
They also said it remained unclear how the government would go about compensating native populations.
"These populations will have to prove that they lived there when the tests occurred," said Patrice Bauveret, of the veterans' group.
The government is also lifting the veil of secrecy surrounding its nuclear programme as it considers the compensation claims.
The military archives of the nuclear programme have been opened and are being examined by two experts who are to submit a report in December on the environmental impact of the tests.
A separate health study is under way of 30,000 personnel who took part in the trials that could help support claims presented to the government.
* Comment on this item www.pacificmediacentre.blogspot.com
Monday, March 23, 2009
Ben's Pen
ben's Pen : Conspiracy theorists line up here
Tuesday, 24 March 2009 04:03
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
LAST Friday, as it seems to be the practice of our esteemed federal court chief judge to release orders right before the weekend, found the government of Guam in contempt for the failure to deposit $993,700.00 as ordered by the court in its Feb. 13 order.
The court only cited this section of her order and did not even comment on the other aspects of Public Law 30-1, which was crafted by the Legislature after careful and deliberate and repeated reading of the entire order.
The court did order the payment of the $993,700.00 beginning on March 1. The court also encouraged the legislative and the executive branches to continue efforts to find “viable alternatives” means of financing the consent decree projects at a later time. Public Law 30-1 did not wait for a later time and instead gave the court a viable financing plan prior to March 1.
In the proceedings of the committee of the whole, prior to passing Bill 51 which became P.L. 30-1, I asked point blank the government of Guam’s financial advisor and the underwriter of the bond issue if the conditions for the security of the bond issuance in the bill was viable. These conditions are:
1. It authorized the issuance of the entire amount estimated by the receiver as what is needed to fund the consent decree projects, $202 million.
2. It pledged the full faith and credit of the general fund as a guarantee for the payment of the debt service.
3. It sets the maximum interest rate for the bonds at 9 percent.
4. It approves the terms and conditions and authorizes the Governor to issue the bonds
Both financial experts stated that this was a viable financing plan. Quoting from the same order: “Should this occur, the court will suspend the weekly payments provided the court is satisfied that at a minimum, authorized without the need for further legislative authorization or action, the maximum amount of bonds.” The Legislature clearly did that in the bill it passed.
The court also required that the “governor and the Guam Economic Development Authority in good faith and to the court’s satisfaction move to sell the first series of these bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds at a later date as required to keep the Consent Decree projects and on schedule.”
The court did not even ask the governor or GEDA if they “move to sell the first series of these bonds.” Why? It is clear that the court is not interested in what the Governor is not doing and it remains unknown to everyone, except the court. It is clear that she remains fixated on not only what the Legislature is doing, but on what it is not doing that displeases the court.
It appears that the court as well as the federal government wants a landfill built that serves the needs of someone else other than the people of Guam.
What is your theory?
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 30th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his eighth term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to
senbenp@guam.net. ctzenben@ite.net
Tuesday, 24 March 2009 04:03
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
LAST Friday, as it seems to be the practice of our esteemed federal court chief judge to release orders right before the weekend, found the government of Guam in contempt for the failure to deposit $993,700.00 as ordered by the court in its Feb. 13 order.
The court only cited this section of her order and did not even comment on the other aspects of Public Law 30-1, which was crafted by the Legislature after careful and deliberate and repeated reading of the entire order.
The court did order the payment of the $993,700.00 beginning on March 1. The court also encouraged the legislative and the executive branches to continue efforts to find “viable alternatives” means of financing the consent decree projects at a later time. Public Law 30-1 did not wait for a later time and instead gave the court a viable financing plan prior to March 1.
In the proceedings of the committee of the whole, prior to passing Bill 51 which became P.L. 30-1, I asked point blank the government of Guam’s financial advisor and the underwriter of the bond issue if the conditions for the security of the bond issuance in the bill was viable. These conditions are:
1. It authorized the issuance of the entire amount estimated by the receiver as what is needed to fund the consent decree projects, $202 million.
2. It pledged the full faith and credit of the general fund as a guarantee for the payment of the debt service.
3. It sets the maximum interest rate for the bonds at 9 percent.
4. It approves the terms and conditions and authorizes the Governor to issue the bonds
Both financial experts stated that this was a viable financing plan. Quoting from the same order: “Should this occur, the court will suspend the weekly payments provided the court is satisfied that at a minimum, authorized without the need for further legislative authorization or action, the maximum amount of bonds.” The Legislature clearly did that in the bill it passed.
The court also required that the “governor and the Guam Economic Development Authority in good faith and to the court’s satisfaction move to sell the first series of these bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds at a later date as required to keep the Consent Decree projects and on schedule.”
The court did not even ask the governor or GEDA if they “move to sell the first series of these bonds.” Why? It is clear that the court is not interested in what the Governor is not doing and it remains unknown to everyone, except the court. It is clear that she remains fixated on not only what the Legislature is doing, but on what it is not doing that displeases the court.
It appears that the court as well as the federal government wants a landfill built that serves the needs of someone else other than the people of Guam.
What is your theory?
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 30th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his eighth term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to
senbenp@guam.net. ctzenben@ite.net
Sunday, March 22, 2009
GovGuam Found to Be in Civil Contempt
GovGuam found to be in civil contempt
By Mindy Aguon
Published Mar 20, 2009
KUAM News
Despite the Government of Guam's contention that Public Law 30-1 was a viable solution, District Court Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood in a 16-page decision shot down every argument presented by the government. Not only did she hold the government in civil contempt and order the immediate payment of nearly $4 million by Monday, but the judge admonished lawmakers for passing legislation that she deemed unconstitutional.
It's clear in the chief judge's decision that the she wasn't buying GovGuam's argument that existing Guam policy was the answer to closing the dump and opening a new landfill. In fact, the judge contends lawmakers who voted for its passage violated their oath of office. Her order requires weekly one million dollar payments and compliance by the government otherwise stiff monetary penalties will be imposed.
Saying the court and the people of Guam have been more than patient in expecting Guam's leaders to jointly arrive at a solution to the Ordot Dump crisis, Tydingco-Gatewood made it clear Friday that inaction and obstacles will no longer be tolerated. She further reiterated her position by finding the government of Guam in civil contempt. Saying the government met both thresholds to be held in contempt, the judge first found that the government disobeyed a specific court order she handed down on February 13, mandating weekly cash payments beginning March 1.
Tydingco-Gatewood noted that the order could not be more specific and definite, writing, "It unequivocally told the government what it was to do, and when it was to do it. No reasonable person or entity could be confused as to what was required." While the government maintained that Public Law 30-1 represented its good faith effort to find a viable alternative to the weekly payment, the chief judge found that despite Governor Felix Camacho's cooperation through the introduction of Bill 51 and specific funding mechanisms, the legislature made "radical amendments" and "Cannot imagine how PL 30-1 could qualify as a reasonable step taken in compliance with the court's February 13 2009 order."
Senator B.J. Cruz introduced Section 6 of the public law prohibiting the government from making any payments for consent decree-related projects unless first receiving approval from the Guam Legislature. It's this particular section the judge says was clearly enacted in direct contravention of her order and it's this section that she declared null and void under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Tydingco-Gatewood added that every lawmaker who supported the enactment of Section 6 violated his or her oath of office, saying, "...not only have our island's officials wasted time and money by enacting patently unconstitutional legislation designed to frustrate compliance with a valid court order effecting federal law, they have 'warred against the Constitution', thereby violating their oath of office."
She also found that the government's force majeure argument was not only unfounded and frivolous but she warned that future attempts to use that argument would be cause for sanctions.
After finding the government in civil contempt the court ordered the government to immediately turn over the $3.9 million that has been set aside by the Camacho Administration by noon on Monday, March 23. The judge noted that the government may purge its contempt and avoid the actual payment of the coercive sanction by immediately coming into compliance reiterating the suggestion of using Section 30-backed revenue bonds. She even referred to the government's consultants that pointed out flaws in Public Law 30-1 that created uncertainties for the issuance of financing for consent decree projects.
Should the government fail to deposit the money on Monday, the court will immediately impose daily civil contempt sanctions beginning at $10,000 and doubling each day, up to a daily limit of $250,000. If no payment is made by April 1, the sanctions will accrue at a quarter-million dollars per day until the government comes into full compliance.
With a little more than two years of airspace left at the dump, the court is hopeful today's order will be the catalyst for officials to take action in compliance with the consent decree.
Voicing her own response to the order, Senator Judi Guthertz wrote, "I am disappointed in the District Court Judge's ruling. I am studying the ruling and I believe the repercussions on our community will be severe. I believe that the judge is not being reasonable and I believe the Legislature should consider whether it should challenge the judge’s interpretation of the Supremacy Clause.” As for acting speaker Tom Ada, he reacted by saying he was disappointed because he felt the Legislature provided viable options in the Public Law 30-1, however he understands the reality is those options may not be available as soon as the court may have wanted them. Ada added he is focusing his attention on how the million dollar weekly payments will affect the people of Guam.
By Mindy Aguon
Published Mar 20, 2009
KUAM News
Despite the Government of Guam's contention that Public Law 30-1 was a viable solution, District Court Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood in a 16-page decision shot down every argument presented by the government. Not only did she hold the government in civil contempt and order the immediate payment of nearly $4 million by Monday, but the judge admonished lawmakers for passing legislation that she deemed unconstitutional.
It's clear in the chief judge's decision that the she wasn't buying GovGuam's argument that existing Guam policy was the answer to closing the dump and opening a new landfill. In fact, the judge contends lawmakers who voted for its passage violated their oath of office. Her order requires weekly one million dollar payments and compliance by the government otherwise stiff monetary penalties will be imposed.
Saying the court and the people of Guam have been more than patient in expecting Guam's leaders to jointly arrive at a solution to the Ordot Dump crisis, Tydingco-Gatewood made it clear Friday that inaction and obstacles will no longer be tolerated. She further reiterated her position by finding the government of Guam in civil contempt. Saying the government met both thresholds to be held in contempt, the judge first found that the government disobeyed a specific court order she handed down on February 13, mandating weekly cash payments beginning March 1.
Tydingco-Gatewood noted that the order could not be more specific and definite, writing, "It unequivocally told the government what it was to do, and when it was to do it. No reasonable person or entity could be confused as to what was required." While the government maintained that Public Law 30-1 represented its good faith effort to find a viable alternative to the weekly payment, the chief judge found that despite Governor Felix Camacho's cooperation through the introduction of Bill 51 and specific funding mechanisms, the legislature made "radical amendments" and "Cannot imagine how PL 30-1 could qualify as a reasonable step taken in compliance with the court's February 13 2009 order."
Senator B.J. Cruz introduced Section 6 of the public law prohibiting the government from making any payments for consent decree-related projects unless first receiving approval from the Guam Legislature. It's this particular section the judge says was clearly enacted in direct contravention of her order and it's this section that she declared null and void under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Tydingco-Gatewood added that every lawmaker who supported the enactment of Section 6 violated his or her oath of office, saying, "...not only have our island's officials wasted time and money by enacting patently unconstitutional legislation designed to frustrate compliance with a valid court order effecting federal law, they have 'warred against the Constitution', thereby violating their oath of office."
She also found that the government's force majeure argument was not only unfounded and frivolous but she warned that future attempts to use that argument would be cause for sanctions.
After finding the government in civil contempt the court ordered the government to immediately turn over the $3.9 million that has been set aside by the Camacho Administration by noon on Monday, March 23. The judge noted that the government may purge its contempt and avoid the actual payment of the coercive sanction by immediately coming into compliance reiterating the suggestion of using Section 30-backed revenue bonds. She even referred to the government's consultants that pointed out flaws in Public Law 30-1 that created uncertainties for the issuance of financing for consent decree projects.
Should the government fail to deposit the money on Monday, the court will immediately impose daily civil contempt sanctions beginning at $10,000 and doubling each day, up to a daily limit of $250,000. If no payment is made by April 1, the sanctions will accrue at a quarter-million dollars per day until the government comes into full compliance.
With a little more than two years of airspace left at the dump, the court is hopeful today's order will be the catalyst for officials to take action in compliance with the consent decree.
Voicing her own response to the order, Senator Judi Guthertz wrote, "I am disappointed in the District Court Judge's ruling. I am studying the ruling and I believe the repercussions on our community will be severe. I believe that the judge is not being reasonable and I believe the Legislature should consider whether it should challenge the judge’s interpretation of the Supremacy Clause.” As for acting speaker Tom Ada, he reacted by saying he was disappointed because he felt the Legislature provided viable options in the Public Law 30-1, however he understands the reality is those options may not be available as soon as the court may have wanted them. Ada added he is focusing his attention on how the million dollar weekly payments will affect the people of Guam.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Indigenous group says federalization ‘violates’ NMI right to self-government
Friday, 13 March 2009 00:00 By Gemma Q. Casas - Variety News Staff
THE CNMI Descent for Self-Government and Indigenous Rights Inc. says the U.S. Congress exceeded its lawful powers under the Covenant when it enacted the federalization law, or U.S. P.L. 110-229.
The CNMI Descent filed its 48-page brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as amicus curiae or friend of the court.
Federal Judge Paul Friedman allowed the CNMI Descent to file its brief but not to orally argue its position.
The group’s counsel, Saipan defense attorney Robert O’Connor, argued that federalization “is the infringement on, and deprivation of, the CNMI’s Covenant-guaranteed right of self-government,” and that this “is the immediate and primary injury, not any economic harm that may ultimately result from that deprivation.”
He added, “Regardless of how the law is classified or described, Congress exceeded its lawful powers under the Covenant by enacting it, and this court must therefore uphold the Covenant by enjoining its application to the CNMI.”
The lawyer said they are not seeking economic damages but rather a declaratory relief.
According to O’Connor, U.S. P.L. 110-229 not only applies federal immigration law to the CNMI but also creates a new and unique immigration law for the commonwealth.
“It purports…to establish a separate and distinct regulatory regime of indefinite duration, under which the immigration laws of the CNMI are established by the secretary of Homeland Security, in [her] sole discretion,” he said.
Gov. Benigno R. Fitial believes that federalization will destroy what is left of the CNMI’s alien labor-based economy.
The federal government, for its part, argued that the Covenant allows Congress to extend U.S. immigration law to the islands.
THE CNMI Descent for Self-Government and Indigenous Rights Inc. says the U.S. Congress exceeded its lawful powers under the Covenant when it enacted the federalization law, or U.S. P.L. 110-229.
The CNMI Descent filed its 48-page brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as amicus curiae or friend of the court.
Federal Judge Paul Friedman allowed the CNMI Descent to file its brief but not to orally argue its position.
The group’s counsel, Saipan defense attorney Robert O’Connor, argued that federalization “is the infringement on, and deprivation of, the CNMI’s Covenant-guaranteed right of self-government,” and that this “is the immediate and primary injury, not any economic harm that may ultimately result from that deprivation.”
He added, “Regardless of how the law is classified or described, Congress exceeded its lawful powers under the Covenant by enacting it, and this court must therefore uphold the Covenant by enjoining its application to the CNMI.”
The lawyer said they are not seeking economic damages but rather a declaratory relief.
According to O’Connor, U.S. P.L. 110-229 not only applies federal immigration law to the CNMI but also creates a new and unique immigration law for the commonwealth.
“It purports…to establish a separate and distinct regulatory regime of indefinite duration, under which the immigration laws of the CNMI are established by the secretary of Homeland Security, in [her] sole discretion,” he said.
Gov. Benigno R. Fitial believes that federalization will destroy what is left of the CNMI’s alien labor-based economy.
The federal government, for its part, argued that the Covenant allows Congress to extend U.S. immigration law to the islands.
NMI resident disputes local group’s federalization claim
Friday, 13 March 2009 00:00 By Gemma Q. Casas - Variety News Staff
A local resident who wants to participate in the ongoing CNMI lawsuit against the U.S. Departments of Homeland Security and Labor in a federal court in Washington, D.C. is challenging the legitimacy of the CNMI Descent for Self-Government and Indigenous Rights’ claim that it represents 4,100 persons of NMI-descent.
Human rights lawyer Bruce Jorgensen told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Paul L. Friedman that his client, Celina Tilipao Mettao Setefano, an NMI-descent person is questioning the validity of the CNMI Descent group’s contention.
Setefano asked Friedman to allow her to file a brief as an amicus curiae, Latin for “friend of the court,” a privilege granted to the CNMI Descent group.
Jorgensen said there are also indigenous people who believe that the federalization law would be good for the CNMI.
He said Setefano is among those indigenous people who welcome the changes to the islands’ immigration system.
“Ms. Setefano and similarly situated others maintain that a substantial if not overwhelming number of CNMI situated persons of NMI descent and of non-NMI descent, including both U.S. and non-U.S. citizens, resoundingly support, laud, and are collectively relieved by, the recently enacted federal statutory provisions by which the U.S. government has finally come to the aid of the CNMI general populace — including the CNMI’s disenfranchised masses…,” he said.
“Local immigration laws, policies, and procedures have been “ineptly and woefully controlled over the past two decades by a malfeasant CNMI bureaucracy,” he added.
Jorgensen asked permission to attend today’s scheduled hearing regarding the CNMI’s motion to declare that certain provisions of the federalization law are illegal and the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Lawyers from the Washington-based law firm Jenner & Block will orally argue for the CNMI’s motion for preliminary injunction.
A team of Justice Department of lawyers will represent Homeland Security and the U.S. Labor in the hearing.
A local resident who wants to participate in the ongoing CNMI lawsuit against the U.S. Departments of Homeland Security and Labor in a federal court in Washington, D.C. is challenging the legitimacy of the CNMI Descent for Self-Government and Indigenous Rights’ claim that it represents 4,100 persons of NMI-descent.
Human rights lawyer Bruce Jorgensen told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Paul L. Friedman that his client, Celina Tilipao Mettao Setefano, an NMI-descent person is questioning the validity of the CNMI Descent group’s contention.
Setefano asked Friedman to allow her to file a brief as an amicus curiae, Latin for “friend of the court,” a privilege granted to the CNMI Descent group.
Jorgensen said there are also indigenous people who believe that the federalization law would be good for the CNMI.
He said Setefano is among those indigenous people who welcome the changes to the islands’ immigration system.
“Ms. Setefano and similarly situated others maintain that a substantial if not overwhelming number of CNMI situated persons of NMI descent and of non-NMI descent, including both U.S. and non-U.S. citizens, resoundingly support, laud, and are collectively relieved by, the recently enacted federal statutory provisions by which the U.S. government has finally come to the aid of the CNMI general populace — including the CNMI’s disenfranchised masses…,” he said.
“Local immigration laws, policies, and procedures have been “ineptly and woefully controlled over the past two decades by a malfeasant CNMI bureaucracy,” he added.
Jorgensen asked permission to attend today’s scheduled hearing regarding the CNMI’s motion to declare that certain provisions of the federalization law are illegal and the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Lawyers from the Washington-based law firm Jenner & Block will orally argue for the CNMI’s motion for preliminary injunction.
A team of Justice Department of lawyers will represent Homeland Security and the U.S. Labor in the hearing.
Guam Residents Unhappy About Relocation of US Marines from Okinawa By Akahata
Original source: Akahata (Japan)
Residents of Guam are so reluctant to accept the US Marines to be stationed on the island of US territory in the Pacific, that the Guam governor would sign the ordinance passed by the Guam Legislature to hold a referendum over the planned reinforcement of US forces in Guam, said the speaker of the Guam Territorial Legislature.
Japanese Communist Party member of the House of Councilors Inoue Satoshi heard this while he was visiting Guam on March 8-9 while leading a JCP investigation team in preparation for the upcoming parliamentary discussion on the so-called Guam Agreement recently signed by Japanese Foreign Minister Nakasone Hirofumi and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The agreement, if it comes into force after being approved by both countries, will force Japan to pay the costs for constructing US military facilities on Guam.
Speaker of Guam's Territorial Legislature Judith Won Pat and representatives of residents' organizations in meetings with the JCP team proved that the Japanese government's argument that Guam is welcoming the US Marine Corps (USMC) to be relocated to Guam is false.
In May 2006, the Japanese and US governments reached the final agreement on the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan, which included the relocation of 8,000 US Marines and 9,000 families from Okinawa to Guam as well as Japan's payment of about 6.1 billion dollars as part of the cost for the USMC relocation project totaling about 10.3 billion dollars.
On February 17, the two governments agreed to remake the roadmap, including the payment of the 6.1 billion dollars, into an official treaty entitled: AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RELOCATION OF III MARINE EXPEDITIONARY FORCE PERSONNEL AND THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM OKINAWA TO GUAM.
After visiting the site for the construction of the new USMC facilities, the JCP investigation team met with landowners and residents.
On March 9, after a briefing from Japan's consul general in Guam, they met and held about two hours of talks with Speaker of Guam's Territorial Legislature Won Pat.
The Speaker stated that the US Department of Defense has provided Guam with little information concerning the relocation plan and that no public opinion survey has been held on this issue. She expressed anxieties over further contamination from sewage water from the new military facilities as well as possible sexual assaults by the increased presence of Marines.
She referred to Guam's Governor Felix P. Camacho, who is expected to sign the bill to hold a referendum on the relocation issue.
Specifically on the Japan-US agreement on the USMC Guam relocation, which is expected to be discussed in Japan's Diet, she stressed that the Diet is called upon to listen to Guam and that she is ready to provide information concerned to any Japanese political parties.
On the USFJ realignment issue, she indicated the possibility that additional units will come to a new US base to be constructed in the Henoko district of Nago City, even after a part of the US Marines are moved to Guam.
The JCP team toured the island guided by a representative of the Chamorro Nations, an organization of aboriginals in Guam.
Upon watching CNN news reports on mass layoffs sweeping Japan, they said that they don't understand why Japan has agreed to pay so much money for a foreign government instead of stimulating the Japanese economy.
Guam's landowners association chief Antonio told Inoue that he has not been paid a penny by the military every since his land was taken for use by the U.S. Andersen Air Base. He expressed worries over an additional expropriation of land as a result of the USMC Guam relocation.
JCP Inoue stated, "It is extraordinary for Japan to use tax money for the construction of a military base on foreign territory. I want to convey Guam people's voices to the Japanese Diet so that the new Guam Agreement will be rejected."
Residents of Guam are so reluctant to accept the US Marines to be stationed on the island of US territory in the Pacific, that the Guam governor would sign the ordinance passed by the Guam Legislature to hold a referendum over the planned reinforcement of US forces in Guam, said the speaker of the Guam Territorial Legislature.
Japanese Communist Party member of the House of Councilors Inoue Satoshi heard this while he was visiting Guam on March 8-9 while leading a JCP investigation team in preparation for the upcoming parliamentary discussion on the so-called Guam Agreement recently signed by Japanese Foreign Minister Nakasone Hirofumi and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The agreement, if it comes into force after being approved by both countries, will force Japan to pay the costs for constructing US military facilities on Guam.
Speaker of Guam's Territorial Legislature Judith Won Pat and representatives of residents' organizations in meetings with the JCP team proved that the Japanese government's argument that Guam is welcoming the US Marine Corps (USMC) to be relocated to Guam is false.
In May 2006, the Japanese and US governments reached the final agreement on the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan, which included the relocation of 8,000 US Marines and 9,000 families from Okinawa to Guam as well as Japan's payment of about 6.1 billion dollars as part of the cost for the USMC relocation project totaling about 10.3 billion dollars.
On February 17, the two governments agreed to remake the roadmap, including the payment of the 6.1 billion dollars, into an official treaty entitled: AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RELOCATION OF III MARINE EXPEDITIONARY FORCE PERSONNEL AND THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM OKINAWA TO GUAM.
After visiting the site for the construction of the new USMC facilities, the JCP investigation team met with landowners and residents.
On March 9, after a briefing from Japan's consul general in Guam, they met and held about two hours of talks with Speaker of Guam's Territorial Legislature Won Pat.
The Speaker stated that the US Department of Defense has provided Guam with little information concerning the relocation plan and that no public opinion survey has been held on this issue. She expressed anxieties over further contamination from sewage water from the new military facilities as well as possible sexual assaults by the increased presence of Marines.
She referred to Guam's Governor Felix P. Camacho, who is expected to sign the bill to hold a referendum on the relocation issue.
Specifically on the Japan-US agreement on the USMC Guam relocation, which is expected to be discussed in Japan's Diet, she stressed that the Diet is called upon to listen to Guam and that she is ready to provide information concerned to any Japanese political parties.
On the USFJ realignment issue, she indicated the possibility that additional units will come to a new US base to be constructed in the Henoko district of Nago City, even after a part of the US Marines are moved to Guam.
The JCP team toured the island guided by a representative of the Chamorro Nations, an organization of aboriginals in Guam.
Upon watching CNN news reports on mass layoffs sweeping Japan, they said that they don't understand why Japan has agreed to pay so much money for a foreign government instead of stimulating the Japanese economy.
Guam's landowners association chief Antonio told Inoue that he has not been paid a penny by the military every since his land was taken for use by the U.S. Andersen Air Base. He expressed worries over an additional expropriation of land as a result of the USMC Guam relocation.
JCP Inoue stated, "It is extraordinary for Japan to use tax money for the construction of a military base on foreign territory. I want to convey Guam people's voices to the Japanese Diet so that the new Guam Agreement will be rejected."
Sunday, March 08, 2009
BREAKING NEWS: Guam Wildlife Threatened By Andersen Air force Base
Written by Patti Arroyo, Pacific News Center - Guam, Saipan, CNMI, Asia-Pacific
Guam - Scathing allegations have been lodged against Andersen Air Force Base today:
A complaint filed with the Department of Defense Inspector General says Andersen Air Force Base for years has turned a blind eye to poaching of deer by base "volunteers", and are sponsoring questionable construction projects that are harming rare bats, birds and sea turtles, among other native species.
That allegations are listed in a whistleblower disclosure filed by “PEER”, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility that was released today through the website Common Dreams.org.
Nancy Mitton has been the Natural Resources Specialist at Andersen since 2006 and filed that disclosure with the DOD Inspector General. Mitton wants the I-G to immediately review widespread environmental violations at the base and the complicity of base command.
She cites rampant poaching by base Volunteer Conservation Officers, including illegal trapping of coconut crabs and resale of trophy deer. She complains that half of the endangered fruit bats on the base have recently disappeared. A flock of extremely rare Mariana crows has been virtually wiped out by hunters. Yet, in both cases base command refused to take recommended protective steps; and she also says the Andersen is paving beaches and stripping vegetation used for nesting by endangered hawksbill turtles and threatened green sea turtles. Among the questionable shoreline projects pushed by base officers are dog trails to allow their pets to run unleashed on sensitive wildlife tracts.
"The air force program for protecting Guam's natural resources has utterly broken down" stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who today filed Mitton's complaint with the Defense Inspector General. "Officers are treating sensitive wildlife habitat like their personal beach resort."
Many of the issues identified by Mitton involve unrestricted hunting by local volunteers who are allowed to enter and leave the Air Force Base without their vehicles being searched, in violation of security rules. In addition, the disclosure describes a variety of unsafe ordnance detonation practices.
"Andersen is so remote that there is a feeling of invulnerability reported by staff about the command - a sense that rules do not apply on the island," Dinerstein added. "Until our Defense agencies start holding officers to account for environmental violations, the vast trove of vital natural resources in military custody can never be secure."
Guam - Scathing allegations have been lodged against Andersen Air Force Base today:
A complaint filed with the Department of Defense Inspector General says Andersen Air Force Base for years has turned a blind eye to poaching of deer by base "volunteers", and are sponsoring questionable construction projects that are harming rare bats, birds and sea turtles, among other native species.
That allegations are listed in a whistleblower disclosure filed by “PEER”, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility that was released today through the website Common Dreams.org.
Nancy Mitton has been the Natural Resources Specialist at Andersen since 2006 and filed that disclosure with the DOD Inspector General. Mitton wants the I-G to immediately review widespread environmental violations at the base and the complicity of base command.
She cites rampant poaching by base Volunteer Conservation Officers, including illegal trapping of coconut crabs and resale of trophy deer. She complains that half of the endangered fruit bats on the base have recently disappeared. A flock of extremely rare Mariana crows has been virtually wiped out by hunters. Yet, in both cases base command refused to take recommended protective steps; and she also says the Andersen is paving beaches and stripping vegetation used for nesting by endangered hawksbill turtles and threatened green sea turtles. Among the questionable shoreline projects pushed by base officers are dog trails to allow their pets to run unleashed on sensitive wildlife tracts.
"The air force program for protecting Guam's natural resources has utterly broken down" stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein, who today filed Mitton's complaint with the Defense Inspector General. "Officers are treating sensitive wildlife habitat like their personal beach resort."
Many of the issues identified by Mitton involve unrestricted hunting by local volunteers who are allowed to enter and leave the Air Force Base without their vehicles being searched, in violation of security rules. In addition, the disclosure describes a variety of unsafe ordnance detonation practices.
"Andersen is so remote that there is a feeling of invulnerability reported by staff about the command - a sense that rules do not apply on the island," Dinerstein added. "Until our Defense agencies start holding officers to account for environmental violations, the vast trove of vital natural resources in military custody can never be secure."
The rise of nationalism
Sunday, 08 March 2009 23:11 by Therese Hart | Variety News Staff
Guam leaders say history is repeating itself
On March 6, 1949, local leaders led by Assemblymen Antonio B. Won Pat and Carlos P. Taitano made a historical move by walking out in protest of the Naval government’s refusal to recognize their authority and power to govern their island.
The lack of respect and the seemingly insensitive treatment of the federal government decades ago continue today, according to members of the Guam Legislature, who looked back to the island’s history and its implications today during a discussion held at a pavilion across the street from the federal court in Anigua.
Led by Speaker Judi Won Pat, who wanted to commemorate the historical event, island residents and leaders held dialogue on issues such as Guam’s political self determination, non-reimbursement of over $400 million in Compact Impact funds, the military buildup and recent island-federal issues such as the consent decree projects.
“What are the lessons that we can learn from our past leaders?” asked Won Pat, daughter of the late assemblyman. “That’s what this is all about and how can we carry forth the pioneering spirit they had that moved them to do what they knew was right for their people. It seems that by fate we are facing the same challenges today.”
Local resident Felix Aguon said the 1949 event happened before he was born, but he felt that the federal governor’s treatment of the local community then has not changed.
“Why are we where we are right now? Why are we being kicked around like sheep and dogs? We are U.S. citizens,” Aguon said. “We want respect. I think it’s time to find better dialogue between ourselves and the federal government.”
Federal lawsuits
Sen. Judi Guthertz said she felt that Guam was at a crossroads with the federal government since there are federal issues that are directly impacting the island. She mentioned, for example, the solid waste consent decree and the permanent injunction imposed on the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse and the Department of Integrated Services for Individuals with Disabilities.
“I believe the Guam Legislature should go to court to challenge the District Court depending on the decision the judge makes on March 17,” said Guthertz.
“If the judge decides to go forward and force the issue of grabbing the $1 million a week to give the receiver in a bank account, then we need to go to court and challenge that authority of the federal court,” she added.
One subject that needs to be addressed is Guam’s political status, according to activist and former senator Hope Cristobal.
“The walk out happened 60 years ago and today in the 21st century, we are still being strong-armed by the federal government. I really would like to encourage a walkout with the legislature because we need to show the federal government that 60 years later,” Cristobal said. “We are diminishing, population, and we are losing our ability to maximize our existence in our own homeland through real self government.”
Definition of powers
Former Lt. Gov. Frank Blas Sr. dialogued with the group and brought up the fact that Guam leaders must define exactly what powers it has and its relationship with the U.S. and to its people.
“I share the decision to be very definitive of who we are and what we are as a people. We need to define what kind of power we have and in terms of how to deal with a sovereign power,” Blas said.
“I support and I believe the walkout was done for the right reason. We need to know how much authority we have and relate it to how we can govern our island. There’s the concept of One Guam; Team Guam. I think that’s what needs to be accomplished,” he added.
Activist Jonathan Diaz said that he believed that the government of Guam is powerless.
“To me, there is no such thing as self-government in Guam. The federal government is trying to separate the land from the people. It is their strategic prerogative to go in and take over,” he said.
“All they have to do is define their strategic prerogative, and that’s it. There’s no such thing as sovereignty in Micronesia,” Diaz added.
Sen. Frank Blas Jr., said it’s time for Guam to ask for a stronger voice in Congress.
“Our people walked out on a government that refused to see them as equal,” Blas said. “We talk about a representative that has no voting power. We want a seat in Congress. We want a seat in the Senate. Our citizenship was conferred upon us by a congressional act, not by the U.S. Constitution. At the whim of Congress, they can take away our citizenship,” said Blas.
Won Pat said Friday’s peaceful demonstration was just a start and she expects more dialogues to continue as Guam faces a far reaching change that will determine the future of Guam.
Guam leaders say history is repeating itself
On March 6, 1949, local leaders led by Assemblymen Antonio B. Won Pat and Carlos P. Taitano made a historical move by walking out in protest of the Naval government’s refusal to recognize their authority and power to govern their island.
The lack of respect and the seemingly insensitive treatment of the federal government decades ago continue today, according to members of the Guam Legislature, who looked back to the island’s history and its implications today during a discussion held at a pavilion across the street from the federal court in Anigua.
Led by Speaker Judi Won Pat, who wanted to commemorate the historical event, island residents and leaders held dialogue on issues such as Guam’s political self determination, non-reimbursement of over $400 million in Compact Impact funds, the military buildup and recent island-federal issues such as the consent decree projects.
“What are the lessons that we can learn from our past leaders?” asked Won Pat, daughter of the late assemblyman. “That’s what this is all about and how can we carry forth the pioneering spirit they had that moved them to do what they knew was right for their people. It seems that by fate we are facing the same challenges today.”
Local resident Felix Aguon said the 1949 event happened before he was born, but he felt that the federal governor’s treatment of the local community then has not changed.
“Why are we where we are right now? Why are we being kicked around like sheep and dogs? We are U.S. citizens,” Aguon said. “We want respect. I think it’s time to find better dialogue between ourselves and the federal government.”
Federal lawsuits
Sen. Judi Guthertz said she felt that Guam was at a crossroads with the federal government since there are federal issues that are directly impacting the island. She mentioned, for example, the solid waste consent decree and the permanent injunction imposed on the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse and the Department of Integrated Services for Individuals with Disabilities.
“I believe the Guam Legislature should go to court to challenge the District Court depending on the decision the judge makes on March 17,” said Guthertz.
“If the judge decides to go forward and force the issue of grabbing the $1 million a week to give the receiver in a bank account, then we need to go to court and challenge that authority of the federal court,” she added.
One subject that needs to be addressed is Guam’s political status, according to activist and former senator Hope Cristobal.
“The walk out happened 60 years ago and today in the 21st century, we are still being strong-armed by the federal government. I really would like to encourage a walkout with the legislature because we need to show the federal government that 60 years later,” Cristobal said. “We are diminishing, population, and we are losing our ability to maximize our existence in our own homeland through real self government.”
Definition of powers
Former Lt. Gov. Frank Blas Sr. dialogued with the group and brought up the fact that Guam leaders must define exactly what powers it has and its relationship with the U.S. and to its people.
“I share the decision to be very definitive of who we are and what we are as a people. We need to define what kind of power we have and in terms of how to deal with a sovereign power,” Blas said.
“I support and I believe the walkout was done for the right reason. We need to know how much authority we have and relate it to how we can govern our island. There’s the concept of One Guam; Team Guam. I think that’s what needs to be accomplished,” he added.
Activist Jonathan Diaz said that he believed that the government of Guam is powerless.
“To me, there is no such thing as self-government in Guam. The federal government is trying to separate the land from the people. It is their strategic prerogative to go in and take over,” he said.
“All they have to do is define their strategic prerogative, and that’s it. There’s no such thing as sovereignty in Micronesia,” Diaz added.
Sen. Frank Blas Jr., said it’s time for Guam to ask for a stronger voice in Congress.
“Our people walked out on a government that refused to see them as equal,” Blas said. “We talk about a representative that has no voting power. We want a seat in Congress. We want a seat in the Senate. Our citizenship was conferred upon us by a congressional act, not by the U.S. Constitution. At the whim of Congress, they can take away our citizenship,” said Blas.
Won Pat said Friday’s peaceful demonstration was just a start and she expects more dialogues to continue as Guam faces a far reaching change that will determine the future of Guam.
A Guam Legislature Walkout?
March 4th, 2009
Michael Lujan Bevacqua
On my blog last week I wrote that, until Guam’s political status changes, the national anthem of the island should be changed to “The Hand that Feeds” by Nine Inch Nails. This week, I think that the official song of the Government of Guam and in particular the Guam Legislature should be changed to the protest song “Federåles” by the rock band Chamorro.
In all colonies, because of the fundamentally unequal relationship between parties, there is always constant tension and sometimes conflict over the “proper” governance of the colonies. In the case of Guam, we can see this at a grassroots, everyday personal level in each of our lives (even if we chosen not to admit to it), but the place where you can see and feel it the most everyday, is in the relationship between the Government of Guam and the Federal Government. For them the Federal Government truly is the Feds or Federåles, an oppressive force thats coming down on you or always looking over your shoulder and interfering in your life. A lot of this feeling comes down to Federal-Territorial relations, or the lack thereof.
The thinking of the Federal Government at pretty much any level, in relation to the colonies of the United States can generally be divided into two “thinking” points. 1st. What territories? 2nd. Whatever is good for the 50 stars on the flag should be good for our backwater colonies too. This means that Federal-Territorial relations is a horrifying game of fighting to find or force a place for yourself in the maze of Federal laws and funding sources. As not being a foreign country or a state, you don’t have a place in that maze, you aren’t seated at the table with everyone else, nor are you provided a table of your own. Wherever you end up sitting depends on how much the Federales care or don’t care, how much they know or don’t know, and what place you try to fight for. We can see this clearly in the life of the non-voting delegates to Congress.
Without a secure political identity for your colony, your legislative life is all about fighting for inclusion on some bills/laws and exclusion on others. Its not a life I would envy, since you can never take your place for granted. You can never assume that a bill will automatically include you and you can never assume that any law is ever made thinking about the particular needs of your colony. This is why at one point during his tenure, Congressman Robert Underwood actually attempted to pass a bill with a long and frustrated title that went something like this “Whenever you Write a Bill Don’t Forget the Territories!”
So in one way, those who can most smell and feel the stench of American colonialism on Guam aren’t necessarily the crazy activists such as myself, its actually people in the Government of Guam. They are on the front line for feeling the heavy, ignorant and sometimes racist hand of the Federal Government or the military.
They are the ones who have to deal with the Federal agencies who seem to unanimously feel that Guam is the most corrupt and backwards place in the universe, a never-ending black whole of dependency, laziness and crime. They are the ones who are stuck with a government which everyone seems to feel is bloated and useless, but in actuality is not funded anywhere near the level it should be in order to provide adequate services to Guam’s population. They are the ones who on the one hand have to deal with the horrible red tape and attached-strings of Federal funds, but at the same time deal with a population who seems to think that Federal funds come like big baskets of money, soaps and shower gels put on the door steps of Felix Camacho and the Legislature every morning, with a cheery and simple note attached, “Spend it however you like, just don’t hire your pare’!”
Ground zero right now for feeling the realities of colonialism on Guam is the Guam Legislature. Unlike the Governor or the courts which may be chosen through a democratic process, but aren’t very democratic afterwards, the Legislature cannot help but always be a democratic and representative body. It is the one which is allowed to be responsive to the needs or concerns of everyday people. The Governor may be elected by the people, but the Legislature is supposed to represent, in both senses of the word, the people.
In the past year they have been pushed into a position where they have become the front line for defending Guam against rising Federal pressure. What they do in the coming months will determine much in the near future of Guam. Whether or not they can rise to this challenge, will have a huge impact on where Guam goes from here.
The two main fronts in this conflict are the closing of Ordot Dump and the building of a new landfill at Dandan and the planned 2014 military buildup. The conduct of the Federal Government in both of these issues reek of colonialism, you have to literally be getting lasik done with American flags soaked in kerosene to not see it.
On the military buildup side of things, the Legislature has been one of the few spots in the government in general where you see some fight against the military, some willingness to complain, to criticize, to make demands and to openly argue that Guam’s interests should be put first, before we begin to prioritize our lives to support the military buildup. They are voices of reason in an island which completely refuses to even think about what is going to happen to the island when it undergoes as the Pacific Daily News put it “20 years of growth in just five.” They are the voices who are cautiously reminding us that there are plenty of dangers here, plenty of negative aspects to having this increase. Plenty of ways in which property and commodity prices will rise up, that public utilities and government services will be strained, and the island will no doubt be damaged even more environmentally.
For supporters of the buildup, all the focus is on the new monies that will be coming in. To listen to some you would imagine that each Marine will bring with them a suitcase full of hundred dollar bills, and they will literally, as part of their community engagement, walk around each weekend to family barbeques, just handing out cash. And each of these Marines will bring with them a friend from the states who runs a Cracker Barrel, Besy Buy or Chili’s that they are going to set up on Guam. Because, as the late Joe Murphy prophesized what really matters is that we will be getting out of this buildup, better restaurants, better nightclubs and better movie theaters.
Proponents of the buildup love to cite the $15 billion figure as a sum which will absolutely help Guam, even if we just get a small piece of it. But as I have exhaustedly tried to tell people, NONE of that money will be spent outside of the bases, all of it is directly towards improvements within the fences. In reality, this buildup will cost GovGuam plenty, CMTF estimates vary, but they all exceed a billion dollars, with one estimate putting the total cost at $6.1 billion. Imagine how many Marines buying shishkabobs at the Chamorro village would it take to reach that figure?
The Government and the people of Guam are being asked to prioritize the needs of the military, and alter the landscape of their island, and possibly even give up 950 more acres of Chamorro Land Trust property in order to accommodate what they need, with, as of yet, no guarantees that they will receive any Federal aid to cover those costs. They are being asked to take on a massive burden in order to accommodate, what amounts to a military typhoon which will rapidly descend on the island, which they were not even included in the planning or discussions of.
Believe it or not, but the Ordot Dump and new landfill issue is tied to the military buildup. The dump was supposed to be closed more than a decade ago, and the Government of Guam has been incurring regular fines because of its inability to close it. Both the current and previous Governors and the Legislatures since as well, have all acted poorly in this regard. Either refusing to take any bold action on the trash situation in Guam in general, or attempting to skew the issue to benefit themselves. But the Federal Government for years seemed to be content to sit on the sidelines, keep giving fines and just watch. There was never any significant pressure for years, in fact the fact that Ordot still wasn’t closed seem to prove all of the racist fantasies that people in the Federal Government had about Guam. So lazy and corrupt they’d rather live in trash than take care of themselves.
But for some reasons out of nowhere, all of this changed last year, when Federal Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood appointed a Federal Receiver, Gershman, Brickner and Bratton, Inc, to take over the solid waste management of Guam and most importantly to oversee the closing of the Ordot and the opening of a new dump.
For many this act by the judge has been interpreted as a long-overdue disciplining of GovGuam. Of a swift patek gi i daggå-ña, to finally get it moving. This might be true, but the timing remains suspicious. As part of the proposed military buildup, Anderson Air Force base will soon close its own dump, and rather than open a new one in their existing foot print, they are planning to use the new landfill in Dandan. The judge’s order ensures that the military’s needs will be met, even if it means a catastrophe for the Government of Guam.
In January the Federal Receiver announced that in order for it to fulfill its mandate it would have to be paid $1 million dollars a week by the Government of Guam. The Government of Guam balked at this, asking to meet with the Receiver and work out an alternative plan. At its present levels there is simply no way that the Government would pay that amount each week. In order to accommodate that payment, the Government of Guam would either have to reduce every single office/agency by 9%, or in order not to upset the budgets or staff of essential agencies, all non-essential agencies would have to take a cut somewhere between 30-40%.
The Legislature last week, passed Bill 51, which provided three different options for paying the Federal Receiver, but prohibited the use of any funds save for those outlined in the Bill itself. It even went so far as to ban any Government of Guam official from paying the $1 million weekly payments, and prohibited the use of Section 30 money to make any payments.
Earlier today, Tydingco-Gatewood responded demanding to know why she shouldn’t place the Government of Guam in contempt for not making its first payment, and outlined five options that the Government should undertake in order to make the weekly $1 million payments. These options included, the raising of taxes, the implementation of new GRT or other commercial taxes, the using or other Federal funds (such as Federal Highway funds), the selling off of Chamorro Land Trust Property, the selling of Government assets such as buildings, vehicles.
The Government of Guam has until March 10th to file its argument, and the United States Government has until March 17th to file their response. The most interesting and frightening part of all this (as if it wasn’t crazy enough already), is that in their briefs each party is supposed to discuss the court’s powers in implementing her suggestions. Basically, if GovGuam doesn’t convince Tydingco-Gatewood about the viability of Bill 51, she, as a Federal Judge, might actually order that Guam’s taxes be raised, or force it to sell Chamorro Land Trust lands, or actually force it to mis-use Federal funds!
As a colony, this sort of abuse is always there in the relationship, even if people don’t feel it. We are, as I always find myself reminding people, the tip of America’s spear, we are something that the Federal Government feels it owns and feels it can do whatever it wants with. Every once in a while, the Government of Guam will try to find a way to resist this objectivization. There will be strong statements, court cases filed, protective or defensive laws passed, and sometimes even protests will take place. Looking at the state of affairs in Guam today, with a Legislature which is straining to find a way to prioritize Guam’s interest, against a Federal machine which is determined to interfere and force Guam to accommodate it. I am reminded of an event which took place close to today, sixty years ago. I am of course thinking of March 5, 1949 and the Guam Congress Walkout.
I won’t give you much details here, for fear that I may never stop writing this post. Guampedia has a decent article on the walkout, which you can read here. But Anne Perez Hattori’s article on it “Righting Civil Wrongs: The Guam Congress Walkout of 1949″ is a must read, and you can find it in the blue Hale’-ta book, also known as Kinalamten Pulitikat. There are also numerous writings and interviews on it from former Senator Carlos Taitano who was instrumental in the planning and the promotion of the walkout.
The Guam Congress Walkout was an act of defiance, against a greedy and ignorant military that had returned to Guam during World War II, and was determined that Guam be remade into a modern day fortress. While at first Chamorros were grateful and happy to be able to provide their land, their island and their loyalty in exchange for the expulsion of the Japanese and the return of the United States, as families saw more and more land being snatched up, and sitting often times fallow or poisoned behind tall fences, they began to question their “liberation” and what the real cost of the militarization of their island had become. This was exasperated, by the fact that Chamorros were still denied even the most basic rights and political protections after the war, continuing the colonial policies of the Navy from the prewar period.
In order to protest these issues and a number of others, the members of the Guam Congress voted to adjourn and walkout. It was an action that ended up making news around the world and shed light on the abuses of the US Navy in Guam, its ravenous landtaking after World War II and its refusal to provide self-government for Chamorros. It ended up changing the entire game, as the walkout was one of the events that compelled the United States Federal Government to create an Organic Act for Guam, which at last satisfied in some way the longstanding Chamorro desire for some political protections and rights, and also a chance to have its own government.
The Guam Legislature of today is in a similar position to its ancestors of 1949. And, if I were one of its members I would be considering my own act of protest, my own way of changing the game.
Something symbolic, yet something powerful enough to bring the eyes of the island, the nation and the world to Guam and to reveal to all the other side of American power, this colonial side that we live with and struggle under everyday.
Michael Lujan Bevacqua
On my blog last week I wrote that, until Guam’s political status changes, the national anthem of the island should be changed to “The Hand that Feeds” by Nine Inch Nails. This week, I think that the official song of the Government of Guam and in particular the Guam Legislature should be changed to the protest song “Federåles” by the rock band Chamorro.
In all colonies, because of the fundamentally unequal relationship between parties, there is always constant tension and sometimes conflict over the “proper” governance of the colonies. In the case of Guam, we can see this at a grassroots, everyday personal level in each of our lives (even if we chosen not to admit to it), but the place where you can see and feel it the most everyday, is in the relationship between the Government of Guam and the Federal Government. For them the Federal Government truly is the Feds or Federåles, an oppressive force thats coming down on you or always looking over your shoulder and interfering in your life. A lot of this feeling comes down to Federal-Territorial relations, or the lack thereof.
The thinking of the Federal Government at pretty much any level, in relation to the colonies of the United States can generally be divided into two “thinking” points. 1st. What territories? 2nd. Whatever is good for the 50 stars on the flag should be good for our backwater colonies too. This means that Federal-Territorial relations is a horrifying game of fighting to find or force a place for yourself in the maze of Federal laws and funding sources. As not being a foreign country or a state, you don’t have a place in that maze, you aren’t seated at the table with everyone else, nor are you provided a table of your own. Wherever you end up sitting depends on how much the Federales care or don’t care, how much they know or don’t know, and what place you try to fight for. We can see this clearly in the life of the non-voting delegates to Congress.
Without a secure political identity for your colony, your legislative life is all about fighting for inclusion on some bills/laws and exclusion on others. Its not a life I would envy, since you can never take your place for granted. You can never assume that a bill will automatically include you and you can never assume that any law is ever made thinking about the particular needs of your colony. This is why at one point during his tenure, Congressman Robert Underwood actually attempted to pass a bill with a long and frustrated title that went something like this “Whenever you Write a Bill Don’t Forget the Territories!”
So in one way, those who can most smell and feel the stench of American colonialism on Guam aren’t necessarily the crazy activists such as myself, its actually people in the Government of Guam. They are on the front line for feeling the heavy, ignorant and sometimes racist hand of the Federal Government or the military.
They are the ones who have to deal with the Federal agencies who seem to unanimously feel that Guam is the most corrupt and backwards place in the universe, a never-ending black whole of dependency, laziness and crime. They are the ones who are stuck with a government which everyone seems to feel is bloated and useless, but in actuality is not funded anywhere near the level it should be in order to provide adequate services to Guam’s population. They are the ones who on the one hand have to deal with the horrible red tape and attached-strings of Federal funds, but at the same time deal with a population who seems to think that Federal funds come like big baskets of money, soaps and shower gels put on the door steps of Felix Camacho and the Legislature every morning, with a cheery and simple note attached, “Spend it however you like, just don’t hire your pare’!”
Ground zero right now for feeling the realities of colonialism on Guam is the Guam Legislature. Unlike the Governor or the courts which may be chosen through a democratic process, but aren’t very democratic afterwards, the Legislature cannot help but always be a democratic and representative body. It is the one which is allowed to be responsive to the needs or concerns of everyday people. The Governor may be elected by the people, but the Legislature is supposed to represent, in both senses of the word, the people.
In the past year they have been pushed into a position where they have become the front line for defending Guam against rising Federal pressure. What they do in the coming months will determine much in the near future of Guam. Whether or not they can rise to this challenge, will have a huge impact on where Guam goes from here.
The two main fronts in this conflict are the closing of Ordot Dump and the building of a new landfill at Dandan and the planned 2014 military buildup. The conduct of the Federal Government in both of these issues reek of colonialism, you have to literally be getting lasik done with American flags soaked in kerosene to not see it.
On the military buildup side of things, the Legislature has been one of the few spots in the government in general where you see some fight against the military, some willingness to complain, to criticize, to make demands and to openly argue that Guam’s interests should be put first, before we begin to prioritize our lives to support the military buildup. They are voices of reason in an island which completely refuses to even think about what is going to happen to the island when it undergoes as the Pacific Daily News put it “20 years of growth in just five.” They are the voices who are cautiously reminding us that there are plenty of dangers here, plenty of negative aspects to having this increase. Plenty of ways in which property and commodity prices will rise up, that public utilities and government services will be strained, and the island will no doubt be damaged even more environmentally.
For supporters of the buildup, all the focus is on the new monies that will be coming in. To listen to some you would imagine that each Marine will bring with them a suitcase full of hundred dollar bills, and they will literally, as part of their community engagement, walk around each weekend to family barbeques, just handing out cash. And each of these Marines will bring with them a friend from the states who runs a Cracker Barrel, Besy Buy or Chili’s that they are going to set up on Guam. Because, as the late Joe Murphy prophesized what really matters is that we will be getting out of this buildup, better restaurants, better nightclubs and better movie theaters.
Proponents of the buildup love to cite the $15 billion figure as a sum which will absolutely help Guam, even if we just get a small piece of it. But as I have exhaustedly tried to tell people, NONE of that money will be spent outside of the bases, all of it is directly towards improvements within the fences. In reality, this buildup will cost GovGuam plenty, CMTF estimates vary, but they all exceed a billion dollars, with one estimate putting the total cost at $6.1 billion. Imagine how many Marines buying shishkabobs at the Chamorro village would it take to reach that figure?
The Government and the people of Guam are being asked to prioritize the needs of the military, and alter the landscape of their island, and possibly even give up 950 more acres of Chamorro Land Trust property in order to accommodate what they need, with, as of yet, no guarantees that they will receive any Federal aid to cover those costs. They are being asked to take on a massive burden in order to accommodate, what amounts to a military typhoon which will rapidly descend on the island, which they were not even included in the planning or discussions of.
Believe it or not, but the Ordot Dump and new landfill issue is tied to the military buildup. The dump was supposed to be closed more than a decade ago, and the Government of Guam has been incurring regular fines because of its inability to close it. Both the current and previous Governors and the Legislatures since as well, have all acted poorly in this regard. Either refusing to take any bold action on the trash situation in Guam in general, or attempting to skew the issue to benefit themselves. But the Federal Government for years seemed to be content to sit on the sidelines, keep giving fines and just watch. There was never any significant pressure for years, in fact the fact that Ordot still wasn’t closed seem to prove all of the racist fantasies that people in the Federal Government had about Guam. So lazy and corrupt they’d rather live in trash than take care of themselves.
But for some reasons out of nowhere, all of this changed last year, when Federal Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood appointed a Federal Receiver, Gershman, Brickner and Bratton, Inc, to take over the solid waste management of Guam and most importantly to oversee the closing of the Ordot and the opening of a new dump.
For many this act by the judge has been interpreted as a long-overdue disciplining of GovGuam. Of a swift patek gi i daggå-ña, to finally get it moving. This might be true, but the timing remains suspicious. As part of the proposed military buildup, Anderson Air Force base will soon close its own dump, and rather than open a new one in their existing foot print, they are planning to use the new landfill in Dandan. The judge’s order ensures that the military’s needs will be met, even if it means a catastrophe for the Government of Guam.
In January the Federal Receiver announced that in order for it to fulfill its mandate it would have to be paid $1 million dollars a week by the Government of Guam. The Government of Guam balked at this, asking to meet with the Receiver and work out an alternative plan. At its present levels there is simply no way that the Government would pay that amount each week. In order to accommodate that payment, the Government of Guam would either have to reduce every single office/agency by 9%, or in order not to upset the budgets or staff of essential agencies, all non-essential agencies would have to take a cut somewhere between 30-40%.
The Legislature last week, passed Bill 51, which provided three different options for paying the Federal Receiver, but prohibited the use of any funds save for those outlined in the Bill itself. It even went so far as to ban any Government of Guam official from paying the $1 million weekly payments, and prohibited the use of Section 30 money to make any payments.
Earlier today, Tydingco-Gatewood responded demanding to know why she shouldn’t place the Government of Guam in contempt for not making its first payment, and outlined five options that the Government should undertake in order to make the weekly $1 million payments. These options included, the raising of taxes, the implementation of new GRT or other commercial taxes, the using or other Federal funds (such as Federal Highway funds), the selling off of Chamorro Land Trust Property, the selling of Government assets such as buildings, vehicles.
The Government of Guam has until March 10th to file its argument, and the United States Government has until March 17th to file their response. The most interesting and frightening part of all this (as if it wasn’t crazy enough already), is that in their briefs each party is supposed to discuss the court’s powers in implementing her suggestions. Basically, if GovGuam doesn’t convince Tydingco-Gatewood about the viability of Bill 51, she, as a Federal Judge, might actually order that Guam’s taxes be raised, or force it to sell Chamorro Land Trust lands, or actually force it to mis-use Federal funds!
As a colony, this sort of abuse is always there in the relationship, even if people don’t feel it. We are, as I always find myself reminding people, the tip of America’s spear, we are something that the Federal Government feels it owns and feels it can do whatever it wants with. Every once in a while, the Government of Guam will try to find a way to resist this objectivization. There will be strong statements, court cases filed, protective or defensive laws passed, and sometimes even protests will take place. Looking at the state of affairs in Guam today, with a Legislature which is straining to find a way to prioritize Guam’s interest, against a Federal machine which is determined to interfere and force Guam to accommodate it. I am reminded of an event which took place close to today, sixty years ago. I am of course thinking of March 5, 1949 and the Guam Congress Walkout.
I won’t give you much details here, for fear that I may never stop writing this post. Guampedia has a decent article on the walkout, which you can read here. But Anne Perez Hattori’s article on it “Righting Civil Wrongs: The Guam Congress Walkout of 1949″ is a must read, and you can find it in the blue Hale’-ta book, also known as Kinalamten Pulitikat. There are also numerous writings and interviews on it from former Senator Carlos Taitano who was instrumental in the planning and the promotion of the walkout.
The Guam Congress Walkout was an act of defiance, against a greedy and ignorant military that had returned to Guam during World War II, and was determined that Guam be remade into a modern day fortress. While at first Chamorros were grateful and happy to be able to provide their land, their island and their loyalty in exchange for the expulsion of the Japanese and the return of the United States, as families saw more and more land being snatched up, and sitting often times fallow or poisoned behind tall fences, they began to question their “liberation” and what the real cost of the militarization of their island had become. This was exasperated, by the fact that Chamorros were still denied even the most basic rights and political protections after the war, continuing the colonial policies of the Navy from the prewar period.
In order to protest these issues and a number of others, the members of the Guam Congress voted to adjourn and walkout. It was an action that ended up making news around the world and shed light on the abuses of the US Navy in Guam, its ravenous landtaking after World War II and its refusal to provide self-government for Chamorros. It ended up changing the entire game, as the walkout was one of the events that compelled the United States Federal Government to create an Organic Act for Guam, which at last satisfied in some way the longstanding Chamorro desire for some political protections and rights, and also a chance to have its own government.
The Guam Legislature of today is in a similar position to its ancestors of 1949. And, if I were one of its members I would be considering my own act of protest, my own way of changing the game.
Something symbolic, yet something powerful enough to bring the eyes of the island, the nation and the world to Guam and to reveal to all the other side of American power, this colonial side that we live with and struggle under everyday.
Marines’ plans could go before Guam voters
Legislators mull nonbinding referendum on troop move
By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday, March 5, 2009
TOKYO — Guam voters may get a chance later this year to say whether they want 8,000 U.S. Marines and their families to move onto the island, according to Guam lawmakers.
The proposed referendum would also ask voters whether the military should be allowed to lease Guam-controlled lands currently set aside for residential development and for reparations for some island residents who lost land decades ago to military use.
Lawmakers and leaders from both parties support the idea of the nonbinding vote, though for differing reasons, according to interviews with Guam senators in recent days.
Some say a strong showing could help persuade federal leaders to funnel more money to Guam, a U.S. territory that lacks a full vote in Congress and grapples daily with an inadequate tax base, aging infrastructure, troubled public schools, an overcrowded hospital and an overflowing landfill.
Others say that after three years of ample public discussion but few tangible investments, the public deserves a say about the project, especially now that the military is surveying land outside its fences to find adequate room for firing ranges.
Gauging the support of this last issue — the military’s need for more land — is the most important part of the proposal, according to Sen. Benjamin J.F. Cruz, sponsor of the referendum.
"There was a lot of concern from the community about losing that much property to the military," said Cruz, a Democrat and vice speaker of the legislature. "I thought, well, let’s ask the people."
As currently written, the referendum would take place 90 days after it’s approved by the legislature.
The special election would cost $150,000 to $200,000. Cruz said he hopes for a vote in the legislature in coming days.
More than three years ago, U.S. and Japanese governments announced an agreement to move Marines from III Marine Expeditionary Force on Okinawa to Guam. The buildup plans have grown to include the addition of an Army air defense unit and the ability to host weeks-long aircraft carrier visits.
It amounts to an expansion of the current 14,000 troops and Pentagon workers to an estimated 40,000 by 2014.
Currently, the military controls a little more than a quarter of the island’s 212 square miles, according to Sen. Judith Guthertz, another Democrat who heads the legislature’s Committee on the Guam Military Buildup and Homeland Security.
Earlier this year, military leaders shepherding the project told Guam officials they needed to look beyond the Navy and Air Force’s current land holdings to accommodate the Marines’ need for firing ranges, senators interviewed said. It was a change in tack for the military’s Joint Guam Project Office, whose officials had said for years they hoped not to increase the military’s footprint on the island. As plans developed, that goal became harder, according to Capt. Neil Ruggerio, a spokesman for the project office.
With the buildup, the military needs more area for rifle and machine gun ranges, he said. That means the military also needs to secure a pie-shaped wedge of land behind the targets for safety reasons. On existing bases, that safety area comes too close to popular tourist areas, endangered species’ domains and munitions storage, Ruggerio said.
This week, surveyors from the Navy’s Facilities Engineering Command in Hawaii are on Guam to look for adequate land. No land has been selected, though the military is talking with landowners and local mayors as it surveys, Ruggerio said. Some of the surveyed area includes Guam-controlled land in the Chamurro Land Trust Commission and the Ancestral Lands Trust Commission, according to senators who were interviewed.
The former is undeveloped land set aside for residents who were on the island before 1950. Those who qualify for the land can lease plots; in return, the government uses the lease payments to invest in infrastructure for the lots.
The second category is reserved for families who lost land during World War II but cannot reclaim it because of current use.
"You have to be very sensitive here," said Guthertz, who added she had not made up her mind about the land-use issue.
"People had difficult experiences at the end of World War II. … There has to be an overwhelming reason [to use more land]. That’s going to be a hard nut to crack for our indigenous people."
Sen. Edward Calvo, the legislature’s minority leader, said he too supported the referendum and he thought a public vote would overwhelmingly favor the buildup.
"The biggest question is paying for the election," he said Tuesday.
"And, if we find out that it’s not supported any more, we have to find out why."
Military officials, in a written statement, said they would welcome the public’s opinion.
The office of Republican Gov. Felix Camacho also had indicated support. Any passage would send a vote of confidence for the project, Lt. Gov. Michael Cruz wrote last week in response to written questions.
A public rejection, however, could slow down the process, Lt. Gov. Cruz wrote.
"Whether or not it will stop the process is tough to determine," he added.
Even Sen. Benjamin Cruz, who does not support the buildup, acknowledged that the referendum effort may be moot. "We may not have a choice in the matter," he said.
By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday, March 5, 2009
TOKYO — Guam voters may get a chance later this year to say whether they want 8,000 U.S. Marines and their families to move onto the island, according to Guam lawmakers.
The proposed referendum would also ask voters whether the military should be allowed to lease Guam-controlled lands currently set aside for residential development and for reparations for some island residents who lost land decades ago to military use.
Lawmakers and leaders from both parties support the idea of the nonbinding vote, though for differing reasons, according to interviews with Guam senators in recent days.
Some say a strong showing could help persuade federal leaders to funnel more money to Guam, a U.S. territory that lacks a full vote in Congress and grapples daily with an inadequate tax base, aging infrastructure, troubled public schools, an overcrowded hospital and an overflowing landfill.
Others say that after three years of ample public discussion but few tangible investments, the public deserves a say about the project, especially now that the military is surveying land outside its fences to find adequate room for firing ranges.
Gauging the support of this last issue — the military’s need for more land — is the most important part of the proposal, according to Sen. Benjamin J.F. Cruz, sponsor of the referendum.
"There was a lot of concern from the community about losing that much property to the military," said Cruz, a Democrat and vice speaker of the legislature. "I thought, well, let’s ask the people."
As currently written, the referendum would take place 90 days after it’s approved by the legislature.
The special election would cost $150,000 to $200,000. Cruz said he hopes for a vote in the legislature in coming days.
More than three years ago, U.S. and Japanese governments announced an agreement to move Marines from III Marine Expeditionary Force on Okinawa to Guam. The buildup plans have grown to include the addition of an Army air defense unit and the ability to host weeks-long aircraft carrier visits.
It amounts to an expansion of the current 14,000 troops and Pentagon workers to an estimated 40,000 by 2014.
Currently, the military controls a little more than a quarter of the island’s 212 square miles, according to Sen. Judith Guthertz, another Democrat who heads the legislature’s Committee on the Guam Military Buildup and Homeland Security.
Earlier this year, military leaders shepherding the project told Guam officials they needed to look beyond the Navy and Air Force’s current land holdings to accommodate the Marines’ need for firing ranges, senators interviewed said. It was a change in tack for the military’s Joint Guam Project Office, whose officials had said for years they hoped not to increase the military’s footprint on the island. As plans developed, that goal became harder, according to Capt. Neil Ruggerio, a spokesman for the project office.
With the buildup, the military needs more area for rifle and machine gun ranges, he said. That means the military also needs to secure a pie-shaped wedge of land behind the targets for safety reasons. On existing bases, that safety area comes too close to popular tourist areas, endangered species’ domains and munitions storage, Ruggerio said.
This week, surveyors from the Navy’s Facilities Engineering Command in Hawaii are on Guam to look for adequate land. No land has been selected, though the military is talking with landowners and local mayors as it surveys, Ruggerio said. Some of the surveyed area includes Guam-controlled land in the Chamurro Land Trust Commission and the Ancestral Lands Trust Commission, according to senators who were interviewed.
The former is undeveloped land set aside for residents who were on the island before 1950. Those who qualify for the land can lease plots; in return, the government uses the lease payments to invest in infrastructure for the lots.
The second category is reserved for families who lost land during World War II but cannot reclaim it because of current use.
"You have to be very sensitive here," said Guthertz, who added she had not made up her mind about the land-use issue.
"People had difficult experiences at the end of World War II. … There has to be an overwhelming reason [to use more land]. That’s going to be a hard nut to crack for our indigenous people."
Sen. Edward Calvo, the legislature’s minority leader, said he too supported the referendum and he thought a public vote would overwhelmingly favor the buildup.
"The biggest question is paying for the election," he said Tuesday.
"And, if we find out that it’s not supported any more, we have to find out why."
Military officials, in a written statement, said they would welcome the public’s opinion.
The office of Republican Gov. Felix Camacho also had indicated support. Any passage would send a vote of confidence for the project, Lt. Gov. Michael Cruz wrote last week in response to written questions.
A public rejection, however, could slow down the process, Lt. Gov. Cruz wrote.
"Whether or not it will stop the process is tough to determine," he added.
Even Sen. Benjamin Cruz, who does not support the buildup, acknowledged that the referendum effort may be moot. "We may not have a choice in the matter," he said.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Survivors reach out to stateside Chamorros
A group of local war survivors is reaching out to the thousands of Chamorros scattered across the country to get the war claims bill through the U.S. Senate.
"We are appealing to all the Chamorros in the mainland," said Tom Barcinas, a Santa Rita resident and World War II survivor. "Every Chamorro is linked to the Chamorros back here."
Barcinas, who is president of the Guam AARP, said his organization and the Young Men's League of Guam are trying to contact people who live in the states, to get them to e-mail or call their senators and ask for support for the war claims bill. "Those people have more power than we do -- they're voters and we're not," Barcinas said of mainland residents. Guam does not have a representative in the U.S. Senate, but each state has two.
Bill 44 passed the U.S. House of Representatives with more than two-thirds support yesterday. It faces another hurdle in the Senate before it can reach President Obama's desk. The Senate voted down the war claims bill in 2007, the year it first passed the House.
War claims bills introduced by Guam's previous congressional delegates since the 1980s have failed.
"Rather than just hope everything will turn out, the idea is to try to identify people living in the different states to write to their senators, asking them to support the bill," said Tamuning resident Tony Palomo. Palomo is helping to write a form letter that said can be forwarded to U.S. senators.
Barcinas said organizers plan to use the Internet for the grass-roots effort. People can e-mail him to get a copy of the form letter to send to their senators. "Some of the people living in the states have grandparents who were in the war; some of them have grandchildren already," he said. "They deserve the war claims."
(2 of 3)
Tom Barcinas' cousin, Joe Barcinas, of Sinajana said organizers are targeting those who live in states with Republican senators. Conservatives are expected to vote against the bill.
Joe Barcinas, who was a child during the war, said it could be a challenge to get nationwide support for the bill. "Many of the younger generation and people in the U.S. don't understand the contributions the Chamorros made for the United States," he said. He said Chamorros were tortured for supporting the United States during the war, but more U.S. troops would have died during the liberation had it not been for the efforts of locals.
About 4,200 of the 22,500 Chamorros who lived through World War II are still alive, estimated war survivor Bert Unpingco.
Unpingco added that the war claims bill is especially timely with thousands of U.S. Marines and their dependents expected to relocate to Guam within four years. "For the military to feel 100 percent welcome to Guam, they must pay us what we've been waiting for, for 60 years," he said. "We're not begging for anything more than we're entitled to."
Unpingco, who is an Air Force veteran with two grandchildren in the Armed Forces, questioned why Guam is still waiting for recognition when the United States has paid war reparations to other groups in the past.
Last week, President Obama's recent economic stimulus act authorized payments for Filipino World War II veterans.
"Our country took over the responsibility and liability of World War II. I appreciate that very much, but it took so long, most of us have reached a point where some of us feel we are not part of the U.S.," Unpingco said. "Yet the loyalty of the Chamorro to the country is so strong."
(3 of 3)
The bill would pay $25,000 to survivors of those who died as a result of the Japanese occupation. It also gives $7,000 to $15,000 to be paid to each resident -- or survivor -- who suffered injury, rape, forced labor or forced marches, internment or hiding to escape internment.
Antonio Lizama, Art Toves and others discussed the passage of the bill over gin rummy at the Agat Senior Citizens Center yesterday. Everyone who played the game survived the war or had a relative who did.
"We suffered a lot," said Lizama, who was a child during the war. "We've just been trying to get something out of this."
"Those were really hard times," Toves added from across the table. He was 12 when the war ended.
Agat resident Margie Salas said the war claims bill is important not just to those who survived the war, but to everyone who has Guam roots. "I've been waiting for this," she said. "And we have a lot of Chamorros living off island who have waited for this."
"We are appealing to all the Chamorros in the mainland," said Tom Barcinas, a Santa Rita resident and World War II survivor. "Every Chamorro is linked to the Chamorros back here."
Barcinas, who is president of the Guam AARP, said his organization and the Young Men's League of Guam are trying to contact people who live in the states, to get them to e-mail or call their senators and ask for support for the war claims bill. "Those people have more power than we do -- they're voters and we're not," Barcinas said of mainland residents. Guam does not have a representative in the U.S. Senate, but each state has two.
Bill 44 passed the U.S. House of Representatives with more than two-thirds support yesterday. It faces another hurdle in the Senate before it can reach President Obama's desk. The Senate voted down the war claims bill in 2007, the year it first passed the House.
War claims bills introduced by Guam's previous congressional delegates since the 1980s have failed.
"Rather than just hope everything will turn out, the idea is to try to identify people living in the different states to write to their senators, asking them to support the bill," said Tamuning resident Tony Palomo. Palomo is helping to write a form letter that said can be forwarded to U.S. senators.
Barcinas said organizers plan to use the Internet for the grass-roots effort. People can e-mail him to get a copy of the form letter to send to their senators. "Some of the people living in the states have grandparents who were in the war; some of them have grandchildren already," he said. "They deserve the war claims."
(2 of 3)
Tom Barcinas' cousin, Joe Barcinas, of Sinajana said organizers are targeting those who live in states with Republican senators. Conservatives are expected to vote against the bill.
Joe Barcinas, who was a child during the war, said it could be a challenge to get nationwide support for the bill. "Many of the younger generation and people in the U.S. don't understand the contributions the Chamorros made for the United States," he said. He said Chamorros were tortured for supporting the United States during the war, but more U.S. troops would have died during the liberation had it not been for the efforts of locals.
About 4,200 of the 22,500 Chamorros who lived through World War II are still alive, estimated war survivor Bert Unpingco.
Unpingco added that the war claims bill is especially timely with thousands of U.S. Marines and their dependents expected to relocate to Guam within four years. "For the military to feel 100 percent welcome to Guam, they must pay us what we've been waiting for, for 60 years," he said. "We're not begging for anything more than we're entitled to."
Unpingco, who is an Air Force veteran with two grandchildren in the Armed Forces, questioned why Guam is still waiting for recognition when the United States has paid war reparations to other groups in the past.
Last week, President Obama's recent economic stimulus act authorized payments for Filipino World War II veterans.
"Our country took over the responsibility and liability of World War II. I appreciate that very much, but it took so long, most of us have reached a point where some of us feel we are not part of the U.S.," Unpingco said. "Yet the loyalty of the Chamorro to the country is so strong."
(3 of 3)
The bill would pay $25,000 to survivors of those who died as a result of the Japanese occupation. It also gives $7,000 to $15,000 to be paid to each resident -- or survivor -- who suffered injury, rape, forced labor or forced marches, internment or hiding to escape internment.
Antonio Lizama, Art Toves and others discussed the passage of the bill over gin rummy at the Agat Senior Citizens Center yesterday. Everyone who played the game survived the war or had a relative who did.
"We suffered a lot," said Lizama, who was a child during the war. "We've just been trying to get something out of this."
"Those were really hard times," Toves added from across the table. He was 12 when the war ended.
Agat resident Margie Salas said the war claims bill is important not just to those who survived the war, but to everyone who has Guam roots. "I've been waiting for this," she said. "And we have a lot of Chamorros living off island who have waited for this."
Protect: Museum, other efforts will help preserve and perpetuate the Chamorro culture
March 1, 2009
Each year in March, Guam holds Chamorro Month. Cultural performances and demonstrations, classroom projects and lectures, exhibits and fiestas are packed into a monthlong celebration of the Chamorro culture.
But is enough being done during the rest of the year to properly protect, preserve and propagate the Chamorro culture?
Overall, there have been great improvements in this area in recent years. The number of Chamorro dance groups in the community and at our public schools continues to increase. But there is still so much more that can be done, by individuals and groups in the community as well as the government.
The largest missing piece in the effort to preserve the Chamorro culture is the lack of a fully functioning, permanent museum.
The Guam Museum Foundation is pushing efforts to build a new 50,000-square-foot facility to house and display the island's artifacts. Our elected officials and the entire community need to support this important effort to preserve and perpetuate the Chamorro culture.
Many of Guam's archival material, artifacts and remnants were dispatched to other museums or private collectors around the world including places such as Manila, Cebu, Rome, Madrid, Mexico City, Acapulco, Washington, D.C., Annapolis, Maryland and Honolulu. A significant portion of the collection is on Guam, remaining in storage.
The community's generous support for this project will help move the foundation closer to building the Guam Museum, a permanent home for our history and culture.
The Legacy Walk of Hagåtña is another project that promises to celebrate Chamorro history and culture.
The Legacy Walk will be a red-brick path that starts at Fort Santa Agueda and winds its way through a total of 17 places of interest before ending at Padre Palomo Park. The $1.4 million project, funded by the U.S. Department of the Interior, is expected to be completed by the end of December.
The walking tour includes nine sites listed on the Guam Register of Historic Places and six that are on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.
The Guam Museum and the Legacy Walk are exactly the type of attractions that tourists have been saying they want to see more of in Guam.
But it won't be an asset solely of tourism. Both projects will be community treasures that will be enjoyed by all residents. Both also provide great teaching tools for the island's schools.
Each year in March, Guam holds Chamorro Month. Cultural performances and demonstrations, classroom projects and lectures, exhibits and fiestas are packed into a monthlong celebration of the Chamorro culture.
But is enough being done during the rest of the year to properly protect, preserve and propagate the Chamorro culture?
Overall, there have been great improvements in this area in recent years. The number of Chamorro dance groups in the community and at our public schools continues to increase. But there is still so much more that can be done, by individuals and groups in the community as well as the government.
The largest missing piece in the effort to preserve the Chamorro culture is the lack of a fully functioning, permanent museum.
The Guam Museum Foundation is pushing efforts to build a new 50,000-square-foot facility to house and display the island's artifacts. Our elected officials and the entire community need to support this important effort to preserve and perpetuate the Chamorro culture.
Many of Guam's archival material, artifacts and remnants were dispatched to other museums or private collectors around the world including places such as Manila, Cebu, Rome, Madrid, Mexico City, Acapulco, Washington, D.C., Annapolis, Maryland and Honolulu. A significant portion of the collection is on Guam, remaining in storage.
The community's generous support for this project will help move the foundation closer to building the Guam Museum, a permanent home for our history and culture.
The Legacy Walk of Hagåtña is another project that promises to celebrate Chamorro history and culture.
The Legacy Walk will be a red-brick path that starts at Fort Santa Agueda and winds its way through a total of 17 places of interest before ending at Padre Palomo Park. The $1.4 million project, funded by the U.S. Department of the Interior, is expected to be completed by the end of December.
The walking tour includes nine sites listed on the Guam Register of Historic Places and six that are on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.
The Guam Museum and the Legacy Walk are exactly the type of attractions that tourists have been saying they want to see more of in Guam.
But it won't be an asset solely of tourism. Both projects will be community treasures that will be enjoyed by all residents. Both also provide great teaching tools for the island's schools.
60 years later, feds still lord over people of Guam
By Victoria-Lola M. Leon Guerrero • March 6, 2009
On March 5, 1949, members of the Guam Congress made history for resisting federal control over local governance. They adjourned their session and walked out on the premise that the people of Guam deserved the right to govern themselves. They made international headlines and helped the island attain some form of self-government with the Organic Act.
At the time of the walkout, Guam was under naval rule and the local government had no real power to govern the people. "Let us not hide behind doors, but let us come right out and tell our people that we cannot do things they wish, because we have somebody to tell us what to do," said then-Congressman Frank D. Perez on the day of the walkout.
Sixty years later, we sit idle as the history they fought repeats itself.
We have a federal judge ordering our local government to spend $1 million a week on the landfill, while two high schools share one campus, our only hospital struggles to meet the needs of its patients and our government employees live with the fear of looming pay cuts, payless paydays and layoffs.
We are also expected to meet the demands of the federal government as it expands its military presence on our island -- a decision that was made without our consent. This military buildup will make the native Chamorro people an extreme minority in our homeland, where we still haven't exercised our human right to self-determination.
And with construction for the buildup set to begin in a just over a year, our community is left with a long list of unanswered questions. At the top of the list is exactly how much money and resources will the people of Guam sacrifice to accommodate the infrastructural strain of a massive population boom and increased military presence?
(2 of 2)
As our island constantly takes on the burden of supporting the military and following federal orders, what do we lose in the process? Aren't we, the people of Guam, worthy of the dignity and right to govern ourselves and decide our future?
The recent battle over the landfill proves that the federal government still assumes it has ultimate control over the island. The federal judge stated in her order earlier this week that the federal court could have the power to raise our taxes and sell our assets, including the Chamorro Land Trust properties we fought hard for.
In response to the federal judge's statements, Speaker Judith Won Pat accurately made the connection to our history. "The court's actions remind me of the day(s) of the naval government, where we had no rights whatsoever," said the speaker.
During the days of the naval government, it was made explicit that the interests of the military would always take precedence over the needs of the people of Guam. For example, in a 1946 naval report to Washington it was written that, "The economic development (of Guam) must be geared to meet the demands of (Navy) service and service connected personnel, and cannot be geared to the financial, technical, or business ability of the Guamanian entrepreneur."
As the military buildup plays out, it is not hard to see how this is still the case. What worries me is that not enough people are making the historical connection, or fighting against it. In the case of the landfill, the governor has shown a clear lack of leadership as his office publicly ponders what to follow: local law or federal orders.
In order for us to change our fate, we must fight for our right to govern ourselves. It is time to follow in the bold footsteps taken by the Guam Congress 60 years ago, and celebrate the parts of our history that obligate us to fight for our land and our people. We must support leaders who are determined to put our island first, and not allow our people to be taken advantage of any longer.
Victoria-Lola M. Leon Guerrero, a middle school teacher, lives in Toto.
On March 5, 1949, members of the Guam Congress made history for resisting federal control over local governance. They adjourned their session and walked out on the premise that the people of Guam deserved the right to govern themselves. They made international headlines and helped the island attain some form of self-government with the Organic Act.
At the time of the walkout, Guam was under naval rule and the local government had no real power to govern the people. "Let us not hide behind doors, but let us come right out and tell our people that we cannot do things they wish, because we have somebody to tell us what to do," said then-Congressman Frank D. Perez on the day of the walkout.
Sixty years later, we sit idle as the history they fought repeats itself.
We have a federal judge ordering our local government to spend $1 million a week on the landfill, while two high schools share one campus, our only hospital struggles to meet the needs of its patients and our government employees live with the fear of looming pay cuts, payless paydays and layoffs.
We are also expected to meet the demands of the federal government as it expands its military presence on our island -- a decision that was made without our consent. This military buildup will make the native Chamorro people an extreme minority in our homeland, where we still haven't exercised our human right to self-determination.
And with construction for the buildup set to begin in a just over a year, our community is left with a long list of unanswered questions. At the top of the list is exactly how much money and resources will the people of Guam sacrifice to accommodate the infrastructural strain of a massive population boom and increased military presence?
(2 of 2)
As our island constantly takes on the burden of supporting the military and following federal orders, what do we lose in the process? Aren't we, the people of Guam, worthy of the dignity and right to govern ourselves and decide our future?
The recent battle over the landfill proves that the federal government still assumes it has ultimate control over the island. The federal judge stated in her order earlier this week that the federal court could have the power to raise our taxes and sell our assets, including the Chamorro Land Trust properties we fought hard for.
In response to the federal judge's statements, Speaker Judith Won Pat accurately made the connection to our history. "The court's actions remind me of the day(s) of the naval government, where we had no rights whatsoever," said the speaker.
During the days of the naval government, it was made explicit that the interests of the military would always take precedence over the needs of the people of Guam. For example, in a 1946 naval report to Washington it was written that, "The economic development (of Guam) must be geared to meet the demands of (Navy) service and service connected personnel, and cannot be geared to the financial, technical, or business ability of the Guamanian entrepreneur."
As the military buildup plays out, it is not hard to see how this is still the case. What worries me is that not enough people are making the historical connection, or fighting against it. In the case of the landfill, the governor has shown a clear lack of leadership as his office publicly ponders what to follow: local law or federal orders.
In order for us to change our fate, we must fight for our right to govern ourselves. It is time to follow in the bold footsteps taken by the Guam Congress 60 years ago, and celebrate the parts of our history that obligate us to fight for our land and our people. We must support leaders who are determined to put our island first, and not allow our people to be taken advantage of any longer.
Victoria-Lola M. Leon Guerrero, a middle school teacher, lives in Toto.
Legislators Mull Nonbinding Referendum on Troop Move
Marines’ plans could go before Guam voters
By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday, March 5, 2009
Legislators mull nonbinding referendum on troop move
TOKYO — Guam voters may get a chance later this year to say whether they want 8,000 U.S. Marines and their families to move onto the island, according to Guam lawmakers.
The proposed referendum would also ask voters whether the military should be allowed to lease Guam-controlled lands currently set aside for residential development and for reparations for some island residents who lost land decades ago to military use.
Lawmakers and leaders from both parties support the idea of the nonbinding vote, though for differing reasons, according to interviews with Guam senators in recent days.
Some say a strong showing could help persuade federal leaders to funnel more money to Guam, a U.S. territory that lacks a full vote in Congress and grapples daily with an inadequate tax base, aging infrastructure, troubled public schools, an overcrowded hospital and an overflowing landfill.
Others say that after three years of ample public discussion but few tangible investments, the public deserves a say about the project, especially now that the military is surveying land outside its fences to find adequate room for firing ranges.
Gauging the support of this last issue — the military’s need for more land — is the most important part of the proposal, according to Sen. Benjamin J.F. Cruz, sponsor of the referendum.
"There was a lot of concern from the community about losing that much property to the military," said Cruz, a Democrat and vice speaker of the legislature. "I thought, well, let’s ask the people."
As currently written, the referendum would take place 90 days after it’s approved by the legislature.
The special election would cost $150,000 to $200,000. Cruz said he hopes for a vote in the legislature in coming days.
More than three years ago, U.S. and Japanese governments announced an agreement to move Marines from III Marine Expeditionary Force on Okinawa to Guam. The buildup plans have grown to include the addition of an Army air defense unit and the ability to host weeks-long aircraft carrier visits.
It amounts to an expansion of the current 14,000 troops and Pentagon workers to an estimated 40,000 by 2014.
Currently, the military controls a little more than a quarter of the island’s 212 square miles, according to Sen. Judith Guthertz, another Democrat who heads the legislature’s Committee on the Guam Military Buildup and Homeland Security.
Earlier this year, military leaders shepherding the project told Guam officials they needed to look beyond the Navy and Air Force’s current land holdings to accommodate the Marines’ need for firing ranges, senators interviewed said. It was a change in tack for the military’s Joint Guam Project Office, whose officials had said for years they hoped not to increase the military’s footprint on the island. As plans developed, that goal became harder, according to Capt. Neil Ruggerio, a spokesman for the project office.
With the buildup, the military needs more area for rifle and machine gun ranges, he said. That means the military also needs to secure a pie-shaped wedge of land behind the targets for safety reasons. On existing bases, that safety area comes too close to popular tourist areas, endangered species’ domains and munitions storage, Ruggerio said.
This week, surveyors from the Navy’s Facilities Engineering Command in Hawaii are on Guam to look for adequate land. No land has been selected, though the military is talking with landowners and local mayors as it surveys, Ruggerio said. Some of the surveyed area includes Guam-controlled land in the Chamurro Land Trust Commission and the Ancestral Lands Trust Commission, according to senators who were interviewed.
The former is undeveloped land set aside for residents who were on the island before 1950. Those who qualify for the land can lease plots; in return, the government uses the lease payments to invest in infrastructure for the lots.
The second category is reserved for families who lost land during World War II but cannot reclaim it because of current use.
"You have to be very sensitive here," said Guthertz, who added she had not made up her mind about the land-use issue.
"People had difficult experiences at the end of World War II. … There has to be an overwhelming reason [to use more land]. That’s going to be a hard nut to crack for our indigenous people."
Sen. Edward Calvo, the legislature’s minority leader, said he too supported the referendum and he thought a public vote would overwhelmingly favor the buildup.
"The biggest question is paying for the election," he said Tuesday.
"And, if we find out that it’s not supported any more, we have to find out why."
Military officials, in a written statement, said they would welcome the public’s opinion.
The office of Republican Gov. Felix Camacho also had indicated support. Any passage would send a vote of confidence for the project, Lt. Gov. Michael Cruz wrote last week in response to written questions.
A public rejection, however, could slow down the process, Lt. Gov. Cruz wrote.
"Whether or not it will stop the process is tough to determine," he added.
Even Sen. Benjamin Cruz, who does not support the buildup, acknowledged that the referendum effort may be moot. "We may not have a choice in the matter," he said.
By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday, March 5, 2009
Legislators mull nonbinding referendum on troop move
TOKYO — Guam voters may get a chance later this year to say whether they want 8,000 U.S. Marines and their families to move onto the island, according to Guam lawmakers.
The proposed referendum would also ask voters whether the military should be allowed to lease Guam-controlled lands currently set aside for residential development and for reparations for some island residents who lost land decades ago to military use.
Lawmakers and leaders from both parties support the idea of the nonbinding vote, though for differing reasons, according to interviews with Guam senators in recent days.
Some say a strong showing could help persuade federal leaders to funnel more money to Guam, a U.S. territory that lacks a full vote in Congress and grapples daily with an inadequate tax base, aging infrastructure, troubled public schools, an overcrowded hospital and an overflowing landfill.
Others say that after three years of ample public discussion but few tangible investments, the public deserves a say about the project, especially now that the military is surveying land outside its fences to find adequate room for firing ranges.
Gauging the support of this last issue — the military’s need for more land — is the most important part of the proposal, according to Sen. Benjamin J.F. Cruz, sponsor of the referendum.
"There was a lot of concern from the community about losing that much property to the military," said Cruz, a Democrat and vice speaker of the legislature. "I thought, well, let’s ask the people."
As currently written, the referendum would take place 90 days after it’s approved by the legislature.
The special election would cost $150,000 to $200,000. Cruz said he hopes for a vote in the legislature in coming days.
More than three years ago, U.S. and Japanese governments announced an agreement to move Marines from III Marine Expeditionary Force on Okinawa to Guam. The buildup plans have grown to include the addition of an Army air defense unit and the ability to host weeks-long aircraft carrier visits.
It amounts to an expansion of the current 14,000 troops and Pentagon workers to an estimated 40,000 by 2014.
Currently, the military controls a little more than a quarter of the island’s 212 square miles, according to Sen. Judith Guthertz, another Democrat who heads the legislature’s Committee on the Guam Military Buildup and Homeland Security.
Earlier this year, military leaders shepherding the project told Guam officials they needed to look beyond the Navy and Air Force’s current land holdings to accommodate the Marines’ need for firing ranges, senators interviewed said. It was a change in tack for the military’s Joint Guam Project Office, whose officials had said for years they hoped not to increase the military’s footprint on the island. As plans developed, that goal became harder, according to Capt. Neil Ruggerio, a spokesman for the project office.
With the buildup, the military needs more area for rifle and machine gun ranges, he said. That means the military also needs to secure a pie-shaped wedge of land behind the targets for safety reasons. On existing bases, that safety area comes too close to popular tourist areas, endangered species’ domains and munitions storage, Ruggerio said.
This week, surveyors from the Navy’s Facilities Engineering Command in Hawaii are on Guam to look for adequate land. No land has been selected, though the military is talking with landowners and local mayors as it surveys, Ruggerio said. Some of the surveyed area includes Guam-controlled land in the Chamurro Land Trust Commission and the Ancestral Lands Trust Commission, according to senators who were interviewed.
The former is undeveloped land set aside for residents who were on the island before 1950. Those who qualify for the land can lease plots; in return, the government uses the lease payments to invest in infrastructure for the lots.
The second category is reserved for families who lost land during World War II but cannot reclaim it because of current use.
"You have to be very sensitive here," said Guthertz, who added she had not made up her mind about the land-use issue.
"People had difficult experiences at the end of World War II. … There has to be an overwhelming reason [to use more land]. That’s going to be a hard nut to crack for our indigenous people."
Sen. Edward Calvo, the legislature’s minority leader, said he too supported the referendum and he thought a public vote would overwhelmingly favor the buildup.
"The biggest question is paying for the election," he said Tuesday.
"And, if we find out that it’s not supported any more, we have to find out why."
Military officials, in a written statement, said they would welcome the public’s opinion.
The office of Republican Gov. Felix Camacho also had indicated support. Any passage would send a vote of confidence for the project, Lt. Gov. Michael Cruz wrote last week in response to written questions.
A public rejection, however, could slow down the process, Lt. Gov. Cruz wrote.
"Whether or not it will stop the process is tough to determine," he added.
Even Sen. Benjamin Cruz, who does not support the buildup, acknowledged that the referendum effort may be moot. "We may not have a choice in the matter," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)