NMI’s control over immigration

For 21 years now, the NMI has been treated like a territory, nation or even a foreign country by many of our national policymakers who have no inkling of our history as contained in the Covenant Agreement.
The Covenant Negotiations which started in 1972 has a history why the NMI sought control over its borders. Although the primary reason may not turn out as intended, the basic fact remains that the NMI dictates who crosses its gates. This very federal authority is a perfect example of returning governing to the governance where it rightfully belongs at least in the unique situation of the NMI so far removed from mainstream. The NMI isn’t trying to be a virulent juvenile on these issues but must necessarily step on a giant’s toe to be heard.

As we analyze the Tent City situation on Tinian, it is no secret that despite its good intentions, the US Immigration and Naturalization Service isn’t equipped to handle the many sunrise-like appearances of boats in our waters with illegals who hail from provinces in China. It’s the US Coast Guard who guide these boats into Tinian because our southern neighbor of Guam refuses to take anymore illegals seeking political asylum. The NMI is fortunate to have control over its immigration where no such asylum is issued.

Assuming that INS is given authority to control and manage our open-water borders. It would mean reinventing INS to take on the role of the US Navy with dozens or more sophisticated patrol boats plying the waters between Hawaii and Micronesia. It would mean millions of US mainland taxpayers’ money to reinvent INS into its new responsibility. The entire issue would translate into an additional burden on US taxpayers’ pocketbooks. We’re not sure this is the appropriate approach.

The basic misunderstanding of the manner the NMI has handled immigration is inundated with misperception fueled by our detractors using sensationalized information as fodder to secure what they wish to have accomplished on behalf of moneyed people in the US Textile Labor Unions. Indeed, the maze of confusion has turned into a powerful twister of our interest against theirs. But what most detractors have conveniently neglected is that the system works in positive ways no one even thought of when this authority was granted the NMI under the terms and conditions of the Covenant.

Suffice it to say, it must be remembered (albeit difficult to do so in the midst of this dizzying controversy) that the NMI is also equipped with a working judicial system that has promptly and soundly disposed of violations pertaining to labor and immigration. This is the undeniable premise that must be allowed to continue “as is” in the absence of a better system. It is for this reason that we feel control over our non-conventional borders must remain with the local government. Most importantly, it has allowed the NMI to propel itself into phenomenal economic heights no other territory under the union has attained as to be able to stand on its feet in terms of shouldering its own cost on government operations. This too must be given greater weight in future discussions pertaining to control of immigration. It is the wise thing to do and a huge savings to US mainland taxpayers down the years. Si Yuus Maase`!