The grand illusion

Yes Marianas, the Pew propaganda machine is still alive. The most recent example is when the Friends of the Monument—the alter ego of the Pew Environment Group—were attempting to show they have strong community support for their monument proposal. This case is particularly disturbing because I believe it is directed at those in the U.S. mainland who may not recognize it for what it is—an illusion created by the Pew magicians.

This story starts out with a recent trip to Washington, D.C. in early December 2008 by a group of Friends of the Monument to lobby the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to adopt Pew’s national marine monument proposal.

The group received positive media coverage from National Public Radio (NPR) who, by the way, is the recipient of numerous generous donations from the Pew Charitable Trusts. In his interview titled ‘Bush May Scale Back Plans for Marine Reserve’, NPR reporter Richard Harris states “Salas and Cabrerra went to the White House this week to plead for complete protection for an area the size of Arizona. They brought with them petitions signed by businesses, schoolchildren and 6,000 local residents. The island only has 10,000 voters.”(see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97967207)

After their D.C. trip, the Friends of the Monument sent a letter (dated 15 December 2008) to Mr. James Connaughton (Chairman, Council on Environmental Quality) stating among other things “More than 60 of us gathered signatures on a petition in support of a marine national monument – which 6000 residents signed! That’s an unheard of number and dwarfs the 2300 votes of the top vote getter in the recent election for our first congressional delegate.” (see http://marianamonument.blogspot.com/2008/12/letter-to-connaughton.html)

An editorial appeared in the LA Times on 30 December 2008 which stated: “Yet the majority of residents of the Marianas seem to disagree with their leaders; polls and petitions of the islands’ 10,000 registered voters show strong support.” (see http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-oceans30-2008dec30,0,4945323,print.story)

And finally, in a Saipan Tribune article titled “Marine monument plan proves divisive for NMI” (1 January 2009) the same claim is again repeated: “The group (Friends of the Monument) launched a signature campaign and claimed to have garnered some 6,000 supporters for the plan. The CNMI has a voting population of 10,000.” (see http://www.saipantribune.com/newsstory.aspx?cat=1&newsID=86563

Pew’s claim has a very specific point—it is suppose to show wide based community support for their monument proposal. Of course, we in the Marianas know this is not true; however Pew’s purpose is to create the illusion of strong community support so as to influence the decision makers at CEQ and the White House to adopt their monument proposal.

In a futile attempt to make it appear that Pew’s proposal has strong community support where there is none, the number of petition signatures (e.g., 6,000) is compared directly to the number of CNMI voters. In order to mislead the reader into thinking the petition has even greater significance; Pew substantially underestimates the CNMI voter population at 10,000.

Fatal flaws with Pew’s interpretation of the facts includes the reality that their petition contains the names of tourists, children/kids, and foreign guest workers—people who cannot vote in the CNMI. In addition, a quick call to the Commonwealth Election Commission informed me that the CNMI currently has 13,000 voters (a decrease from previous elections). The number of signatures on the Pew petition and number of CNMI voters are UNRELATED issues.

The Pew illusion of strong community support quickly fades away when the reader realizes that you cannot compare a petition containing non-voting signatories (e.g., apples) to the number of CNMI voters (e.g., oranges)! This comparison is invalid, purposely misleading, and an insult to the people of the Marianas.

While I certainly support the right for any and all individuals to sign whatever petition they wish, I expect Pew to have some dignity and moral principles to accurately interpret conclusions from their campaign, especially when the information is widely disseminated across the US mainland. Unfortunately, I believe this is just too much to ask from the Pew Environment Group.

Misleading the general public is only a part of Pew’s overall campaign plan to create the illusion that the people of the Marianas support their monument proposal. The CNMI and Guam Governments and a majority of people in the Marianas do not support the Pew monument proposal. We know the truth, but will CEQ and the White House see through Pew’s smoke and mirrors and reject their monument proposal? Will President Bush care more about politics then the sensitive cultural and sustainable use concerns raised time and time again by the people of the Marianas? I understand we will find out shortly.

The Marianas Trench National Monument: Our Ocean—Bush’s Legacy—Pew’s Future!