Click here for the draft agenda

CLICK HERE FOR THE AGENDA

I owe an enormous debt of gratitude to my fellow citizens, friends, and family members who contributed to my election campaign.  In particular, I would like to thank my parents Eugenio and Carmela Sablan for their untiring affection and for reminding me from time to time to eat and sleep; my better half Glen Hunter for his boundless love and unfailing honesty; my second mother Gloria Hunter whose home and company gave me a warm and much-needed refuge; my dearest friend Martha Mendiola, who helped me keep my sense of humor and sanity during a sometimes trying campaign; my co-treasurers Brooke Nevitt and Reina Camacho, who cheerfully and diligently kept the financial books in order; and Jessica Barcinas and Val Alepuyo, whose earnest words of conviction and encouragement ultimately convinced me to run for office in the first place.      

I am also deeply grateful to the scores of people, too numerous to list individually here, who generously assisted my campaign in one heartfelt way or another.  To all who helped collect signatures for my candidacy, spent their evenings with me in community gatherings and brainstorming sessions, went house to house with me, stuffed envelopes, passed out brochures, shared information, and freely gave of their time, resources, advice, constructive criticism, support, and prayers: thank you.

I would like to encourage my fellow citizens to begin thinking now about running for office themselves in 2009 and beyond.  A major factor in my decision to run this year was the hope that my campaign might help open the doors for new candidates in future elections, not only in the Legislature, but in all branches of government.  The CNMI needs more of its honest and visionary citizens to step forward and offer themselves to the community as candidates for leadership and public service.  That an independent first-time candidate can make it into office on a campaign based entirely on a call for good governance, without a single fundraiser, rally, billboard, bumper sticker, roadside waving, or promise of jobs is a sign that our community is indeed ready for change. 

There is no question that we face a long and difficult road ahead, but we can prevail and realize a great vision for our Commonwealth if enough caring citizens are committed to that cause. 

As always, I continue to welcome ideas, concerns, and advice from the community.  I may be reached by email at tinasablan@gmail.com, by phone at 483-3935, and here at the Commonwealth Dialogues online forum. 

Tina Sablan

“i would like to hear your thoughts about the tribune’s headline yesterday where cohen mentioned the possibility of granting permanent residence here in the commonweath to approx 8K non-resident workers. you testified in congress last month that you did not see anything wrong with this move and i wonder if you still have the same view today.” — Nicky/John Jr. “all i ask of you is to PLEASE side with us.protect our future.DON’T GIVE PERMANENT RESIDENCY TO ALL NON-RESIDENT PEOPLE! this ideas spells D-I-S-A-S-T-E-R!!!! and this is your statement to the US CONGRESS.that is another issue i have with you, by the way.i like you, BUT YOU ARE SCARING ME.” — Nicky/John Jr.

“Tina, how can you put those animals above your own people?” — Anonymous caller, after the federal hearing in August

Nicky/John Jr. and others on and off this forum have asked me to explain my position supporting the efforts of nonresidents to improve their status in the CNMI.  Some have warned me that I will lose votes if I maintain this position.  I can accept that.  People should know where their candidates honestly stand on the issues,  and then make their own informed decisions.  I respect any citizen’s decision to vote or not vote for me based on a position that I have taken as a matter of conscience.  My position supporting the efforts of nonresidents to improve their status in these islands is just that: a matter of conscience.

The fears that have been expressed by others in our community with respect to improving the status of long-term nonresidents have always struck me as illogical and misguided, not to mention racist.  If we were to be very honest with ourselves, we would acknowledge that racism is alive and well in the Commonwealth, and it has thrived under our exploitative immigration and labor system.  I am still haunted by the question I received from an anonymous caller after the federal hearing in August: “Tina, how can you put those animals above your own people?”  This person was talking, of course, about nonresidents in our community.

To me, that question signified the clearest, simplest expression of how much our community has been divided and weakened by our immigration and labor problems.  We have on the one hand a class of nonresidents who are vulnerable to exploitation no matter how long they live here; they occupy most of the private sector jobs.  We have on the other hand a class of residents who find it difficult to secure decent jobs and wages in the private sector, and so most work for the government, are practically held hostage by their jobs, and are afraid to speak their minds.  Many of these residents have already left the islands out of frustration and in search of better opportunities for themselves and their families.

Our immigration and labor system has hurt us all — residents as well as nonresidents.  My response to that anonymous caller, and to everyone else in this community who would ask me such a question is, “Those ‘animals’ you are referring to are also our people.  We are all one people, and we are all suffering in the same sinking boat.”  

And speaking of boats, I often think back to the old saying, “A rising tide floats all boats.”  It applies well to the reason I support the efforts of nonresidents to improve their status here.  Just as I believe that the status quo has hurt all of us, so too do I believe that we all stand to benefit from reform.  Some people seem to think that a policy that hurts nonresidents, makes life difficult and more insecure for them, divides their families, and keeps them afraid of speaking out, must somehow be good for “locals.”  But by now it should be painfully clear to all of us that we do not raise ourselves by tearing others down.  Policies that hurt one group of people in our community will hurt all of us — and policies that help one group of people in our community will ultimately benefit the entire community.  Hence, the rising tide.  

I love this community enough to wish all people who call our islands home the opportunity to improve their quality of life.  I love this community enough to consider everyone whose hearts, homes, and families are here as “local” as I am, and as deserving of the right to speak their minds and advocate for themselves as anyone else should be.  I love this community enough to be angered by exploitation no matter who the perpetrator is, and to be distressed by poverty and village slums no matter who is poor and who is living in dilapidated homes and barracks.  And I love this community enough to be deeply offended when anyone calls my friends, co-workers, former students, former teachers, and family members “animals” — no matter who is doing the name-calling.    

Now, I know that I said earlier that our immigration and labor system has divided this community — and it has, in many ways, truly brought out the worst, most ignorant, and most racist instincts in some of our people.  But in other ways, the amazing diversity of people in the Commonwealth is slowly giving rise to a new, vibrant, and more tolerant culture, and there is much potential for this new culture to be one of our greatest strengths.  I see it increasingly in my generation — a much freer acceptance and appreciation of other traditions, and a greater sympathy for people who have made their homes here and simply want better lives for themselves and their families.  I see it even more in younger children.  It gives me hope.  And at a time like this, we need more than anything to be able to pull together as a community and make the most of the talents, skills, and resources of all our people.

We need, in other words, to seek out the tide that will raise us all.         

– Tina

P.S.  Those who want more information on my position on federalization can access everything I have written on the subject (letters, testimony, notes, etc.) on this website.  See the “Immigration and Labor” post, and the documents listed under “My letters” and “My speeches.”  

• Nicky
• Lativa
• John Jr.
• Ramona
• Plato (although Ramona later said this was a typo in a post that followed)
• Pauline
• Martina
• Alice
• Carnaag the Magician
• Mary

For a full listing of comments that have been attributed to multiple aliases coming from one computer, please click here.  

This means that all of the above forum participants are either using the same computer… or they are all one and the same person. 

I have no problem whatsoever with anonymous posts or the use of aliases.  It’s fine if people wish to post their real names, and it’s fine if they don’t.  We don’t need to know everyone’s true identity to carry on an intelligent discussion of the issues.  But when one person pretends to be multiple people all weighing in with multiple (but similar) opinions on an issue, and even pretends to be engaged in dialogue with his own aliases – well, that is not only deceptive and dishonest, it is insulting to the other commentors who participate in this forum with a sincere interest in exploring the issues. 

Please, folks — and especially Nicky/Lativa/Ramona/John Jr./Martina/Pauline/Alice/Carnaag/Mary, etc. — have some respect.  It’s ok to disagree on the issues, and it’s ok to use aliases.  But let’s not use aliases to deliberately skew the conversation, insult other participants, and promote our own agendas.  That is not true dialogue.  And it is totally disrespectful.       

– Tina

Lately citizens have been asking me what kind of legislator I would be if I were elected.   Will I compromise my principles and vote against my better judgment on my colleagues’ bills so I can win their votes for my bills?  Have I identified anyone in the Legislature who would support my ideas?  Do I realize that pushing bills through the Legislature is a “numbers game,” a game of tit for tat, of “I’ll scratch your back, if you scratch mine”? Am I willing to set aside idealism for two years and play the games of old school politics? 

Underneath all those questions, there seems to be one burning question that has been implied but not yet directly asked: How will I avoid burning out, breaking down, and wasting two years of my life?     

Most of us by now should be well aware of the games that our lawmakers have played for years in order to win votes, earn favors, pass bills, put a check on independent thinkers within the Legislature, and even put a check on their own constituents.  They work behind the scenes, promising votes or favors in exchange for other votes or favors.  They manipulate purse strings, session schedules, and meeting agendas to suit their own ends.  They exploit the weaknesses of their colleagues and constituents – their gullibility, their egos, their fears.  They pass bills quickly and quietly – to appease the governor, perhaps, or to benefit themselves, or to avoid public outcry.  If a bill is really controversial, they might schedule a session in Rota or Tinian to avoid scrutiny, or cancel it altogether.  They might not break the law, but they are adept at bending it, and can rationalize virtually any decision they make, however unethical it might be. 

Such is the culture of gamesmanship that has evolved at our Legislature, a culture that has caused many a good, honest citizen to shudder at the thought of public office.  Well-meaning individuals who decide to try it either leave frustrated and disappointed, or they stay year after year and become adept at the manipulation, backstabbing, and other forms of petty politics that have characterized our Legislature.  And so the culture of gamesmanship continues.

I can imagine that if one stays in the Legislature long enough, this culture of gamesmanship would begin to seem natural, even inevitable – the way things simply are and the way they always will be. For seasoned politicians, and for weary long-time observers of local politics, a vision of anything different in the Legislature would seem hopelessly idealistic and naïve.

But these politicians and political observers would only be right if the people of this Commonwealth believe they are right.  They would only be right if the people also cannot imagine anything different, if they do not believe that they deserve more than gamesmanship from their elected representatives. 

And so I come to this crucial point:  the culture of gamesmanship at the Legislature will change when the people decide that they want change.  Gamesmanship is made possible not only by the politicians who practice it, but also by voters who elect them again and again, and by citizens who keep silent and do nothing even when conscience calls them to speak up and take action.    

If we truly want change in the Legislature, why not demand it?  If we want new leaders who would refuse to play games in public office, why not elect them, or run for office ourselves?  If elected representatives become ostracized in the Legislature for calling for transparency and accountability in government and for defending the public welfare, where will citizens be, what will citizens do?    

Will we initiate or respond to calls for action?  Will we turn out for public hearings and forums, circulate and sign petitions, send letters of protest or praise, and demonstrate? Will we make an effort to become informed about the issues and the candidates before we vote? Will any of us be willing to step forward to run for public office ourselves someday and be the change we wish to see in the Commonwealth? 

Or will we simply shake our heads, keep our mouths shut, feel sympathy for the embattled representative or citizen of the day – and allow other politicians to continue to play games with our tax dollars, our wellbeing, our future?

As citizens we should absolutely be asking all the candidates this year where they stand on the issues we care about, and what they plan to do about the problems of the Commonwealth.  But we should also be turning the very same questions to ourselves:  where do WE stand on the issues, each one of us, and what do WE plan to do to help? 

For myself, I know that I will avoid burning out, breaking down, and wasting two years of my life in public office by upholding my convictions, pushing for maximum transparency and accountability in government, urging other citizens to participate in the affairs of our government, and helping to build a long-term vision for the Commonwealth that incorporates the best ideas and aspirations of all our people.   

Problems that have been years in the making will take far longer than two years to resolve, and there is only so much that one person can do alone.  But tackling the enormous challenges we face in the Commonwealth should not be the work of only one person, nor should it be the work of only the government.  Rebuilding the Commonwealth must be the work of the entire community, and we must be committed to it for the long haul.  I am counting on fellow citizens to join me.

I may be reached at 483-3935, or by email at tinasablan@gmail.com .

Tina Sablan

Disagreement and criticism are important elements in dialogue — they keep us on our toes, challenge us to defend our ideas, perhaps move us to change our minds and our behavior in a positive and constructive way.  Open, honest dialogue brings us all closer to identifying solutions for all the problems we face; personal attacks get us nowhere.   If anyone sees a personal attack on this site (or anywhere, really),  please don’t ignore it or be discouraged from visiting this site again.  Go ahead and speak up.  Point it out.  But do it respectfully, and show by example what constructive criticism looks like.       

Thank you very much, and may the dialogue continue!

Tina