VI Democratic Party Issues Bleeding heart liberalism at its best

At long last

SENATOR Al Franken

Governor de Jongh’s Kobayashi Maru

Trekkies should be familiar with the name Kobayashi Maru.  It’s a test that Starfleet cadets take in the fictional Star Trek universe.  The basis of the test is to test the moral character of the taker.  You’re presented with a situation with no hope of a win-win solution.  In the Kobayashi Maru simulation, you must choose between helping the titular disabled ship risking your own ship and the lives of your crew or leaving the Kobayashi Maru to certain doom.  I believe that the governor’s role in the constitutional convention process is his Kobayashi Maru.

On one hand he could have rubber stamped the document, added his comments and forwarded it on to Congress.  That is after all what the public law states his role to be.

Sec. 4. [Submittal of proposed constitutions to governors and President] The conventions shall submit to the Governor of the Virgin Islands a proposed constitution for the Virgin Islands and to the Governor of Guam a proposed constitution for Guam which shall comply with the requirements set forth in section 2(b) above. Such constitutions shall be submitted to the President of the United States by the Governors of the Virgin Islands and Guam.

However, the governor has wiggle room from this requirement but another section of the public law:

b) Such constitutions shall -
“(1) recognize, and be consistent with, the sovereignty of the
United States over the Virgin Islands and Guam, respectively, and
the supremacy of the provisions of the Constitution, treaties,
and laws of the United States applicable to the Virgin Islands
and Guam, respectively, including, but not limited to, those
provisions of the Organic Act [section 1405 et seq. of this
title] and Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands [this
chapter] and the Organic Act of Guam [section 1421 et seq. of
this title] which do not relate to local self-government.

This is something the draft constitution clearly does not do.  But for the sake of argument, let’s say that the governor did rubber stamp the constitution and sent it off to Washington.  Do you really think he wouldn’t shoulder a large amount of the blame if the President and Congress attacked this document?  Even if he did comment that he was strongly opposed to the language?

If the courts decide the Governor did not have the legal authority to halt the process then at the very least we’ll have clarification of a very vague section of public law and the governor will have absolved himself of the actions of the Constitutional Convention.

This is why I’ve labeled this a Kobayashi Maru.  If the governor had passed it on he would have to take some of the blame for it’s failure.  Since he has not, he’s being accused of overstepping his bounds and acting as judge and jury.  If you’re the governor, there’s no win-win solution.  Given the options, and despite how much I hate that another constitutional process has failed, I think Governor de Jongh made the best choice.

Let’s see how it all plays out.

Draft Constitution hits the web

I got notice today that the draft constitution is now available on the web.  While I don’t care much for the source, I did take the time to download and read it.  Once I started I realized I would have to start jotting notes on all the issues I had concerns about.

Preamble

It’s painfully long.  Is all this really necessary?  Also, but citing “Almighty God” I believe that is rather insensitive to other religions (however, as a recent exchange has taught me, there are many of that faith who readily dismisses all others in the name of theirs…so much for unity).

Article 1 Section 18

As some are quick to point out, this section doesn’t ban civil unions.  But it doesn’t support them either.  It’s still discrimination and I don’t think this definition belongs in our constitution.

Article II Section 2
Are we finally going to adopt the VI Flag?  You’d be surprised to learn that the flag we wave to this day isn’t our official national flag.  Technically we don’t have one.
Article III

There was nothing wrong with this section until it was used to grant special privileges, which it does under this constitution.

Article IV Section 1
Doesn’t limiting the status vote to just Ancestral and Native Virgin Islands violate this section?

Article IV Section 2
So an election for “All executive brance officers and members of the Senate” is mandated every 2 years by this section?  Then why are At-Large members, the Governor and Lieutenant Governor serving for 4?  This section needs clarification.

Article V Section 2(1)
Where are the boundaries of the subdistricts?

Article V Section 10
“The Senate may impeach for cause any elected official..” So that includes the Governor and Lieutenant Governor?  It can easily be interpreted to mean so.

Article VI Section 2
The way it’s written “A Governor may not serve more than two successive full terms and 26 may not serve as Lieutenant Governor immediately following two successive full terms.” successive is a problem.  Successive can be interpreted to mean after serving an elected term.  Also, apparently a person may never run for those offices ever again even after serving their terms.

Article IX Section 2
“at least fifty percent (50%) of all earnings derived from legal and illegal games of chance in the territory”  Did I just read that right?!  We’re allowing illegal gaming as long as we can derive funds from it?!

Also, is 50% feasible?

Article IX Section 3(b)(5)
Redundant.  The constitution already establishes the limit at 20 in Section 1(d).

Why do Sections 3(b)(6) and 3(b)(12) say practically the same thing?

Article X Section 2
So a position in Government is guaranteed following graduation for participants in this program?  We could end up creating a lot of new positions.  I see this program being a burden on our government.

Article XI Section 5(g)
A tax exemption for Ancestral Natives?  No sir, that’s unconstitutional.

Article XI Section 11(a)
There goes EDC.

Article XIII Section 1(c)
Something about that section seems redundant.

Article XVII Section 2(b)
This section violates Article IV Section 1

Overall, if it weren’t for the hot button issues I would have been all for this constitution.  However, I can’t support it as it is now.

Time to stick a fork in the Constitutional Convention

It’s officially done.  Two days ago the Constitutional Convention met for the final time to approve a draft constitution.  The measure failed in a 14-6 vote.  In order for the constitution to be approved, 20 of the 30 delegates must vote in favor of it.  If you do the math, that means every delegate who met on Wednesday would have had to vote in favor of it.  The final meeting seemed almost set up for failure.  You know things took a turn for the weird when I find myself actually agreeing with Charles Turnbull:

Turnbull, a veteran of all five of the territory’s constitutional conventions, was emphatic in his reasons for voting against the document. Foremost among his reasons was the fact that delegates blatantly ignored legal advice from the two attorneys the convention has hired to advise them. Attorneys Lloyd Jordan and Lisa Moorhead advised against many of the specific rights delegates gave to ancestral native Virgin Islanders on Wednesday, saying that they were against federal law and would not pass the necessary federal review.

Ah, but it doesn’t end there.  The story gets funnier.  The delegates are poised to request yet another extension and additional funding from the Senate:

Moorhead made a motion to petition the Senate for an extension to produce a finished document. The motion, which passed without objection, will request that the Senate change the law to give delegates until the end of September to come to consensus on the document - as well as $500,000 more to finish the convention’s work and conduct a public education campaign.

Oh, so now they care about the public?  Well I wouldn’t expect too much public sympathy since we were barred from having any meaningful input throughout the entire convention.  We even lost the right to look at drafts that were being considered.  To spend any more time and money on this would be nothing short of a waste.  Hold on that $500,000 for the next convention.  Given what we’ve learned during this convention, perhaps the public will make more informed decisions of who they let represent them the next time around.

Miss California: What’s the big deal?

I’ve been hearing a lot about Carrie Prejean, and I’m feeling obliged to comment now that the news is out that in light of discovered nude photos of her she has been allowed to keep her crown.  I do believe that a) the question she got was waaay loaded, b) I give her credit for giving her honest opinion (even if it is a narrow minded one), and c) some of us on the left did pursue her because of her comments.  Personally, I didn’t give a rat’s ass about the her or the pageant but I kind of like to believe that rules means something.  According to the pageant’s rules she should have been stripped of her crown.  But for the life of me I JUST DON’T CARE ABOUT IT ENOUGH TO BITCH ABOUT IT!  So Carrie, go off into the sunset and think happy happy thoughts forever.  I hope you enjoyed your 5 minutes.

Puerto Rico Takes Another Swipe At The USVI Diageo Deal

This was the scene last year.  While the USVI was trying to broker a deal to bring Diageo to St. Croix protesters from Puerto Rico flew in literally overnight and plasterd Charlotte Amalie with the signs you see above.  Apparently this was an attempt to incite the people of the USVI to contact the Legislature and discourage Senators from approving the deal.  It didn’t work.

Yesterday, Puerto Rico’s congressman introduced a bill designed to take another swipe at the deal.  According to a breakdown by the Virgin Islands Daily News:

It would prevent territories from using the funds received from rum excise tax rebates as “unreasonable subsidies” for rum producers. According to the bill, the territorial government would be able to use only 10 percent of the total amount of funds rebated through excise taxes as a subsidy. Additionally, the bill deems any subsidy used to entice a rum producer to move from one territory to the other territory as unreasonable.

According to the bill, if the U.S. Treasury secretary decides that one territory is giving subsidies that do not meet the guidelines, that territory would get no excise tax rebates from rum sales in the United Sates. All of those funds will instead go to to the other territory.

In short, only 10% of the funds rebated through excises taxes would be allowed to use for the Diageo project and if we go over that then any excise rebates earned as a result would revert back to Puerto Rico.

The bill is silly and it’s a blatant effort to derail the Diageo deal.  Why would Congress approve a bill that seeks to reward a company’s old home after it’s new home attracted the company with a better deal?  How un-American is THAT?

Our Congresswoman, Delegate Donna M. Christensen, is right on the money on her assessment of this:

V.I. Delegate to Congress Donna Christensen said the Puerto Rico bill not only strikes at the territory’s existing agreement with Diageo, but it also puts the entire excise tax rebate program in jeopardy. There have been no challenges to the program in the federal government in the recent past, and Christensen said this bill - which significantly benefits both Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands - could place the use of funds in the national spotlight. Christensen said that the bill also brings an issue that exists only between the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico before the U.S. Congress.

It’s a bold and uniquely stupid move to put such a spotlight on this program especially after all the attention it got last year as part of the economic bailout.  This bill reeks of sour grapes.  Governor John P. de Jongh explains here:

“Diageo has never operated a rum distillery in Puerto Rico, but rather had a supply agreement with a private distillery there,” deJongh said. “As their contract was coming to an end in 2011, Diageo decided that Captain Morgan had grown to a point where it was time to own their own production facilities. Given the dominance of Bacardi in Puerto Rico, they chose to look elsewhere, notably in Central America. It was at that point they contacted us to discuss building Captain Morgan’s future in St. Croix.”
The deal with Diageo is consistent with the intent of the U.S. Congress in the creation of the cover-over program, the governor said.
“Every state in the union is charged with the obligation of building its economy to the benefit of its people, so too are we, and that is what we have done,” deJongh said.

I would plead with Puerto Rico legislators to rethink introducing this bill but it seems it is already too late.  However, I’m certain we can count on our congresswoman to make sure this bill gets voted down.

The Magic Number Is Within Sight

Democrats were already looking at a 59 member majority once Norm Coleman finally gives up the goat and let’s Al Franken take his seat, but lo and behold Arlan Specter announced today he’s switching parties!

Constitutional Convention Continues To Waste Precious Time

Local news sources here and here are reporting that beyond accepting a revised draft written by legal counsel based on the numerous versions of the constitution (most of which the public has not been privy too).  With the St. Thomas Carnival season upon us, I don’t expect any more work to be done until mid-May.  Enough time?  With constant bickering among the delegates and no serious interest in public input I doubt it.  I look forward to what’ll happen when the draft (if there ever is a final one) is sent to Congress for approval.  I anticipate that we won’t even get a chance to vote on this.

The New Majority: What Does It Mean?

I’m surprised no one has ask me anything about the recent shakeup of the VI Legislature.  I even wrote about the Constitutional Convention before taking on this issue.  The short answer:  I was too floored to say anything.

I won’t lie.  As an advocate for the Democratic Party this is a bitter pill to swallow.  It reflects very badly on us.  The sad truth was we sorta did it to ourselves.  The previous majority was organized to be Democratic, but also to curtail “line jumping”.  We know from a very brief history who these line jumpers are; Senator Adlah ‘Foncie’ Donastorg was one of them.  We also know that did not keep Senator Shawn Michael Malone from his usual dissention.  And as part of the shakeup, Senator Alvin Williams Jr. was ousted from the majority.

From a party perspecitive, this was a pretty ballsy move.  If the senators had a problem with Donastorg as president then it was their prerogative to remove him.  But what really caught my eye is that the new majority preemptively ousted Senator Williams and replaced him with Senator Carlton Dowe, an Independent.   This means that Democratic control of the Senate now hinges on the loyalty of Senator Dowe.

But listen to me talking about Democrats and party loyalty.  Folks, the honest to goodness truth is that the political scene right now is like the Wild WIld West.  The party system was created so that when you elect someone you know what they stand for.  Then your votes follow the party line because THE PARTY is supposed to stand for something.  That something is detailed in a platform; something that every Democrat in the last election cycle ran without.  The ICM has a platform.  Independents?  Well you kind of have to hope that the platform they show you is something they really plan to stick with.  See, that’s the other benefit of the platform: it keeps the party focused on specific goals and agendas.

So what does the new Legislature mean?  It means that we Democrats need to come together, draft our platform and make sure that those who run under our banner are bound to it.  I wish the new majority lots of luck.  I’m hoping that they will develop and implement Democratic policies but I understand that without a platform I never had any guarantee of that to begin with.  Turing Sen. Donastorg into a pariah puts a great deal of pressure on this new majority to get things done.  I hope they’re really as up to the task as they claim to be.

Constitutional Convention Still Refuses To Listen To Reason

The Constitutional Convention met to attempt to arrive at concensus.

Convention legal counsel Lloyd Jordan circulated a four-column chart at Friday’s convention session to demonstrate that idea just is not true.

One column contained the text of the constitutional draft passed by a majority of delegates at convention sessions since 2007. One column contained the same information, redrafted in proper constitutional language by Jordan. One column contained the draft constitution written by delegates to the Fourth Constitutional Convention in 1980. One column contained the alternative constitutional proposal written by delegate Eugene Petersen.

“What I found going through this exercise is you are so close to consensus,” Jordan said. “You are so close to where you need to be - provided you understand that you are doing the will of the people, not concentrating on things to fight over.”

However, despite warning from Mr. Jordan, many of the delegates seemed adamant about keeping controversial language in the constitution that would most likely not pass the mustard with Congress or the voters.  On defining native Virgin Islanders, I agree with Delegate Craig Barshinger:

“I will go for putting it in, but we need to assure people that it will never be used against them as a weapon,” Barshinger said.

Many delegates had previously expressed interest in carving out special rights for “native Virgin Islanders”.  To do such would be unconstitutional and would most likely result in Congress rejecting the draft.

Legal counsel warned the delegates that limiting the Governorship and Lieutenant Governorship to native born Virgin Islanders may result in rejection of the draft by the federal government.  The delegates seemed somewhat split on this issue.  The delegates also seemed split on defining marriage.  I do want to pay special attention to the comments made by Delegate Wilma Marsh Monsanto:

Delegate Wilma Marsh Monsanto, who has championed placing the definition in the constitution, reminded her colleagues that they have received petitions with more 1,000 signatures asking for the definition to be in the constitution. The petitions were mainly circulated at the territory’s churches.

“If you take this out, individuals will go to vote for this, and they will vote no,” Monsanto said. “We had testimony about this from many many people. We should put in the people’s will. We should not put in a constitution to be defeated. If it will not go in, it will fail.”

I hate to be the one to inform the delegate, but 1,000 people only account for less than 1% of the population of the US Virgin Islands.  Also, if those signatures do not belong to registered voters then collecting them was for naught.

There was some discussion on the Senate but there was no mention in the article if they planned to include language for subdistricting or numbered seats.

With only about a month left, my confindence in this convention has dwindled to none.