Just recently, Gov. Lou Leon Guerrero proposed a rather novel idea to have a non-governmental organization determine the future political status of our island by holding a referendum.
Just the fact that the governor is proposing an NGO to manage such a crucial referendum lacks legitimacy and thus Guam loses further credibility regarding choosing our political status.
Unfortunately, our leadership failed to seize the unique opportunity provided by the military buildup to demonstrate the need for a change in political status. Our elected leadership thus avoided this real opportunity toward self-determination. It appears that our politicians are content with the military bringing them vast sums of money.
To expand the potential choices of future political status, I am offering two new political status choices. Both are rather unique, clever, and tongue-in-cheek alternatives for consideration.
First choice is for all of Guam to be a military base. After all, we are already on the road to Guam becoming one giant military base.
Consider the following: The military has no problems keeping their own ambulances operating and assisting in providing ambulances to the civilian community.
The Department of Defense Education Activity’s schools have not delayed their openings due to failed sanitary inspections and the military assisted in preparing Guam Department of Education schools for the school year. Certainly, the military could quickly provide us with a new public hospital and a new Simon Sanchez High School.
Under military control, the Guam Civil Defense Office would actually be fully engaged in planning and implementing protection for the people of Guam in the event of a military attack. Crime is minimal on the bases and would vastly be reduced with island-wide drug testing.
We would be assured that department heads would be competent and not unqualified political appointees.
The current leadership at Adelup is already embarked on the road to military control for all of Guam and the business community is apparently quite delighted with the military money flowing to our island as a future depending on tourism is rather uncertain.
The second choice is for Guam to remain a colony, but we get to choose our colonial master country.
I would select Canada for several reasons. They have a true democracy, have not had a major political party become controlled by right-wing extremists, are truly bilingual, and above all, we would have universal health care.
The members of the Canadian Parliament that represent Canadian territories have full voting rights on the floor of the Canadian Parliament as compared Guam’s non-voting delegate in the U.S. Congress. Besides, Canadian currency is more attractive.
How about Guam just joining politically with the Northern Mariana Islands or becoming part of a state such as Hawaii?
Of course, we should allow the current status quo, unincorporated territory to be a choice, which would probably receive most of the votes simply because voters presently do not see any benefits of changing political status and are leery of a choice that would require the government of Guam to take on additional responsibilities considering ineptness all too often prevalent in GovGuam in spite of many hard-working civil servants.
Thank you for considering these novel and not too serious approaches to our island’s future as we witness our political leaders procrastinate on our island’s political future.
(3) comments
The main issue with Dave is that he always puts his finger on some major issues, but consistently comes up with solutions that are completely delusional. To even consider Canada as an example of "democracy" is so out of touch with reality that it would be funny if it was not so sad. Canada has definitely been flirting with fascist attitude in the past, specifically with its racist and coercive policies towards its indigenous people. Right now while its government is not acting like a fascist government, it is clearly acting like a stalinist one. Trampling free speech, canceling businesses like truckers who disagree with government policies, going as far as ceasing bank accounts, and the list goes on. I understand being against the military presence on Guam, but at least come up with some good arguments and good solutions, not nefarious concepts coming out of your behind. That would create a true debate. I also understand that a majority of the anti military cottage industry would rather throw invectives and easy slogans, it is certainly more emotional and more easy that to articulate a real issue.
It feels like that, that the island will be like a Diego Garcia, but just as fast as they buildup, they can disappear and there are two major reasons. One is the foreign wars would have morphed into a domestic war on immigrants. Trump is proposing an Office of Denaturalization in the DOJ where they would strip legal status of immigrants. (I wonder how our brothers and sisters from this region would fare.) He is laying the groundwork for it by promoting the concept of 'inferior genes'. Two is the US foreign policy post-WWII would turn on its head by withdrawing from NATO -- something that would delight Putin -- and then being transactional or shaking down heads of state and countries for money to defend them. You think he is going to pivot to Asia like Obama proposed? He could start something with China but China is closer to Russia now than ever, so that won't happen under Putin's watch. Pursuing anti-Sino policies would fit right in with item #1, the domestic war on immigrants. Look at the hate generated by just COVID, which was not a lab leak. That has evolved into a war on vaccines and good public health. Trump is not an idiot. His supporters are if they think they are untouchable when ethnic cleansing gets going. (Sent COVID tests secretly to Putin as per Bob Woodward which was confirmed by the Kremlin.)
What a regurgitating of nonsensical mental garbage... you are all over the place, and beside the point. While I disagree with Dave's solutions, he actually tries to start a debate on a serious issue for Guam, you sir bring nothing to the debate except for an example of derangement syndrome that is not even laid out in a coherent way.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In