CNMI Investor Visa

I've gotten a few requests in the past few months from non-US citizens on whether or not it is possible to live in the CNMI. It is. Here is the response I sent to the last enquirer.

***

For “non-US” types, you can enter in one of three ways: as a contract worker, on an investor visa, or on a retirement visa. The first requires an employer, the latter two require money. Actually, there is a fourth option-- marry a US citizen.

I think the retirement visa is available if you are over 55 years old. I’m not sure of the financial requirements.

The investor visa requires an investment of $150K, but the investment can include the purchase/lease of property, i.e. a home. I have good friend who is Canadian, and living here by virtue of an investor visa. Here is his input:

The investor visa is obtained through the Dept of Commerce. Any questions you have should be directed to Lillian, she is very helpful and easy to work with. You can also download the application and its requirements, I believe it’s on the cnmi.gov website.

There is a long list of requirements and its a lengthy process, but its easy to follow and goes smoothly. Briefly, the investor must set up an "investment" in the CNMI, which is usually a corporation to do business, and a minimum of $150,000 in assets (real estate is acceptable). The assets must be in the CNMI, and they must all owned by the corporation.

My application has been almost an inch thick both times, but most of the info is the business plan, tax statements, etc. The application costs $1000 and the permit is good for two years.

Understanding the American Mind

(My column from the Saipan Tribune, Nov 30)

America is a nation of immigrants. Almost everyone who lives on American soil traces their roots back to some poor foreigner who arrived on American shores, often with little more than a desire to purse a dream and a new life. Some, like my father, came with skills; many came with only determination. Most did not speak English. They came in waves, from around the world, and they continue to come. America became the great melting pot, each culture contributed its share to the culture of a new nation, while giving up parts of themselves to be a part of the new creation called America – a creation that continues.

The American Dream – that idea of limitless possibilities – of being able to succeed based on your own individual merit and effort – is a sacred idea in the American mind. It’s the story of the underdog, who against all odds, makes it: the guy who shows up at the dock day after day, to find work, doing anything, loading cargo, and who one day becomes the owner of the shipping line; the domestic cleaner who saves and invests her meager earnings, and before her death gives a gift of millions to a university; the kid from the ghetto who studies hard and becomes a brilliant scientist; the peanut farmer who becomes President.

These two ideas – a nation open to immigrants, and a land of dreams built by little people through hard work -- are intertwined, and deeply ingrained upon the American conscience. Any idea or act that somehow goes against these concepts strike a deep visceral chord. We cannot even begin to understand the federal policy makers until we understand these two concepts and their place in the American mind. The ideas have a history hundreds of years old in the American consciousness.

On the other hand, these two ideas are not so deeply ingrained here. In fact, in our recent history, the very ideas themselves are foreign to us. We have not had any significant immigration. Sure, we have contract workers, but not immigration in the sense of allowing people to put down roots and build for generations and to be a part of our society and government and culture. Unlike for most Americans, immigration is not part of our personal heritage.

Although life in the private sector rewards effort with success, the single largest employer – the government – relies to a large extent on a system of “who you know” rather than “what you know.” There are ceilings on advancement. And a new person in power can result in a complete change in your situation that has nothing to do with your merit. It’s the relationships that matter more. The icon of the immigrant who beats all odds to succeed, is not a dominant part of our family histories.

Thus the bewilderment with the federal perspective. We do everything we believe is required to protect our culture, which itself is not a dominant value of the ever-morphing American culture. We allow workers to enter, but not to immigrate. We pass laws that favor the hiring of our own ethnic group over others. We “reform” our labor laws, requiring aliens to exit periodically, for the expressly stated purpose of preventing them from growing roots and becoming part of the political landscape, the power base. It all makes perfect sense, and resonates with our core value of cultural preservation. We don't want to become politically alienated. We strive to protect our ethnic control over the institutions of power. But the American value and the local value smack hard against one another.

Never mind that in many ways, America is conflicted about immigration and race. The inconsistency does not negate the deep pride that many feel in having come from humble immigrant roots. And never mind that the aliens that are here didn’t arrive with promises of immigration. They have contributed greatly, and the American values seeks to find a home for them.

This is all worth bearing in mind when we sit at a table discussing issues with the representatives of the federal government. They are the sons and daughters of those immigrants who were once disenfranchised workers coming from a foreign land, and who entered America, whether literally or figuratively, beneath the lamp of the Statue of Liberty, on whose pedestal are carved these words:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

The CNMI's New Labor (and Immigration) Law

This controversial bill was signed into law yesterday. The most contentious section of the new law provides for an exit requirement. All non-resident workers must leave the CNMI for six months every three-and-a-half years. The business community has been fighting hard against this. Many rely heavily upon non-resident workers, and the prospect of being without key workers for a six month period, and the cost of filling the gap, have been concerning.

Why the clause? Today's Saipan Tribune gives the answer, quoting the Governor.

Fitial said the exit requirement is designed "to prevent the aliens from making the CNMI their home and making them eligible for permanent resident status [under future federal immigration law]."

There you have it.

Hearing Today

Well, the congressional hearing on federalization of our local immigration is taking place today. Are any of you bloggers going? I was planning to go, but I think I've decided not to. Last week I got in touch with Jayvee, my editor at the Tribune, to see if he could get a "press pass" for me. Apparently, there are no press passes, nor a designated section for the press. We would just have to fight with the throngs for a seat, and I expect there will the throngs. (I just realized that "throngs" and "thongs" are almost the same word. Here's a Middle Road question for you: "Do you expect there will be thongs at the hearing?" Sorry to even put that image into your head.)

Instead of a press pass, I thought about going anyway, and wearing my NMIFA soccer ID around my neck, and carrying myself like I belonged in the front row. That kind of stuff always works for me.

But, ultimately, I think I decided that I've already heard all the points of view on this. And I don't want to hear them again. Some of them churn my stomach. Plus, I don't like to be in places that require a lot of security. I don't' worry about the threats. I worry about the security guys walking around with those M16's, looking a little unsure about what to do other than just spray. It was pretty freaky after 9/11, driving up the airport here in Saipan, seeing these guys in full combat gear, walking around with their machine guns. I actually asked one of them, "Is that a real gun?".

So, anyone going?

Immigration Issues

I was impressed by this well articulated view presented by Maria Pangelinan. This appeared in the June 19 issue of the Saipan Tribune. Here is her entire column.

***

Discussion about whether or not we should “allow” the federalization of immigration has been lively, even heated. I want to clarify at least part of the discussion. History wasn't my favorite subject in school, but our Commonwealth is so young it is generally easy to access the original sources of our legal system.

Section by Section Analysis of the Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Marianas Political Status Commission - February 1975

“Section 503. Section 503 deals with certain important laws of the United States, not presently applicable to the Northern Marianas. It provides that these laws will not apply to the Northern Marianas prior to termination of the Trusteeship and will not ever apply after termination unless and until the Congress of the United States specifically acts to make them applicable. Section 503(a) deals with the immigration and naturalization laws of the Unites States. These laws will not apply until, after termination, Congress acts to make them applicable either as they are applicable in other areas under the American flag, or in some special way which takes into account the particular conditions in existence at that time in the Northern Marianas.”

The U.S. Congress has a right to federalize our immigration law. Your parents and grandparents negotiated the Covenant fully and freely. They did a good job. We have gained far more than we could ever lose by becoming part of the American family. I've heard some say that maybe we should reconsider that status. Although I respect a person's right to hold and voice that view, I flatly disagree. There were other Pacific islands under U.S. control at the end of World War II. Some of them chose different paths. We continue to benefit greatly from our Covenant with the United States. Other island states have not fared so well, choosing to be independent to one degree or another. Look around.

In my view, it is time to invest our energetic interest in this matter in finding the ways that federalizing immigration will work, not conjecturing about how it will not.

We have been and continue to be invited to provide input that will be considered when shaping the proposed legislation and hopefully, the law, if enacted.

I had some concerns about the proposed legislation and am pleased to find some of these issues addressed in some form or another, in the bill:

• The continuation of existing guest worker contracts.
• New CNMI guest worker permits with exemptions from standard limitations.
• A mechanism to “grandfather” long-term workers who have been legally working in the Commonwealth for several years.
• Assurance of “customer” access to the CNMI by permitting “CNMI-only” visas or visa-waivers for potential customers (tourists or students).

Some of the wording of the draft bill concerns a long-term implementation designed to not disrupt the ability of the Commonwealth to work on turning its economic slump around.

Another issue that is of concern to all the inhabitants of our islands is border security. The world is a very different place since 9/11. I for one am gratified to see the vast resources of the United States brought to bear on securing our borders. It is not just our ports that concern me. I believe good border security in the Northern Islands is also important. As the military gears up to move from Okinawa to Guam, this will continue to gain importance for the Commonwealth.

The bill, however, continues to be deafeningly silent on the establishment of a non-voting Delegate for the Commonwealth in the U.S. House of Representatives. There was a period of time when the message Congress was receiving was that the Commonwealth didn't want or need one. During those same years Congress was willing to address the issue. Today, all the negative publicity about Abramoff, immigration, and the minimum wage has caused members of Congress to avoid the issue. Having a non-voting Delegate now would be very helpful. We have some work to do to make this happen.

I recently offered to supply copies of the proposed legislation to any interested parties. The response has been good, and I'm proud to see how many people are taking an active interest in the process. The proposed legislation is complex, especially in that it amends or refers to existing U.S. law. I still have questions, and will continue to research them, but overall, I think it moves us toward a paradigm that is overdue.

I've noticed a frequent choice of words in day-to-day conversations. We tend to refer to nonresidents as “workers”, and residents as “employees”. I think that the difference between these two words is subtle, but profound.

We all need to think carefully when choosing words to describe the social phenomena that we have created. Words are powerful. We invited nonresidents to our islands. Many have been here a long time; some have started families. Some of our nieces, nephews, and grandchildren were born of these unions. Many long-term nonresidents are a valued and integral part of our community. The worth of a person does not lie in what country they were born in, or who their parents are, or what type of employment they hold.

Some view the proposed federal immigration legislation as a threat to our culture. I do not feel this way. The proposed legislation presents us with issues about the changing face of our society that many have not considered before. One cannot “legislate” the survival of a culture. A culture will survive because it is honored and nurtures its people. Our culture is constantly changing, in some ways I'm glad, greatly preferring a car to an ox-cart.

Change also brings with it a degree of uncertainty, a state of being that few take any pleasure in. Often, the benefits of change are not realized or understood until long after the fact. No one can be certain about the outcome of the proposed legislation. It may be amended after being presented to the Congress and it may not even become law.

What I know is that to date, our immigration policies, although much improved over the years, have not been satisfactory for numerous reasons. Congress plans to take a very difficult and expensive problem off our table. I continue to support their efforts, as I feel the long term effects will be more positive than detrimental for all people in our Commonwealth.