Memorial Day: Faleomavaega Again a No Show

It has been just over seven months now that Faleomavaega continues to have been absent from public view.  Despite the insistence of friends, family and staff on island that he is “doing just fine,” few are fooled by the few public appearances he has made since suffering last October what are rumored to have been two strokes.  No one is certain because his office has provided no information on his health situation.   His two video appearances (one a brief Christmas message and the other a one-minute speech on the House Floor about Flag Day) and two photographs (one with ASG Homeland Security Director Utuali'i Iuniasolua T. Savusa and another with visiting Close Up Foundation students from home) seem staged and give little reassurance to anyone back here that he is alive, well and at his duty station in Washington.

To the contrary, although no one knows what he is doing in Washington, people are very aware that he was not here for Flag Day last month and now his participation in Memorial Day activities has been reduced to his office issuing a short statement on his behalf.   Readers of this blog will recall he shamefully piggybacked on this solemn holiday three years ago to launch a partisan attack  on Republicans in Congress, which, of course, our local media carried word for word.  An obviously more subdued Faleomavaega this year limited himself to remembrances of the war dead.

Not only has Faleomavaega missed Flag Day and Memorial Day here this year, we have heard from Washington sources that he also has missed countless meetings of caucuses and committees to which he belongs.  We have monitored on line the live broadcasts of committee hearings in which he normally would be expected to participate because of his interests, the subject matter or his responsibilities, particularly the House insular subcommittee, on which he is the senior Democrat, and the Asia Pacific subcommittee, on which he is the Ranking Democrat, but we can find no one who can say they have seen him at any hearings since last year.

Of course, absence from hearings and meetings is nothing new for Faleomavaega, who has shown a penchant for travel to the far corners of the earth over his quarter century in Congress and has shown little regard for the congressional calendar.  If he wants to go, he goes, whether Congress is in session or not.  It is doubtful any other member of Congress ever has been to Thursday Island, let alone twice, and few have been to Rapanui, where he went to insert himself into a local land dispute.  Both Thursday Island and Rapanui are parts of larger countries (Australia and Chile, respectively) in which he has no responsibilities in any of his committee assignments.

Recent Foreign Affairs Committee trips to East Asia, which he long has considered his back yard, and Ukraine were evidence that all is not well with the wandering delegate.  Although he is not on any subcommittee with responsibility for Ukraine, as a member of the Full Committee he would be invited and more often than not he could be counted on to be on any Congressional delegation that wanted him.  Then-Foreign Affairs subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA) once was reported to have said that although Faleomavaega was annoying, he found it useful to have him around because when there was a need to have a bipartisan delegation to qualify for military aircraft, he could always count on Faleomavaega to sign up—no matter where they were going. 

Indeed, it must have grated Faleomavaega that Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) a freshman congresswoman of Samoan descent who is younger than his children, has in at least one hearing served as Ranking Democrat in Faleomavaega’s absence and was a star on the subcommittee’s trip to Asia.  More about that in a subsequent post.

Faleomavaega has done the voters a disservice by remaining silent about his health and only time will tell if as a political calculation it turns out to backfire on him, should he run for re-election.  That is the question on everyone’s mind right now and it gets more and more so on every occasion, like today, when his absence is noticed and as the July 1 date approaches when the candidate filing period opens with the election office.  Indeed, speculation over the seven months of his absence has ranged from him being in a coma to dying of cancer.   

His movement to the House podium, albeit it slow, and his unslurred remarks to talk about Flag Day, the video of which he was eager to distribute on the island, do not suggest any residual physical effects of a stroke but there are credible sources here who say the problem is mental, with Faleomavaega suffering serious memory gaps.  It is said by some that he can be propped up for a short term photo opportunity or pointed to the microphone to deliver a prepared short speech but cannot think very well on his feet. Nevertheless, although he has not publicly announced his intentions, Faleomavaega is indeed officially a candidate in the eyes of the Federal Election Commission: he has a functioning campaign committee and already has raised funds for this election cycle.  

Moreover, he could win, just as U.S. Rep. Gladys Spellman (D-MD) did once even though she was in a coma at the time.  Indeed, Congress was in a dilemma over what to do because there is no prohibition against running while in a coma (or from behind bars, for that matter) and if the voters choose to elect someone anyway, that is their choice.  It was only when she did not revive that after six months they declared her seat vacant because she was unable to take the oath of office.  By the way, she remained ina coma for eight years before passing away at age 70, the same age Faleomavaega is now. 

Our local media either is not interested or is too lazy to go to the Federal Election Commission records where they would learn that Faleomavaega already has raised over $40,000 for this election cycle, which is a substantial amount for a small race like this one.  Indeed, it may be more money already than any other congressional candidate ever has raised for an entire campaign here.  It would not be that hard to research from FEC records.

His contributions come largely from tuna interests and people with Asian surnames, and many donations are for $2,000 or more, including one person at the maximum $2,600 allowed.  Surely these folks are not just throwing money down a rat hole.   Faleomavaega must be sending them a signal, probably through his chief enforcer, Lisa Williams, that he intends to run again.  His congressional office chief of staff, the feared and hated Williams, also is often on his campaign payroll as a fundraiser in election years. 

It is probably the uncertainty of Faleomavaega’s intentions that are keeping most potential candidates on the sidelines for now.  Only two people have announced their candidacies so far: ASCC employee Fuala'au 'Rosie' Tago Lancaster, a retired army warrant officer, and the Governor’s deputy senior policy adviser, Tua’au Kereti Mata’utia.  Both have run before and run poorly, and neither is considered much of a threat.  Lancaster has not reported to FEC any money raised this cycle and Mata’utia has not even registered a committee with the federal regulatory body (and did not do so last time, either, although he is a lawyer and should know his federal obligations).

Names of potential candidates being mentioned in the rumor mill include Faleomavaega’s sister Vaitinasa Dr. Salu Hunkin-Finau, who is director of Education for the government and a failed gubernatorial candidate in 2012, and Fai’ivae Alex Godinet, who is long-time director of Faleomavaega’s district office but has never run for office.  Both are thought to be “heirs-apparent” behind one of whom Faleomavaega conceivably would through his weight and lend his organization, should he bow out.  A third potential candidate who falls into that category is Homeland Security Director Savusa, who not only had his photo taken with Faleomavaega on a recent trip to Washington but has been “nominated” by him to serve on a Pentagon committee reviewing a proposal to establish a National Guard unit in the territory.  More about that in a later blog post.  Savusa was an unsuccessful candidate for lt. governor in 2012. 

Beyond those three potential heirs-apparent, none of whom likely would run if Faleomavaega decided to seek re-election, speculation has centered on former governor Togiola Tulafono, who had a contentious relationship with Faleomavaega during his almost 10 years in office, once even publicly calling for him to retire. Togiola has not filed any paperwork with the FEC.  Finally, there is Aumua Amata Radewagen, who has run unsuccessfully several times in the past but could be a contender in a multi-candidate race if she could hold her base vote.  Her committee remains active at FEC but she has raised only a token $850 this cycle and while she has kept in the public eye, she has not signaled her plans.  Whether Faleomavaega runs or not, it could be as much as a five-person race this fall or maybe more, if one of the usual delusional loons on the island also jumps into the contest.

We are updating our poll to add the names of all these speculated candidates.  Regrettably, this blog system’s polling app will not allow us to modify the current poll, so we are going to have to take it down and start over.  Our apologies to the enthusiastic Matau’tia supports who have voted him so far the overwhelming favorite to succeed Faleomavaega.  They are just going to have to vote again in the new poll, as will the supporters of any other candidates, if they are of a mind.  The results, of course, are entirely unscientific.

One final note.  This is the sort of speculative or analytical article that virtually every newspaper in America—including those in the other territories—publishes before elections.  Don’t hold your breath, however, waiting for one in our leading media:  Radio 93KHJ-FM or Samoa News.  In fairness, the radio station’s news format does not lend itself well to long form analysis.  Samoa News, on the other hand, does have the capacity but simply does not carry much political news beyond a single story about a candidate when he or she announces a candidacy.  There long has been speculation in the community that Samoa News has an unwritten policy not to carry political news as a means of driving up revenue by forcing candidates to spend more money with them on advertising.  Shameful and unethical by most U.S. journalism standards, but not illegal.

Speaking of local media, they seem again to have reverted once again to publishing Faleomavaega’s news releases without any caveats on their veracity.

Election time again

Well folks, it's election time again, so we are opening up our survey to give you a chance to choose who you prefer to replace Faleomavaega as delegate to Congress. The choices this year are Aumua Amata begin_of_the_skype_highlighting     end_of_the_skype_highlighting, who has contested the seat several times in the past and Tuika Tuika, Jr., who has run for congress once before.

The good news for a lot of governments around the world is that they are safe from Eni's wrath for three weeks while he confines himself to the territory to face the voters. So, he will have to put aside his two main, seemingly contradictory preoccupations: coddling dictators and championing the oppressed. In the former categories are such people as Frank Bainamarama (Fiji), Nursultan Nazarbayev (Kazakhstan), the late Ho Chi Minh (Vietnam) and Bouasone Bouphavanh (Laos). The oppressed people include West Papua's Melanesians, French Polynesian separatists, Armenians, Koren comfort women, Cambodian Agent Orange sufferers, Native Hawaiians, American Indians on reservations and low-wage cannery workers.

The only place where he has had any impact, as far as we can tell, is with the low wage cannery workers. He fought for and won for them an increase in the minimum wage, forcing one cannery to close and the other to downsize, so that now he can champion a new group: the no-wage ex-cannery workers. Atta boy, Eni, way to go in your never-ending search for "social justice."

The good news for Eni is that if he wins again, he is likely to have a whole lot more time to devote to his pet causes because if Republicans take control of Congress, as many analysts now believe they will, he won't need to show up in Washington every once in a while to chair hearings or cast committee votes at the direction of his party to give cover to real members. As was the case for the 12 years Republicans controlled the House between 1995 and 2007, he will be largely irrelevant as a member of the minority. Even though Republicans will control travel budgets, they do like to have Democrats on their fact-finding delegations abroad to show "bipartisanship," and Eni has proved useful for that purpose because he never refuses a trip he is offered.

He seems to have adopted a strategy of flying under the radar this election, as he made no formal announcement of his candidacy, just quietly filing his petitions to activate his candidacy. And he can count on Samoa News, where his sister-in-law is one of the editors, to play his little game of keeping controversy out of print. There are only 22 days left in the campaign and so far there have been exactly NO stories in the paper about the campaign. The candidates each made the first of their customary television presentations last week and Samoa News did not even bother to cover them. nor have any of the media taken the simple step of going on-line to the Federal Election Committee website to see how much money has been raised any from whom. Virtually every other newspaper in the country does this for their local congressional races but apparently not Samoa News. Maybe his sister-in-law won't like what she sees: massive contributions from people with Asian names with addresses in the U.S. No one seems to care or wonder why all these people would be so interested in a congressional race on a small, remote Pacific Island. As long as the voters are fed on Election Day, why bother, I suppose?

FALEOMAVAEGA BATTLES ON

As we explained earlier when we described the responsibilities of non-voting delegates, it is not like they have nothing better to do than battle with the press. But Faleomavaega must have some time on his hands -- perhaps at some airport awaiting a delayed plane on his next excursion out of Washington.

Howard Berman must not have called him in because, as we predicted, he came roaring back at the Taipei Times and, in true form, beat the dead horse yet again! Let's take apart his latest skirmish with the Times in his second letter to the editor on April 8. Keep in mind as you are reading this that his sole objective is to deflect attention away from his humiliation at the hands of his own Democrat colleagues who reversed his Beijing-backed revisions to the TRA resolution on which he had insisted at the subcommittee he chairs, over which he has full control.

Faleomavaega response No. 2

Eni: Once again, Taipei Times has inaccurately reported on the workings of the US Congress and my position regarding Taiwan and Beijing.

ABCDEFG: Deflection. The fact is the Times accurately reported that the House reversed Eni's amendments to the TRA resolution. Workings of Congress are not at issue. It's the results.

Eni: Most recently, Taipei Times published my rebuttal on March 31 to a guest editorial [sic] printed in its paper on March 25 in which an anonymous author misrepresented my involvement with the TRA [Taiwan Relations Act] legislation.

ABCDEFG: As the Times notes in the use of the term [sic], this is not a guest editorial. The Times made that point in its editor's note following his first letter, which he must have read in order to write this second letter. This was the paper's own editorial and in standard journalistic practice, editorials are not signed.

Eni: To be clear, Taipei Times falsely states that I cannot support my claim that changes I made to the TRA legislation [sic] had the full backing of Committee members. If Taipei Times understood the workings of Congress, it would have understood what I already stated in my previous response — that the changes I made were supported by our Subcommittee members, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the full Committee, as well as the bill’s author, each of whom approved the measure to go forward by unanimous consent.

ABCDEFG: Eni arrogantly insults the Times about the paper's knowledge of how Congress works but makes a fool out of himself in so doing. Note that the Times again employs the term [sic] as a gracious way to put him down. What they are doing is demonstrating that Eni has made an error in calling the TRA resolution legislation. It is not. It is a resolution. Thus he is demonstrating that it is he who does not understand how Congress works, not the Times.

Eni: The bill then moved from the Subcommittee to the full Committee, as this is how the process works in the US Congress. Although the Chairman and Ranking Member of the full Committee had already agreed to the Subcommittee changes, other Members, which is their prerogative in a democracy, asked for the word “cornerstone” to be put back in the legislation to replace the word “vital,” which I had used instead. Upon the advice of the US House of Representatives’ legislative counsel — which argued that the word “vital” (which means “essential,” “critical,” “most important”) was legally stronger than the word “cornerstone” (which means “foundation,” “starting point,” “beginning”) — Republicans and Democrats of the full Committee reached an agreement to make the change back to “cornerstone,” and the bill was then sent directly to the House floor, with no further changes.

ABCDEFG: This is a time tested Eni tactic: over explanation. If you can't beat them, confuse them. Buried in all his verbiage is the concession that the "full committee reached an agreement to make the change back to 'cornerstone.'"

Eni: Finally, regarding Taipei Times’ assertion that I am confused about the TRA, I would kindly point out that the Taipei Times should review the TRA, as contrary to your assertions, the TRA absolutely implies that the US wants peace — peace between Taipei and Beijing, peace in the Western Pacific and peace for US troops. This is why the TRA plainly states that it is the policy of the United States “to preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people on Taiwan, as well as the people on the China mainland and all other peoples of the Western Pacific area.”

ABCDEFG: Once again Eni employs one of his favorite tactics. He admits in the previous paragraph that he lost the battle over cornerstone, so now he wants to change the argument to what the TRA means to the concept of "peace." Moreover, "absolute implies" sounds like one of those oxymorons like "jumbo shrimp," "guest host" and "army intelligence."

Eni: While I have always supported the people on Taiwan, my first priority will always be to prevent as much as possible a gross misuse of US military forces to fight any unnecessary war and, for this reason, I will continue to support the long-standing position of the United States on the issue of Taiwan, which is to support peaceful relations across the Strait and to maintain the One China policy. Every President since 1979 has affirmed this position.

ABCDEFG: Another Eni tactic: here he infers that the Times does not want peace. He is standing as a noble and lonely guardian against the wicked agenda of the Times.

Eni: And no matter how Taipei Times twists the truth, or contorts the words of Senator Richard Lugar or President Ronald Reagan, the fact remains “that the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve.” Hopefully, the Taipei Times and FAPA [Formosan Association for Public Affairs] will do their part to support peace more than ever in a manner that is respectful of America’s young men and women who do not deserve to be dragged into another war, now or in the future, just because sensible people refuse to get along.

ABCDEFG: He goes on to imply that the Times and FAPA want to drag American troops into war over Taiwan.

***

Oh, this is so classic Eni. You just have to love it. If you have the time, go back to Samoa News archives. It's filled with all sorts of jibberish like this on a variety of issues large and small. The Taipei Times demonstrated that it understands that Eni is trying to draw them into a debate on his terms and won't fall for it. They contented themselves with a footnote saying they stand by what they have written. That's the only way to handle this idiot. Read it all here:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2009/04/03/2003440085

This should be the end of this skirmish because Eni is too dense to understand how the Times put him down with classic subtlety. That is the only reason they published his second rebuttal. Remember Eni, the Times buys ink by the barrel.

Faleomavaega at War with Taiwan

Although we like to settle disputes here by developing consensus, Faleomavaega has been quite successful through the years using a U.S.-style adversarial and confrontational approach. Perhaps he developed his methods early in his congressional career by watching Bill Clinton, who organized a rapid response team to deal with any political attacks he might suffer on the way to his successful 1992 run for the presidency.

Eni is viewed by many as having a “thin skin,” and typically fires back whenever someone criticizes him publicly for some action he has or has not taken, particularly during campaign seasons. And his counterattacks usually are lengthy diatribes--some would say overkill--laced with invective and personal insults. He has had some memorable feuds with Lorn Cramer (over Eni’s Hanoi toast to Ho Chi Minh), Togiola, Aumua Amata and an especially juicy one with Afimutasi Gus Hannemann, which bordered on abusiveness. Google the names (e.g. Faleomavaega and Hannemann) and you can will see the exchanges that were carried out in public.

His method has worked well for him because the territory’s largest and most influential medium, the Samoa News, which employs his sister-in-law as a top editor, has served as his lap dog over the years, mostly giving Eni the last word in any dispute. Typically, someone will make an accusation, which the News will print and then Eni responds with a lengthy press release or letter to the editor, which the News prints in full. It may last for another cycle but then that is the end of it, with Eni pronouncing the final word. There are several occasions on which the target of Eni’s counter assault has replied a second time but the News has declined to print it.

So Eni, who prides himself in being a seasoned diplomat, can be forgiven for thinking his method will work elsewhere but this time he may have bitten off more than he can chew. As we reported in a previous post, the Taipei Times last month ran in editorial labeled “Faleomavaega: no friend of Taiwan” in which the paper criticized our wandering delegate for attempting to water down a House resolution saluting Taiwan on the 30th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act.

In a follow up letter to the editor, Eni accused the paper of having a political agenda because the editorial was “anonymous.” Of course, it is well known that most newspaper editorials are not signed because they are intended to reflect the views of the paper, not an individual. But Eni knows that. That’s one of his favorite tactics. He was using the editorial writer’s “anonymity” at as a pretext for charging the paper with having a political agenda, thus attempting to shift the focus away from his unsuccessful effort to dilute the resolution and back onto the paper, so that the Times would be on the defensive. Classic Eni: when you are losing the debate, change the debate.

If this were American Samoa, Samoa News would have curled up into a fetal position and sucked its corporate thumb and that would have been the end of it. But this is Taiwan, a major actor on the world economic and political stages. So, the old adage “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel” applies here. Unlike Samoa News, the Taipei Times gave it right back to Faleomavaega in comments that appeared right after his letter, letting him know that his tactics, which one political opponent has labeled a “thumb-in-your-eye” approach, were not welcome in Taipei. And his response set off the blogosphere as well.

Let’s take Eni’s contentions in his letter and measure them against the responses by the Times and by bloggers:

Eni’s letter: I am writing in response to your recent editorial (“Faleomavaega: No friend of Taiwan,” March 25, page 8). No name is attached to the editorial, which suggests that either the author or your newspaper has its own political agenda.

Times response: The March 25 article Congressman Faleomavaega refers to was a Taipei Times editorial and therefore carried no byline.

Foreigner in Formosa Blog (FFB): A brief list of OTHER papers which print unattributed editorials: the New York Times, the Washington Post, the National Review, the Wall Street Journal, and Taiwan's China Post. Conspiracy theorists in congressmen's offices: You may begin connecting the dots . . . now.

Eni: . . . one might conclude that your newspaper stands in opposition to the will of your people [the Taiwanese], who voted in 2008 for a change in Administration and for a more honest government.

FFB: Heh. The Taiwanese may indeed have voted for a government which they thought was more honest. What they received however, was a president who is described (by his own media DEFENDERS) as a liar who would say anything to get elected. By the by, I see from a recent post by Tim Maddog over at Taiwan Matters! that Taiwanese president Ma Ying-jeou's approval rating is currently floundering below the 30% mark, while his Chinese Nationalist Party colleagues in the legislature plumb the depths even further -- below 20%. Let's be generous, and say Taiwan's legislative and presidential branches enjoy 20 and 30% approval ratings, respectively. So, what was that you were saying about, "the will of the people," Mr. Faleomavaega?

Eni: Given that your paper published false reports from Coen Blaauw, executive director of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA), on March 21 and again on March 26, in which he twisted the truth about my involvement with the 30th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), and also given that your newspaper never bothered to contact my office for a response to his untruthful comments, one might conclude that your newspaper stands in opposition to the will of your people, who voted in 2008 for a change in Administration and for a more honest government.

Times: William Lowther, the Taipei Times’ Washington correspondent, did not contact Mr Faleomavaega’s office because he spoke directly with Mr Faleomavaega at the end of the subcommittee meeting, together with a number of other reporters.

Eni: In view of the fact that this language is straight from the TRA, why would your anonymous writer, your reporter, or Mr. Blaauw take issue with this language? I submit they take issue because it is their desire to turn the TRA into something it is not. . . . Such an approach is wrong, and our American troops deserve better from FAPA and the Taipei Times.

Times: The Taipei Times has no connection with FAPA, though we do occasionally run opinion pieces by FAPA personnel. These pieces do not necessarily represent the views of the Taipei Times.

Eni: Prior to the Subcommittee’s markup, Chairman Howard Berman and Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of the Foreign Affairs committee agreed to the changes I offered, as did the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, Mr. Manzullo, and the bill’s author. All other Subcommittee members agreed to the language by unanimous consent.

Times: Mr Faleomavaega’s claim that changes he made to the resolution had full backing from fellow committee members cannot be sustained in light of the reversal and, in substance, repudiation by committee members of the amendments on the floor of the House of Representatives, as we reported on March 26. Nor does Mr Faleomavaega refer to his most contentious amendment to the resolution: replacing the words “the cornerstone of” with “vital to” in the sentence “[Congress] reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act as the cornerstone of United States relations with Taiwan.”

Eni: The TRA came into existence only after the United States established diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. Since 1979, US policy regarding Taiwan has remained unchanged. The Joint Communiques, together with the Taiwan Relations Act, are the foundation of our One China policy, which implies, as Republican President Ronald Reagan once said, that “the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve.” Every US President since 1979 has stood by this assertion. As Senator Richard Lugar, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in 2001, said, “For many years, successive US administrations have affirmed that there is one China and that the people on Taiwan and the people of China should work out a plan for peaceful unification.”

Times: Mr Faleomavaega seems confused about the content of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). Nowhere does the TRA imply, for example, that Taiwan and China “should work out a plan for peaceful unification.” These words from Senator Lugar reflected and still reflect the policy preferences of certain politicians, but they derive no authority from the TRA. Three years after Lugar made these comments, then-secretary of state Colin Powell made a similar comment, which he later retracted.

Taiwan Matters Blog (TMB): Yes, Lugar said "unification" , but the fact behind the US' policies is that the word should be "resolution." Actually, that same CRS Report for Congress which quotes Lugar ("China/Taiwan: Evolution of the 'One China' Policy — Key Statements from Washington, Beijing, and Taipei") states this quite clearly: President Reagan's 1982 statement on arms sales to Taiwan declared that "the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese people, on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, to resolve." Moreover, "settlement" or "resolution" — not stated as "unification" — of the Taiwan question is left open to be peacefully determined by both sides. Big difference. What does Faleomavaega know about what's "better for the people of Taiwan"? Not a damn thing, apparently.

Eni: The TRA is not a platform for independence, as they would like it to be, and the American people, as well as the young people on Taiwan, deserve to know the truth about the history of the TRA.

Times: Mr Faleomavaega says “the TRA is not a platform for independence.” The wording of the TRA does not support independence or unification. The key expression is “peaceful means” in determining Taiwan’s future.

You can read Faleomavaega’s amazingly combative and insulting letter in its entirety here: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2009/03/31/2003439824
Links to previous stories are provided and readers also can navigate to the various bloggers to get the full text of their comments.

Now we just wait to see what Eni’s next move is. If this were our local media, we could expect another blast from Washington. But because it is Taiwan, there may be silence. And if there is, you know it’s because the full committee chairman, Howard Berman, called him in and told him to cool it or lose his travel allowance. Now, that is something that really would get Eni’s attention.

Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior

We have been looking over the stories, press releases and ads for the congressional race in recent weeks and have been struck by how Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior for some reason focuses his fire on one of his two opponents, Aumua Amata. No matter that the governor, the fono leaders, the other opponent, one of the other candidates for governor and a variety of members of the fishing community are opposing his secret tunaboat amendment, Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior seems to relish concentrating his attacks on Aumua Amata. Sounds to me like maybe she is breathing down Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior's neck.

One thing we have noticed in particular is Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior's habit of referring to Aumua by her full name in virtually every instance Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior mentions it. Other than to show contempt for her--or at least her name--we are not certin just exactly what point Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior is trying to make. Our point in doing the very same thing here, of course, is to demonstrate just how childish Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior looks. After all, Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior now is at retirement age. Isn't it about time for Congressional Non-voting Delegate Faleomavaega Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin, Junior to grow up? Or maybe retire?

Faleomavaega's vicious attack

As the name of our group suggests, we are for anyone but Faleomavaega. But the filing deadline is well past and that "anyone" boils down to two alternatives: one is his previous opponent, Aumua Amata, who in 2006 held him to the fourth closest race in the country against any Democrat who won a House seat and a retired army enlistee, Rosie Lancaster, who it appears spent her entire career as a paper shuffling personnel specialist and has no Washington experience. Lancaster, who previously was a volunteer on Aumua Amata's campaign, is a paper shuffling bureaucrat at the community college. Since Lancaster's campaign seems to be going nowhere, let us focus on Aumua Amata.

About 10 days ago, her campaign chairman, the respected Senator Salanoa Aumoeualogo, in the wake of the U.S. financial crisis issued the following statement:

As everyone who has been following the national news knows, the United States is in the midst of the worst financial crisis it has faced since the Great Depression over 75 years ago. The federal government is taking urgent action to correct the problems, which affect the world economy, including the U.S. territories.

Last weekend the Bush Administration met with Congressional Leaders and made a proposal that will require congressional action. This week this issue is squarely in the hands of Congress, with both political parties in both houses working around the clock to develop a consensus solution. Underscoring the seriousness of the crisis, Sen. McCain on Wednesday announced he was suspending his presidential campaign to return to Washington to work on the legislation.

One of the reasons the process continues unresolved is that various senators and representatives have different ideas on what should be in the bill being drafted. In situations such as these it is of paramount importance that we be vigilant so that any legislation passed by Congress does not have unintended consequences for American Samoa.

To minimize the possibilities that national legislation would be harmful to our territory, Congress created a non-voting delegate seat in the U.S. House of Representatives beginning with the 1980 election. Having that seat is particularly crucial at a time like this. Therefore, I was shaken to learn that as this crisis was developing last weekend, our delegate left Washington to return to Pago Pago and remains here now.

No matter how talented or well connected his congressional staff may be, they are no substitutes in Washington for the physical presence of the delegate, the only one who is permitted to attend high level meetings where key decisions are debated and made. We need only look back to 2007 to see the ramifications of having our delegate absent from Washington when crucial decisions are being made. The plans to abolish the industry committee and automatically raise our minimum wage were formulated and announced while our delegate was not in the capital. As we now have seen, the change in law has threatened our fragile economy and may have further consequences we are not yet able to foresee.

If Senator McCain were able to suspend his campaign, then surely our delegate could suspend his and return to Washington on the earliest possible flight and remain there to protect our interests until Congress has adjourned. Except in the direst case of personal emergency, it is imperative Faleomavaega fulfill his responsibilities as our Member of Congress. The situation demands no less.

end of statement

A few days later, Faleomavaega issued a response that for anyone who understands who Samoan politics is practiced, would stand on end the hairs on the back of your neck. Line by line we have dissected this statement, which is filled with lies, half truths, misstatements, mischaracterizations and distortions. Over the course of the next few days, we intend to post his statement along with our analysis. Stay tuned.