Results Matter More

Letter by Mary Camacho Torres

Mary Camacho Torres shaking hands with military leaders

In Washington, there’s a saying that if you aren’t at the table, it’s because you’re on the menu. This week, Guam was almost dinner.

The recent scare of losing millions in federal funding for mental health and substance-use treatment made that reality painfully clear.

On an island grappling with methamphetamine and limited access to care, these services are lifelines for families trying to keep loved ones safe, veterans seeking support, and people in recovery who already face long waits and few alternatives.

Thankfully, the funding cuts have since been reversed. But let’s be clear: signing a letter urging the president’s administration to reverse a decision is not leadership. It’s damage control.

Guam deserves representation that protects us in the first place. And while this decision caught nearly every state off guard, for Guam this kind of reactionary response has become all too familiar.

We saw it when duty-free exemptions were eliminated, sweeping Guam into a one-size-fits-all policy that drove up costs for island consumers and small businesses. Advocacy followed only after the damage was done.

Meanwhile, higher shipping costs continue to hit families at the checkout counter and strain local companies.

We saw it when Guam asked for more time while decisions moved forward on potential deep-sea mining near our shores. As early as last year, members of Congress introduced legislation calling for moratoria until environmental risks were better understood. Guam’s representative was noticeably absent from that early push.

And we’ve seen it in major defense legislation, where Guam’s strategic role is routinely praised, yet veterans here still struggle with access and infrastructure that lag behind the rhetoric.

The pattern is clear: when Guam isn’t represented early and forcefully, people here pay the price.

Ironically, when these challenges come up, the explanation often given is that relationships are being built in Congress—the committees, the connections, the photo ops.

Relationships matter. But as Guam continues to lose ground, the question becomes unavoidable: what are those relationships actually producing?

It’s fine for a delegate to be regarded as nice or courteous or collegial. Those are admirable qualities. But Guam cannot afford representation that confuses being agreeable with being effective.

Simply being liked does not shield our island from funding cuts, higher costs, or environmental risk—and that’s what the record continues to show.

When the same issues arise again and again, when opportunities slip by and we are left asking for extensions or explanations, it’s fair to ask whether our representation is working as hard for Guam as Guam deserves.

Because if Guam keeps showing up to the table and keeps leaving empty-handed, it’s not bad luck. It’s bad advocacy.

---