ARGUMENTATIVE

The campaigning for the 2016 presidential elections in the Philippines and United States has already
begun but is expected to make stronger towards the last quarter of this year. Since the Philippine
democratic system is basically modeled after the American presidential system, there are differences
and obvious similarities between the two nations’ election process.

The one similarity is that the best person for the position of president does not always win. Philippine
history is full of personalities who should never have become president. Heading the list is Ferdinand
Marcos whose presidency ended in martial law. At the beginning of his rule in 1965, the Philippines
were the second richest country in Asia next only to Japan. It may be hard to believe now, but this
country was actually more economically progressive than South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, and China.
After 21 years of Marcos rule, the Philippines deteriorated, economically and politically, to become the
sick man of Asia.

There is no truth to the belief that martial law was beneficial to the Philippines. It had the opposite
effect. It is a false belief that intrinsically we are a people that are less progressive than other Asians. It
was Marcos rule that destroyed this nation – this Pearl of the Orient. It was another president –
Corazon Aquino that started us on the road to recovery by restoring democracy, eliminating crony
capitalism, and restoring hope among the Filipino people.

Two presidents – Erap Estrada and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo – almost destroyed again the gains of the
Cory Aquino presidency and People Power Movement. It took another Aquino – Noynoy Aquino – to
restart the economy. In four short years we have turned around and become the second fastest growing
economy in Asia.

People often wonder what the Philippines would be like if the president, instead of the dictator Marcos,
had been Ninoy Aquino or Jose Diokno. What would the nation’s economy be like today? What if the
Philippines stayed as the second richest country in Asia or even just the third or fourth or fifth richest
country in Asia?

We are now the second fastest growing economy in Asia. This government has gone a long way in the
fight against corruption at the highest level. A former president, a chief justice of the Supreme Court,
three senators have been put in jail for corruption. Major infrastructure projects have started or are
about to start. A long delayed and much needed reform in basic education – through the K to 12
program has finally gotten off the ground under the guidance of Br. Armin Luistro FSC.

Opinion ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1

There are, of course, those who long for the return of the days of corrupt deals, crony capitalism,
unchecked tax evasion, and pork barrel funding of roads that never existed. For the overwhelming
majority of the Filipino people the greatest fear is the election of a new president who will return to
those terrible days.
If we see a return to those “good old days,” are we again going to see street demonstrations and
impeachment demands which will result in political and economic instability? Are we going to again see
money fleeing to foreign tax havens and investments drying up? Are we going to see the return of
abandoned corruption in the use of government funds resulting in roads and bridges that do not exist?

When P-Noy ran for president in 2010, people supported him because of his promise to start the change
– the transformation of Philippine society. It was clear that transformation would need more than one
presidential term. We have seen so much progress during the term of P-Noy. The Filipino people are
looking for a leader who will continue the struggle to change Philippine society and institutionalize the
rule of law.

When Corazon Aquino visited Sister Lucy in Fatima, the story is that Sister Lucy gave Cory a rosary and
told her that “she was God’s gift to the Filipino people.” Are we going to wait for another miracle to give
us a new leader in the belief that God will never abandon the Philippines ? Or are we finally going to be
told that it is time we took our destiny in our hands and rally together for a president who will continue
the transformation of Philippine society.

Winning elections

As I said, the best person does not always win elections. Certainly Marcos was the worst president the
Philippines ever elected. But the basic framework for winning elections is the same. There are five major
factors that are usually present in a winning electoral campaign.

The first two factors – message and image – are closely linked. Message must be relevant, believable,
and easy to understand by the electorate. PNoy’s message in the 2010 was to battle corruption and the
evils it had brought to the nation. His personal image of being clean and incorruptible made the message
credible. The image was further strengthened by the image of the Aquino family — his mother, sisters
and in-laws — as being untainted by corruption.

In the 2008 Democratic primary elections, Barack Obama’s message was Change and because he was
going to be the first African American president, his image was credible. Hillary Clinton’s message was
one of experience and the ability to react to crisis “in the middle of the night” But her image was never
clearly defined since the message needed a tough image but her campaign handlers felt she should
show a “softer” image.

The next factor, unfortunately, is money — the mother’s milk of politics everywhere in the world. In the
2012, US presidential elections, the total recorded campaign spending was $7 Billion.

The other two factors are a built-in campaign network and a solid, disciplined campaign team. A
presidential campaign network cannot be created. It needs to have been formed over decades and
integrated with institutions like schools, clubs, and grassroots organizations. The presence of a unified “
Yellow Movement” was one of the biggest factor for P-Noy’s victory.
This movement began with the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983 and was formalized during the
Cory Aquino for President campaign. It was strengthened by the EDSA People Power Movement and the
struggle against the coup attempts against Cory Aquino.

The Yellow Movement is nationwide and includes a lot of non-politicians who have learned to organize
at the grassroots and synergize with other similar groups. In 1998 the movement splintered supporting
different candidates. This disunity resulted in the Estrada victory. In 2010, the Yellow Movement
solidified behind P-Noy but was split for the vice-president. This was a key factor in the victory of
Jejomar Binay. Will the Yellow Movement rally behind a single candidate in 2016?

We can only hope that the winning candidate in 2016 will be the right person for the Filipino people.

In times of great evil, we are often reminded of Epicurus who famously questioned the notion of an
omnipotent God. Epicurus argued: “If God is unable to prevent evil, then he is not all-powerful; if God is
not willing to prevent evil, then he is not all-good; and if God is both willing and able to prevent evil,
then why does it exist?”

Indeed, the answer is that if God designed a perfect world for each one of us, then there would be no
value to human freedom. Precisely, we have to learn from our mistakes, suffer from the consequences
of unfortunate decisions, but most important of all, the reflexive attitude toward human action means
we must not commit the same mistake over and over again.

This, however, is not true in the realm of Philippine politics. Our political leaders are still in their usual
intramural debates and politically motivated legislative investigations. In 2010 we saw President Aquino
as some silver bullet delivered from above, thanks to the death of a democracy icon, yet what we have
seen so far is that the job of cleaning the terrible mess of corruption is next to impossible. The issue of
the Disbursement Acceleration Program only showed that he also fell into the indispensable necessity of
party politics.

The difference between Third World politics and First World politics is not really in the efficiency or the
scientific way developed countries do things. The difference is more fundamental. Mature democracies
determine the fate of their country on the basis of political principles. The formula we are using is like
the one filmmakers use in their movies, and that is: Some superhero will save the day for all of us. We
think that there is some superhuman who will finally bridge the gap between rich and poor.

Theorists in this country talk about all-inclusive growth, yet one government think tank is recommending
relaxing minimum-wage regulations in order to solve the high rate of unemployment. That suggestion is
not even a Band-Aid solution; it simply hides the real problem by artificially improving employment
numbers. People do not need just jobs. People need jobs that are sustainable, that will give them the
capability to send their children to school and to afford healthcare.

The rumor that Manuel V. Pangilinan will supposedly bankroll the presidential campaign of Vice
President Jejomar Binay is not at all good news. It means simply, if confirmed, the marriage of business
and politics. While both camps deny it, it is nevertheless a matter of fact that politicians get their
campaign kitty from corporate patrons. The reason is simple: Businessmen expect returns.

The difference between public service and business needs no further explaining. In the corporate world,
you hire the brightest and weed out the incompetent. In electing people to public office, everything will
depend on the decision of the majority. While the right of suffrage is an equalizer, a vote is always
counted as one regardless of the voter’s IQ. The reality, however, is that new forms of control, subtle
and obvious, are employed by cunning politicians in order to influence voters. There are many examples.
There is no need to mention one.

A politics based on personalities is the root cause of all evil. But I suppose this is not something that God
willed for the Filipino people. We can point to history, culture and tradition as to why the future of our
children has been compromised. Some of our intelligent legislators are even proposing useless bills in
Congress. There are good bills, though, like those that are intended to enhance the role of the middle
class by easing the burden of income taxation.

In the Philippines, politics is always about the glamour of public office. Marriage proposals take more
space in social media than the achievement of a teacher who has committed his life to serving the
children in tribal communities. The facts are glaring. Dynasties in the South have stifled human
development. The poorest provinces are ruled by pseudo-kings.

Many bright academicians feel that politics is nothing but a chaotic vision. For them, it is a hopeless
case. Those who say that there is a light at the end of the tunnel are actually outside of it. They want
nothing about political engagements. The poor, in this regard, have two problems: Many good men who
refuse to get involved in designing a better country for our children, and plenty of evil politicians who
continue to bully their way into the future of this nation by way of political machinations.

In 2010, I put a lot of faith in President Aquino. I was wrong. It was a mistake. A mistake cannot be
undone. However, while the courage to be is still preferred over falling into the hole of hopelessness, I
suppose we have to change the way we see things. We have to encourage civil society to improve
discussions of public issues rather than recommend political heroes. The face of Philippine politics has
not changed. Not because we still have the same leaders in office, but because many Filipinos have
remained in the prisons of human poverty.

Philippine Political System: How can it be changed by the youth? 

Philippine political system has been tagged to be corrupt and hopeless. Politics is unhealthy and rights
are abused. Social justice seems to be a faraway dream. And the observance of the law seems ruthless. 

The youth is said to be the promoter of change. It is said that the youth is the hope of changing and
bringing an ideal system. But how exactly can the youth change the present system when he is
surrounded by a corrupt system? How can he do it when not all can study and get themselves involved
in worthy activities? How can he do his advocacies when his freedoms are suppressed? How can the
youth fight the pain of a corrupt system and maintain his idealism for an ideal system? 

PHILIPPINE Politics is curious and intriguing, interesting and entertaining—and particularly detestable as
well as disgusting. Philippine politics is the origin of wonderful promises and as well as the cause of big
disappointments productive of misery and poverty.

Philippine Politics is not simply the source of hope but likewise the cause of despair. It is the jumping
board of gross graft and corrupt practices instead of a response to the call of what is right, proper, and
just. Philippine politics is anything but admirable even for those harboring optimism—if not
hallucination. Would that it were otherwise. And would that following thoughts and impressions were
but in the realm of fallacy:

It is a great business. While there are exceptions, most, however, enter the sphere of Philippine politics
not really to render public service but to ascertain fast and fruitful self-service. This is precisely why it is
very much worth making all the required capital investments in seeking elective public office whereas
politics in the Philippine is a very profitable investment. Poor Filipino politicians are a rare breed. They
are the picture of few small needles in a huge haystack.

It is a distinctly advantageous way of life.  Philippine politics is not only a convenient and advantageous
way of making a living. It is also a highly profitable means of livelihood. This is why it is primarily the
wealthy who aspire for, who hold on and cling to political positions. They have many family interests to
protect, a good number of clan concerns to promote. Politicians need only talk much and act well—and
the beneficial returns are many and spectacular.

It is an addictive adventure. It is not true that the maxim “Once a boy scout, always a boy scout,” is an
exclusive claim and principle of scouting. There is the living and vibrant reality that once a politician,
always a politician. Otherwise, it would be hard to explain the so-called “political dynasties.” How true it
is that Philippine politics is very addictive indeed. Husband and wife and kid, father and son and
daughter etc. etc. all in politics—these are but few examples of the living proofs that politics is addictive.

Would those Filipino politicians think of and work for the country—not for themselves! Would that they
dedicate themselves to the socio-economic development of the Philippines—not that of their family and
clan! Would that Philippine politics be for the public welfare and the common good—not for dynastic
well-being and progress!

Social media, negative campaign to define 2016 polls

In emerging democracies, the street represents a passing era. The 'parliament of the social media' is the
new venue of what could be considered an ongoing social and political revolution.

Philip M. Lustre Jr.

Published 7:00 PM, August 12, 2015

Updated 11:44 PM, August 12, 2015

What have been unnoticed in the grueling political dynamics of the 2016 presidential polls are the
unexpected occurrence of specific pressure groups formed to conduct organized negative campaigns
against certain presidential candidates and the growing use of social media in the political discussions.

These two factors would define the character of the 2016 presidential elections.

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram – these are the commonly used social networking sites, which have
assumed the first line of communications platforms in the political run-up to the 2016 presidential
elections. Filipino netizens use them for a variety of reasons: establish connections with people in other
parts of the country and the world; reconnect with old friends and lost relatives; interact freely without
fear, malice, or retribution; create virtual friendships or networks among netizens; convey information,
including news; and express views and opinions.

Social media is the latest platform to convey messages, express opinions, and establish connections and
re-connections. The social networking sites have reshaped social interaction. They have become the
source of information. Before, social interaction is defined by distance and intensity of emotions. Now,
friendship has become virtual as a result of these sites.

Social media competes with traditional media like print (newspapers and magazines) and broadcast
(radio and television). Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have attracted millions of Filipinos to use them
in daily social intercourse. Netizens are hooked to and have become dependent on these networking
sites.

It has become inconceivable for a Filipino not to have an account in any of these major social networking
sites.

Stop Binay!, Jail Binay Movement, Netizens Against Binay, No to Binay, Ikulong si Binay – these are just
some social media-based organizations that have mushroomed almost overnight to stage organized
negative campaign against the presidential candidacy of Vice President Jejomar Binay in 2016. They are
composed mostly of netizens, but they appear committed to work for Binay’s total rejection at the polls.

In previous elections, negative campaigns against certain candidates, political groups and interests, and
political issues were usually sporadic and disorganized. Except in the 1986 “snap” presidential elections,
where various organized groups came out to stage organized political campaigns against the issue of
Marcos dictatorship, virtually all previous elections saw the marked absence of organized negative
campaigns.

Organized negative campaigns could spell the difference because they are usually focused to pursue
objectives and even funded to go all out.
When unchecked, negative campaign led by certain organizations could alter the political equation and
become the determining factor of political loss or victory of certain candidates.

Traditional media in politics

Political campaign in the prewar period was simple.

Print media dominated the scene. Candidates relied on newspapers, magazines, and books to explain
their programs of government, distributed leaflets and folios, and held political meetings to express
their messages and explain their objectives. Radio was then a nascent technology. Television was non-
existent.

Election campaign changed during the early postwar period with radio joining print media as major
vehicles to bring specific campaign messages. The 1961 presidential elections saw the emergence of
television as a new vehicle for political campaign. But it was in the 1965 presidential elections that it was
used extensively.

The 1969 presidential elections saw the extensive use of television in the political campaign. The camp
of President Ferdinand Marcos, who was running for reelection, used it to the hilt to defeat rival then
Senator Sergio Osmena Jr. Since then, the use of 3 media – or the trimedia of print, radio, and television
– has been described as ultimately necessary to ensure victory in every political exercise.

The martial law era saw the continued use of traditional media in the Marcos-controlled political
exercise. They were all intended to prop up the Marcos dictatorial regime. The 1986 “snap” presidential
polls also relied heavily on traditional media, although wireless phones were used on limited occasions.

The 2001 Second EDSA People Power Revolution saw the massive use of cell phones, where many
citizens, through text messaging, rallied the people to bring down the Joseph Estrada government. At
that time, the country was having a revolution in wireless telephony, as millions of Filipinos started to
acquire their cell phone units and gained access to the Internet information highway.

The full use of the wireless telephony and the Internet became pronounced in the 2004 presidential
elections that saw Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo staging a questionable victory over popular movie actor
Fernando Poe Jr. Social media was a nascent development during those days but it was hardly used.

Social media was experimented on in the 2007 midterm elections, when the camp of detained Antonio
Trillanes IV used Friendster to complement their email messages to netizens and urge them to vote for
the detained navy officer. It proved to be effective as Trillanes won despite campaigning from his cell in
Fort Bonifacio. Trillanes was the first senatorial candidate to have won in an election without going
public.

Facebook has emerged as the site of choice in 2010, replacing Friendster, but its effectiveness was not
exactly decisive as few Filipinos had FB accounts during those days. Times have changed nowadays, as
more than 50 million or half of the country’s population of 100 million have FB accounts. An increasing
number of Filipinos have Twitter and Instagram accounts.
Hence, social media is a now strategic area to stage a political campaign.

Negative campaign

Except in 1986, practically all negative political campaigns in the country’s political history were largely
disorganized, sporadic, and not orchestrated, as political parties and leaders left everything for the
people to decide. The two-party political system that persisted during the premartial law days assured
sufficient ventilation of issues. It did not require organized negative political campaign.

The adoption of a multiparty system under the 1987 Constitution has changed the political environment.
The multiparty system has led to the dispersal of national focus on many issues of national concern.
Hence, organized negative campaigning has become a matter of course, an alternative of choice.

Political entities of varying persuasions have to form groups and organizations to pursue negative
campaigns against specific politicians and political groups. When they operate as groups, their negative
campaigns reach the optimal level as they could maximize the use of their resources, time and efforts on
specific individual.

‘Parliament of social media’

The growing strength and power of social has led to the “parliament of social media,” where the nagging
issues of the day are discussed, debated, and resolved, or left unresolved there. This “parliament of
social media” has supplanted the "parliament of the streets," which has become irrelevant in the
modern times.

Hence, the "parliament of the social media" is the new venue of what could be considered an ongoing
social and political revolution.

In the battle for sound bites (or "teledemocracy" as political theorists aptly call it), the street is now
perceived as a poor arena. It is suited for Arab nations, where the information superhighway, or
Internet, has yet to take a deeper root.

In emerging democracies, or a restored democracy like the Philippines, the street represents a passing
era, or one of the several stages in the political dynamics of strengthening democratic institutions and
processes.

Nontraditional media, particularly social media, is now the better venue than the streets. Issues are
better discussed and debated in major social networking sites. Public resolve is developed on the pages
of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, among others.

Moreover, signature campaigns are pursued better on social media than in the streets. Social media –
not the streets – is fast becoming the main venue for conflict resolution.

Organized negative campaign

At the early stages of the political run-up to the 2016 presidential elections, several groups have come
out to stage organized negative campaign against the Binay political dynasty. Citizens’ movements like
No to Binay, Stop Binay!, Netizens against Binay, Bitayin si Binay Movement, among others, have
sprouted like mushrooms, asking the people to reject Binay as the next president. While they do not
necessarily favor certain candidates, they appear united and obsessed to bring the vice president down
to his knees.

They have launched low-key demonstrations in Makati City and other cities, but they have kept on
bringing the message that Binay personifies corruption and a Binay presidency will be a corrupt
presidency. But those citizens’ movements are composed mainly of netizens, who have been using social
media to disseminate anti-Binay sentiments.

Their social media campaigns have been successful, as more netizens have expressed their rejection of
Binay. For his part, Binay’s reaction was childish and ridiculous. He branded those netizens as “paid
hacks.”

A lot of things will happen before the 2016 presidential elections. At this point, social media has become
incredibly active in the political discussions. Likewise, organized groups have been mushrooming to stop
the presidential aspirations of the Vice President.

The one who will win must fire our imagination and inspire us to dream again, break us free from
destructive cynicism, jadedness, and despair'

Chay F. Hofileña

@chayhofilena

Published 6:30 PM, June 25, 2015

Updated 1:06 PM, July 02, 2015

Rappler presents “The  Scrum,” our take on issues and personalities of the 2016 elections. Derived from a
media term that refers to reporters surrounding politicians to press them to answer questions and
respond candidly, “The  Scrum” hopes to spark smart conversations on politics and elections.

The much-awaited June survey results from major polling outfits Pulse Asia and Social Weather
Stations were finally released this past week. They confirmed what many expected: that Senator Grace
Poe would continue to rise and Vice President Jojo Binay would spiral downwards some more. Let’s see
how his cutting ties with the administration will affect his numbers in the next survey.
One bit of a surprise was Interior Secretary Mar Roxas’ double-digit rise from his previous 4%
presidential preference rating. How did that happen, many were left wondering. After all, it’s common
knowledge that his rather bland, aloof, and technocrat mien is the biggest barrier to a rapid rise in his
popularity.

Statistician Jose Ramon Albert however carefully points out that given the ±3% margin of error in the
survey, the change in Roxas’ ratings “may or may not be real” and may still be on the boundary. For the
change to be truly significant, he said Roxas’ increase should be greater than 6 percentage points.

If only Roxas had the ability to just turn on that switch that would connect him instantaneously to the
common man, or even that lowly barangay captain or town mayor, half of the Liberal Party leadership’s
headache would probably go away. After all, unlike Binay, Roxas has no corruption issues.

Unfortunately, that switch is non-operational. Many of his close friends who know him very well know
it’s a given and it’s something they can’t change. He doesn’t have the common man’s touch. It’s part of
the DNA and the Roxas package and any attempt to alter it will come off as artificial and manufactured.

A look at the surveys shows that Roxas continues to do poorly among the poorest sectors. A year ago,
Roxas rated 6% among class E and slightly better with class D at 8% in the Pulse Asia June 2014 survey.
This rose a hundred percent to 12% for class E and slightly better at 10% for class D in the June 2015
survey.

Pulse Asia Survey Classes Roxas Binay Poe

Period

June-July 2014 ABC 7% 36% 7%

D 8% 42% 12%

E 6% 40% 14%

June 2015 ABC 9% 29% 31%

D 10% 20% 31%

E 12% 26% 25%

How did Binay fare? In the same June-July 2014 survey, Binay was preferred by an overwhelming 40%
among the poorest sector or class E, and an even higher 42% by class D. But these numbers slid to 26%
for class E and 20% for class D. Compared to Roxas, Binay remains to be the preferred candidate of the
poor – at least as of June 2015. Cognizant of the drop, Binay said the latest survey results were a “wake-
up call.”

Grace Poe

The numbers tell a different story, however, when Grace Poe is included in the picture. Until March
2015, Binay was undoubtedly the most popular among poor respondents. By June 2015, the tide shifted
dramatically in favor of Poe among class D respondents – she obtained a 31% preferential rating
compared to Binay’s 20%. Given the survey’s margin of error, she almost tied Binay’s 26% with her 25%
among class E. She also tied, if not slightly edged out, Binay among the ABC classes who are better off,
with her 31% compared to Binay’s 29%.

Clearly the numbers mirror greater public sympathy for Poe after the Binay camp’s offensives against
her. The challenges to her citizenship, residency, and competence appear to have backfired, and instead
gave her a platform to gain sympathy and attention. She responded very well to the attacks and even
thanked UNA interim president Toby Tiangco for them.

Taking on the issue of her being unqualified to run for president or vice president because her being a
natural born citizen is not firmly established, Poe said: “I don’t think you should discriminate based on
the circumstance of birth. Especially when it’s so ridiculous to assume that the child is a foreigner, born
in the province, in Iloilo no less, and with physical attributes that are obviously Filipino.”

It’s easy to imagine how she could turn around the attack on her being a foundling, and ask her voters or
even an entire nation to adopt her as their own. Being the adopted daughter of actor Fernando Poe Jr
and actress Susan Roces, Grace Poe seems to have an intuitive grasp of what will connect with the public
in terms of message. If not acquired throught DNA, it’s probably by osmosis.

To Roxas supporters, what he has going for him is the probable support of the President (we’ll know that
for sure after his last State of the Nation Address in July). To pollsters, however, that’s debatable and
may be a false source of optimism. It may add a few votes but will not determine victory at the polls.
Past presidential elections are replete with examples of this.

Courting the poor

Then there is Davao City’s Rody Duterte, who was included in the Pulse survey only last March. Among
ABC, he scored 21%, very close to Binay’s 22%. Among the class D respondents, he got 11% and 10%
among class E. In the June survey, he dropped to 13% among the ABC, but became more popular among
the D and E, getting 17% and 14%, respectively.

It is common knowledge that there seems to be mutual respect between Duterte and Roxas. Across
classes, there is wider support for Duterte than Roxas. The big question in many minds is, where will
those for Duterte go if the Davao mayor decides not to run? Will they end up supporting Roxas, Poe, or
Binay? Who will be the Mindanaoans next choice?

Pollsters are doing, or have probably completed by now, further probes on the survey data.
Unfortunately, they are not sharing the information with the media so only subscribers and campaign
strategists will know. But what should be the takeaway from the numbers at this point in time?

1. The poor are not blind to corruption issues even as they continue to aspire for a better life. This is
apparent in the Binay and Roxas numbers.
2. The poor want a sense of security and a degree of bull-headedness, which they probably see in
Duterte.

3. They prefer a candidate who they can identify, and share a narrative, with. Poe, the foundling, who is
being deprived of a shot at the presidency because of the circumstances of her birth, is one of them.

4. Competence or the ability to deliver services that will change the quality of their lives, not being
corrupt, and empathy should go hand in hand.

In 2010, Aquino became president not because he really wanted it but because Filipinos got reminded of
the promise of EDSA. Cory Aquino may have had her failures as president, but she remained the icon of
what could have been, post-Marcos. And her son was a symbol of that interrupted continuity.

Campaign strategists say that Filipino voters tend to choose the opposition of the previous president in
selecting their new one. This is why, in 2010, Aquino, the perceived opposite of the corruption-tainted
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, was the hands-down winner.

In 2016, the one who will win must want the presidency with a passion – unlike Aquino. The one who
will win must be more decisive, demonstrate more competence, have a clearer vision of where the poor
should be, and must be able to take them there, no matter what.

The one who will win must fire our imagination and inspire us to dream again, break us free from
destructive suspicion, jadedness, and despair. – with research by Reynaldo Santos Jr/Rappler.com

Philippine Politics is the Problem of the Philippines

It is the summit of irony when something envisioned to be the solution is in fact the problem, when
what is supposed to provide people their public welfare precisely becomes detrimental to their common
good, when what is expected to bring about socio-economic development turns out to be the basic
cause of poverty and misery. This is sad but true.

Martial Law is evil yet it then made the Philippines second only to Japan in financial stature. Democracy
is great but it can be anything but comfortable to say what the economic standing of the country in Asia
is now. There seems to be one basic causal factor for such a misfortune: The individuals in bad
governance. The dynasties in dirty politics. The favored persons in public disservice. This is a pity but a
reality.

No wonder then why when someone in public office – proved to be adorned with integrity, vested with
industry and gifted with simplicity – suffered from an untimely death, people mourned his passing away
but celebrated his person not only in the local but also in the national level. Why? He was singular in his
personal and official attributions. He was a big rarity in government. He would be hard to replace in the
public office he held.
“Philippine politics, the way it has been and is still being practiced is possibly the biggest bane in our
life as a nation, and the most pernicious obstacle to our achieving full human development.”

The censure was not made by neither ideologists nor pessimists. The injunction was pronounced by
neither leftists nor rightists. Much less was the reproach propelled either by senseless or hopeless
individuals. The above quote is nothing less than the opening salvo of the “Pastoral Exhortation on
Philippine Politics” made by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) in 1997. Today, a
decade and a half after, it bears asking if anything substantial has changed in the way politics is practiced
in the country.

To mention but three of the negative features of politics still gripping the life and breath of the Filipinos
– as already cited by the CBCP in 1997: One, the interests of the few powerful and rich and pitied against
those of many weak and poor people through political peddling and influence. Two, the equal
application of the law and administration of justice are jeopardized by preferential factors on account of
political considerations. Three, the constitutional principles of the separation of powers among three
branches of government are set aside for politico-reciprocal advantages.

Who says that Philippine politics in not the problem of the Philippines?