Electoral and Party Politics in Prewar Philippines Jorge V Tigno My loyalty to my party ends where my loyalty to my country begins. - Manuel L. Quezon Th Leaming Objectives At the end of this chapter, the student should be able to: 1. Gain a basic knowledgé of the evolution and institutionalization of the conduct of elections and the behavior of political parties inthe Philippines, with specific emphasis on the period from 1900 until the outbreak of the ‘Second World War. 2. Appreciate how party organizations began and under what cont they are able to maintain their dominance in the Philippines. 3. Explain how elections and political parties have transformed the overall ‘national and local political landscape of the country during the period. {D introduction I: the years since the beginning of American colonial rule in the Philippines in 1899 up to the period before the declaration of martial law in 1972, parties and elections have become an essential feature of the country’s political landscape. Political parties and elections are seen in a largely instrumentalist and particularistic context. Party activities are mainly confined to electoral politics. Moreover, parties in the Philippines are essentially tactical entities. Party leaders are more interested in achieving electoral, i-e., tactical success, rather than the espousal or pursuit of doctrinal or ideological ends and concerns. The notion that predominates in terms of describing the Philippine political system is that parties and elections function more as tactical instrumentalities for the attainment of the personal political success of a few candidate or party leaders rather than in the doctrinal or ideological pursuit of strategic governance. osPhilippine Politics ond Governance: An Introduction or 1. Cat Lande, Lesders, Fac: tans, and Paes: Tho Stveture .2f Phippie Pohics, Monegragh ‘Sens Number 6 (Souneust Ana ‘Stucies,Yalo Unwverty, 1965), 2 2, Dapen Liang. Phiippine ) The Birth of Party and Electoral Politics Under Spanish colonial administration, only a limited form of suffrage was observed and one which only covered the principales or principal men of the town who were also eligible to run as town mayor or gobernadorcillo. Due to the limited number of the electorate, Lande notes that “campaigning for such offices was a simple matter requiring little organization..."' At the time, party organizations were unnecessary. By the end of Spanish occupation of the Philippines, the goal of independence was deeply underscored in the program of the revolutionary government under Emilio Aguinaldo. In 1899, shortly after the start of hostilities between the US and the Philippine forces, the revolutionary government created a committee tasked to offer the terms of negotiations between Filipino and American troops. The negotiations would include securing a peace agreement between the US and the Philippines that was, in the words of Apolinario Mabini, “worthy and honorable” because it was based on the premise that the Philippines would eventually be granted autonomy by the United States.* However, a critical and dedicated nationalist, General Antonio Luna, allegedly stopped the negotiating committee that was dispatched; its members charged with and arrested for high treason. A second committee was created and subsequently dispatched but the Americans insisted that there could be no negotiations without the surrender of Filipino fighters. For obvious reasons, such a condition was impossible for the revolutionary government to comply with. Nonetheless, by that time, the US had created the first Philippine Commission headed by William Taft (later to be governor-general of the islands). American political presence had been established in the Philippines and was to stay until the formal granting of independence in 1946. Early on, some Filipinos had realized the importance of having a political organization that would become the conduit of support from the new colonizers. In December 1900, a group of upper-class Filipinos led by Trinidad Pardo de Tavera established the Federal Party whose platform was anchored on seeking peace with the United States within President William McKinley's “benevolent assimilation” framework. This meant nothing else but that the pany advocated the goal of eventual entry into the Union by the Philippines.‘ Despite the fact that hostilities between American soldiers and Filipino revolutionaries continued during this time, the Federal Panty soon gained prominence especially in pacified areas. This was because other forms of political expression were disallowed by the American authorities with the exception of those that were not hostile toward American intentions in the Philippines. In November 1901, the Philippine Commission passed the Anti-Sedition Law, which Punishes those persons who advocate independence or separation from US sovereignty even by peaceful means. This law became the basis a short whileChapter 3: Electoral and Party Politics in Prewar Philippines eS later for Governor-General Taft to refuse recognition to parties that called for independence even by peaceful political means. In the context of the Anti-Sedition Law as well as the apparent futility of the victory of Filipino revolutionary forces, the importance and prominence of the Federal Party spread quickly and extensively throughout the country at the time.’ Indeed, because all other political associations advocating independence were ited and outlawed until 1906, the Federal Panty enjoyed prominence and a monopoly on political power.* The party itself claimed in 1901 that there were more than 200,000 persons affiliated with it. There was no doubt in the minds of many (particularly those who were Manila-based) that the Federal Party was the strongest and most popular political organization in the country. It even had its own party newspapers— La Democracia and El Tiempo” ‘The Federal Party's importance could not be underestimated even or especially by the Americans during the early years of occupation. The party played a major role in America's pacification campaign precisely because it involved a significant number of Filipino elites who, by and large, had a strong influence on the people. The emergence of the Federal Party effectively complemented the efforts of the American colonial leadership at “expanding jpino participation in governance and building a universal educational system” that would eventually be their most significant legacy in the Philippines." Early on, the more prominent and educated class of Philippine society “understood that the American policy of attraction offered them representation and a hand in governance, little held them to the receding goal of national independence.” However, while allowing the Americans to think that the Federal Party was an ally of America, its leadership, including Pardo de Tavera himself, insisted that they were “continuing the insurrection, but by legal rather than violent means" given the fact that many Filipinos stil favored independence." By gaining the trust of American authorities, the Federal Party was able to acquire a virtual monopoly in the government appointment of Filipino officials. Liang observes that “appointments to public offices up to 1907 were almost completely confined to the federalistas.”" Local elective positions (most notably for municipal and provincial officials) prior to 1907 were almost exclusively from among those affiliated with the Federal Party."? Moreover, the broadening of the vote would explain why the membership of the party ballooned so quickly."? ‘The Federal Party had become, for all intents and purposes, the Philippine party in power because it was the only one in existence at the time and because the American leadership encouraged and supported it." With the absence of any significant political opposition to the federalistas, partisan (but legal and peaceful) activities were largely proscribed. Spain in 300 years of colonial rule could not accomplish what the Americans had done during 5. The breakdown in ‘evolaionary adership agg ‘ated by hunger and dlasese had ‘commiimant fo achieve national Independence al that point ‘ainady. bm gol ol many ce ‘rovinci eies athe tne was fo altgovermment toe tom the onto! ofthe Taare. In Paco ‘insles and Donna Amoroso, ‘Stato and Society ne Pappas (Pang Cay: Ard, 2008), 197. ntaiion at Cor Congresses of the Phippin 100d and 1695: papa precanied at he "Workahe governor Broughout mech ofthe county a8 tanyas 1902 In lang, Prappine Panios and Pots, 57; Abnales tnd Aneroto, Sat and Socety in the Prilppines, slactore for the alcade or tmunkal mayor and the cabers ‘barangay or brangay che tenumber ef vters growin dict ‘roporton oe quaiiatns fr (ling. As preserbed ns eat \oting regulations, the qu slecion, and that they should belongs anyone ofthe owing alegre: abl fo rand and wrte in Spanien or Englan, own property worth at leaat Ph $09, held local poston prior 10 1000. n ADialea and Aroroeo,Philippi Politics and Governance; An Introduction ee 15, By 1602, ls sad hat ‘mote han 200,000 students ware ‘oroted in primary schoo! and ‘nother 28,600 n right school as wall as almost 20,000. in ‘econderysenooks nthe county. In Abialas and Amoroso, State ‘and Society 0 the Philppines, 12021 16. Abinales and Amores0, State and Society In tho its first decade of presence in the Philippines. It would seem that the consolidation of American rule was undertaken by way of establishing democratic (though not necessarily more accountable) governmental structures, which further eroded the immediate and strong desire to gain independence. The federalistas certainly collaborated with the new colonizers but in a way that it manifested a different kind of nationalism—one that is guided by a strong sense of pragmatism." Other Party Formations in the Early 1900s Prior to 1907, there were attempts to establish parties that would challenge the social and political supremacy of the Federal Party and establish a viable ‘opposition and alternative to the goal of statehood and limited autonomy under American sponsorship. As early as 1901 and 1902, the Partido Nacionalista or Nationalist Party and the Union Obrera or Labor Union, respectively, were organized and sought recognition from the American authorities. Instead of recognition, Governor Taft advised their leaders that “they should be interested in agriculture rather than politics.”” In 1901, while fighting was still going on between Filipino revolutionary and American forces, the Partido Conservador or Conservative Party was established which, according to federalista Pardo de Tavera sought to “conserve the Spanish customs and, moreover, to praise the superiority of the Spaniards as a race.” However, the Conservative Party, according to Taft, “never had but 50 members and never could get more than that." Another group of Filipinos led by Sergio Osmefia from Cebu, unwilling to accept the idea of eventual and permanent American sovereignty over the islands, sought recognition for their Partido Democrata or Democratic Party. Their basis for establishing a separate party was based on “the necessity of two opposing parties for a popular government so as to enable the people to express wider opinions in matters of public policy.” What this meant was that the party was established to provide an alternative to the Federal Party and thus ensure the proper functioning of a democracy. Despite this seemingly innocent initiative, the American authorities refused to grant the Democratic Party formal recognition because it maintained its call for eventual independence (albeit by peaceful and legal means). In 1904, a group of religious nationalists under Gregorio Aglipay, founder of the Philippine Independent Church, formed the Republic Party of the Philippines. Its desire was to ally with the Americans “which shall assist us to undertake public works and exploit our natural resources; but we are opposed to the sale of lands and mines to persons who are not Filipinos.’® Sull, the American authorities did not recognize the Republic Party at the time. Up toChopter 3: Electoral and Party Politics in Prewar Philippines 1907, the supremacy of the Federal Party remained practically unchallenged. Unfortunately, this supremacy was short-lived. (000 The End of the “Insurrection” and the Emergence of Political Opposition As early as 1902, the Schurman Commission had recommended a proposal for the Philippines to be granted self-government at some future time. This resulted in the US Congressional Act of 1902 or the Philippine Bill of 1902, which called for the creation of a Philippine Assembly (whose members would be elected by Filipinos) as soon as peace and order has been established in the country. The assembly served as a kind of check on the powers exercised by the Philippine Commission whose members were all appointed by the president of the US and who were largely composed of Americans and even a few Progressive Party members from the US. In addition to creating the assembly, the Philippine Bill of 1902 also provided for the election of two resident Commissioners who would be given nonvoting seats in the US House of Representatives. By the middle of the decade, independence had become an inevitability. In 1905, hostilities had largely ceased except in some areas. Overall, American auttiorities were now more confident in relaxing the restrictions on the formation of political groups that sought eventual independence but without rejecting US sovereignty over the archipelago as implied in the Philippine Bill of 1902. In 1907, the Sedition Law of 1901 was relaxed and it then became possible for 2, consunina, me Pup. groups seeking independence for the country to speak openly about sts APs Resin a8 independence and eventually challenge the Federal Party. Subsequently and in sndPoes.82, consonance with the Philippine Bill of 1902, the Philippine Commission on March 28, 1905, issued an executive order calling for a general election on the establishment of the Philippine Assembly by June 1967. Groups that were not associated with the Federal Party saw their opportunity to create a strong ‘opposition party. In effect, two converging factors have led to the conditions that would account for the emergence of a viable opposition to the federalistas. The first ‘was the settlement of the question on the part of the US in granting independence Susanna ante to the Philippines. The second was the further opening up of the national gukdwinnesttbepastane political leadership by way of the creation of the Philippine Assembly. Bepuarslactcl competion. ‘The opening up of municipal and provincial offices to electoral competition Ssaawinime Murenaniae” combined with the establishment of a relatively popularly elected national _paiseulpopsatin ol aivont eet legislature, i.e., the Philippine Assembly, meant that politicians intending to be —_mMleh. here ware only 104,808 elected to the national legislature would have to deal with local networks at the —_pecentol he otal population. provincial, municipal, and even barangay levels. The political party as an Pas Aewstes 21Philippine Politics and Governance: Aa Introduction ee 26, Lang, Pritppine Parton organized network of voter support would be the only necessary mechanism to achieve this, especially if the party had a national as well as local presence and following. However, given the peculiar situation mentioned above, the Federal Party's days were numbered despite its being a national organization. The US had earlier on convinced itself that self-government was the only way for the Philippines. By the latter part of the decade, few Americans had thought of actually accommodating the Federal Party platform of statehood for the Philippines. The Federal Party was waning in popularity among the people and influence over the American authorities. {) The Federalistas Reinvent Themselves Just six months before the first Philippine Assembly elections in 1907, the Federal Party convened and, for fear of becoming irrelevant, changed its platform from one of annexation to one that called for gradual independence for the Philippines under American sovereignty. In the same convention, the party changed its name to Partido Nacional Progresista or National Progressive Party. ‘At that point, the Federal Party that advocated statehood for the country no longer existed and was promptly forgotten. With the relaxation of the Anti-Sedition Law brought about by the reduction in hostilities even in outlying areas of the country by 1905, it was no longer a crime to call for independence. Armed resistance or the use of violence to achieve the goal of independence was no longer an option. Several partisan and pro-independence groups reemerged. However, these groups were divided between those that advocated immediate independence without foreign aid and those for early (or eventual) independence with foreign assistance. The former was led by the Partido Union Nacionalista or United Nationalist Party while the latter was led by the Partido Independista or Independence Party.” On March 12, 1907, some three months before the election for members of the first Philippine Assembly, a merger of the two political groups occurred, thus giving birth to the Partido Nacionalista or Nationalist Party under the leadership of notable personalities such as Manuel L. Quezon from Tayabas and Sergio Osmefia. The Nationalist Party became the single dominant champion of Philippine independence and one that posed a serious challenge to the Progressive Party (i.e, the erstwhile Federal Party), which had given up on the idea of US annexation and adopted a position that was pro-independence. ‘Aggravating the situation for the federalistas was the fact that appointments to political offices had also changed. The American governor-general in 1906, Luke E. Wright, followed a policy of granting appointments based on merit rather than on political affiliation as what Taft had done previously. Such a newChapor 3: coral and Party Politi in Prowor Philipines policy can be seen as a way for the Americans to distance themselves from the prospect of incorporating the Philippines into the Union, which had never been a popular American option from the beginning. Subsequent governors- general followed the same principle, which led to the further political marginalization of the so-called progresistas or the erstwhile federalistas.* 1 The Advent of Two-Party Politics, Philippine-Style In the elections of July 30, 1907, for members of the first Philippine Assembly, the electorate was overwhelmingly in favor of the Nationalist Party. It was able to take fifty-nine seats while the Progressive Party got only sixteen seats and the independents got the rest.” The report of the Philippine Commission in 1908 said that voters from Manila and Cebu (Osmefa's hometown) were the strongest supporters of the Nationalist Party while the strongest support for the Progressive Party came from Albay and Ilocos Sur voters.» Invariably, during the first Philippine Assembly, Osmefia became the speaker." a By this time, the two-party system had begun to emerge, with the Nationalist Party leading significantly over the Progressive Party. The lead widened further during the 1909 elections with the Nationalists getting sixty-two seats as against the-sixteen seats of the Progressives and two independents.* In the beginning it appeared like the difference between the Progressive and Nationalist parties was one of ideology pertaining specifically to the question of whether or not to grant independence to the country. However, as seen above, the Progressives saw the need to review and revise its electoral platform from one that advocated annexation to one that also pushed for independence. ‘What may be interesting to note at this point is that even the Nacionalistas themselves were not that serious about independence but were more interested in acquiring power using the independence issue as a means to generate voter support? But by 1912, cracks had begun to show within the Nationalist Party. Teodoro Sandiko, jealous over the greater authority received by Osmefia, bolted from the panty and established the Partido Democrata Nacional or National Democratic Party. Known as the Terceristas or Third Party in order to distinguish itself from aeencen the progresistas, Sandiko and company accused Osmefia of being autocratic 30.4. 83. and intolerant of those who express their free and honest opinions. However, in the elections of 1916, the Terceristas got only two seats. This was even less than what the Progressive Party and independent candidates got (seven and six, respectively). The Nationalist Party clearly claimed an even more significant victory in the Philippine Assembly by gaining seventy-five seats. By this time, there were ninety seats in the assembly, including nine appointed delegates from the so-called non-Christian provinces.Philipine Politics ond Governanc Ja Introduction ee 35, Ourngte cary 19008, be Prilppine Commission wes senator dering atime served a Steyn tum veh hal of toe ‘lcted every three years wie the House. wiih ninety representatives had & wcm of ‘The Naclonalistas Never Wanted Immediate Independence? In early 1916, Senator Clarke from Arkansas introduced an amendment to an original draft bill filed in 1912 by Congressman Jones of Virginia, which established a specific timeline for the granting of independence. The measure specified that independence be granted “in not less than two and not more than four years” under certain conditions “provided that the President (of the US] might at his own discretion extend the time to one more year..." The Nacionalistas were at the time accused “of being responsible for the defeat of the Clarke amendment... [by theit] lack of interest and enthusiasm...” Instead, the Nationalist Party supported an alternative proposal that did not indicate any specific timetable for the granting of independence. Paredes argues that “Osmefia subsequently played an active role in subverting the people's will by ‘killfing] three attempts to introduce an immediate independence resolution.” As early as 1907, Govemor-General William Forbes is said to have noted that when asked if the Nacionalista leadership would press for independence should they win the elections of that year, they answered that seeking independence ‘was really a catchway of getting votes; that what they wanted was office, not independence. Sources: Liang 1971, 94-95; Paredes 1989, 42; and Constantino 1978, 38. The year 1916 was also the time for the election of the members of the first Philippine Senate, which was mandated by the Jones Law or the Philippine Organic Act of 1916 creating the body out of the old Philippine Commission. The Jones Law paved the way for eventual independence by providing a gradual shift in representation in policy-making bodies as well as in executive departments. ‘The Commission effectively became the Senate of the early Philippine legislature while the Assembly effectively became the House of Representatives after 1916. ‘The showing of the Nationalist Party was even more impressive at the Senate. All but one of the twenty-two seats in the Senate were occupied by Nacionalistas.¥ As a result of their losses, the National Democratic and Progressive parties formed a fusion party known as the Partido Democrata or Democratic Party on April 22, 1917. However, “there was not much to be said about the principles of the new party.” Their objective was, in the main, more toward ensuring that the majority party respect the principles of democratic fair play than to actually work for the country’s independence. The platform of the new merger party indicated that it only wanted “a greater and more direct participation of the people in the administration of our public affairs." At this point, the main electoral issue had started to shift away from calling for independence toward increased participation in public policy making.hoptr 3: Bectoral and Party Polis in Prowar Philipines RT Lian ‘The State of an Emergent Philippine Electorate Dus to the gender, literacy, and property requirements for electors in the pre- 1935 period, the number of voters was distinctly limited comparedto the overall population at the time. During the first election for delegates to the Philippine Assembly in 1907, there were only 104,966 registered voters. Of this total number, only 98,251 actually voted during the elections held that year. By 1909, the second election for the Philippine Assembly, there were 208,850 registered voters, almost twice as many as those who registered two years earlier, and 192,975 actually voted. However, Liang observed that “people were more interested in local rather than national affairs.” The Jones Law of 1916, to some extent, widened the suffrage base of Philippine electors. Section 15 states that voters shall be: “Every male person who is not a citizen or subject of a foreign power, 21 years of age or over (except insane and feeble-minded persons and those convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction of a grave offense after August 19, 1899), who has been a resident of the Philippines for ‘one year and of the municipality in which he had voted for six months receding the day of voting, and who can be included in one of the following classes: (a) Those who under existing law are legal voters and hhave exercised the right of suffrage. (b) Those who own real property to the value of 500 pesos, or who annually pay 30 pesos or more of the ‘established taxes. (c) Those who are able to read and write either Spanish, English, or a native language.” From the above-cited passag for voting appears to have become just an ‘Source: Liang 1971, 72, 109, 118-119. In the elections of 1919, the Democratic Party was once again severely defeated. Only one of the thirty-six provincial governors was a Democrata. ‘Their performance in the legislative elections was no better. All the elected senators and eighty-three out of ninety representatives were Nacionalistas. Even though it was not the only party in existence, the Nationalist Party clearly dominated the country’s electoral and party politics. However, by the early 1920s, divisions among the Nacionalista leadership were beginning to show. In the absence of a strong opposition from the progresistas or the terceristas to keep its leadership in check, the question arose as to who should actually lead the government—is it the party in power or someone popularly elected by the people?Philipine Politics ond Governance: An Introduction a8 gE ‘The Power of the Nacionalistas. The influence and power of the Nationalist Party after 1907 had clearly exceeded that of the Federal Party a few years before. Having virtually total control over the Senate and the House of Representatives as well as much of the local governments, the Nacionalistas even aggressively sought for and got the power for the Senate to confirm all the appointments made by the governor-general. In addition, as Hayden observed: the Nacionalista Party controlled the appointments, not only of executive and administrative officials in the central government, but of the judges ‘of the courts of first instance and of ail the justices of peace throughout the archipelago. It ikewise named the provincial fiscals, or prosecuting attomeys who long have been key men in Filipino polis. During the 1920s, the Nationalist Party was a highly organized network and its membership was both extensive and politically endowed, Recruitment to the party was largely based on the capacity of its members to be elected to local and national government positions. Liang observed that: ‘members who were elective officials of the government [served] as ex officio members of the party's governing body of the same echelon. Source: Liang 1971, 99, 139. The two dominant personalities within the party were Osmefia (the House speaker) and Quezon (the Senate president). The Osmefia camp was in favor of the rule of the dominant party while Quezon was for the popular election for the leader. Anxious to maintain his significant leadership advantage over Quezon, ‘Osmeiia sought for, and got, the endorsement of the party convention that the party (which he was leading at the time) should continue directing the policies of the government. On the other hand, Quezon opposed this by arguing that such a situation was “conducive to oligarchy or autocracy and therefore is undemocratic.” Clearly, the power struggle within the party was on between Osmefta and Quezon. This situation led Quezon on February 17, 1922, to organize the Partido Nacionalista-Collectivista or Nationalist-Collectivist Party. Still arguing for a populist leadership, Quezon proclaimed, “My loyalty to my party ends where my loyalty to my country begins." Such a position was clearly directed against the personal leadership of Osmefia over the party even as it was not totally against the idea given the strong personality of Quezon. Thus began the quarrel within the Nationalist Party between the Collectivistas or those in favor of collectiveChapor 3: coral and Party Pos in Prowor Philipines leadership (presumably under the guidance of Quezon) and the Unipersonalistas or those who believed in the “personal” leadership of Osmefia as the basis for government decision making and action. ‘The elections of 1922 proved to be a peculiar three-party contest between the Nationalist (Unipersonalistas), Nationalist-Collectivist (Colectivistas), and Democratic Parties. Both Osmefia and Quezon ran and won seats in the Senate. Asa result of the split in the Nacionalista ticket, the Democratas obtained many seats in both chambers though still not enough to make a majority. On the other hand, the Colectivistas had a small majority in the Senate and a plurality in the House. The power of either the Colectivistas or Nacionalistas could not be guaranteed until one or the other could win the support of the Democratas. This resulted in the need for alliances and coalitions in both the upper and lower houses of the legislature. More important, it created the necessity to establish a coalition within the executive cabinet as well that now included the erstwhile marginalized Democratas particularly within the Council of State.” The Council of State The Jones Law of 1916 provided for a separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches. Under the law, the governor-general was no longer a member of the Philippine legislature. Prior to 1916, however, the governor-general presided over the Philippine Commission which, until 1907, effectively formed the legislature and after 1916 became the Senate. After 1916 the Commission became a separate legislative body, i.e., the upper house or Senate; and the assembly was transformed into the House of Representatives. Nevertheless, the governor-general continued to exercise fairly extensive powers that included: ‘general supervision and control of al of the departments and bureaus of the government in the Philippine Islands as far as itis not inconsistent with the provisions of this act, and shall be commander-in-chiet of all locally created armed forces and militia. He is hereby vested with the exclusive power to grant pardons and reprieves and remit fines and forfeitures, and veto any legislation enacted as herein provided. ‘The Jones Law granted significant powers to both chambers of the Pt legislature. This included the power: to increase the number, or abolish any, of the executive departments, ‘or make such changes in the names and duties thereof as it may ‘deem necessary, and to provide for the appointment and removal of the heads of the executive departments by the governor-general, ti, 131.Philippine Politics ond Governance: An Introduction With a strong executive in the person of the governor-general and a Nacionalista-dominated legislature that likewise had extensive powers by 1916, the question arose as to who or which party was actually leading the government in the Philippines. This was eventually addressed with the creation of the Council of State on October 16, 1918, by the governor- general. The council was composed of the governor-general, two presiding officers of the legislature (one each from both chamb members of the cabinet. Its function was to provide assistance and advice to the governor-general on matters of public policy and action. The creation of the council effectively overshadowed the executive cabinet since the latter was simply a set within the former. The council was a way for the inos (notably the Nacionalistas who dominated the legislature) to effect a kind of national leadership role for the government because the governor- general had been reduced to, in the words of Harrison himself, “a mere figure-head" since key officials of the cabinet were now subject to the concurrence of the Senate. While its presiding officer remained the governor-general, the real power lay in the vice president in the person of Speaker Osmefia, who became a virtual prime minister of the government. The council's accountability was to no one else but its own, Moreover, it had the strong backing of the Legislature with both of its key leaders (namely Osmefia who headed the House of Representatives, and Quezon, the Senate president —both of whom were key leaders of the dominant Nationalist Party). Jiang observed that the existence of the council ‘could be regarded as an approximation to parliamentary government of the English model...” ‘Source: Liang 1971, 100, 97. 104-405 The power struggle of the 1920s within the Nationalist Party resulted in ‘Osmeiia losing power and prominence to Quezon who was reelected Senate president while the speakership went to his close ally, Manuel Roxas, who was also a Colectivista. Effectively, the leadership of the party as well had now passed from Osmefia to Quezon. The party quarrel, however, was short-lived. In April 1924, the two factions reunited under the Partido Nacionalista Consolidado or Consolidated Nationalist Party. Nevertheless, the leadership change had been effected with Quezon taking the helm of both the party and government as Senate president.‘Chapter 3: Electoral and Party Politics in Prewar Philippines OCS TT Minority Parties in the 1930s and the Partido Sakdalista With the dissolution of the Democratic Party in 1932, there emerged a host of other alternative (but less powerful) electoral parties that competed with the Nationalist Party. These included the Partido Modemista or Modernist Party (established in February 1932), the New Youth Party of the Philippines (established in September 1933), the Young Philippines Party (established in January 1934), and the Partido Sakdalista (sakda/ means to accuse orto put ‘on trial). Of these minority political parties, the Sakdalistas achieved relative measure of success particularly in the elections of 1934 where they “won three seats in the legislature, a provincial governor, and a number of municipal officials.” ‘The Sakdal Party was founded by Benigno Ramos, a disgruntled Senate employee. The party loudly denounced the government's policies and programs, It advocated immediate and full independence for the Philippi Their populist stand quickly made them the champion of the oppressed, especially the peasants in the countryside. During the 1934 general elections, they scored impressively (relative to other minority parties) by gaining three seats in the House (that included one from Quezon's province of Tayabas) along with a number of municipal and provincial offices. In early May 1935, the Sakdalistas launched an uprising, which was quickly and violently ‘suppressed by the military and police. Ramos ended up being arrested but released on bail, whereupon he established a new group—the Lapiang Ganap, which was openly pro-Japanese and anti-American. In general, however, minority parties have appeared from time to time. Their lite spans have been short-lived owing to their ins to muster sufficient Support from the ruling political elites and also to their inability to adapt to the established institutional practices, especially electoral politics. ‘Sources: Liang 1971, 198; Abinales and Amoroso 2005, 148-489; and Constantino 1978, 11. {))) The End of Opposition Parties and the Rise of the Hegemonic Party cals ermine Satioguiedunicetts ohuarcs By the late 1920s, the system of majority party-led government had become nena th masses of southern reality. This situation assured the dominance of the Consolidated Nationalist Party under Quezon and Osmeia and spelled the demise of the Democratic Party. The final nail in the coffin was the election of 1931 in which the NationalistPhilipine Politics ond Governance: An Introduction Party won overwhelmingly against the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the Nacionalistas continued to exercise their hegemony over the executive branch through the cabinet. In the words of Liang: ‘no Filipino member of the cabinet should be allowed to stay in case of failing to enjoy the majority confidence (i., of the party in power). The power of the Democratic Party had reached its lowest point. Finally, on January 31, 1932, the remaining members of the party voted for its formal dissolution, The dissolution of the Democratic Party in 1932 was not seen positively by the majority party “since the disappearance of opposition from without, would mean an inevitable opposition from within,” not unlike the internal struggles for party leadership a decade earlier.“ For Lande, the absence of an opposition party invariably leads to the “bifurcation” of the single dominant party.“ This meant that those who were previously Democratas “simply joined the ranks of the Nacionalistas... now all styling themselves as Nacionalistas” jons awaited them.‘ They did not have to wait where a new set of di long. By the early 1930s, the question of party and government leadership was ‘once again raised within the Nationalist Party. This culminated in the issue surrounding the Hare-Hawes-Cutting (HHC) Bill that established a blueprint for the eventual granting of independence to the Philippines. The Nacionalistas were again divided this time between the Pros, led by Osmefta, who were in favor of the HHC Bill, and the Antis, led by Quezon, who were against it. Former Democratas also lost no time in taking one of the two sides, which even further blurred the distinction between parties.” The approval of a law that would practically grant independence to the Philippines would certainly bring much prestige and power to whoever could secure it. With the HHC Bill in his pocket, Quezon would be worried that such an accomplishment would prestige to Osmefta who was the one who negotiated with the US for its passage. Rather than support a partymate, Quezon instead opposed the Bill and advocated its rejection by the Senate. He then proceeded to negotiate with the US for a new independence bill. The result was the Tydings-Medutfie (TM) Act of 1934. Bringing back the TM Act (and having it approved by the Philippine legislature) assured Quezon of his continued leadership not only of the party but of the national government as well.” The elections of June 1934 gave the ‘Antis a significant victory over the Pros with the former having seventeen seats and the latter having only six in the Senate. The results in the House of Representatives were not that much different with the Antis claiming seventy Seats as against the Pros with only nineteen seats.” This electoral victory assured Quezon of the Senate presidency once again.Chapter 3: Electoral and Party Politics in Prewar Phil OT As provided for in the TM Act, the elections to the 202-seat Constitutional Convention were held on July 10, 1934, with only about 40 percent of the qualified voters actually casting their ballots.* Nevertheless, the elections also reflected the partisan political groupings at the time with 120 coming from the ‘Antis as against sixty from the Pros (the rest were independents). The average age of the delegates was around forty. While on the surface, it looked like the convention was composed of men from diverse social and economic backgrounds, it became apparent upon closer investigation that many were actually lawyers. Amoroso (2005) observed that: many of the successful businessmen and financiers were lawyers; the jurists ‘were of course lawyers; these particular educators from the University of the Philippines were lawyers; and the experienced politicians were certainly lawyers. In fact, reading the admirably reproduced transcripts of this convention reveals many of the delegates who made speeches to be seasoned lawyers. The initial draft of the 1935 Constitution provided for a unicameral legislature. ‘A key member argued that “the present system of bicameralism in our legislature is not the creation, nor the product, nor the invention of Filipino political genius” and that “the theory of interparliamentary check” made the two chambers “careless, hasty, and irresponsible” in drafting legislation. ‘The members of the convention met from July 30, 1934, to February 8, 1935, with Senator Claro Recto presiding. Despite the fact that the convention was led by a prominent advocate of Philippine independence and nationalism, it cannot be discounted that the drafters of the constitution were heavily influenced by Quezon, being that majority of its members are composed of those associated with the Antis. Indeed, the majority members “caucused in the Senate president's office throughout the convention.... Quezon also asserted his right to open the convention... and contributed in key meetings where final language was drafted... Interestingly, one of the issues raised in the convention that was seriously debated upon was the question of women’s suffrage. Since Spanish times, women ‘were not qualified to vote. The legislature had given women the right to vote, subject to legal qualifications, by January 1, 1935. Critics and advocates of ‘women’s suffrage raised the issue in the convention. Those against the vote argued that women voting “would destroy the Filipino home" while others said that women would be contaminated by vice once they participated in politics through the vote. Those in favor of women’s suffrage insisted that they were “half of humanity” and that many already played important social functions outside the household as professionals.* ‘As a compromise solution, the convention instead mandated a piebiscite by April 1937 in which the women themselves would decide on whether or notPhilippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction a they would prefer to be given the right to vote. More than half a million women registered for the referendum. Around 490,000 voted, with only 44,307 voting against the proposal. The draft constitution was signed by President Roosevelt on May 14, 1935, as provided for in the TM Act, whereupon it was submitted to the Filipino electorate for ratification. As expected, the constitution was ratified by more than a million votes. By September 1935, the first Commonwealth election was held. Besides Quezon, there were two new parties that had candidates for Commonwealth president—the National Socialist Party led by Emilio Aguinaldo and the reincarnated Republican Party led by Gregorio Aglipay. For the vice presidency, Osmefia was the candidate of the Nacionalistas. The program of the party in power during the 1935 elections was comprehensive compared to the platforms of the other two parties.” The Nationalist Party was clearly the only major contender. As a result, Quezon won as president with 695,546 votes as against 179,402 votes for Aguinaldo and 148,441 for Aglipay. Interestingly enough, Osmefia received more votes than Quezon (811,138) as against his closest rival from the National Socialist Party who got only 51,590 votes.* In the ninety-eight-seat legislature, sixty-four seats went to the Quezon wing while nineteen seats went to the Osmefa wing of the Nationalist Party.” ‘At the time, the Commonwealth constitution provided for a single-chamber Assembly with ninety-eight seats. The constitution specified that the assembly should have no more than 120 seats. By the elections of November 11, 1941, Quezon’s and Osmefia’s mandates ‘were once again renewed under the amended provisions of the constitution. ‘Whatever was left of the opposition parties was once again defeated. The failure of the opposition is explained by Liang: First, the lack of a unified leadership strong and popular enough to challenge both President Quezon and Vice President Osmefia in any political contest; second, their inability to present any constructive program that would appeal much to the people; third, they themselves had less in common and more in conflict; fourth, the people who psychologically and subconsciously could not have accepted anyone other than either President Quezon or Vice :nt Osmefia for leadership; and fifth, practically all the public money available for political purposes had always been used only by the Nacionalistas. 8 ule se ate Parties: ‘Since Quezon had already served his first term as president for six years, he sem, 13 could only serve his second term for two more years, i.e., from November 1941 60.239. to November 1943.Chapter 3: Electool ond Party Pls ia PreworPiippnes | The Constitutional Amendments of 1940 By early 1940, a number of constitutional issues were raised within the ‘Commonwealth government pertaining to the structure and direction of the exercise of executive power. All these issues revolved around the matter of Quezon’s leadership of the government. Liang argued that because of the widespread concern of the people about the problems and responsibilities confronting the young Commonwealth, many advocated the continued leadership of Quezon. It was at this point that allowing the president to hold office for two four-year terms was raised within the Nacionalista Convention. The original 1935 Constitution provides for a single six-year term for the Commonwealth president. The question of the reelection of the president was also accompanied by the issues of reinstating a bicameral legislature and the creation of an independent commission on elections. These questions were raised in the June 18, 1940, plebiscite as regards the amendments to the 1935 Constitution, which wete as follows: 1. Ate you in favor of the establishment of a bicameral legistature to tbe known as Congress of the PI a senate whose members will be elected at large and a house of representatives whose members will be elected by districts with a salary of Php 7,200 year for each member of the senate and each member of the house? 2. Are youin favor of shortening the term of office of the president and the vice president from six years to four years with only one reelection? 3, Are you in favor of the establishment of an electoral commission, ‘composed of a president and two members, which will take charge exclusively of the enforcement and application of laws regarding Political observers at the time fell that Quezon was the one who gave the “go” signal to initiate the proposed amendments... “because he was unable to resist the desire to continue in power...” However, under the revised provisions of the constitution, Quezon could only serve two more years since the term limit is up 'to eight years only. On the day of the plebiscite, only half of the 2,270,000 registered voters cast their votes. Of this number, around three-quarters voted for the amendments. The ratified amendments eventually took effect upon the approval of US President Roosevelt. ‘Source: Liang, 219-20, 222-23, 236.hippie Pl and Governance: An Introduction a 61. Liang. Piping Paris ‘nd Polite, 223; Aros McCoy. “Ouoren's Commonweat: The Emergence of Pippin Auer. State and Society In the Prippines, 183. 163 Lang, Phiippine Panis ang Potten 22223. “a. tbe 224 5. Absalon and Amoroso, State and” Society in the 67. 1oe, 107. The End of Party Politics and the Beginning of “Partyless” Democracy Shortly after the amendments were ratified, Quezon apparently felt no need to continue with the kind of party-led politics that had guided the govemment for the past three decades or so. In July 1940 he declared that the country “must discard the theory that democracy cannot function without political parties.”*' Thus began the period of so-called partyless democracy that was also, curiously, “president- centered." Quezon even went to the extent of denouncing political parties: ‘as among the most harmful evils of democratic government, and which threaten the continued existence of democracy itself [arguing that] it is party politics... that causes inefficiency in government... it is party spirit that weakens the government and makes it incapable of facing difficult situations. Along with his condemnation of party politics, Quezon also discarded the idea that democratic government cannot exist without an opposition. According to Abinales and Amoroso, it was not in Quezon’s character “to accept limitations on his power..." Such has been one of the key founding principles of Philippine party politics. Party Politics in the Prewar Legislature In the wake of the jones Law of 1916, the commission became the Senate whose members were almost all elected while the assembly was transformed into the House of Representatives. The House speaker continued to be Osmefia until 1922) while Quezon became the president of the Senate. The Nacionalista- dominated legislature lost no time in arrogating upon its leadership and members vast powers within both chambers. The presiding officers of both houses: were given the power respectively to name all chairmen of the committees, to control the contingent funds, to appoint members to work during recess of the legislature, and to require, if necessary, the services of any other employee of the Philippine government * The opposition Democratic Party had very litle say in the way that things were run in the legislature. However, Liang observed that: no line of demarcation could be drawn between Partido Nacionalista and the Partido Democrata except that the latter being the opposition often charged the former for abandoning the inmediatisia stand or the granting of immediate and otal independence to the Philippines) and unconditional acceptance of the Jones Law. The Democratas were in this respect a litle more radical than the Necionalistas, but this difference was of no practical significance."(Chapter 3: Electoral and Party Polis in Prowar Philippi Since its establishment in 1907, the Philippine Assembly (and after 1916, both the Senate and the House of Repiesentatives) was dominated by members of the Nationalist Party; it was not surprising for it to be led by its prominent party members, most notably, Quezon and Osmefia. However, personality differences and ambitions, combined with the absence of a strong doctrinal or ideological opposition, led to the party's weakening of internal cohesion, dominant as it was for almost the entire prewar period. 1) The Roots of Party Politics, Power, and Patronage Prior to the coming of the Americans and the establishment of democratic electoral political institutions, the Philippines is said to have been comprised largely of towns dominated, most commonly, by “two constellations, or groups of constellations of families, whose rivalry for local social prominence, often extending back for generations, had acquired political overtones during the years of Spanish rule." Not surprisingly, in the beginning of American occupation, party “affiliation was based on affinities of blood, friendship, and regionalism as well as on personal expedience." Under the Americans, suffrage was eventually extended and broadened by way of reducing the qualifications for voters as well as increasing the number of public offices subject to electoral competition. During the time of Spanish colonial occupation, much of the colonial administration was undertaken by appointed officials (usually also Spaniards). In contrast, during the first decade ‘of American “tutelage,” provincial governors were elected as early as 1903; in 1907, legislative seats became elective. Such higher positions were also accompanied by higher levels of power and prestige than municipal offices. ‘They were obviously more difficult to acquire as the competition for these elective positions became more intense. Lande concludes that these contests “tended to attract and in practice were confined to men of considerable wealth.”” By the 1930s, the lack of ideological differences between parties became more pronounced. What was important was for a party to obtain power by way of electoral mandate. Parties that are “out of power are extremely vulnerable to disintegration.”” Such was the case of the Federal Party of the early 1900s, the Progressive Party of the 1910s, and the Democratic Party of the 1920s and 1930s. This was because there were no compelling ideological reasons for politicians to be loyal to one party. Even the so-called platform of the Federal Party in the early 1900s was radically altered from one that advocated annexation and/or statehood to one that also pushed for eventual independence albeit a US-sponsored one. Political parties in prewar Philippines were invariably led by the wealthy local elites. The goal of these local elites was to secure national leadership 68, Lando, Loaders, Factions, nd Parton 25. 168, Constantin. The Pitp- nos: A Past Revie, 325 See ‘so Paredes, Phippine Colona) of "70, Lande, Leaders, Factions, ng Parties, 30. "1. $0,Philippine Politics ond Governance: An Introduction a positions. This consolidation of leadership was epitomized in the rise to power of Quezon. Abinales and Amoroso observed that “the combination of political decentralization {and to some extent broadened electoral contestation] and centralized state capacity ‘produced’ Manuel Quezon."”* Ina way, these elites were actually consolidating their power by way of the formation of national party organizations, most notably the Nationalist Party. ‘The broadening of the right of suffrage to include a relatively significant portion of the population combined with the opening of more local as well as national positions for electoral competition also contributed to the growth of national parties. IB Guide questions 1. What factors would account for the pragmatic and non-ideological nature of parties that emerged during the prewar period? 2. What conditions led to the emergence of the Nationalist Party as the dominant electoral party of the prewar period? 3. How were parties able to tale control of the prewar government? Glossary Anti-Sedition Law — the law passed Ly the Philippine Commission in 1901 that punishes persons who advocate independence or separation from US sovereignty even by peaceful means. Antis - the group against the Hare Hawes Cutting Bill of the early 1930s. It is a faction within the Nationalist Party led by Quezon who eventually worked for the passage of the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934. Collectivistas - the faction within the Nationalist Party that was allied with Quez:»n in 1922. They considered themselves in favor of collective leadership (under Quezon). Their protagonist was the Unipersonalistas under Osmefia. Federal Party ~ the first Philippine political party established in 1900 by Trinidad Pardo de Tavera. Its platform was anchored on the eventual entry of the Philippines into the Union. Gobernadorcillo — the elective administrative post of the town during the Spanish period. Jones Law ~also know as the Philippine Organic Act passed by the US Congress in 1916, the law called for the election of the members of the Philippine Commission transforming it into the Philippine Senate.Chapter 3: Electoral ond Party Politics in Prewar Philippines aE Nationalist Party - the party that was founded in March 1907 under the leadership of notable personalities such as Manuel L. Quezon and Sergio Osmejia. Partyless Democracy — the principle of ending the importance or influence of political parties in the administration of the government. It was adopted by Quezon to propagate a more president-centered kind of administration. Philippine Assembly — the country’s first legislative body established in 1907. By 1916, it became the House of Representatives, Philippine Commission — a body, created by the Americans in 1899, composed of persons appointed by the US president and working in an advisory capacity to the governor-general. By 1916, the Philippine Commission. became the Senate composed of elected members. Principales — generally, the principal men of the town. Pros — the faction within the Nationalist Party allied with Osmena and in favor of the conditions for Philippine independence as provided for in the Hare Hawes Cutting Bilt of the early 1930s. ‘Sakdalista Party — sakkdal means to accuse or put on trial. The party was established by Benigno Ramos as a third party that eventually had a mass following especially from central and southern Luzon. The party achieved some degree of electoral success but eventually died out after it initiated an uprising that was violently crushed by the government. Terceristas — established in the early 1910s, they considered themselves a third party to the two contending political groups at the time—the Nationalist Party and the Democratic Party. ‘Tydings-Mcdutfie (TM) Act — the bill that was substituted to the Hare Hawes Cutting Bill and was passed by the US Congress in 1934. It provides for the eventual granting of independence to the Philippines. Unipersonalistas — the group allied with Osmefia and believed to be in favor of “personal” and single leadership of the Nationalist Party in 1922. Bibliography Abinales, Patricio, and Donna Amoroso. State and Society in the Philippines. Pasig City: Anvil, 2005. Amoroso, Donna. “Changing Notions of Nation and Representation at Constitutional Congresses of the Philippines, 1898 and 1935.” Paper presented at the “Workshop on Political Reform and Charter Change in the Philippines: Perspectives from the Nation and the Region,” Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore; Philippine SocialPhilippine Poltis and Gov nce: An Infroduction Science Council; and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, Antipolo City (uly 8- 9, 2005). Bocar, Juan. “Address on the Unicameral System of Legislature,” Constitutional Convention Record 14 (August 16, 1934), 343-50, as cited by Amoroso 2005, 16. Constantino, Renato. The Philippines: A Past Revisited, Quezon City: Renato Constantino, 1975. Constantino, Renato. The Philippines: The Continuing Past. Quezon City: The Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1978. Hayden, Joseph. “The Philippines: An Experiment in Democracy.” Atlantic Monthly (March 1926), as cited by Liang 1971. Lande, Carl. Leaders, Factions, and Parties: The Structure of Philippine Politics. Monograph Series no. 6, Southeast Asia Studies, Yale University, 1965. Liang, Dapen. Philippine Parties and Politics: A Historical Study of National Experience in Democracy. New edition; completely revised and enlarged. San Francisco: The Gladstone Company, 1971. McCoy, Alfred. “Quezon’s Commonwealth: The Emergence of Philippine Authoritarianism.” In Paredes 1989, 114-60. Paredes, Ruby, ed. Philippine Colonial Democracy. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1989. ~ ”) Further Reading Constantino, Renato. The Philippines: A Past Revisited. Quezon City: Renato ‘Constantino, 1975. Franco, Jennifer. Campaigning for Democracy: Grassroots Citizenship Movements, Less-than-Democratic Elections, and Regime Transition in the Philippines. Quezon City: Institute for Popular Democracy, 2001. Hague, Rod, and Martin Harrop. Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Heywood, Andres. Politics. New York: Palgrave, 2002. Hutchcroft, Paul, and Joel Rocamora. “Strong Demands and Weak Institutions: ‘The Origins and Evolution of the Democratic Deficit in the Philippines.” Journal of Asian Studies 3 (2003): 259-92. Kerkvliet, Benedict, “Contested Meanings of Elections in the Philippines.” In The Politics of Elections in Southeast Asia, edited by R.H. Taylor. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.haptor 3: lcorl ond Party Poi in Prowar Philipines 7 Michel, Robert, Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. New York: Collier, 1962. Paredes, Ruby, ed., Philippine Colonial Democracy. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1989. Steinberg, David, Philippine Collaboration in World War Il. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1967.