10 biggest losers in the 2010 national elections

 

10. Rebel soldiers

Trillanes won it big when he got a Senate seat in 2007. But after one of his court sessions, he suddenly thought of checking into Hotel Intercontinental Makati even without reservation… once a rebel soldier, always a rebel even if elected as senator. Sorry Gen. Danny Lim and Col. Ariel Querubin… we already have too many fugitive senators (where is Ping, anyway?)

 

9. Lakas Kampi CMD

The first sign was already alarming, Lakas Kampi took outsiders (non party members) as candidates for president and vice president and they were not even very popular (Gibo’s relative popularity only came after people heard him talk… if he started talking three years ago he might have won). 

 

Hit with defections, Lakas Kampi disintegrated in the last few stages of the campaign. It might also disappear into oblivion in the future. Political parties in the Philippines are personality based, usually one prominent individual or family bank-rolling the candidacies of local politicians (remember Gibo is no longer an official of the party).  I am not sure if GMA is willing to share their ill-gotten wealth to ensure her political control for the next few years. The size of their amassed wealth will allow them to do it but I am not sure by the size of greed.

 

8. Partylist system

Other than being used by traditional politicians to enter congress if they cannot be elected in their own districts, the much abused partylist system took another hit in 2010. They allowed national candidates to use their air time for their ads. It will not be surprising if hundreds (or thousands) of partylist groups will register in the future only to sell their airtime to other national candidates. And soon we will have a ballot longer than the voting queue (poor PCOS machine). 

 

7. Bayan Muna, Satur Ocampo and Liza Maza

A lot of people scratched their heads when they learned that street parliamentarians and left-leaning partylist congressmen Satur Ocampo and Liza Maza were included in the senatorial line up of one of the country’s biggest capitalists. Their problems started to mount, first they have to share the stage and dance with Bongbong Marcos. Then, Liza Maza, a feminist and women’s rights activist had to endure watching Willie Revillame’s Kendeng Girls during their campaign. When the issues of lying, stealing and possible cheating were raised against Manny Villar, they were muted. For a “rallyist” and a “street protester” to be muted is like a butterfly without wings (with 89% of votes tallied, Maza and Ocampo were in rank 25 and 26, respectively with over 3 million votes).

 

6. Loren Legarda

In 2004, Loren got more than 14 million votes. In 2010, she’ll probably end up with a little less than 4 million votes. What is wrong with Loren? She was a Lakas stalwart until it was clear that GMA will not pick her as VP in 2004, so she jumped ship and ran with FPJ. In 2010, she was hoping to run as president under the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC) but it seems the NPC has other plans. She slid to VP but her party’s presidential candidate (Chiz) backed out. Will she return to Lakas and run with Gibo or run with Erap (whom she helped oust by crying on national TV) or with Villar (whom she accused of corruption in connection with the C5 controversy)? She ran with Villar and the rest was history. Nevertheless, she will probably be reelected senator in 2013.

 

5. Villar Campaign team

There is a thin line between stretching the truth and lying. To say “Manny Villar was born an ordinary citizen” is true; to say “he was dirt poor and he swam in garbage” is stretching the truth. To say that his “brother died because they do not have money to buy medicines” when in fact he died because there was no cure for leukemia at that time is a lie. The campaign team also failed when they instructed Villar to issue blanket denials instead of answering issues point by point. If you are the frontrunner, you have the luxury to say “all these are black propaganda” and “all the accusations are politically motivated.” But if you are the runner up, you have to do more and prove your innocence way beyond reasonable doubt (but then again it is difficult to defend yourself if you are truly guilty and you might end up digging a deeper hole the more you speak).

 

Finally, in the advent of the internet and social networking sites (this is the first election in the Facebook and Twitter era), you can no longer rely on paid columnists and experts to defend/ promote you. Before, a professor (of public administration, perhaps) can come on TV and pretend to be unbiased and make statements saying that this candidate is good or bad. With the internet, it is very easy to search and retrieve articles in the past. Extremely biased views from paid consultants of certain candidates can be easily checked and cross referenced. A campaign is effective when ordinary netizens started copying and pasting them on their facebook and twitter accounts even if they were not paid to do so.

 

4. Mike Velarde

He was once a king-maker (he successfully endorsed GMA and Erap). He played with the idea of becoming king (president)… but with very low ratings he decided to remain a king maker. But then again, his seemingly anointed king (and business partner) was quickly losing ground in the surveys … and at the last minute, he decided not to play king maker anymore. Neither king nor king maker, Velarde will probably retain some political clout but he can quickly become a court jester unless he does something dramatic (or miraculous).

 

3. Dick Gordon

You were running in a marathon. While you are miles behind the frontrunners you badmouth everyone, the spectators, frontrunners, officials, media people and even the PA system. In elections, there are losers but some choose to lose in style, even managing to stage comebacks. Alfredo Lim, Raul Roco, Miriam Santiago and Ping Lacson all managed to win a senate seat after their failed presidential bids. I am not sure about Dick (I already saw a “like-page” for “Gibo for Senator in 2013”)… but then again, Filipinos are forgetful and forgiving. Three years from now I will not be surprised when people say “ah, tumakbo pala syang presidente nun, sayang si Roco binoto ko.”

 

2. Manny Villar

A lot of things will be written about him and his failure and I choose not to add except for one note: Hiding from the media a few days before the election makes you look like a loser.

 

1. Mar Roxas

Even if he finally wins by a “hairline”, Roxas will still be the biggest loser in this election. The thin margin makes him (and Binay) out of the running for 2016, unless they really work wonders for the next six year. He can probably win a Senate seat in 2013 and remain president of the Liberal Party but he should recognize that his opportunity has passed and must give way to other party members. He should also strive hard to make the Liberal Party more mature and less personality based. And similar to Villar, hiding from the media a few days after the election makes you look like a “such a loser, yaya!”.

5 disgusting things in Philippine politics (no. 4: Rape)

Coming in no. 4 for my list of 5 disgusting things in Philippine politics is the case of "Filipina "Nicole",  American US Soldier Daniel Smith and whatever happened before and after that incident in Subic.

Rape is typically defined as forced, unwanted sexual intercourse or sex without mutual consent. We may never really know what really happened that fateful day. According to a Makati judge, it was rape. But according to our Court of Appeals, it was not rape, it was a romantic encounter.

But more than just sex, rape is about power. The act involves the desire of individuals to dominate over others. Hence, rape is found in almost all societies, regardless of economic or income class and regardless of political or social structure. It is used a weapon in wars and conflicts. We also see rape used against vulnerable members of the society, like children and women. Because rape is more about power, it should not be a mystery why most rape cases were perpetrated by people whom the victims knew.

Looking at the Subic incident at a bigger context, both Nicole and Smith can be seen as victims. They may have been used as pawns in an international chess game played by the US and the Philippines. You may look at it this way, Bush felt betrayed by GMA's decision to pull out of Iraq. But GMA found a bargaining chip, a US soldier that can be jailed in a Philippine prison. This is a huge embarrassment for Bush's global war on terror. A bargain was struck, Smith is convicted but jailed inside the US Embassy.

Then, here comes the Obama Administration with less focus on war but more on the economy. Nobody really knows what GMA and Obama talked about when he called, but a lot of things happened after that phone call. Smith's conviction was reversed and he was immediately whisked back to the US.

Obama could have say any of the two
1. "okay, jail Smith, we don't care" 
2. "okay... I don't know what is the deal between you and Bush, but please free him now and we will include Filipino veterans in our recovery package"

Whatever really happened, what we know is that Nicole is in the US right now with her American groom-to-be who is also a soldier. Smith is also in the US with no military career and a dishonorable discharge.

While in the Philippines, we are at odds on how to deal with this issue. When economic, political and social realities clash with the quest for truth, justice and the rule of law, where do we draw the line? In other countries, debate ensues regarding principles, laws and direction the country will go to. Here, we focus on the drama of the individuals involved. (too much telenovela is bad for our country's future)

There is a very thin line dividing "blaming the victim" and "asking people to take precautions, so that they will not be a victim." It is true that nobody wakes up in the morning hoping to be raped. But you cannot also blame people when they say that "if she were not in that bar, drinking and dancing as if there is no tomorrow, she would not end up in that situation." This thin line, our Justice Secretary always carelessly crosses.

But what can we do, as long as his remarks can add up to the drama, then we can comfortably watch our evening news and our primetime telenovelas even if there are no clear distinctions between them.

5 disgusting things in Philippine politics (no. 5)

April is a busy month... summer vacations, out-of-town trips and numerous adventures. But no matter how frustrated you get with the way the weather ruins all your plans, Philippine politics undoubtedly is far from being frustrating, it is disgusting. Here are five of the most disgusting things in Philippine politics:

5. GMA legacy "investments"
When we went to Los Baños, Laguna, we stayed at Trace Suites, a hotel inside Trace Colleges- Los Baños Campus. It is where the swimming and diving competitions for the most recent ASEAN Games were held. It also hosted the swimsuit competition for the Miss Earth Beauty Pageant. We were surprised and amazed on how a small, relatively unheard college could afford such a expensive aquatics facility and hotel complex.

When we learned that Trace College is owned by the family of PAGCOR Chairman Efraim Genuino, all our questions are answered. We were surprised further when our friends from UPLB told us that the real owners of the hotel and college is the First Family.

When we went to Coron, Palawan, our tour guide told us that the governor, allegedly in partnership with the First Family is building a new hotel and resort complex in Coron (they are referred to as The Boracay Group).

And a friend who just came back from Mindanao, told me that a new chain of gasoline station sprung up all over Mindanao, Phoenix Petroleum. Its biggest endorser/part-owner is Manny Pacquiao. However, rumor  has it that the real owners of the gas company is... the First Family.

Is this GMA's legacy??? Crony investments similar to what the Marcoses did? Simply disgusting....

Presidential Legacy

After George W. Bush became the 43rd US President in 2001, he said that his father's presidency (George H.W. Bush, the 41st President) failed, mainly because daddy-Bush was not reelected in 1992.

To win and re-win the presidency, Bush employed the services of Karl Rove, the engineer and mastermind behind the most vicious and dirtiest campaigns in modern US history. In 2001, Rove launched an attack on John McCain, Bush's strongest contender for nomination of the Republican Party. While campaigning for reelection against John Kerry in 2004, they discredited Kerry's service record during the Vietnam War including the multiple medals he received.

At the end of Baby-Bush's presidency, he is perceived as one of the most unpopular presidents ever.  But baby-Bush can still be considered as an achiever compared to his dad. Daddy-Bush launched the Iraq War, Baby-Bush launched two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Daddy-Bush left the economy weak, Baby-Bush wrecked the economy into recession. Daddy-Bush failed to capture Saddam Hussein, Baby-Bush captured Saddam Hussein but failed to get Osama bin Laden. Other than that, Baby-Bush can boast of other legacies including his failures regarding Katrina, Guantanamo, sub-prime mortgages, financial market collapse, debt and deficit, and the list continues (no comparison for daddy-Bush).

With all the wrong intentions to become the president, baby-Bush's legacy is still debatable, whether he is "the worst president ever" or just "one of the worst" or "the worst so far".

Back home, with a more than a year left in the GMA administration, I wonder what her legacy would be. On the negative side, I think GMA is really not worse compared to past presidents. GMA failed in battling poverty, unemployment, homelessness, corruption, cronyism, nepotism and others, just like her predecessors. We still have a failed agrarian reform project, no centralized land registration bureau, cumbersome and inadequate social security programs, peace in Mindanao and the countryside is still elusive, just like when Aguinaldo proclaimed independence in 1898. 

Nevertheless, Marcos definitely has the worst record in terms of corruption, human rights and temper. But it can be mainly due to the length of their presidencies. When GMA steps down in 2010, she has been president for 9 years, the second longest in Philippine history after Marcos' 21 years in power.

On the positive side, I think the following are GMA's greatest legacies (in no particular order):
1. E-VAT (Expanded Value-Added Tax Law raised the rate from 10% to 12% and widened its scope)
Th  E-VAT helped diffuse the impending fiscal crisis the Philippines chronically faces. VAT is relatively easy to compute and collect. As a consumption tax, it follows the principle of taxing people based on what they take out of the economy instead on their contributions to the economy, i.e., VAT discourages consumption while income tax discourages work.

One of the greatest advantages of the E-VAT is its imposition on oil, a highly unpopular decision avoided by Aquino, Ramos and Estrada. VAT on oil is good for several reasons:
i. Richer people (private vehicle owners) pay more compared to poorer people (those who take public transport).
ii. It serves as a pollution tax, thus discourages the use of gas-guzzling SUVs and encourages walking, biking and the use of mass transport systems.
iii. It is the only way that the highly informal transportation industry is taxed (most public utility vehicle operators, drivers and owners don't pay income tax... but I still cannot use this argument when talking to a tip-asking-taxi-driver).

With the unpopular E-VAT already in place, the next president should personally thank GMA for it. Let us just hope that E-VAT will not be scrapped due to populist tendencies of politicians. 

2. Holiday economics (the practice of moving national holidays to a Monday or Friday)
As a promdi, the holiday economics allowed me to spend more time with my family in Bulacan. It also helped me and my friends plan out-of-town trips, (we have visited numerous places and islands around the country). With tourism, income and wealth is distributed more equitably around the country. With tourism interlinked with numerous industries such as land, sea and air transport, food, hospitality and local handicraft, the multiplier effect is much much bigger. Aside from providing numerous jobs, tourism allows people from different places to interact and learn from each other.

3. RORO (Roll-in Roll-out) Facilities
As an archipelago with 7,107 islands (is the Kalayaan Group of Islands included in this count?), the transport of goods and services within the country is hampered by high cost and the lack of infrastructure. The RORO System lowers cost, minimizes spoilage of agricultural products, promotes tourism, increases productivity and brings people together. I really wonder why this project was not launched earlier by other administrations. 

4. Bridges, Airports and Public Infrastructure
Going around the country, we saw the numerous infrastructure programs launched by this administration. Although these projects are typically overpriced due to multi-billion dollar worth of kickbacks, the final output is still very useful.

Aside from being an archipelago, each island is dotted with several rivers, lakes, mountains and hills, making transportation difficult. It is sometimes surprising how much improvement a new road can bring to far flung town. Bridges that connect communities to major markets, can lead to substantial increase in income for farmers and craftsmen. These were complimented with new and expanded expressway systems and airports.

I most excited with the new mass rail transit systems (North Rail, South Rail and new lines of MRT), that I hope can be finished much sooner.

5. Bayani Fernando's Metro Manila
Bayani Fernando at the MMDA is the longest serving member of GMA cabinet after his appointment in 2002. Although his tactics are controversial, his methods are unpopular and his decisions and gut instinct questionable, he has brought so much order into Metro Manila's chaotic nature.

Most of his projects were initially greeted with skepticism, protests and sometimes outright rejection. However, he pushes through with pure political will. Way back in college (early-2000s), I can distinctly remember the we were often stuck in traffic for 30 minutes or more in-front of Muñoz market in Quezon City. That is no longer the case, thanks to the much derided U-turn slots.

I don't agree with all of Bayani's projects, some are downright wasteful while some are obviously kickback-friendly. Bayani might be corrupt or Machiavellian, but he has done so much for Metro Manila that I hope he can be MMDA chairman forever. And I salute GMA for not axing the controversial, unpopular but very effective MMDA Chairman.

Now, if only he can remove those kotong traffic enforcers and implement a bus-scheme similar to those in Hong Kong and Singapore...

Obama in, GMA out. McCain in, GMA stays?

Iraq War. Historic high oil prices. Sub-prime mortgage crisis. Philippine occupation.
What do they have in common? They all happened while a Republican is in the White House.

Flashback: 1901
US is an emerging US power. US President William McKinley, a Republican, annexed the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam after winning the Spanish-American War.

As a colony, the highest government offices in the Philippine Islands were all held by Americans. This continued to the next decade as Republicans continue to rule the US. While the Philippine-American War was ongoing, the government implemented "Benevolent Assimilation", intended to teach "brown monkeys" civility.

Things changed in 1913, when Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat became president. The US government changed its track in dealing with their colonies, a series of policy changes which eventually led to Philippine independence. Why the shift in policy? The Democrats realized that it was too costly to maintain the Philippine Islands as a colony.

In 1933, a Democrat-led US Congress passed the Hares-Hawes-Cutting Law overriding a veto by Pres. Herbert Hoover, a Republican. It was the first law dealing with the decolonization of the Philippines. However, the Philippine Senate led by Manuel Quezon rejected the law.

In 1934, a revised version of the law was passed, the Tydings-McDuffie Law or the Philippine Independence Act. It was signed by Pres. Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat. It led to the creation of the Commonwealth of the Philippines in 1935 with a ten-year transition period before full independence.

Interrupted by World War 2, there were talks that the Philippines should not be independent in 1945. But with a Democrat US president, Harry Truman, the Philippines became independent in 1946.

When Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law in 1971, the White House was occupied by Republican Richard Nixon. When Martial Law was lifted in January 1981, the White House was occupied by Democrat Jimmy Carter.

The ousting of Marcos might have happened earlier if Democrats continued to occupy the White House. However, because Republican Ronald Reagan was president from 1981-1989, we had to endure more of Marcos. Marcos was ousted by People Power in 1986, but Reagan  allowed Marcos to live in exile in Hawaii.

Back to the present:
Iraq is the new Philippines (remember that Macario Sakay, the last Filipino general to surrender to Americans, was called an Insurgent). Republican John McCain is against pull-out from Iraq. Democrat Obama is calling for an end to American occupation of Iraq.

Republicans have a long history of keeping loyal dictators in power as long as they support the US against whatever it is fighting... communism then and terrorism now.

GMA supported the War in Iraq and she was elected in May 2004. In July 2004, sure that she "won" the election, she ordered a pull-out of Philippine troops from Iraq so that kidnap victim Angelo delaCruz can be released.

Now, here is where the conspiracy theorist in me gets excited. Remember when GMA went to the US and tried to meet both US candidates... she was able to talk in person to McCain but not to Obama (he called her instead)...

What are the chances... Obama in White House in 2008, GMA out of Malacanang in 2010. McCain in White House, GMA stays...

Historical Sources:
Corpuz, O.D. (1997). An Economic History of the Philippines. Quezon City, UP Press.

Constantino, R. (1996). Ang Bagong Lumipas. Quezon City, UP Press.

Promoting Housing for All

In her 2008 SONA, GMA asked Congress to allow SSS and GSIS to increase the allowable amount of loans for housing from the current 10% limit. This is to address here earlier promise of housing for everyone.

In her previous SONAs, she talked about housing in terms of increasing the amount of loans provided by Pag-ibig, the state owned housing lending corporation. She also mentioned the number of housing units constructed and distributed by the National Housing Authority.

The government’s approach to housing is archaic, the state directly involved in the production of housing units or the provision of housing loans.  Except for the city-states of Singapore and Hong Kong where you can literally count the population, direct provision of housing by the government typically lead to disastrous consequences.

If the government intends to promote housing, the government should instead cut taxes that impede the housing market. This includes the 6% Capital Gains Tax (CGT), which is a misnomer.  In other countries the CGT is imposed on the increase in property values or capital gains. Only in the Philippines that the capital “GAINS” tax is imposed on the entire selling price.

Aside from the CGT, the seller also has to pay 5% real estate agent’s commission, 1.5% documentary stamp tax and legal fees. The buyer, on the other hand, pays for the local transfer tax (0.5% - 0.75%), registration and notarial fees and his lawyer.

Because of the prohibitive costs, a prospective seller is discouraged from selling the property unless the actual gains are enough to cover all the taxes involved in selling the property. For instance, if the value of your property rose by 15% but upon selling it you have to pay around 13% for taxes and commission, then you are left with only 2% net income. Because property owners are discouraged from selling their property, the enormous housing deficit worsens, leading to more expensive properties.  

With the costs of buying and selling properties in the Philippines among the highest in Asia, it is no wonder why there are so many homelessness people and squatters here.

Removing or reducing the 6% CGT would not lead to much tax loss anyway. According to a study in 2001, sellers report a lower selling price (by as much as 2 times lower the actual selling price) to minimize the CGT.  The resulting transparency in real estate transactions is more than enough to compensate from the minuscule tax loss. Moreover, if sellers report the real price of the property, the government will be able to collect more property taxes which are more sustainable.

There are other measures needed to promote housing including simplifying the property registration process. In the Philippines, you have to deal with 3 government offices for registration (the City or Municipal Office, the BIR and the Land Registration Authority). The process is completed in 3 months to a year depending on how much you are willing to produce for grease money. In New Zealand, you deal with only one office and the registration process is completed in two days.

To promote housing, abolish the 6% CAPITAL GAINS TAX!

P.S.
After an eternity, the proposed bill creating The Land Registration Authority passed the committee level in the House of Representatives. I wonder how many eternities we have to wait before it is enacted into a law.

5 Reasons why Gloria would not bomb Glorietta?

After the news regarding the Glorietta blast came out, several groups raised the idea that it was a diversionary tactic by the government. Aside from the fact that the first person who raised the “diversionary tactic angle” was the only person I saw on TV planning to bomb Glorietta, i.e. the Honorable Senator Trillanes, there are several reasons why I don’t buy that angle…

1. The effects of the blast are too costly that the government cannot afford it. The government has exerted a lot of effort to attract foreign investments into the Philippines. A bombing in Metro Manila would undo several years of hard work. And it would take several years of peace and order before investors forget the blast. The blast will adveresely affect investment inflow, economic growth, the stock market and the real estate market.

2. They say that the blast is meant to distract the public from the political issues hounding the administration. If someone can pinpoint a time period when the president, any president of any country, is not embroiled in a political issue, then I will campaign for Trillanes next election. GMA has been in more serious political issues than now. The people are actually tired of corruption issues and grandstanding senators.

3. Typically, nobody is hurt in diversionary tactic bombings. Remember the staged Enrile assassination during the Marcos Regime used to justify Martial Law (for my age-group, read your history books), nobody was actually hurt other than the bullets and the car.

4. They said the bombing was planned so that the government can use the Anti-Terror Law, a.k.a. the Human Security Act. According to government officials, the law was severely watered down that it is very costly and difficult to implement. It is easier for the government to charge the bombing suspects with illegal possession of explosives.

5. I still don’t see the military guarding malls and other public places. If the blast was planned so that GMA can declare emergency powers calling in the military, then the military should be in the streets by now.

Echoing the call of Edj, please tell the Honorable Senator Trillanes to please shut up. At the least, please think before speaking. Come to think of it, we have no-talk, no-think senators (Lapid, Gringo, and Bong), no-think, just-talk senators (Jinggoy, Trillanes) and talk-and-talk-and-talk senators (Miriam, Ping, Chiz, Allan Peter…).