Category: poverty

cheating

i disagree with conrado de quiros that

… something has changed, and that is the public expectation of cheating. Few now seriously consider we’d be back in Arroyo’s time when it could be expected as a matter of course. Though concerns have been raised about the source code, some clamoring for it to be made public, they have not been of the scale or stridence they were three years ago. And unless there are glaring or eye-popping gaps between expectation and result, the elections will generally be taken, like the previous one, as reasonably clean. 

the only reason that public expectation of cheating is lower than usual is that the voting masses don’t really understand the gobbledygook of source codes and PCOS machines and CF cards, and how they were quite likely manipulated in 2010, and will likely be manipulated on may 13.   this is one of those things about which the public have not been adequately informed, hence, they are in no position to conclude that cheating will or will not happen.  this is one of those times when voters trust their leaders, their candidates, to show them the way, and since candidates aren’t complaining, neither are the voters.  i guess candidates want to stay on the good side of the brilliantes comelec’?

only in the philippines.  in effect, we are taking brillantes’ word for it that the source code and PCOS machines and CF cards can be trusted to count our votes honestly, correctly, never mind that these machines have not undergone rigorous examination and testing and have not been pronounced safe and tamper-proof by our own IT experts, and never mind that brillantes is wanting in credibility, as jarius bondoc intimates..

• Brillantes was election-lawyering for Noynoy Aquino and Jojo Binay in 2010 when the Comelec wrongfully leased 76,000 PCOS units from Smartmatic. “Wrongfully,” because the Venezuelan impostor was a mere system integrator — a middleman. Still the Comelec paid it a whopping P7.2 billion. The Comelec also hired disreputable SysTest, whose license had been suspended for two years for testing fraud.

• Enter Brillantes as Comelec chairman in January 2011. That was when his law firm was collecting P8 million from Smartmatic in behalf of a secret client. Too, the Comelec then was contemplating to buy from Smartmatic 5,000 PCOS units for P600 million for the Muslim Mindanao election (later postponed to synchronize with Election 2013). It’s unclear if Brillantes knew about Smartmatic’s con game and went along with it, or if the firm fooled him too. In March 2012 he bought Smartmatic’s 82,000 earlier leased PCOS units, for P1.8 billion….

and what about this, still from de quiros:  “… unless there are glaring or eye-popping gaps between expectation and result, the elections will generally be taken, like the previous one, as reasonably clean.”

whose expectation?  eye-popping to whom?  the prez?  the veep?  or the voters?

it’s unfortunate that results will be under a cloud of doubt, obviously, for lack of transparency.  unfortunate because there is now a rising consciousness about dynastic politics and how decades of it has only mired the nation in poverty.  it would be great if the results of the may 13 elections were credible, every vote honestly counted, so we could see whether or not such rising awareness has reached significant heights.

if, as in 2010, the usual famous names top yet again the senate polls, regardless of party or no-platform, that would tell us that mainstream and social media and civil society are failing to communicate the message, failing to reach and connect with, the voting masses.  either that, or the voting masses are so poor and so grateful for a sack of rice or free celfone load or a few hundreds in cash, a matter of life and death possibly, so the attitude is, a little now is better than nothing, until the next disaster of an election.

it would be a fantastic surprise if, despite vote-buying and cheating, a few, or even just one or two, new or not-too-famous names were to make it to the winning 12.  what a wonderful message that would send.

poverty and elections

… This is what has been largely missing in the campaign for the 2013 elections—a serious debate on desirable strategies for achieving national prosperity.

We have been treated to endless mantras about free public education, stable jobs, lower prices, lower taxes, etc.

I have yet to hear anyone talk about the need for frugality and sharing—in the light of our limited resources and the scandalous disparities in wealth and income that divide our people.

Everyone seems to accept the primacy of economic growth as a national goal, with little regard for the environmental consequences.

Everyone seems to concede that the ultimate goal of every Filipino is to earn as much money as possible to be able to satisfy desires that the market itself incessantly creates.

We talk of the need to radically change our way of life. Elections should be the occasion for discussing what exactly needs changing, why, and how we can all take part in the effort.

~ Randy David

Why the Philippines Failed?

… In Why Nations Fail, economists Acemoglu and Robinson provide a brilliant explanation on how progress and development is largely a function of ‘inclusive’ — as opposed to extractive — governance. Using their dichotomy, the Philippines clearly falls within the extractive category, whereby the core-elite have blocked appropriate policies, which would have made the country a true democracy, anchored by a large middle class, an entrepreneurial sector, and strong institutions spurring growth and innovation. Therefore, in many ways, the developmental failure of the Philippines has something to do with its weak and divided state, which seldom had the right ‘policy space’ to make optimal economic decisions. Throughout the post-War period, the Philippine state has either been at the mercy of entrenched elites, pushing for particularistic interests and blocking policies/legislations aimed at national development, or international financial institutions (IFIs), which have prescribed counterproductive policies, notably ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’ (SAPs), causing tremendous poverty, social dislocation, agricultural decline and ‘de-industrialization’ across the developing world. Sometimes, the Philippines was at the mercy of both...

~ Richard Javad Heydarian

Paths to change

By Calixto V. Chikiamco

OUR CURRENT situation seems hopeless. Our economic oligarchy is powerful, rich beyond imagination. It controls conglomerates that reach into almost every aspect of Filipinos’ lives, its unassailable position protected by law or other barriers to entry. More importantly, its rent-seeking power provides self-reinforcing means for enrichment and impregnable authority: it can penetrate, influence, and manipulate the weak state and its institutions almost at will. In other words, it can buy off or influence politicians, judges, bureaucrats, and media organizations to thwart change, prevent competition, and extract more economic favors or rent through the weak state.

The state of our politics also provides reasons for hopelessness. Whereas the political class is supposed to be distinct from the economic oligarchy in that the former must at least answer to the people through democratic elections, that has not been so. Cheating, vote buying, and voter intimidation through private armies have undermined the true expression of the people’s will. Also, an almost non-existent party system with politicians changing parties and positions at the drop of a hat undermines democratic accountability.

Moreover, with the amount of money needed now to run for elections, running for office is a rich man’s (or woman’s) game or a corrupt man’s game. Therefore, either the politician must be rich himself and is part of the economic oligarchy or has sold himself to vested interests. Politics has also become a family business. Dynasties rule our political landscape. The interests of the state are subsumed to the interests of the family.

Much hope had been placed that President Aquino’s Daang Matuwid will bring about change. While his moral style has been a marked contrast to the blatant corruption under former President Arroyo, President Aquino has proven himself to be a reactionary, unable and unwilling to make changes to the system of which he’s a product. He was, after all, a congressman then a senator, before becoming president. Political reforms are absent from his agenda. There’s no talk of campaign finance reform, dismantling private armies, eradicating jueteng, banning party turncoatism, or reducing the role of political dynasties.

Forget about revolution. The Left already missed its opportunity with its disastrous boycott of the 1986 elections. Furthermore, the Philippine Left has proven to be a tool of the Right, equating nationalism to keeping out foreign competition and promoting laws like CARP that only enrich the rent seekers in the government.

So, how will change happen then? Is the Philippines doomed to a thousand-year rule by an irresponsible political and economic oligarchy which will resist any reform of its privileges and rent-seeking power?

Change can still happen, although very slowly. Change can happen under the following scenarios.

The threat to the state. This is the circumstance by which almost all countries in Asia got its act together and started their remarkable rise. External and internal threats often spur the state to positive change: South Korea with the threat of invasion from the North, Taiwan from the threat of invasion by communist China, Singapore vulnerable as a tiny nation surrounded by big countries and formerly threatened internally by Communist subversion (read Lee Kwan Yew’s biography), Indonesia threatened by the Communist coup de e’tat in 1965 and where a million people died in the aftermath. Japan, as a thousand year old civilization, embarked on the Meiji Restoration, a revolution that modernized Japan after its feudal backwardness and vulnerability was exposed by US Commodore Perry’s black ships in 1853.

Therefore, the threat of China bullying the country may similarly spur changes internally as well. Narrow vested interests may have to be subsumed as the state tries to strengthen itself in a possible confrontation. For example, the country may be forced to finally amend the Constitution to lift the restrictions on foreign ownership if it’s to join the US-sponsored Transpacific Partnership (TPP). Joining the TPP and moving closer to the US may be needed to get the US as counterweight to China. Japan is already doing so, and has indicated its willingness to sacrifice its powerful rice farmers and automotive lobby in order to join the US-sponsored TPP.

Tail wagging the dog. This is the Shenzhen scenario. Deng, faced with powerful opposition from conservative interests in Beijing, created a capitalist experiment in Shenzhen, then a tiny, undeveloped fishing outpost in the far south. The experiment proved so successful that the rest of the country had no choice but to follow, and opposition melted away.

Can the country have its own Shenzhen? That was supposed to have been Subic with its free port status, but Subic and other free port zones just became havens for smuggling. The ARMM with its economic and political autonomy, could have been a Shenzhen but it failed because Misuari built it on the same corrupt political patronage system as the rest of the country. Will the new Bangsamoro Region be our Shenzhen or will it be another failed experiment? It remains to be seen whether the MILF leadership can use its autonomy to build a region with a political and economic model different from the rest of the country.

A change in political economy. The political economy may change if the local oligarchy or at least parts of it, is forced to become more outward-looking. Why? Because the need to compete in the world market would temper its abuses and the elite would see the need to have a strong bureaucracy, efficient infrastructure, and vibrant domestic industries to compete in the global markets.

For the economic oligarchy to become more outward-looking, it would have to find exporting more profitable than extracting rent from regulated, non-tradable industries (power, telecommunications, ports, shipping, banking, etc.). The key to this is to undervalue the exchange rate, as it had been in other countries like Taiwan, China, and South Korea and to open up protected service sectors to foreign competition.

Change from below. It’s still possible to defeat powerful vested interests in a democracy. Coalition-building, voting, organizing, and protesting through social media or in the streets, legal challenges, and other forms of democratic collective action, given the right historical moment, can force positive change even if these are opposed by powerful vested interests.

Social security, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, civil rights legislation, the Glass-Steagal Act and other progressive legislation got passed in the United States despite opposition from powerful vested interests. Recently, the sin tax got passed because a broad coalition pushed for it and won despite the power of the tobacco monopolist. Therefore, the way forward is not, as some suggest, to revert to a dictatorship, but to strengthen democracy. Change in the Philippines will be forced from below and not initiated by an enlightened leadership.

Will change happen? If we don’t hope, we die.