It’s too complicated #NoToFederalism

Tony Samson

CERTAIN topics are just too hard to “laymanize.” This is a buzzword current nowadays. It means presenting a concept in words and phrases that can be grasped by the man on the street. Such subjects are, by definition, complex and presume prior familiarity and knowledge, sometimes requiring their own special vocabulary.

… Now, what about a complicated change in the political structure that affects the whole country which nobody seems to understand, much less sees a need for? (If it ain’t broke, hurl it against the wall so it breaks into little pieces.)

The challenge then for the designated communicator for the complex structure and transition mechanism being proposed and possibly voted on is how to laymanize this. Add to this hurdle, all the previous failed attempts (maybe five in all) to overhaul the system and change the form of government. One previous proposal was the parliamentary system where the chief executive was elected by the party with the most seats in the parliament. Of course, the new structure allowed the present chief to run again for a different title.

Faced with the daunting task of bringing airy concepts down to earth, what is a communicator to do but fall back on what she knows best? Can the communicators learn from the past on why previous concepts failed to persuade or even connect? Okay, a song and dance on the parliamentary system just wouldn’t have worked — i-par, par mo; i-lia-lia mo? Parliamento. Nah. There was no social media to spread that for some lambasting. Anyway, what body parts are those?

The simple rule in communications states, “If you can’t explain it in three sentences, you can’t sell it.” And maybe you don’t really understand it yourself anyway. So, how can you persuade anyone, even if you are armed with answers to FAQ?

You need to give credit to innovation in the field of persuasion. Until now, it was presumed that you required a power point presentation, interviews in talk shows with articulate advocates (that is still a work in progress), a road show with prospective candidates for national positions in tow, or even a TV commercial with sunrise and carabaos pulling the plow. Why not use a song and dance routine as a low-cost alternative to get the topic into the daily conversation of barbers and wine connoisseurs?

As to the charges of vulgarity, from the Latin word “vulgus” or crowd, somebody important found the dance number cool. (You are asking me about vulgarity?) While the song and dance did get the topic to trend in social media, it’s not certain which side of the debate it truly helped. So please don’t be too hard on her. She should keep her job. Why? It’s too complicated.

gloria makes ligaw the senate: separate voting!

august 1, 2018 — the heat is on.  malinaw na charter change ang agenda ni gloria.  and she is not wasting the house’s time on endless debates over joint vs separate voting by the two chambers.

Arroyo expressed openness to separate voting of the two chambers on the proposed amendment to the 1987 Constitution, in an ambush interview following a tree-planting ceremony at the North Luzon Expressway in Pampanga.

“[It’s] better to move forward and achieve something than be stubborn and achieve nothing,” said Arroyo.

Arroyo also recalled that the issue of joint or separate voting was the same issue that hindered the move to amend the 1987 Constitution during her presidency.

“I ended my presidency with the same stalemate—voting separately and voting together. Years later, it’s the same stalemate,” she explained.

tama naman siya.  move forward.  separate voting talaga dapat.  so.  is there a chance that the senate would respond with a matamis na oo?

for a while i thought the senate might make pakipot, but only a little, because anyone who has been keeping track of past charter change attempts via con-ass knows how seriously senators have always wanted to amend the economic provisions, not just in gloria’s time but also in pNoy’s:

In September 2011, Sen. Franklin Drilon said both Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and Speaker Feliciano Belmonte had concurred with his proposal to have both chambers vote separately on bills involving Charter change, which would only touch on economic provisions.   

the senate tried again five years later, on january 18 2016.

The Senate today passed on third and final reading a bill which will open up financing companies, investment houses, lending companies and adjustment companies to foreign ownership, to help increase the flow of investments and jobs into the country.

no doubt, therefore, that neither gloria nor the senate is happy with ex-cj puno’s draft proposal that retains the 40% cap on foreign ownership of corporations, public utilities, and land, even if it would allow a 30% cap on media and advertising.  no-cap across the board is the holy grail for politicians in the service of big business / the oligarchs, and this is their chance, gloria might say.  ka-ching!  ka-ching!

but, but, but, every time they’ve tried to do a con-ass in pursuit of the dream, civil society raises a howl.  read do not delete (economic provisions) from dec 2008.  though, yes, these are different times, and gloria and the lower house might think it can happen, finally, under duterte, who, i have a feeling would go along with anything, basta federalism pa rin.

the good news is, busted  si gloria.  read Pangilinan: Arroyo nod to separate voting welcome, but no guarantee.  august 2 –

Speaking on “The Source” on CNN Philippines, Sen. Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan said that Arroyo’s assurance that the House would go for separate voting in case Congress constitutes itself into a constituent assembly is a welcome development.

“However, what is to stop anyone from going to the Supreme Court and say, ‘No, it’s not separately. The letter of the law says, it’s voting jointly.’ Of course, the Senate disagrees, so what happens there?” Pangilinan said during the interview.

The Liberal Party president said that this issue would become more worrisome considering the voting record of the Supreme Court, which in May issued a landmark decision allowing the removal of a chief justice through a quo warranto or ouster petition.

… He said that Arroyo could say one thing while her allies or other groups could do another especially since cracks in the ruling coalition burst in the open following a recent leadership showdown in the House which led to the former president’s election as speaker.

besides, some senators have grievances galore against gloria arroyo.

Sen. Grace Poe has stated her displeasure over the assumption of Arroyo as House speaker because of her involvement in various controversies during her term as president.

Poe’s father, the late actor Fernando Poe Jr., ran for president against Arroyo in the 2004 elections, which was seen by many as tainted by fraud.

Sen. Joseph Victor Ejercito said the rise to power of Arroyo in the House does not look good for the Duterte administration, particularly with regard to its campaign against corruption.

Ejercito’s father, former president and now Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada, was ousted in 2001 and as a result, then vice president Arroyo took over.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson said the other day that if the ascension of Arroyo to the speakership is a prelude to becoming prime minister later on, the people behind this should think twice.

looks like gloria can’t have her way with this senate, salamat naman, even if for the wrong reasons.  i’d love to hear a senator or two or three justify the economic protectionism enshrined in all our constitutions since quezon’s time.  even marcos did not have the heart to delete these provisions, knowing full well that it would not bode well for nation.

so.  abangan ang next moves ni ate glo, who has promises to keep.

samantala, the duterte camp remains optimistic.  ding generoso, trixie cruz-angeles, and marie banaag are prepping mocha uson for the info campaign, and my favorite ex-senator rene saguisag wonders:

Can Mocha Uson help swing the work of the consultants who played a role not spelled out in the Constitution? That’s rich. How much is there for her, as a snake oil saleswoman, in pushing for what was done by a monolithic committee with only one woman and no known Duterte critic as members? Foolish questions might have been checked at the door. (?) How would she sell four Supreme Courts in Art. IX of the consultants’ draft, just for one contentious issue?

We now see that the Palace has reportedly allocated close to P100 million for a yes campaign, in addition to what has been spent so far when it created an office. Normally creating one which requires a huge budget can originate only exclusively in the Bigger House; the Better House (Senate) may concur with amendments. The power of the purse belongs to Congress; the way Digong allocates and spends money right and left we now see in him the equivalent of Macoy, a super-executive, a super-court, a super-legislature and a one-man continuing constitutional convention.

gloria in the house: worst case scenario

i think i get it, finally, why rep danilo suarez refuses to give up the minority leadership even if he is part of the majority that ingloriously voted speaker gloria arroyo into position, AND even if there is a real minority group — a coalition of LP and makabayan bloc reps who did NOT vote for arroyo.

“The House Rules clearly state that those who voted for the winning Speaker will constitute the majority bloc. Aside from voting for Speaker Arroyo, the Suarez group did sign the manifesto of support for Speaker Arroyo and even campaigned for her. For the Suarez group to remain a minority bloc is beyond reasonable,” Quimbo said.

beyond reasonable, beyond acceptable, but it would seem that gloria and her megamajority do not want to have to deal with a real minority.  i strongly suspect that it’s because they are still on charter change mode, but without resorting to no-el, which is what did alvarez in.  and now they are testing the waters with this suarez kapit-tuko-sa-posisyon.  if they got away with breaking the rules and improvising to unseat alvarez, maybe they can get away with this, too, in these very fluid times under duterte?

i wouldn’t put it past GMA and her cohorts to have promised sara duterte that without a pesky dissenting minority, they can do a cha-cha via con-ass in time for an info campaign in the run-up to may 2019 AND still pass the 2019 budget (or not, re-enact 2018 na lang) at kung ano-ano pa kuno, before she steps down (or not) in 2019.

GMA, by the way, is a veteran at failed chacha attempts.  maybe she thinks that the 5th (?)  time’s a charm?  read What went before: Past charter change attempts.   

worst case scenario, given duterte’s marching orders:  the lower house convenes (in secret, if necessary) as a constitutional assembly, passes (in the dead of night, possibly) its version of a federal constitution that favors incumbents, and presents it to the nation as a fait accompli, requiring only the people’s approval in a plebiscite kasabay ng may 2019 midterm elections.

never mind that 2 out of 3 filipinos do not know enough about the constitution, much less about the proposed replacement, to make an informed decision on the matter.  maybe the duterte and arroyo camps even consider this a plus in their favor — since there’s no time for a massive multi-media multi-lingual information campaign, much less time for serious debates nationwide, they will simply appeal to / for the people’s trust.  i can already hear mocha uson urging her 5 million followers: let’s trust tatay digong on this, maniwala tayo, manalig tayo, he knows what’s best, vote YES!  argh.

i hope i’m wrong.  my imagination on overdrive.  but if i’m right, and the senate is unable to stop it, ‘twould be time to hit the streets, the people and the senators, together.

ChaCha: Duterte’s endgame #SONA2018 #NoToChaCha

Katrina SS

The Duterte government is on overdrive, providing us all with requisite distractions from the fact that the Duterte-appointed consultative committee has drafted a federal constitution to the President’s liking, and we’re all back to this discussion, not about whether or not we even want charter change, or if it’s necessary at all, but about how it’s going to happen.

Let that sink in.

Duterte’s propagandists and chacha advocates have been able to bring it to this point when we’re not even discussing whether or not charter change will happen but how it will happen. The President and his people have muscled their way through this charter change push — we’re talking THREE different federal constitutions after all since August 2016 — and it has been able to do this by utilizing what we’ve seen government do consistently and viciously the past two years: chaos-by-design.

Read on…