Some of our past posts have delved into the root causes of our problems as a nation, particularly why we continue to fall behind our more progressive Asian neighbors when we had much of a head start during the Spanish and American colonial periods.
These problems can be generally classified into political and social issues; the latter is about the wide gap between the rich and the poor and the lack of equanimity and equality in our society while the former is the political structure which is inevitably tied in with the social aspect as well. It really does not take a genius to figure out what is wrong with the country but the status quo favors those who benefit the most from it and thus we have the entitled rich and the entitled poor.
The Presidential candidates have made public their platforms. Voters do not seem to realize that the issues are the same. None of them have been truly addressed because our population keeps on increasing, which is one reason why progress is hard to come by. Yet our leaders fail to take into account the need for drastic measures in order to put an end to the vicious cycle we have been through since 1946. It has been seventy-six years since the Americans gave us independence but our progress has not been at par with our Asian neighbors.
The Americans kept us on a leash with their parity rights which prevented the inflow of foreign direct investment. These rights only expired in 1973. Since then, we have lost ground to Vietnam, whose war for independence began in the mid-50s and only ended in 1975. Vietnam has passed us by since that time. If thirty years is one generation, we have been through two generations and still have not much to show for it.
It was Ferdinand Marcos who saw the need to change the political structure in order to prevent legislative gridlock. The 1973 Constitution was not perfect but the decree-making powers it gave the President was the last option in case parliament did not deliver or if there was an urgent need for an enabling law. We all know why Marcos failed in his goal. It was a combination of several factors. But it was the only time that the problems the country faced post-war were addressed.
The 1987 Constitution is simply a restoration of the 1935 Constitution without the martial law provisions which Marcos utilized in 1972 when the country was on the verge of being thrown by anti-state forces led by the CPP/NPA. The oligarchs were also a threat and Marcos cut them down to size. The judgment of his crony’s as heads of industry’s during his administration is still not in but there were only a few who delivered such as Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. for the coconut industry.
The truth is not much progress has been made since 1987. The control of politics and the economy has been the paramount focus of both politicians and oligarchs alike. The return of freedom and democracy also meant the democratization of corruption. It has been unregulated ever since.
This has also resulted in mediocrity being the norm rather than the exception in the government bureacracy. Marcos picked the best and the brightest to join government. Now it is the incompetent and unqualified who join government with the singular goal of enriching themselves at the expense of taxpayers.
More importantly, the lack of consistency and continuity in government policies have resulted in our inability to achieve long-term development goals such as food security, energy security, advances in public health and education and infrastructure development. Thirty-six years after Marcos was ousted, we have not made strides but more like tip-toeing through the development process.
There is too much focus on the national instead of the regional and local concerns. These would be addressed faster if a federal parliamentary system is in place. The Senate is next to useless with twenty-four independent republics not doing much except for conducting hearings in aid of legislation at an average cost of P400M per Senator per annum. Imagine how for one six-year term the total amount comes to P2.4B per Senator. Do we actually get what we pay for in terms of the quality of legislation produced by each of the twenty-four members of the Senate?
Even Professor Clarita Carlos is for a shift to a parliamentary form of government.
The quality of legislation at the national level is also improved because Cabinet members are appointed from the members of parliament. As such, they have an accurate picture of what needs to be done at the frontline level to improve service delivery to the public or essential legislation which will have an impact on the citizenry.
At the regional and local levels, the elected officials will be forced to work for their constituents since they can no longer use the national government bureaucracy as an excuse not to deliver on their campaign promises. They will also become more responsible and must be more prepared in terms of background and experience.
There is also the important issue of foreign direct investment. Unless the restrictive ownership provisions in the 1987 Constitution are amended and red tape and corruption minimized in the bureaucracy, it will never happen that we we become an investment destination in the region. We are constantly losing out to our ASEAN neighbors which is why we have to rely on our Overseas Filipino Workers, who are our best exports, because they not only remit foreign exchange on a regular basis but also fuel our consumption-driven economy.
Our leaders have been singing praises of OFWs but they have not done anything concrete which would give Filipinos the option of not going abroad to find jobs. They constantly spew out rhetoric about the social cost but there has been no action take to address the issue since the first OFWs were deployed to the Middle East.
Lastly, federalism will improve the quality of leadership because it will be more feasible for candidates to run for public office. One only has to look at the quality of our leaders thirty-six years after the 1987 Constitution was ratified. Look at the quality of the candidates running for President, Vice-President and the Senate. This is literally scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Comments