Pork Barrel - PDAF

Pork Barrel, by definition, is a slang term used when politicians or governments "unofficially" undertake projects that benefit a group of citizens in return for that group's support or campaign donations. This spending mostly benefits the needs of a small select group despite the fact that the entire community's funds are being used. Also referred to as "patronage".

For example, let's say a city has a large number of potholes, spread evenly throughout its communities. If the mayor took campaign contributions from a group of wealthy residents in exchange for a promise to fix the potholes in their neighborhood first, this would be pork-barrel politics.

One possible derivation for the phrase comes from the practice of country stores keeping a barrel of salted pork open and available to the public. Certain high-ranking citizens would come by daily to dip into this common fund.

From an article by Angela Casauay entitled :Senatorial Bets want to abolish pork barrel “A senator gets about P200 million in pork barrel funds each year, an amount that makes up a substantial amount of congressional allocations that lawmakers receive each year.”

Llasos, a lawyer, said the PDAF, or the Priority Development Assistance Fund, and other discretionary funds are the root of graft and corruption and should therefore be abolished.

According to Marwil Llasos  , "I know the function of a senator. The function is legislation, to create laws, investigations in aid of legislation and education on issues. There is no mention of being a contractor,"

Hontiveros said PDAF allocations must be subjected to “the system of ordinary people” so that they can dictate the kind of projects that the pork barrel will subsidize, while Christian Señeres said it should be “scrutinized up to the last peso."

Bayan Muna Rep Teddy Casiño cited a concrete use of the pork barrel: collect all and give to state colleges. In outlining his platform on education, Casiño acknowledged the need to provide more funding for universities, which can be sourced from the PDAF and by re-aligning funds used to pay for the country’s P5-T debt.

Why can’t the PDAF be distributed directly to local government units? For years,  national and local oligarchs have been benefiting millions from this “unofficial fund”. We do not even know for sure if these supposed to be millions of development funds are being used for development projects, or being corrupted. All we know, is that people who  gets into positions gets even richer and richer.

“Every right involves a corresponding responsibility to others and to society?” an assesment.

There is an old argument about rights that has enjoyed resurgent popularity in these days of “spreading the wealth around.” It is the assertion that while human beings undoubtedly have rights, they also have responsibilities. “For every right there is a corresponding responsibility that is its complement.” One should not be surprised that this line of reasoning appeals to statists of all varieties, because they see in it a way to undercut rights and dress up their schemes of plunder and domination as “responsibilities.” However, it does not take the clear-thinking mind long to see through these principle, for they fail to hold up to a moment’s analysis.

What are the characteristics of a right? A right is an absolute and exclusive claim to something. “Absolute” because you cannot partially have a right to something. You either have a right to it wholly or not at all. “Exclusive” because that which you have a right to no one else can claim a right to. A right defines something that you are entitled to. You do not need anyone’s permission to exercise a right. No one can charge you a fee for exercising it. No government can regulate it. You are entitled to exercise rights without interference by or permission from anyone.

Consider the right to life. Is your right to life absolute or do you only have a right to live under certain conditions? Do you have an exclusive right to live your own life or do others have some partial right to your life? Are you entitled to live, or do other people have a right to charge you a fee in return for allowing you to live? Can any government pass a law or regulation qualifying your right to life?

There are different kinds of rights, based upon their origins. Legal rights derive from a contract. While these rights originate with the consent of others, such as your right to a house that you have purchased, that right nevertheless takes on all of the characteristics described above once you have acquired it. The corresponding responsibility to the right of ownership of the house is the obligation to pay for the house. Your responsibility to pay derives from the contract you entered into. You are obliged to pay because you have consented to pay in exchange for the right to the property previously owned by the seller.

Natural rights are inherent in each person. These do not originate with the consent of others, but are part of and inseparable from our humanity. They cannot be taken away. Even if they are violated, they nevertheless remain. When we recognize something to be “wrong,” it is usually the violation of some kind of right. However, when we recognize something as “evil,” it is invariably the violation of a natural, inalienable right.

A responsibility is something that you are obliged to do. It is an obligation that you must fulfill in order to comply with a moral or legal code. Responsibilities do not always conform to our wishes. We may prefer to do one thing, but have the responsibility to do another. Responsibilities are actions that we are compelled to do, either by religious doctrine, our own consciences, or other people.

Marriage Equality Act

If I were a legislator, this would be the bill I'd be pushing for...but I know the country isn't ready for this yet.

Title: Marriage Equality Act

Executive Summary:

           

Homosexuality in our country, the Philippines is evidently not acceptable compared to other developing countries. Discrimination is still very much evident as some people still refuse to accept the existence of the third sex and other times, limit their expectations, assuming that members of the third sex are deemed to be unclean.

Marriage has long been one way that couples express their love for one another and their commitment to their relationship. Despite arguments that so-called “same-sex marriage” seeks to redefine “traditional marriage,” allowing committed gay and lesbian couples to get married does not change the meaning of marriage. Gay and lesbian couples want to get married to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love and to protect their families.

Bill Text:

The concept of equal protection under the law, to be preserved in our Constitution, requires that fundamental rights like the right to marry be made available equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples. This bill would not only allow same sex couples to get married, but would also serve as an enshrined advocacy on defending LGBT (Lesbian, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgenders) rights and broaden the range of civil liberties.

The act would open the minds of the many who refuse to live with the third sex that they have equal rights as straight people, that they have the capacity to love, work, trade as those who are straight. The act would be part of the constitution, thus it would reflect the political principles of government, and thus recognizing the existence and delegating equal rights to the LGBTs.

In article posted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), “Nine states plus D.C. allow same-sex couples to marry, two more respect marriages of same-sex couples validly performed in other states, eight provide civil unions or comprehensive domestic partnerships, and two more have more limited domestic partnership systems. That’s 20 states plus D.C. that provide some significant state-level relationship protections, and those states are home to 130 million people.

These facts are heartening, but there is still a lot of work to do to improve laws that will protect all families. Since the first marriage lawsuit for same-sex couples in America in 1971, the ACLU has been at the forefront of both legal and public education efforts to secure marriage for same-sex couples and win legal recognition for LGBT relationships.”

For Philippine Implementation, education is the first step for this act to be recognized and accepted to society. Movements promoting the advocacy of giving equal and distinct rights to the LGBTs must also be strengthened and persisted.

What makes the doctrine of separation of powers workable?

The doctrine of separation of powers divides the institution of government into three separate branches; the legislative, executive and judicial. The  powers and execution of each  vary and carried out by  different individuals. They are not allowed to execute solely for another’s authority, each being interdependent from another.

The division of power should prevent absolutism (like in monarchies and dictatorship where all branches are concentrated in a single authority). The doctrine also prevents corruption. The branches also serve as security or authorities to correct and check upon one another. Each interdependent branch helps keeps the other from exceeding their power, thus ensuring the rule of law and protecting the rights of individuals.

The practice of the doctrine is basically a mechanism to prevent power being over concentrated in one arm of government. This is very much workable in the Philippines since abuse of power and corruption is very much rampant in much country, even within the presence of these three branches. The Philippines is a republican state, meaning, sovereignty resides with the people and it loathes the concentration of one or a few. The powers or basic state authority given to the three branches, were only delegated by the people. “The Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary – each branch being supreme in its own sphere but with constitutional limits and a firm tripod of checks and balances” (Atty. Fred)

The Executive branch, headed by the President of the republic, is the approving and implementation body of the supreme government. The President serves as the chief executive and represents the government as a whole. The President exercises general supervision over all local government units and is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

 Being elected by the citizens, the president has control over the executive departments, the bureaus and offices. This means that he has the authority to assume directly the functions of the executive department, bureau and office or interfere with the discretion of its officials. Contrary to the power of control, the President also has the duty of supervising the enforcement of laws for the maintenance of general peace and public order. Thus, he is granted administrative power over bureaus and offices under his control to enable him to discharge his duties effectively.

The legislative branch, which has the authority to make laws is the Congress. The Congress is composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate is composed of twenty-four Senators, who are elected at large by the qualified voters of the Philippines.

The House of Representatives, on the other hand, is composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless fixed by law, who are elected from legislative districts located among the provinces, cities and the Metropolitan Manila area, and those who are elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations.

Judicial Power is vested in the Supreme Court, or any lower courts prescribed by law. The Supreme Court is composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices. While Congress has the power to define, prescribe and allocate the jurisdiction of the various courts, congress cannot deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction provided in the Constitution. No law shall also be passed reorganizing the judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its members. The Supreme Court also has administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof, having the power to discipline or dismiss judges of lower courts.

RH Bill

Free Condoms, Less Corruption?

A Reaction Paper by: Leo Vincent A. Villanueva

I started reading the House Bill No. 5034 which states “An act providing for a national policy on reproductive health, responsible parenthood and population development, and for other purpose.” Its content was good; it made me think that it should be implemented. The bill focuses primarily on the welfare of the people, especially the poor ones. More importantly, population, being one of the many cases to cause poverty, will be controlled.

The RH bill assures the availability and access to a full range of methods, techniques, supplies and services that contribute to reproductive, sexual health and well being. With these, our number will become manageable and eventually, our country will finally taste progress. We can prevent abortion and post abortion complications will be managed. We can also prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and more importantly, the education and counseling on sexuality and sexual reproductive health will be disseminated by the different government units.

The program encourages the use of artificial birth control methods such as contraceptives. Free condoms will be given to those who want it, but then again, we should consider how difficult it would be to track how many people would use them. In some studies, it is said that providing people with free contraceptives or making contraceptives freely available hardly slowed down population growth.

With the average Filipino, especially those in the rural parts who have limited access to education or even sex education, how sure is the government that their efforts, not to mention the millions of money spent for those free condoms and other programs are worthwhile? Do giving away free condoms truly solve the root cause of poverty in our country, corruption?

The RH bill is definitely one of the hottest issues now in our country. The reproductive health bill or any proposed legislation that irritates the Catholic Church is a sure to create controversy and a lot of media noise. The Catholic Church is concerned that the bill could be a precursor to eventual legislation of abortion and other practices contrary to Christian morality.

Cebu Archbishop Ricardo Cardinal Vidal, leading the Church and other organizations, stands tough against the reproductive health bill and even organized a signature campaign against it.

“If you want to really put an abrupt halt to population growth, give people higher quality education and make them productive (I’m not averse to conscripting labor). Good education and a job with some upward mobility is a better contraceptive than whatever you can get over the counter from health clinics”.  

There are many speculations regarding the bill, some say that the government actually has some hidden agendas behind it.

Vince Cinches, chairman of the Central Visayas Fisher folks Development center, said the country’s problem was not in the number of its population. “The Philippines is very rich in resources but these are monopolized by the few elites and foreign corporations,” he said. He also said that the bill does not address to the root cause of poverty.”

Another problem is that the use of contraception and other programs of the RH bill are just voluntary, this may eventually become a big problem because we do not know for sure if people are engaging in to the programs of the RH bill. Perhaps some people will use the free condoms, and perhaps some won’t. And it is the number of those who will not use contraceptives that will say whether the RH bill will be effective in reducing our population or not.

In my view, I think that in order for the RH bill to be truly effective, the people have to be somewhat obligated to use the contraceptives that the government buys for the public. Otherwise, the government will just end up piling all the contraceptives and the companies that produces them will be laughing all the way to the bank.

The government should be more strict with their measures to control the population. That is why I fully agree with these measures posted by a journalist;

·        Institute a system whereby the state will fully subsidize the education and health needs of only the first two children born to a couple who are at least 21 years old.

·        For couples who have more than 2 children or cannot provide for the children they already have, their children will be taken from them and taken care of by the state. Such couples will be forced to undergo tubal ligation (for the women) and vasectomy (for the men)

·        All men and women 15 years old and above who are not in school or are working should be conscripted to labor in government factories (they will be given wages, housing, food, etcetera). I don’t care if they manually produce paper clips or hand craft staple wire or dig holes which others may fill, anything to keep them so busy and bone tired that the last thing they would probably want to do is to have sex.

The actions above may be more drastic and basically throw out certain rights; however it is undeniably proper and more functional in limiting the population growth of the country.

The disagreement of Philippine society over the Reproductive Health bill has been a source of discouragement and discontent among the Filipinos. It is unfortunate that the debate has focused only on whether the Bill should be passed or rejected in its present form. Either option would not be good for Filipinos. The Church sees in the proposed bill serious defects that can lead to violations of human rights and freedom of conscience. It would not be acceptable to pass in its present form.

Total rejection of the bill however, will not change the state of high rates of teenage pregnancy, infant mortality and abortions. I say that a third option is needed. They should have amended all objectionable provisions and retain the provisions that actually improve the lives of the Filipinos.

Bill or no Bill, both parties who agree and disagree with the bill should make a contribution to the protection of the dignity of Filipinos and an improvement of their quality of life. It is a moral obligation that each and every one of us must be responsible for our actions. For all the fathers, be aware of how many you CAN feed. For the mothers, be aware of how many you CAN raise, and for the sons and daughters…just be SAFE.