Leadership change

What can we expect from the approaching change of leadership?

Depending on who wins on May 9, we might finally get our license plates and driver’s license cards, see a reduction in our income tax and an end to tanim-bala and laglag-kisame at the NAIA, and get the light rail trains running with as few glitches as possible.

We might get better public health care and education, see priority given to the proper development of agriculture and tourism, end congestion at the NAIA and Manila port as well as put the fear of God into the hearts of crooks at the Bureau of Customs and other graft-prone agencies.

If one particular candidate wins, we might see the streets littered with the bodies of suspected crooks. This is supposed to put an end to crime, although I haven’t heard of any country that drastically reduced criminality (much less improve the delivery of justice) through unexplained killings.

Depending on who wins, the most sweeping change will be a constitutional revision that will include not only the lifting of restrictive economic provisions but also a shift to a new form of government.

Less certain, regardless of who wins, is whether the leadership change will lead to the deeper reforms that our feudal society with a democratic veneer has needed for decades.

* * *

Judging from the conduct of the campaign and voter preferences as reflected in surveys, the yawning income gap will persist and inclusive growth will remain elusive, regardless of who wins.

The .001 percent of the population will retain its hold on power and wealth, and special interest groups will continue to influence official policy even to the detriment of the public.

Consider the individuals known to be the main donors to the campaigns of the four candidates leading in the surveys – donors who provide not just funds, which are impossible to trace, but tangible contributions such as private jets and helicopters, convoys of Hummers and Land Cruisers. These donors expect a handsome return on investment; they have businesses to protect, businesses they intend to grow if their candidate wins. Those with legal problems hope to end the costly, tortuous litigation with a ruling in their favor.

Opaque campaign finance practices have not changed, and have in fact worsened with recent Supreme Court rulings. These will remain the building blocks of cronyism and large-scale corruption in every administration, regardless of who wins.

The religious mafia, although weakened by internecine feud, will remain among the biggest roadblocks to the development of a merit-based society, weakening the judiciary and undermining the rule of law.

Our political class will continue to resist the lifting of bank secrecy laws and giving more teeth to the fight against money laundering.

Certain members of the moneyed class, in bed with politicians, will continue to enjoy an unfair advantage through lax laws and lax enforcement of the laws governing bank directors, officers, stockholders and related interests or DOSRI. Many foreigners have commented to me about how DOSRI rules are so brazenly violated in this country.

* * *

We can expect the same political resistance to a ban on dynasties.

In my part of town a candidate is running on the platform of ending the stranglehold of a political dynasty. It’s not Makati, but the bailiwick of a political party whose stalwarts include some of the most self-righteous candidates in the May 9 elections.

The candidate’s camp presents a sound case that if an impartial, thorough probe would be conducted, possibly all members of the dynastic clan would land behind bars for plunder and varying degrees of graft, for interwoven sweetheart deals, kickbacks, nepotism and other violations of the code of conduct for government employees.

And yet it looks like the candidate has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning. Like many other long-entrenched dynasties, this one has developed an intricate support network founded on patronage. Jobs, businesses, future assignments and promotions, livelihoods and special privileges of many people are anchored on keeping the dynasty in power.

There is also the average voter’s inherent fear of the untried and unknown. The fear is stronger when the area controlled by the dynasty appears to be run well, starting with the most visible signs of governance: roads are well paved and well lit, neighborhoods are clean and reasonably safe considering the crime rate in this country, and public education and health care facilities are adequate and well maintained.

“If it ain’t broke, why fix it” is a voter sentiment that tends to run deep when a little known candidate, no matter how qualified, dares to challenge dynastic politicians.

Only entertainment superstars have a fighting chance of dismantling dynasties. Unfortunately for us, most of our entertainers have turned out to be lousy in government, unfit for their positions, terrible role models and disastrous for the public.

And so many areas will still go for dynasties on May 9, giving clans the democratic imprimatur to continue enjoying their perks and privileges, including freedom from red tape, first shot at government deals, and advantage for businesses owned by their relatives and cronies.

The presidential candidates have expressed openness to curbs on direct succession as well as the number and types of positions relatives can occupy. Whether they will push their congressional allies to do this remains to be seen. Still, the candidates can be held to their campaign promises, and there are encouraging signs that some change might be coming.

Philippine elections have always been marked by a high turnout. Maybe we pin such high hopes on elections to make our lives better; maybe we just like the fiesta atmosphere. Change is coming on May 9, but in many matters, there will be tremendous resistance to anything that will alter the status quo.