Waste of taxpayers’ money

Every three years we have elections and spend public funds amounting to billions. This coming election, the budget already adds up to a whooping P5.7 billion. For a third world country still struggling to attain a respectable economic growth, that figure certainly looks exorbitant and immoderate considering the sort of elections we conduct and the characters who manage to get "elected". As we go through this triennial political extravaganza again there is a growing sense that the whole exercise is becoming more and more unconscionable and irrational. Why indeed should we spend so much of the taxpayers’ money to elect officials for whose lousy services and bad governance the taxpayers will spend much, much more?

Elections are admittedly essential in a democracy. It is the most effective way of directly determining the peoples’ will. Spending a huge sum for such undertaking is worth it because sustaining a democratic form of government is expensive. In this country however, based on experiences of the past elections, we can never be sure whether the ballots truly reflect the peoples’ voice.

So far, the approaching elections look no different. We see the same face at the helm of the electoral body that cannot unfortunately shed off a disreputable and discreditable reputation acquired in past dealings tainted with irregularities and fraudulent "Garci" type of electoral practices. Lately, an official allegedly involved in the Garci cover up and disappearance has been named Defense Department (DND) Secretary. He supervises and controls the armed forces (AFP) headed by a General also prominently mentioned in the same dubious operation. They head the establishments that play or could play major roles in the coming elections. In fact, the brand new DND chief has already made a pronouncement that the AFP will continue to perform poll duties on the May 14 election – a statement that apparently runs counter to the agreement forge by his predecessor to keep the military out of politics except to provide security. These moves and signs of the times just do not inspire belief and confidence that the May elections will be any different from the past ones. They only render the Administration’s call for an election summit towards peaceful, orderly and clean elections look like a mere palabas. No wonder the CBCP refuses to participate.

This early in the election season, the indubitable signs indicate that we will have more of the same electoral campaign methods and practices destroying the credibility of our elections. Even before the start of the official campaign period, posters of candidates have sprouted all over the place under the guise of extending all sorts of greetings to their constituents ("happy fiesta, happy birthday, happy holidays, happy valentine, congratulations on your graduation, happy vacation etc). Affluent candidates running for national positions, on the other hand invade the TV screens to project themselves. All these wannabes know that under Comelec rules, these illegal practices are enough to disqualify them. Yet they go on with impunity, knowing fully well that they can get away it.

Election malpractices intensify once the campaign period starts when the drive shifts to high gear and election spending soars. The name of the game is name recall. Therefore, candidates spend huge sums to engage experts in the field of advertising with the sole aim of "brainwashing" the electorate so that by Election day their names already ring a bell and their faces look so familiar as to be easily remembered when filling up the ballots. Under the prevailing electoral practices therefore, candidates win elections mainly because they have the money and machinery or have acquired celebrity status, not because they are better qualified for the position. In effect, this method of "brainwashing" for "name recall" purposes dehumanizes our voters for being denied the proper use of reason and intellect in choosing the more qualified candidates. As of now, the Comelec has not taken steps to stop these practices. Yet it can do something about it. It can simply be stricter in enforcing the election laws especially on campaign expenses and use of propaganda materials by disqualifying the violators. A sample case of one prominent law-breaker may be enough to deter others.

Just as the methods remain the same, so are the faces of the candidates. In the Senate race alone the Administration is trying very hard to form a "unity ticket" while the united opposition has been divided into five different slates. Mention is even made of a "Third Force" or a "Moral Force". However, in all these tickets, no fresh faces or spellbinding names appear. All of them "have been there and done that". Our election has degenerated into a political rigodon of the same old faces trying to stay in power or to change those in power. If there are new faces, they either belong to the same breed of politicians or are related to them by consanguinity or affinity. The only new faces perhaps are the few "celebrities" who are being wooed for their "winnability" rather than for the improved quality of the line-up. Some of them have in fact previously failed in their political adventure and are just trying to make a comeback.

If the candidates’ faces have not changed so is the voters’ profile. More than sixty (60%) of the electorate still belongs to the sector that can be easily swayed by all sorts of pecuniary come-ons aside from name recall. They are the informal settlers, squatters and the hakot crowd. Only about 40% mostly coming from the middle class are thinking voters who value their right of suffrage. Yet many of them do not even participate. The sad reality is that our politicians relish the situation and want it to stay that way.

Indeed the unfolding political game show makes the huge outlay for the coming election even more outrageous and an utter waste of money. Somehow, I am beginning to believe the cha-cha proponents who wanted to amend our charter first before holding further elections. Now I am more convinced that we should change our charter. Foremost of these changes will be to make the qualifications of both the candidates and the voters more stringent. Only law abiding and taxpaying citizens should be qualified to exercise the right of suffrage while only citizens with college degrees that have enough subjects on political law and public administration can qualify to run for public office.

In the meantime we can only hope that the huge outlay for the coming elections will not go to waste but will be used for a more credible and non-violent elections.

E-mail us at [email protected] or [email protected]