Unfairness in the name of fairness is not fair

One thing that is very difficult to understand about Philippine politics is that, against the sad reality on the ground, people still seem to believe in motherhood political statements, especially those that harp on fairness, equality, honesty, etc.

Worse, some of the misguided feelings arising from our misplaced expectations do actually find themselves translated into laws meant to regulate the conduct of elections and electoral campaigns but which, in reality, cannot hope to even achieve a tenth of the purpose.

Take the law regulating the sizes of campaign materials and designating places where to put them. Not only is that law impossible to implement nationwide at all times, it also springs from a flawed concept of what we think is fair and equal.

The motherhood statement is that public office should be open to all qualified citizens. Yet we all know that to mount an election campaign would require money. Even the law recognizes that reality by setting amounts that candidates are allowed to spend.

But even if the set amounts are conscientiously and judiciously observed, the reality is that there will still be many otherwise highly qualified citizens who just do not have the kind of money to spend for the kind of campaign that reasonably assures them of a fighting chance.

In other words, and despite the noble objectives of all existing electoral laws, the sad reality on the ground simply is that Philippine elections are just not for everybody. Those who do not have the money must content themselves with just being plain voters.

Now, with that kind of immovable reality, why the heck do we need to regulate the size of campaign materials or designate places where they can be placed or mounted? This is an expensive game for the rich. If you can only afford posters the size of thumbnails, quit the race.

It is ridiculous to acknowledge that election campaigns need money to be mounted and then try to regulate how much money can be spent and where. If we have to regulate spending, as well as regulate where to spend them, we might as well do the spending.

Look, the only way to truly level the playing field is for the government to take care of the spending. It should be the one to give each candidate an equal amount, and then tell them where to spend them. Short of that, and any attempt at regulation is an exercise in futility.

If a candidate has tens of millions to spend, why should government prevent him from spending his money the way the candidate likes it? If the purpose is to level the playing field, then let only the rich run for office. Let them outspend one another.

The worst motherhood statement we can associate with Philippine elections is that which gives the poor any false hopes that he can mount a credible campaign without money. That is not the way the system works here. It may be a very painful truth. But that is the truth.

The situation of course leaves the door wide open for corruption, since the rich who spent tens of millions for his campaign is expected to recover his expenses. But then who is to say that if the poor had an equal shot at the moon that he would not sell it off as cheese.

Come on. Let us not kid ourselves. Poverty is not a ticket to sainthood. Corruption and immorality are not qualified on the basis of economic standing. In fact some of the hungriest crooks are those we, against our better judgment, let into the kitchen.

Those who can afford to spend for giant posters are not being unfair to those who have to sell house, lot and soul just to come up with thumbnails. The former are doing what they can, the latter what they can't. Someone erred in judgment here and should not be voted into office.