Bayanko made a crucial presentation of the movement last week. The one-hour session that included questions and answers and a discussion was made before the executive committee of the 8,500-strong Philippine Military Academy Alumni Association at Camp Aguinaldo.
We had to balance information the group needed to be informed about as clearly as possible while at the same time respecting their loyalty to their military role in government.
It was an extremely delicate task but it needed to be done. Bayanko adviser Jose Alejandrino and this columnist were invited to present the movement’s case to shift the Philippines to a parliamentary federal form of government. There were five reasons.
* * *
The most important and obvious reason for the shift was the debilitating corruption because of the high cost of campaigning for public office under the presidential system we have at present.
It takes at least P2 billion to run for president and P200 million to run for senator. Under a parliamentary system, one only needs to be elected in a district to become prime minister. This means getting 100,000 votes as opposed to 40 million votes nationwide.
* * *
Secondly, under a parliamentary system, all members of the Cabinet are accountable. One cannot be a cabinet minister without being a member of Parliament. Under the present system, a president may appoint and delegate full or partial powers to a cabinet member who is not accountable to the people but to the president. This opens the door to abuses of power by an unscrupulous cabinet minister. (This opened the door to the scandalous DAP and PDAF thievery that remain unresolved),
* * *
Thirdly, an abusive president can only be removed through impeachment. This is a long and tedious process that is near impossible. In a parliamentary system, an abusive prime-minister can be removed by a simple vote of loss of confidence.
* * *
Fourthly, the current presidential system promotes the growth of political dynasties. Money rather than meritocracy decides who are elected to the presidency or Senate. Not surprisingly, personalities and celebrities are more important than programs and issues.
As a result, Congress today no longer represents their constituencies but their families. A 2014 study by Julio Teehankee, college dean of La Salle University, shows 178 family dynasties rule 73 of 80 provinces. Another 2014 study by Ronald Mendoza, director of the Asian Institute of Management Policy Center, shows 75% of the members of Congress and 80% of governors and mayors belong to political dynasties.
* * *
Lastly, a parliamentary federal form of government will mean a greater devolution of powers in taxation, education, healthcare, housing. This allows the smaller constituencies to shape their own destiny.
* * *
We pointed out to the Executive Committee that the presidential system has had a negative impact on the development of the Philippines because too much of the nation’s wealth is in the hands of a privileged few. Take the growth of the middle class which is necessary for a healthy and stable democracy. Surveys show that in the 1980s the rich made up less than 1% of the population, the middle class more than 49%, the lower income or poor nearly 50%. By 2003, the rich still made up less than 1%, but the middle class shrank to less than 20% while the poor grew to 80%. Today, the rich still constitute less than 1%, but the middle class shrank further to 9% and the poor rose to 90%. Of the 90%, 60% earn an average of P15,800 a month and 30% live below the poverty line earning between P5,000 and P10,000 a month. On the other hand, the combined assets of the 40 richest in the Philippines totaled $34 billion according to Forbes magazine.
The high income segment numbers 185,000 families, or less than one million Filipinos, earning P200,000 a month. The middle class, 9 million Filipinos, earn P50,000 a month. If you subtract the number of OFWs in this category, there are only about 5 million middle class Filipinos at home. If this trend continues, the poor in the country will increase to 95 million with a further shrinkage in the middle class.
* * *
A continuously decreasing middle class could push them into the politics of despair, as one general rightly pointed out at the Executive Committee. Historically, revolutions around the world were led by the middle class. It would be wishful thinking to expect the armed forces to side against the people.
As secretary of defense Fidel V Ramos said in 1988, “No government, no armed forces in the world can continue to protect the few who are very rich from the anger that arises out of the frustrations and disappointments of the many who are very poor. And especially if the wealth of the few is acquired through means that are unacceptable to the nation as a whole.”
* * *
A parliamentary federal system will allow the marginalized sectors like labor, women, farmers, urban poor of our society to be amply represented in the decision-making process. Or take the example of the civil service and the military whose officials retire in their mid-50s or early 60s when they are at the peak of experience and skills. By lowering the cost of running for public office, they can run for parliament.
As Pope Francis said, “Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.” The Pope could very well have been referring to the sad conditions in the Philippines foisted by a corrupt presidential system controlled by an elite political-business establishment.
Bayanko continues to meet with workers, farmers, fisherfolks, OFWs, women, teachers, urban poor federations, with soldiers, church leaders, provincial and municipal officials, to educate them on the merits of a parliamentary federal system. So far it has received a very enthusiastic response from these groups.
Ours is a battle of ideas. We have the facts and the figures. We have history on our side. Above all, we have faith in God. We will still change this country.