An interesting theme from commentaries overseas: a kind of all-pervasive mental and moral exhaustion afflicting national elites. Fin de siècle? The 1968 of our times (see contrasting views on that important year by Tom Stoppard and Tariq Ali; Filipinos had their 1968 in, well, 1970… it takes time for fashions to filter through…)? David Sirota thinks that in the United States, the possibility of a grassroots revolt ought to be considered:
America is in the throes of a powerful new uprising right now..
…this uprising is happening on both the Right and the Left. Like most revolts, it is rooted in a backlash to an Establishment widely seen as corrupt and morally decayed. This uprising has more picket signs and protests than pitchforks and pistols… It is a social phenomenon that is impacting all aspects of public life — our pop culture, our media, and most significantly, our upcoming national elections. It could take our country in a very different direction — perhaps positive (think universal health care, an end to the Iraq War, new trade policies), perhaps frighteningly negative (think immigrant bashing and a war with Iran).
Though today’s uprising has been going on since the two major explosions of the last decade — 9/11 and the Enron disaster — polls indicate that it is now intensifying in ways not seen before. Surveys reveal that the public despises its current president, and more importantly, that America is suffering a crisis of confidence in government as an institution. As Scripps Howard’s 2006 poll found, “anger against the federal government is at record levels” and “widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories” — most prominent being the one suggesting our leaders helped plot the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The political topography resembles that of the last major uprising in our history — the one that took place in the 1970s. America then as today faced the same crises that have catalyzed uprisings since colonists tossed tea over the sides of boats in Boston harbor: among others, an energy emergency, a national security quagmire, a recession, a financial meltdown, and an attack on democracy.
As that uprising gained steam, Democrats nominated an outsider candidate for the presidency (sound familiar?). But when that outsider was elected he and the Democratic Party didn’t effectively represent that uprising – and that uprising did not go away. On the contrary, it became more intense. And by 1980, conservative organizers used the candidacy of Ronald Reagan to channel that revolt into the full-fledged conservative movement we’ve been living under for a generation. Over the next two decades, this conservative movement changed America domestically (tax cuts and social service cuts), internationally (massive increase in the military budget), and politically (wholly changed electoral map).
This same pace of change could be upon us again today — though one key indicator suggests the specific kind of change could be different. According to Gallup’s biannual survey of attitudes toward social institutions, Americans’ disgust with government resembles that of the late 1970s — but the variation between then and now is the antipathy toward Corporate America. Whereas in 1979 one in three Americans told Gallup’s pollsters they had confidence in big business, today a little less than one in five express the same confidence. In 1979, almost two out of three citizens said they had faith in banks. Today, only two out of five say the same thing.
The trend bodes well for progressives. Conservatives’ close affiliation with big business puts them at a disadvantage in the Left-versus-Right competition to harness the current uprising…
Of course, today’s uprising could be squelched completely, with neither the Right nor the Left capitalizing on it. Many institutions inside our government and our political parties exist specifically to crush populist, mass-based revolts.
Jared Bernstien responds by saying,
David is obviously writing about bottom-up uprisings, in many cases, movements that are a reaction to government failure. But in my experience, these groups eventually are demanding that the government alter its policies. So we’ve got to think on both bottom-up and top-down tracks.
And the problem for the top-down track is that government is in big trouble. I’m speaking at the federal level, but let’s not get too romantic about local cases. I haven’t seen much evidence that Albany works that much better than DC.
There are lots of reasons for this, but certainly one of the main ones is that if you elect people who explicitly prophesize that government is the problem, they will fulfill that prophecy with a vengeance. And yes, they’ll enrich their cronies along the way.
The problem cuts deep into the agencies… The depth of dysfunction is astounding, and it’s going to take years to repair.
David reminds us that our country was founded partly on “the right of the people to alter or abolish” destructive government. I’m in the “alter” camp, and I’d like to hear someone with David’s insights and movement experience hold forth on what it’s going to take to get there. What steps ought we be taking now that will ultimately give progressive uprisings a public conduit through which their goals can be achieved?
Are there echoes in how the police are despised, even attacked, in China? See Cracks in China’s Armor. Is this all in marked contrast, perhaps, to what’s going on in Thailand, where those formerly characterized as reformists are now advocating the dismantling of parliamentary democracy, according to The Asia Sentinel’s anonymous correspondent in Thailand’s “New Politics” Charade:
The New Politics turns out to be a startlingly reactionary proposal to move Thailand’s parliamentary system towards a form of appointed corporatism, or what might be called a selectoral democracy. Thirty percent of MPs would come from elections, perhaps one per province, and the rest of MPS would derive from various occupations and associations. Sondhi says the proportion is not fixed, it’s up for debate.
The rationale for wanting to dismantle Thailand’s electoral system is evident: pro-Thaksin forces keep winning elections. And as Thaksin is said to represent everything bad about Thai politics, he can not be allowed to wield power directly or indirectly. Thus, for Sondhi, and it would seem the PAD leadership as whole, there is now a need to bring about a revolution in political representation.
The idea of examining alternatives to electoral democracy is not without some merit, for it is common knowledge that massive amounts of money are required to win parliamentary seats, making parliament a millionaire’s playground and a source of further monopolization and corruption. It wasn’t always so, Sondhi told the rally. In the 1970s socialist politicians in Thailand could get elected on the basis of their ideology and popular support, but the emergence of dirty politics in the 1980s crushed any such possibility in the present.
The New Politics has interesting antecedents. The PAD leadership has clearly been speaking to military figures (this is now well documented in the Thai language press) who tried to stifle the emergence of parliament in the 1980s. Indeed, selectoral democracy nicely fits with corporatist visions of the old “Revolutionary Council”. The Council, to which General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh was said to have an association, held that elections merely led to parliamentary dictatorship and proposed a form of corporate representation to realize the “general will”.
A former communist, Prasert Sapsunthon, was the inspiration for this Thai appropriation of Rousseau, the French theorist of the social contract. Prasert became a leading intellectual among military circles calling for non-elective forms of democracy. When the Revolutionary Council effectively declared itself a provisional government during the political crisis of 1988 the elected Chatichai government took it to court for treason. It then faded into obscurity, but its ideas have never quite gone away, finding support among small rightist groups and even in some labor circles.
The New Politics is unashamedly pro-military and even codifies the conditions under which military intervention may occur. Sondhi has spoken of four conditions for military intervention: when charges of lese majeste are not acted on; when a government is incompetent; when corruption is rife; when a government betrays national sovereignty.
This has striking parallels to many discussions taking place here in the Philippines (e.g., “Should the military be kept out of politics or does military interventionism represent a deus ex machina moment to be ardently desired?” or “The problem with elections is that the electorate elects idiots”, see smoke and Verisimilitude), and reminds me of something I brought up when Adrian Cristobal died: the enduring triumph of Marcos’ concept of a New Society helps explain why Edsa contained the seeds of its own destruction.
The papers today report P1 hike for jeepneys, buses; P10 for taxis. The transport sector has to be placated. Senator Escudero lays down the basis for the next round of placating -of workers- as reported in Inflation cancels wage hike; hope pinned on new law. The Catholic bishops have to be placated, too: Gov’t open to lowering, not scrapping, EVAT on oil.
The problem of course is that soothing all these sectors requires money, and proof of the President putting the nation’s money where her mouth is, will be in the national budget.
Former national treasurer Leonor Briones in her column says something germane to yesterday’s entry (and the foreign commentary above), this time from point of view of economists:
Last week, I talked to two eminent economists. One drew a picture of the gathering of a perfect economic storm. To him, all the signals are already making themselves felt: increased unemployment, accelerating inflation, escalating prices, capital flight, and rise in poverty levels. The social consequences of the economic storm are also building up: increase in suicides, rise in criminality , social disintegration, and loss of hope.
So how come people are not rising in anger? The other economist said that all these negative developments did not occur in one fell swoop. They were building up, one after the other. By the time the perfect economic storm sweeps the country, people will be so weakened they will not have the strength to bestir themselves and take action.
She also happens to think Arroyo’s hold on funds, spending habits ‘dangerous’. One presidential habit I’ve heard about, is that the President travels with a stack of blank government checks when she drops in on local government officials; she then fills in these checks personally, a habit that apparently gives professional bureaucrats the Willies.
Anyway, in her column, Briones says the executive department has to redo the proposed national budget, because the macroeconomic assumptions that served as the budget’s parameters have become obsolete in the months since the Budget Call was made in May. Among the assumptions made were: singe-digit inflation, a balanced budget by this year, and a Peso-Dollar exchange rate of 40 to 43 to 1.
The Inquirer editorial for its part, says that real oversight over the national budget is a Mission impossible.
Anyway, the Palace propaganda machine has begun testing potential messages for the State of the Nation Address. If the Palace number-crunchers are, well, number-crunching furiously now, to come up with new economic assumptions for the national budget, Governor Joey Salceda is also batting for his economic plan by claiming it has presidential approval.
So we can expect the budgetary process to pop in and out of the news in the coming weeks and months. For a closer look at the entire process, visit The Philippine Center for National Budget Legislation. And here’s their book: CNBLbook.pdf which provides a crash course in understanding how the budget’s put together, and what it contains. (The Department of Budget and Management website also makes available the Budget Call for 2009 and last year’s national budget-related documents: the General Appropriations Act for 2008, which was based on the President’s Budget Message for 2008,with supplementary material: the National Expenditures Program FY 2008, Staffing Summary FY 2008 and Budget Expenditures and Sources of Financing 2008.)
I’ve reproduced some charts from the Philippine Center for National Budget Legislation’s book, and supplemented them with some charts I prepared for my show.
The first thing they point out, is that the Executive Department dominates the national budget, with the ratios more or less constant. The 2004 budget, for example, has 68% of the monies devoted to, and in the hands of, the Executive Department, with the next-biggest chunk devoted to debt payments, and a relatively slim percentage for the legislature, the judiciary, and constitutional commissions.
The PCNBL helpfully presents past budgets in a color-coordinated manner:
And then explains what the color-coding means:
Most members of Congress spend their time on the yellow portions, and sometimes run out of time to adequately look into the blue portions, which are meant to supplement the expenses of government offices (in yellow). The blue portions are called Special Purpose Funds, and as this chart shows, they total more than what’s spent for the established offices of the government:
A page from the book explains why Alleba Politics, for example, can complain that the National Government is in arrears to the City of Davao, to the tune of 142 million pesos:
Special Purpose Funds are entirely in the hands of the President, who decides when they’re released and to whom -and this includes the pork barrel funds of members of Congress (a surprisingly slender 3% of the whole) as well as the revenue allocations of Local Government Units. In a sense, then, aside from the fixed (because tied to government’s obligation to fund existing employees and offices) national budget, there is a parallel national budget, one bigger than the fixed budget and purely within the discretion of the chief executive.
This chart shows that of these funds, the biggest chunk is for “Unprogrammed” Funds.
These are, in a sense, promissory funds: if they come in, then they can be spent for certain purposes, still pretty much at the chief executive’s discretion. The book explains this in detail:
These “wish ko lang” funds, in turn, have been growing, percentage-wise:
The book provides a glimpse of the budgets and expenses of the major agencies of the government. By way of illustration, here is a set of charts featuring expenditure programs for the different branches of government, and including samples of two constitutional bodies we all adore, the Comelec and the Ombudsman:
Then there’s a focus on some issues raised by the allocations for various departments and their flagship programs, for example:
As well as an introduction to lesser-known budgetary practices such as earmarking funds. One example the book focuses on is the Motor Vehicles’ User’s Charge, which the group says is the third-largest source of revenue for the government, with a tremendous amount collected in a few years:
The charge, levied on vehicle owners, is meant to be specifically used -or earmarked- for a specific fund, with four main programs funded by it:
Subject to two departments:
Here’s the introduction to the fund in the book:
The organization hopes that their book will enable congressmen to deliberate on the budget more wisely and efficiently, and that it will inform the public so that it can keep tabs on budget preparation and execution.
How many people in our country’s government understood the ramifications of a fully deregulated energy market when price discovery would be left to the futures market and not to the physical market itself. A futures market that the Philippines would have no jurisdiction over.
That means all oil companies would be free to price their inventories at the prevailing price in the spot market regardless of the price they paid for it. Hilo ba tayong lahat?????
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/jul2008/bw2008078_706271_page_2.htm
“Worse, in states such as Texas, where utilities deregulation means rate hikes for electricity can be based on the futures market price for natural gas, we all paid higher electric bills thanks to Amaranth and its manipulation. Let’s call it the gift that keeps on giving. I should add that at the time, we were told that natural gas supplies were short; butâ€â€shades of Enronâ€â€one e-mail from Amaranth’s lead trader during this period of manipulation read: “It’s a classic pump and dump…boy, I bet you see some CFTC inquiries [concerning] the last two days.” Click here for that report.”
Karl (at 1:33 pm), thanks. I agree that NGO’s (and individuals) should not stop at fiscalizing (and protest) but should put forward solutions as well. Where i work, some managers believe that whenever we come to them with problems, we should also come with a corresponding set of solutions that they can choose from. They say that’s because they are not there to solve problems but, rather, to manage them. (Which i guess is why they are paid higher. Go figure.)
UPn (at 1:36 pm), nope. I agreed with Jeg that this was the attitude of the Upper/Middle class. I don’t agree with the attitude itself as it is elitist, and by now you know how much i hate elitists.
From today’s Strait’s Times, here’s what Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew says of the current political turmoil in Thailand (and Malaysia but i’m quoting only the Thailand portion):
He sees through the charade of Thai ‘New Politics’.
another prophet of doom. sheesh
i could have believed the book if not for the very subjective analysis.
CVJ,
nod,but when ceos solve problems middlemanagers call it micromanagement;never mind taking credit for it just don’t come up with the solution.
like bart simpson’s favorite line; damned if you do and damed if you don’t.
Looking at the history of OPEc.
It happnened like this humingi ng saklolo ang venezuela sa middle east dahil mas pinaburan ni Eisenhower ang mexico at canada.due to”national security” reasons.
rumesbak sila sa pag form ng OPEC.
the arab israeli wars made it worse.
now history is about to repeat itself with Iran threatening to strike israel and Israel saying that they are not that stupid to do that.
nice campaign platform for both Obama and McCain on how to negotiate.
going back to the sixties
funny that nixon went after vietnam after courting china and ussr.
coke established itself and china; he established partnership with ussr on medicine military and space exploration and of course oil.
they thought they could stop the vietnamese by bombarding cambodia,it backfired,instead of vietnam humbly submitting they went to war.
sabi we were affected by what happened outside,as to why there was martaial law. I guess the evnts above is not even half of the story.
to cvj: I can see some things for me to say that Jeg’s sentence:
has enough reasons (e.g. the educational attainment of bottom 30%-in-income-percentil is abysmal) that the sentence is more true than not.
In addition to discrediting it as elitism and that you don’t feel it is true…. what else do you say? I am not the only one who has gotten frustrated when you disagree with a sentence because you say it is from an “elitist mindset”.
….it is from an elitist mindset and then stop without providing an alternative solution ( or at least, an alternative view).
UP N student:
“leytenian : I can think of three to five organizations that will want to lease 1-million hectares and not ask for guarantees from the Philippine government. Won’t even need agriculture-quality land. Pick the right one, and dollar-kickbacks to Yap not likely.”
from the business stand point, why would shangrila and SMC lease? if land available is for free. what’s the point of SMC and Shangrila being a public company ( i mean selling tsocks to private) if its leasing.
2nd reason: why would shangrila and SMC partner with the other 5 if there’s no guarantee .
the bottom of this : when shangrila makes money and our government is investing , then chances are the government will make money not only from employment revenue but continues corporate taxation that can be used as actual government guarantee.
when government and big corporations with proven profits join together , it is powerful.
the 180 mil bridge of the congressman i mention could have been more appropriate if he partners with hotels, malls and other businesses in the area to also invest with it. his decision making should be based from employment generated from big businesses to assure its expansion in the area and the employment generated from small businesses. why put up a bridge if decision is there’s no actual demand from public.
the philippines has been investing in project with no projected income statement and actual demand from its public.
correction: why put up a bridge if decision is not based from public demand.
UP N student:
“I can think of three to five organizations that will want to lease 1-million hectares and not ask for guarantees ”
for the other 5 organizations… I would suggest for them to market its land to corporation directly in partnership and joint venture. In the business stand point, you always partner and join venture with someone who has more than you ( rule of thumb) .
what’s the use if its idle. make money out of it. they can Create a business plan or even they can present it to any Angel Investors. ( the whole package of an actual proposal).
Libby’s , Honda, Toyota, Ford, and any other companies in need of ethanol, food or beverages as its target market for example.
organizations should not wait for things to happen also if its intention is non profit organization to help the people.
The Country’s Balancing Act. When the Program of Ethanol Development and Use was proposed it is more utilizing Clean Energy than saving on Cost, since during the time the program started the Oil cost in the $40/barrel and even at current price the ethanol mix is even more expensive than regular diesel or gas. Now that it’s effect on climate change is even doubtful, but its effect on rise of Food Prices is very Clear, politicians can be forgiven for doing their favourite pastime, Flip-Flop, our Premier was famous for it, but still won a majority for his re-election: He did Flip-Flops, but there are times that Flip Flopping is necessary because of unforseen developments:
Province Premier has Second thought on Ethanol Plan:
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/457654
Jump in food prices spurs policy shift on 10% gas scheme
Jul 10, 2008 04:30 AM
The province is reconsidering a plan to double the amount of ethanol added to gasoline due to concerns the corn-based fuel is boosting food prices, says Premier Dalton McGuinty.
In a policy shift, McGuinty indicated yesterday he is backing off the plan to require 10 per cent ethanol additives in gasoline in 2010.
“Nationally, it’s going to 5 per cent. The issue for us is whether it’s in the public interest for us to stretch to 10 per cent,” McGuinty told reporters at Queen’s Park. (NOTE: this is Federally mandated Policy)
“We’ve got to pay attention to some of the other developments, including food costs, to make sure that we are not contributing to that.”
The price of corn has doubled in three years in large part due to increased demand for ethanol because of government-mandated fuel-level regulations in the United States and Canada. The use of plant materials for biofuels has contributed to a major increase in global food prices in the past year, which has sparked food riots in 30 countries and threatens to push millions of poor people in developing nations into starvation.
The TTC (Toronto Transit Commission, the city Mass Transit System) is also weighing its biofuel use. It uses a biodiesel blend of 95 per cent ultra low sulphur diesel and 5 per cent soybean oil that is more expensive than regular diesel.
The transit system, in looking at its fuel needs for next year, is reviewing actual environmental benefits and the impact on food prices of using soybean oil in fuel.
“As a result, there is the possibility that the commission may not purchase biofuel in 2009,” staff say in a report for today’s TTC meeting.
An association representing renewable fuel producers yesterday urged McGuinty to stick to his original plan for 10 per cent ethanol.
“In light of the record price of oil, and the need for viable climate change solutions, the case for biofuels has never been stronger,” said Robin Speer, a vice-president at the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association, in an email. “Biofuels cushion the impact at the gas pump by reducing the cost of gasoline by up to 15 per cent.”
There are nine ethanol plants in Ontario, most of which use corn, and 20 across the country.
In April, McGuinty, who has long extolled Ontario’s ambitious biofuels program, denied ethanol was forcing up the cost of food.
“We’ve taken a look at this and we’re convinced that our decision here in Ontario is not having a significant impact because of a whole bunch of circumstances that are driving up food prices,” he said at an agricultural summit April 16.
He has also been pushing the government’s purchase of so-called “flex fuel” vehicles that run on fuel that is 85 per cent ethanol.
Last week, the province announced $7.5 million for research into biofuels made from agricultural waste such as corn husks and manure instead of food crops.
Progressive Conservative MPP Ernie Hardeman (Oxford) pounced on McGuinty’s flip-flop yesterday.
“So, which is it, premier? Is more ethanol a good idea or not?”
Karl (at 7:19 pm), come to think of it you have a point. It used to be that when there was a technical problem, the executives left the troubleshooting to their techies. Now, with the availability of google, the top execs ask the techies to try out what they found on the web. Quite frustrating as well but perhaps a lesser evil as long the bosses know their limits.
UPn (at 8:31 pm), in my blog, i have already explained why i believe those who possess the elitist mindset are committing a fundamental error in characterizing Philippine Society, and by extension, themselves:
http://www.cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/05/philippine-society-and-elitist-mindset.html
It is one thing to say that lack of education is a problem or that poverty is a problem, it’s quite another thing to consider the people who have these problems as the problem which seems to be your view. That kind of thinking is what enabled Manuel Gallego III (a member of Benign0’s ‘Get Real Philippines’) to shamelessly propose the forced sterilization of parents of street children. It’s as if, in his eyes, they are less than human and more like pets who can be neutered.
to cvj: You give me the impression that the iimportance you give to the Gallegos of this world has impacted your ability to be of help to Pinas poor. Think again education. That the poor of the Philippines are unproductively less educated is true. This problem requires attention. And then there is the other problem (Manuel gallego as evidence) — there are people in this country who proposes trash solutions (castrate them!!!) to the poor being less than able to contribute to the country’s economic activity or quality of votes. [I guess Gallego is no different from the extreme leftists. The oligarchs are the scourge of this earth, kill them all!!!!]
If you can only help with solving one or the other, towards solving which problem will you give your cooperation and effort to?
A few elitists (of the elite, i.e. better-educated, generates more income, speaks and writes better English, knows more about the history of Jesus, etcetera) are concerned on education-for-the-poor. Elitists — they think the poor are incapable of helping themselves without help from others.
And some have a mindset of “… I have more important things to do, but here is a check!!” and others actually give both money and their time. So they will work with you even if they know that you want to nullify them.
I have an impression that your “… but they are elitists!!!” stops you from doing the bayanihan-thing.
regarding canada’s ethanol… of course, the backing off was taken into consideration that once ethanol supply exceeds demand as global productions are being encouraged, this could mean, the dependency of US from oil reserve from canada will be diminished. the money making machine of canadian oil will decrease due to decrease demand… in the long run, ethanol or other alternatives , might be expensive to start ( supply and demand) but it will slow down effects of global warming. so… short term and long term planning is in the hands of the in charge. i already know that US is not backing off its green program from preventing urban sprawl, green buildings , new building codes for energy savings and car companies are making more hybrid cars… in the long run…. oil dependency will be corrected. the bubble is almost bursting with speculators… time to get my money out of oil.
for philippines, the poor and the farmers can continue planting and be self sufficient, if there’s surplus then so be it. our farmers has been sitting and not doing work for a while due to imports. it’s time not to get lazy and be productive. concern with fertilizer… then the government subisidies and supervised training by DA.
Successful politicans know budget politics. If hold on to power is the end of politics, the budget (and the accompanying pork) is the means. In a democratic government, how else does one leader compel ambitious others to bend to his will if not through the public purse. Remember: who gets what when and how.
The President knows the game of follow the leader. You have to be where the money is.
philippines has to go back to basic… basic commodities and its production. attract more tourists in our 7100 islands as businessmen in the emerging market will be suffering from stress.. a great place to relax is in our 7100 island paradise. cebu is a good example from tourism revenue. i think the focus should be employment, education, reforestration , and healthcare. there’s a niche for a luxury cruise line. disney cruise is planning for expansion in the Asian market.
when marriot, shangrila, hilton and other brand names came to cebu… it employed so many of the local people in the hotel and restuarant industry. many small business has also benefited. these companies are not the Oligarch. they are not appropriate for privatization proposal by IMF to Philippines. The Oligarch are our politicians who makes money without generating employment.
sulpicio may have created employment but dead bodies exceed employment number. not good. this is the type of oligarchic service that should have been subject for privatization. as mentioned by hvrds, this company is financed by one of the banks that our government guarantee… hmmmnnn. numbers are getting complicated.
UPn (at 11:04 pm), in Philippine Society the elitist mindset has been a major obstacle to development [towards modernity]. For one thing, it’s what gives otherwise decent folks in the Middle (and Upper) Class the sense of entitlement to condone Gloria Arroyo’s cheating because the ones who got cheated are their perceived inferiors. It’s also what has allowed Oligarchs to thrive for as long as they have because the middle class, as Jeg commented above (at 12:05 pm), identifies more with the Upper Class.
Regarding your impression (at at 11:20 pm), if that were true, then why did i endorse Abe Margallo’s proposal for a Bayanihan Pact?
http://www.cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/11/abe-margallo-philippine-elites.html
I believe that even an elitist can be well-meaning and kind-hearted as a person, but i also believe that elitism itself is a degenerate idea in the same league as racism.
“MLQ3 description of GMA traveling with blank checks is proof positive that she knows that you buy loyalty in this country.”
Corruption in the Philippines is widespread. Promotions in both government and military worth fortunes for each person who signs the promotion papers (just thinking of the prepaid senators were against Jamby when she held the promotion of military officers). Garapalan pa with, “Saan na yun sobre at magkano ba nan dyan”. Some have to sell properties or get loans just to shell for the amount. This created a cycle of corruption when the person get promoted and do the same thing to next person in line and do other creative jobs while in power to recoup the money earlier spent.
Remember the only 2nd general facing court martial is in Mindanao for collecting money on soldier applicants – the lowest tier who barely have anything or say anything. The smart generals thought that was an overkill when destabilization or news of unrest is already an extra income during loyalty check (literally check for each general).
“there’s a good point for our government to invest with the company.”
That is what GSIS and SSS are doing. However, an overly enterprising agency president also invested in worthless paintings and pocketed the difference – culture of corruption.
“philippines has to go back to basic… basic commodities and its production.”
That is possible if Filipinos can separate themselves from the culture of corruption. Those in power don’t have the patience waiting the long cycle of production-sell-collection. Getting paid for something needed is quicker as facilitator.
In the recent Ces Drillon kidnapping, Indanan town mayor Isnaji became a collateral damage when he understimated and failed to share the loot with other fixers.
cvj: “endorse” only gets you so far, I meant do.
You did say before you focus on assigning blame. As of now, blaming Gallego only goes so far — you don’t have a big enough club. Maybe action —- cooperation, not talking about cooperation — is the better approach.
And cooperation with with the devil 👿 those sum-of-bitches elitists, may be appropriate. They can sign fatter checks. Consorting with elitists gets the CBCP places; my opinion is that consorting with the elite can work, too, in terms of helping the poor.
[Again…. my opinion.]
“Elitists  they think the poor are incapable of helping themselves without help from others…..have a mindset of … I have more important things to do, but here is a check!!†.
That puts every Filipinos in the country as an elitists. Filipinos paid their maids, driver, etc… for convenience. They paid the policemen, registrar, tax collector, property tax assessor, customs, government contacts, priests (annul), etc.. not for the right amount due but for a way out…
I am the least believer of real change in the Philippine setting after 2010 precisely because no one can change the pervasive rule of elitist mindset of paying fellow Filipinos for convenience institutionalizing corruptions in every layer of the Philippine society.
“That kind of thinking is what enabled Manuel Gallego III to shamelessly propose the forced sterilization of parents of street children are less than human and more like pets who can be neutered.”
Not far from the political mindset that voters are comodities (not a thinking human) and can be bought by cash.
Those salary figures give the impression that there are too many government employees.
P10B had been spent for the AFP modernization. At P50 to $1 that’s $200 M enough to acquire 4 Saab Gripen or 40 Mi-17 helicopters or 40 M1-Abrams tank. I guest the AFP would rather eat than fight.
The P300 M appropriation for the AFP modernization can buy 1 new C-130 Hercules. How many Jollibee hamburgers can you buy with that amount? Cheese and without cheese.
Money is the crux of most evil, and Gloria knows that very well. As an economist-cum-politician, she has learned the dictum that “whoever holds the gold makes the rule.”
Like it or not, the budget of the country hides a huge sum of money that one person can dispose of – all in the name of power and glory, no matter what the consequences may be. Never mind if it dooms the Philippines, or its inhabitants forever.
Sadly, money has been used to woe everybody, even those in white robes, under the guise of “donations to charity.” Tempted, those who are allured by the glitter of gold have also become corrupt themselves, by compromising truth for practicality and convenience, and by sheer alliance with the devil.
Based on the comments ;only a few scrutinized the budget
lahat may conclusion na.
see what i mean on having information in front of you is not enough, you should know what to do with it.
ilagay mo yan sa mga dyaryo ilan ang magbabasa nyan.
the office of the ombudsman 2006 lang medyo tinaas;
kaya kahit tambakan mo ng kaso ang ombudsman di gagalaw yan dahil konti budget.
chr has even less;so wala tayong magagawa kung hanggang press release na lang ang magawa ng CHR.
nakakhilo tingnan isa isa kaya I can’t blame those who did not even bother to take a look.
on modernization.
so wala ng threat nokor (are we sure?)at iran israel tensions will be left to the next us president,so hindi na ba natin kailangan imodernize afp.
fine, let the asg continue outrun our patrol crafts, the chinese vietamese,taiwanese fishermen continue to fish on our waters.the afp now believes daw that the palparan solution will never work so should we stop modernizing? peace talks,talks talk tama laway lang ang puhunan.
I know corruption trickles down to the baranggay level,alam natin ito.
so GI JOE cartoon commercial is wrong that knowing is half of the battle.
UPn (at 1:36 am) , if your idea of cooperation is similar to the way the CBCP consorts with the elitists, hoping to get a share of Gloria Arroyo’s blank checks, then that would just be perpetuating the very pre-modern system that has caused our underdevelopment in the first place. I did say before that i would support any Oligarch candidate who has a credible plan for a soft landing:
http://www.quezon.ph/1687/the-dead-flame-reflections-for-the-weekend/#comment-739616
As for your claim that i focus on assigning blame, you just need to read back this thread to see that what you’re saying is at best, a half-truth.
http://www.quezon.ph/1859/quailing-before-the-palaces-pet-magistrates/#comment-852498
Karl, on the budget, what’s glaring to me is the 3x jump in the permanent position salaries, bonuses and other benefits of the Office of the President in 2005 compared to the previous year.
… consort with the elitists (or even… shudder…. USA) … to get (pesos out of) Gloria Arroyo’s blank checks ….. to fund programs for the poor.
Repeat : to fund programs for the poor .
The USA, too, can be a source of funds. [Also see DJB Rizalist’ writings about the Myanmar syndrome among UP professors, etcetera. ]
and those with a distaste for GMA’s checks really have other options. They can pound the pavement to get an audience with the Ayalas or the Gokongwei’s, or try to beg/borrow from foreign NGO’s..
kg, obviously the commenter preceding you (who tries to sound like an expert) did not read the budget. otherwise, he would know the simple fact that, other than a relatively minuscule portion of the budget that goes to the president’s discretionary fund, the bulk of the people’s money is used to run the entire government; meet foreign loan obligations; finance public works and services; procurement and maintenance of equipment; public education and health, national security, among other things. all these are expenses mandated by law, not on “gloria”‘s say so. to say that all public money is disposed of “by one person”, is the height of ignorance and naivete.
and speaking of consort with the USA … their Air Force is one of the organizations that I believe will be very interested in a million hectares. Not only will there be NO request for the Philippine government to guarantee any loans; it is the US Air Force that will commit to providing a minimum amount of US-dollar-denominated yearly-lease payments.
The US Navy is a second organization that will be interested in acreage (with access to the sea). And poor-quality very-low-yield land will satisfy both these organizations.
—————————-
If not the US… Russia may be interested.
UPn (at 8:37 am), consorting with GMA would be rewarding bad behavior on her part. Besides, it turns what is supposed to be her duty into a favor.
for discussion-purpose only : if you put together the land area of Rizal (130,300 hectares), Bataan(137,300 hectares) , and Batangas (316,600 hectares) … and then add Albay (255,300 hectares)… you are still short one-million hectares.
cvj… then an option is to defer yakking about GMA and instead focus on obtaining money from the Gokongwei’s or the Gates foundation….. to fund programs for the poor.
“The organization hopes that their book will enable congressmen to deliberate on the budget more wisely and efficiently, and that it will inform the public so that it can keep tabs on budget preparation and execution.”
Between 10-15% of government revenues come from perosnal income taxes.
The rest are corporate income taxes, exise taxes, customs duties,consumption taxes and payments for government services.
Corporate and personal income taxes make up between 30-40% of total revenues.
Hence a very small sector of the economy are actually seeing their incomes confiscated with very little in return. This is the sector that gave rise to Edsa I and Edsa II. They are mostly separate from the main population sector. They are the ones who live behind gated communties and do not depend on local government services. They are also the ones mostly populating the new economic subsector of BPO’s.
Their economic self-interest is more integrated with foreign companies than with anything to do with the domestic economy. Hence they are heavily inflenced by the Makati Business Club, Management Association of the Philippines and Financial Executives of the Philippines. The heart of the neo-colonial foundation of the country. Their mindset has been globalized for generations. Their guru is the American Chinese Wash Sycip, the de facto Ambassador of Greater China.
One of the major integrating forces between the PRC and the global economy is Greater China. They are the major investors in their own homeland.
They take their lead predominatly from Amrika. The only method that is keeping American influence in the world is their dollar hegemony over the world trading and financial sytem backed up by a first class military.
The merchant and commercial class will always tend towards that force that can protect property.
The New Romans have almost 700 garrisons around the globe to protect the system.
Except for certain countries the degree of influence over emerging economies down to the basics is dominated by empire.
hvrds: How much of government funds comes from that much-talked about 👿 VAT?
Nash said:
“what is more important is the year-end report.
how is it that senators and congressmen and the executive do not submit a DETAILED report on where the spent the money (and no rounding off to the nearest 1000 please.)
in the UK, with the right to information act, you can look up how much so and so MP paid for taxi or take-away dinner. why can’t we do the same given that congressmen are even overstaffed?”
I would like to share some information:
1. Congress is not exempt from the audit of the COA. That agency, which has the mandate of ensuring that all government agencies spend their budgets in accordance with the General Appropriations Act and prescribed accounting rules and procedures, comes up with a report EVERY YEAR. Those are public documents.
2. Every year, Congress conducts public hearings on the government’s budget where the public is free to attend, observe proceedings and even talk to the legislators to ask questions. Those are public proceedings.
3. COngressmen are overstaffed? Please be informed that the budget allocated to every congressman is good for only SIX staffmembers. That can be verified.
I appreciate people who are very much concerned with how government works. It’s really about time every Filipino cares about the government which is supposed to serve the people. If there is anyone out there who would like to do his or her share to make this government more ideal, I am inviting them to visit me at my office for a dialogue on what really is going on inside government.
Better yet, I would like to invite them to do an observation duty in a Congressman’s office to get a real hands-on experience of how a congressional office is run. That would really provide sufficient authority to those who comment on legislators.
If anyone wants to take up the cudgels for leasing land the size of ALBAY to the US Navy and land the size of Bataan to the US Air Force, the positive reasons are:
(i) they are not asking for Pinas to guarantee any loans;
(ii) payments will be from them, not from Pinas;
(iii) low-quality land , not agricultural land;
(iv) aircraft- and shipping-maintenance jobs, maybe China language experts to be hired;
and the oligarchs will favor the lease because, as hvrds says :
The merchant and commercial class will always tend towards that force that can protect property.
Maybe Nash or cvj can cite the reasons why Kuok is better than US Air Force.
and US Air force/Navy will want a commitment (lease of 50-yr or longer), not a one-night stand.
to Congressman Biazon: The exhibits that MLQ3 posted suggested that in 2007, the Executive Department shorted Pasay to tune of over P60-million?
If yes/Pasay got shorted, what is the recourse for the Pasay LGU? Cowering in fear of the hail and lightning that Malacanang can unleash may be the only option, but it sure sounds counterproductive.
From 2002 to 2008 the AFP got P20B for the modernization program. P10B was already spent. There’s still P10B left. I hope they get the next P10B right.
That’s $400 M at P50 to $1. What can you get with that? Let’s check what Thailand can do with that amount of money.
1. On July 14th, 2000, the Thai government decided to purchase 16 F-16s (15 A’s and 1 B in the ADF version) to establish a third F-16 squadron for $74.5 M
2. The Royal Thai Navy ordered six multi-mission Sikorsky S-70B Seahawk helicopters to be deployed from the Chakrinaruebet in 1997. Costing US$138 million, these helicopters are designed for use in an anti-submarine role.
3. Nine ex-Spanish Matador AV-8Ss on order for US$90 million.
4. Under the contract signed in July 1992, the Chakrinaruebet is being constructed at Bazan’s El Ferrol yard in Spain. The carrier will cost an estimated US$257 million, or US$365 million if fully equipped with combat systems and armament.
Look at what Thailand got for leasing an air base to Singapore. The air base is not even a million hectares in area.
‘On November 18th, 2004 it was announced that Thailand was to receive the remaining 7 RSAF F-16A/B’s (3 Alpha models and 4 Bravo models). They were all handed over in the course of January 2005. Instead of a standard purchase between two governments, these airframes are donated by the government of Singapore to the Thai Air Force. In return the RSAF can train on the Thai air base of Udon Thani a number of days each year.’
To congressman Biazon:
1. Congress is not exempt from the audit of the COA. That agency, which has the mandate of ensuring that all government agencies spend their budgets in accordance with the General Appropriations Act and prescribed accounting rules and procedures, comes up with a report EVERY YEAR. Those are public documents.
the agency is not functioning well. it does not communicate with the public of what’s been done. Public documents will not be understood by many except a few. The schedule of audit and purpose must be clarified. Which region was given budget, how much and for what.
2. Every year, Congress conducts public hearings on the government’s budget where the public is free to attend, observe proceedings and even talk to the legislators to ask questions. Those are public proceedings.
I understand but this information are not again understood nor disclose properly to the public. The Department of Budget must BREAK down expenses or financial statement according to region, city or provinces. The annual budget we have above above is a consolidated statement. I don’t see my region’s budget s and my towns’ budget. I also don’t see who approves it and who credit it from BSP. How can my people in my region get engage in hearings if actual budget propose for our region are not fully disclose. How much and for what? A website for every town is even better. Proposed budget and its purpose should be disclosed. All proposed project approved by meeting and hearings must disclose actual expenses. All towns belonging to a province or region will consolidate all financial statement into one ( the regional website) … The big budget will easily be understood.
I don’t think we have the right system of accounting. We do have the right principle and theory. But the process of implementation for clarity do not exist with the current administration. When would be the change for total transparency? 20 forgotten?
3. COngressmen are overstaffed? Please be informed that the budget allocated to every congressman is good for only SIX staffmembers. That can be verified.
with all due respect, I think the complain is not the actual overstaffing. I think the complain was more on finding positive RESULT of performance. I expect my leader to perform according to public demand not because it is his/her demand.
The Annual Budget is just a Budget. Looking at Senate and Congress… who cares with those numbers…. Department of Budget must BREAKDOWN EXPENSES from barangays all the way to the top. This way, when i see discrepancies in numbers, I know exactly what I will ask during meetings and hearings. The Annual Budget Sucks.