What are we in power for?

“What are we in power for?” The statement was attributed to late Senator Jose Avelino who was reported to have said this in a caucus of the Liberal Party in 1949 after President Elpidio Quirino ordered his investigation for graft and corruption. His statement had become the banner story of several dailies and hence, Avelino suffered from its unintended consequences. The rhetorical question that he had asked had become the destructive spell that led to the downfall of his political career.

What are we in power for? This question provides the answer which we have been dying to hear but which no right thinking government officials would ever give.

Just recently, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) admitted to have used the savings of certain government agencies to augment the shortfall in the pork barrel allocations of some legislators, an action which the DBM dubbed as the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP). A senator’s disclosure had linked the DAP to the “procured” conviction of the former Chief Justice by the Senate Impeachment Court in 2012. The legality of the DAP is now before the Supreme Court. Soon, we will know whether the DBM is correct that the DAP has constitutional bearing.

Meanwhile, officials of the Social Security System (SSS) had appropriated more than a million hundred pesos for their bonuses. According to the Executive Officer of the SSS, the grant is justifiable since the SSS needs to compensate its officials well if it is to compete with the private sector in the hiring of qualified professionals. The justification finds support in the statement of a Malacanang official that the grant of such huge bonuses is legally permissible.

   

In similar fashion, the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (Philhealth) was reported to have paid its officials and employees P1.45 billion in various bonuses in 2012 and P1.245 billion in 2011. Philhealth officials claimed that there was nothing wrong with these since everyone in the quasi-public corporation received a bonus.

While it may be admitted that these disbursements are all above board, their propriety remains highly questionable. Indeed, there might be no legal impediment for such disbursements. Law could not have set a ceiling as to how much could be given as incentives for exemplary performance of duties. Seldom does the law deal in details. Oftentimes, the law sets the parameter but not the millimetre of one’s permissible conduct.   

            The issue therefore is not one of legality but of moral propriety. The formulation that a legally permissible course of action is not necessarily morally justifiable is still the acceptable norm today. No amount of semantics may change it. No person, however genius, can twist it.

            Let us put the situations mentioned above to the test of propriety. Could the officials concerned allocate such huge amount of money for purposes other than what seem to be for the public good? Yes, they certainly could do so. The next question of course is a question of judgement: Given that they could do it legally, should they actually do it? The records are unmistakeable. They decided in favour of the proposition. Nobody registered any objection to such decision; it must have been unanimously agreed upon.

            The most difficult part of this test of propriety is finding an explanation which is more plausible that the ones advanced by the said officials. This is extreme difficult. Even if we should disregard the consequences of their action, we would still fail in finding justification for them. Their action is unjustifiable. No right thinking person can accept what these officials have been saying.

             All told, it would be preferable if those officials have been true to themselves by admitting the spirit that had animated them during their deliberation. It would be more acceptable to hear that they did so because they believed that they have the power to make such a decision than to cater to the argument that they decided to do so for the good of the agency that they are managing. An honest crook seems more preferable than a dishonest one. After all, they say that honesty is a virtue. 

What would you do with a million cash?

"Let's make believe that all of a sudden, you had a million dollars, what's the first thing you would buy and why would you buy it?"

The year was 1973. Ms. Margie Moran, the Philippines’ most beautiful woman, had stunned the audience with her clear-cut answer that earned for her the Miss Universe title: "A house and lot because it's the most expensive thing and I can't afford it. If I had a million bucks, I'd buy a house a lot and live by myself, and other people, of course." (Source:  <http://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/49315/top-10-unforgettable-beauty-pageant-answers/3>)

What would you buy with a million cash?

            Fictional and historical characters did something good with the millions that they have.

Edmond Dantes of Alexander Dumas’ The Count of Monte Cristo bought his way up to avenge himself and put powerful men to justiee. Jean Valjean of Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables used a bishop’s million worth of mercy to redeem his soul from perdition and to save others from damnation. Oskar Schindler, a German industrialist during World War II, used his millions to rescue 1,200 Jews from concentration and death camps. Alfred Nobel, realizing that he and his brother had become, “The merchant of death” after inventing the dynamite, left all his fortune to honor extraordinary men and women for their outstanding achievements in physics, chemistry, medicine, literature, and for work in peace. 

These men had spent their millions for something greater than themselves. They gave the world an invaluable lesson: a million bucks comes with great responsibilities.

            So, what would you buy if you have a million pesos?

            How about food and water? In our time, more than two-thirds of the population is wallowing in deprivation and poverty. Jobs might be available, but most of these are temporary and unstable. Food is slowing becoming a rare commodity. Meanwhile, the water sources of the world continue to dry up and muddle. Scientists have predicted that the next war will be fought over food and potable water. The world is sure to faee a great humanitarian crisis over the lack of food and water. And not even a million pesos can guarantee a long term access to food and water.

            How about real estates? Well, Ms. Margie Moran is right. Real estates are getting more and more expensive. It seems that the Earth itself is shrinking as time passes by. Truth to tell, people are making so many babies without praying to God to give them additional world to inhabit and populate. Indeed, ownership is becoming a fast fading concept. A new approach to homelessness and land insecurity is needed to resolve people’s conerns for permanent and dignified habitat. And even with a million bucks, one cannot simply feel that sense of security which traditional goes with land ownership. You will need more than a million pesos to live a secured and dignified life.   

            How about education? Intelligence, (and especially common sense), is becoming rare nowadays. Education has a price of course. Schools need to invest in state of the art facilities and hire good teachers to be competitive. And with college and post-graduate degrees becoming imperative, people of substance need to earn more so that they can go to good universities. However, while diplomas may be quantifiable, intelligence and good sense are simply beyond any percuniary estimation. They are priceless. As such, a million pesos will not make you more intelligent than anyone who was born with a good brain and the ability to use it well.

            How about public position? Oh yes, with a million pesos you will have a fighting chance to be elected councilor in a third or second class muncipality in the Philippines. Political power comes with a price. The more money you invest, the more power you acquire. This is how our electoral democracy works. Unfortunately, a million pesos is insignificant compared to the tens and hundreds of millions or billions that ogres and vultures in high places are playing with.

            So what would you buy with a million pesos?

Hmm, show me a million bucks and I’ll figure it out for you.  

Special Message for L4A Batch 2010-2011

Posted: Apr 28, '11 4:26 AM RCMCORNER.Multiply.com for everyone

There are two things that I do not like doing. First, attending parties, and second, writing my speech. Since I was told that that I should do at least one of these tonight, I am constrained to write a simple message to you. My predicament prevented my presence in your gathering tonight. Anyway, may this make up for my absence.

            This is the nth time that I was invited to attend a celebration for graduating BSLM students. In several instances in the past, I always had a convenient excuse not to be around. Well, last year, a chronic back pain provided an excuse. But today, it is different. I have to be around at the place where I am now—it’s both duty and privilege.

When you get older, you’ll find that many things should be taken seriously.  I say older because you are still young despite the looks in the faces of some of your seatmates.  Rejoice because you are still young. You still have the magic in your eyes and the wonder in your heart. As you go older, you’ll find out that life is more of a challenge, a process of becoming.

            

The four years that you have spent taking up the BS Legal Management program are incomparable with any event in your life. After you received your diploma, and when you’d look back, you could sense that those four-difficult year feels like one day—a day of excitement, intolerance, disappointment, uncertainty, and fear.   You could not bring back time of course. Time flies, and we, with it. You have to settle with remembering those great days of your life. 

            You would remember some of your teachers with respect. Some would be remembered for their rudeness or bigotry. Some will be recalled for their stupidity while others will be remembered as mere copy cats. And of course, there would those who are not worth remembering at all.

            Despite all the heartaches and headaches, you could proudly tell others that the institution which gave you your diploma is the best of schools. Indeed, that college in Mataas na Lupa,  Lipa City is the best school in Mataas na Lupa, Lipa City. That is your Alma Mater; you have no other option but to be proud of it.

Of course, I would remember you. I could recall each one of you; there’s no doubt about it. How could I forget you when you are the only class who made a biography in a legal writing course? Well, not everyone had been extended the privilege of taking up the legal writing class under me.  

            On top of this, I know that you could not forget me. I know how difficult it has been for you.  Attending a Statutory Construction class at 7:30am and standing for at least an hour during recitation s are experiences that you would not always have in your life.  Having a hot headed teacher is always terrifying. A demanding teacher is always hated.  I know that you have felt this, especially during your early days under me.  I know that it has been difficult for you. I am aware that if you have been given a chance, you would ask for a teacher who is lenient, and who would always impress and patronize you. But that’s not how life should be. Life is challenge. It is a process. It is a becoming.  It is a struggle, sometimes with pain and with tears, but always with joy.  You have experienced life in my class. You have felt it. And I hope that you would remember those days when you have felt that you’re still alive.

            Few days after tonight, I’ll no longer be your teacher. Well, insofar as I am concerned, you were just one of the students that have crossed my path. You are special just as all other students had been special. For a time, we might have shared the same road and have traveled together— this did not make you extra-specials however.   I have treated you the way mortals are to be treated.  And you are mortals, not demigods.

            Now, you have to travel alone.  Along the way, you will meet some other persons who can enrich your life.  Stick with them. Learn from them good things as good things do not grow out of speculation but from experience and examples.  Experience life and feel it as a precious gift. Take risks. Never be afraid.

            In your dealings with anyone, especially with your friends, bear this in mind: DO NOT BREAK A PERSON’S TRUST. You cannot bring back a broken trust. You can never mend it. Strive hard to make your words your bond.  Be credible always.  Do not use anyone or allow others to use you for their ambition. Be ambitious if you must but be fair always. Stand up even if it will cost you dearly. Stand up even if you have to risk things that are precious to you.  And remember, always remember: With good looks comes great responsibility!

March 28, 2011, Lipa City.

What are we in power for?

“What are we in power for?” The statement was attributed to late Senator Jose Avelino who was reported to have said this in a caucus of the Liberal Party in 1949 after President Elpidio Quirino ordered his investigation for graft and corruption. His statement had become the banner story of several dailies and hence, Avelino suffered from its unintended consequences. The rhetorical question that he had asked had become the destructive spell that led to the downfall of his political career.

What are we in power for? This question provides the answer which we have been dying to hear but which no right thinking government officials would ever give.

Just recently, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) admitted to have used the savings of certain government agencies to augment the shortfall in the pork barrel allocations of some legislators, an action which the DBM dubbed as the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP). A senator’s disclosure had linked the DAP to the “procured” conviction of the former Chief Justice by the Senate Impeachment Court in 2012. The legality of the DAP is now before the Supreme Court. Soon, we will know whether the DBM is correct that the DAP has constitutional bearing.

Meanwhile, officials of the Social Security System (SSS) had appropriated more than a million hundred pesos for their bonuses. According to the Executive Officer of the SSS, the grant is justifiable since the SSS needs to compensate its officials well if it is to compete with the private sector in the hiring of qualified professionals. The justification finds support in the statement of a Malacanang official that the grant of such huge bonuses is legally permissible.

   

In similar fashion, the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (Philhealth) was reported to have paid its officials and employees P1.45 billion in various bonuses in 2012 and P1.245 billion in 2011. Philhealth officials claimed that there was nothing wrong with these since everyone in the quasi-public corporation received a bonus.

While it may be admitted that these disbursements are all above board, their propriety remains highly questionable. Indeed, there might be no legal impediment for such disbursements. Law could not have set a ceiling as to how much could be given as incentives for exemplary performance of duties. Seldom does the law deal in details. Oftentimes, the law sets the parameter but not the millimetre of one’s permissible conduct.    

            The issue therefore is not one of legality but of moral propriety. The formulation that a legally permissible course of action is not necessarily morally justifiable is still the acceptable norm today. No amount of semantics may change it. No person, however genius, can twist it.

  

          Let us put the situations mentioned above to the test of propriety. Could the officials concerned allocate such huge amount of money for purposes other than what seem to be for the public good? Yes, they certainly could do so. The next question of course is a question of judgement: Given that they could do it legally, should they actually do it? The records are unmistakeable. They decided in favour of the proposition. Nobody registered any objection to such decision; it must have been unanimously agreed upon.

            The most difficult part of this test of propriety is finding an explanation which is more plausible that the ones advanced by the said officials. This is extreme difficult. Even if we should disregard the consequences of their action, we would still fail in finding justification for them. Their action is unjustifiable. No right thinking person can accept what these officials have been saying.

             All told, it would be preferable if those officials have been true to themselves by admitting the spirit that had animated them during their deliberation. It would be more acceptable to hear that they did so because they believed that they have the power to make such a decision than to cater to the argument that they decided to do so for the good of the agency that they are managing. An honest crook seems more preferable than a dishonest one. After all, they say that honesty is a virtue. 

Where'd all the good people go?

Oh, you are going to love Jack Johnson’s Good People Lyrics. It fits our situation today. It puts music to the question that we have been asking for quite a time: Where’d all the good people go?

Senator Jinggoy Estrada’s revelation that he and the other senators who convicted former Chief Justice Renato Corona received an additional P50 million pesos pork barrel says it all. Proof of bribery is not necessary. There is no accusation in the revelation. The only thing essential is the fact that millions of money had changed hands after that crucial decision which altered the history of the Philippine judiciary.

Of course the disclosure was made after Senator Estrada was tagged in the pork-barrel scam. Indeed, the pork-barrel scam has dragged politicians out in the open. Like the mythical Pandora’s Box, the Napoles Affair is letting out undisclosed ills afflicting politicians in high places. It has rocked the Palace and the Chambers of High Politicians. Finger-pointing has started. Former allies and secret enemies have started to trade accusations. The mess is spilling the blood of the good and the not-so good in high places.

With accusations and mudslinging filling the air, it has become inevitable to ask: Where’d all the good people go?

Well, there are still good people in the government. They inhabit the modest positions, and even high ones. Sure thing is: good people are there but their presence could hardly be felt during these times.

Recent events make us wonder whether the existing political system encourages people to stay good or to cater to their evil side. Is our brand of democracy consistent with the idea that public power should be entrusted to good people because of their inherent capability for goodness?  

Societies prefer liberal democracy on the belief that it gives people opportunities to maximize the good things that they can do. But what happens when the system designed to maximize this capacity for goodness becomes an impetus for evil deeds and corruption?

The word “democracy” did not come from the masses. Philosophers described the concept but it was politicians who gave birth to the term. There could be no debate on this. Labelling ideas is a prerogative which politicians enjoy since time immemorial. Philosophers may explain facts and phenomena but the power of labels always belong to politicians who craft public policies. Democracy, especially in its liberal form, has come down in history as the most politician-friendly political system.

There was once a notion that the best of people are needed to make a dysfunctional government work. This belief seems inapplicable to our case. Repeated failures at governance show that no human talent can unmake the mess that our dysfunctional liberal democracy has created. Worse, our dysfunctional liberal democratic system has given rise to a terrible monster—a bureaucracy that eats up the good in people and exhausts the energy and idealism of the young.

Because of this, good people have developed an aversion towards politics and governance. Philippine politics is so bad that it turns good people to evil. It has become a sure road to perdition. It continues to scare good people away. Critics have even labelled the government as the biggest criminal syndicate in history. We should not wonder then if one day, fiction writers would dub the ruling political administration as a minion from hell. This would hurt of course but truly, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.  

So where’d all the good people go?

Well, there are still many of them around us. However, to see more of them in politics and governance, there is a need to change the system which seduces people to turn to the dark side.