Money begets money

Every presidential election, the cost of running a campaign goes up judging from the kind of resources one would need to mount a formidable operation. This early, serious presidential contenders are beefing up their logistics that would give them an edge over others. Obviously, one of the necessities is transportation to enable candidates to visit every nook and cranny of the archipelago. We were told Manny Villar has purchased a brand-new EC 135 helicopter from Eurocopter that costs $4.5 million, the same with former Joseph Estrada who has reportedly bought an AS 350 B2 Ecureuil estimated at $1.8-$1.9 million also from Eurocopter.

While the official campaign period for the presidential election starts in February 2010, presidential hopefuls are already spending millions in print, radio and television advertisements (where a big chunk of campaign expenses obviously go). According to reports, the frontrunner in terms of money spent for ad placements is Manny Villar reportedly with P321.4 million, followed by Mar Roxas at P256.7 million, Jojo Binay with P115.1 million. Vice president Noli de Castro has clocked in P45.8 million while Loren Legarda and Gilbert Teodoro have spent P42 million and P30.7 million, respectively.

Our election laws place limits on the amount of money a candidate can spend for his campaign, which in the case of an independent presidential or vice presidential candidate is P10 per voter, with an additional P5 per voter allowed for those running under a political party. With an estimated 45 million voters (based on 2007 figures), the spending limit is supposed to be P675 million. But as Manny Villar had explicitly stated, those who cannot raise P1 billion should drop out from the race. The outspoken Senator Miriam Santiago had said she has “the chances of a snowball in hell” – meaning zilch – in running for president in 2010 because the cost of mounting a campaign has increased to P3 billion. In fact, political experts place the amount at P4 billion. 

Obviously, that kind of money will have to be sourced out from donors and contributors from all sides of the spectrum – which inevitably could become a source of corruption especially with the concept of “utang na loob” still figuring prominently in almost all aspects of Filipino culture. A big source of funding comes from big companies – but it’s not so unusual for these businesses to expect a “quid pro quo” for their contribution or donation, or to put it delicately, to “reap back” from what they have invested. After all, there’s really no such thing as a free lunch. But considering the economic crunch and the fact that a lot of companies are also being forced to cut back on their expenses, which means they will only be able to accommodate requests from a few – primarily the ones perceived to be sure winners.

Some political analysts have even gone so far as to bluntly say that in the Philippines, a candidate cannot get elected unless he or she has a rich patron because they need money for every aspect of the election – from securing party endorsement or nomination to making sure their votes are counted. Another unfortunate perception among Filipinos is that funding sources do not necessarily have to come from legal businesses or donors, but from dubious sources like crime groups (drugs, gambling and even kidnapping syndicates), with a correlation already being made to the spike in such crimes during elections.

Perhaps candidates can take a leaf from Obama’s example where he concentrated in getting contributions not from big companies but from individuals, with people repeatedly giving small amounts in what amounted to an “installment” donation. But unfortunately in this country, we don’t have a large enough middle class to be able to get the kind of contributions that helped propel Obama to the presidency.

One can’t really help but wonder why politicians would try to move heaven and earth to get elected. After all, government positions – including the presidency – pay very little compared to private corporations. And this is why we need to change the kind of system we have – because obviously, it is not working. Unfortunately, Charter Change cannot take place at this time because we barely a year left, with suspicions continuing to persist that any attempt to change the Constitution will only be used to prolong the tenure of people in power.

But at the end of the day, the real problem in this country is population growth with more people in the lower sectors not able to pay their taxes, making it difficult for government to engage in development because resources to fund these projects are not enough. In the first place, the money cannot come from companies, NGOs, and private groups because you can only squeeze so much from a small group of people. Besides which, most of the religious taxpayers are the ones working abroad.

What Ronnie Puno says is probably true that the next leader must be able to change the whole system, starting with the electoral process in order to break the cycle where candidates are forced to spend huge amounts of money just to get themselves elected, because this gives rise to perceptions that these politicians will be using their position to recoup their expenditures instead of utilizing government funds for infrastructure and other development projects. Perhaps the only way to eradicate corruption in this country is to have a larger middle class who can broaden our tax base – from which government can source out funds to develop projects and most of all, pay its civil servants better.

* * *

Email: [email protected]