What value does the Senate add?

The public interviews, fora and television programs featuring the candidates for 12 seats in the Senate are up and running. Over all, the public events are good ways of getting to know the candidates. But nothing said so far answers the basic question: What value does the Senate add in our system of government?

Indeed, the questions asked and the answers given indicate a basic misunderstanding of the function the Senate is supposed to perform. Most candidates are promising this and that as if it is within their power to deliver on those promises.

Somehow, people and candidates forget the Senate is not part of the executive branch but of the legislative branch. Senators (like congressmen) are supposed to pass laws and maybe provide some oversight on implementation of laws. But building bridges, roads and basketball courts are within the realm of the executive branch.

That is why strictly speaking, senators and congressmen are not supposed to have pork barrel funds. Congress gets a chance to have an influence on the expenditure of public funds when they pass the National Budget. But they are not supposed to have “kitties” for pet projects that are not in line with a national plan.

This is why I support an ongoing social media effort for what its proponents call the Congressional Reform Act of 2013. Of course I know it is futile but then again, I share the sentiment of people out there who are so fed up with the current system. We shouldn’t be denied the right to dream, no matter how quixotic, that reform can be used in the same sentence as Congress and deliver a smile on our faces.

The proposed Congressional Reform Act of 2013, if by some miracle it happens (who would have thought the Pope would resign?), will herald a new era of governance that will inspire Filipinos to be really proud of their country. It will also cure the system of families making public office a family business because it will make that unprofitable.

There are four items in this reform idea: 1. No pork barrel; 2. A candidate running for a seat in Congress must understand that being elected is an honor, a chance to render public service and not a career. We are looking for citizen legislators who will serve their term, then go home and back to their original work/profession.

3. There will be a term limit of six years, just like the President with NO reelection; 4. NO Dynasty. . . All:  Wife, children, brothers/sisters and family members cannot hold public office, at the same time. Allow one term (six years) before any relative can seek public office.

Whoever started this campaign is asking each person to contact a minimum of 20 people and so on down the line until most voters get the message. THIS IS HOW YOU FIX THE PHILIPPINES! This is how enraged citizens can do something.

Well, I think whoever thought this up just got too fed up and decided to let off steam. Politicians shouldn’t ignore such signs of citizen disgust. No one knows when the tipping point will be reached and all hell breaks loose.

This is why the broadcast networks should not do the same old things in the coverage of the May election. They need to make their coverage meaningful by using these public interviews as a way of educating both candidates and voters.

It is on this basis that I hope we will get a good discussion of exactly what is the value of having a Senate. I had covered the Senate as a reporter before martial law and shortly after EDSA-1. When we had better quality of senators elected, the chamber provided the national perspective in any issue of national importance versus parochialism of the congressmen.

There were times when badly written bills passed by the House were painstakingly edited by senators. But that was during an era when no senator had been accused of plagiarizing. Now, there is even no remorse for the crime of intellectual dishonesty by a senior senator. That notorious Cyber crime bill passed by the Senate shows how the quality of its work has deteriorated... how we cannot even depend on the usually reliable Ed Angara.

But the Senate, even in better times, couldn’t help being a chamber of ego-maniacs. Someone once made the comment that the problem with the Senate (at that time) is that it is composed of 23 men and women who think they should be President and one who wants to be the Pope (that was Sen. Kit Tatad).

There were movie stars elected too in the Senate in those times as were some pretty notoriously corrupt politicians with no shame in declaring, “what are we in power for?” But on the whole, the so called upper chamber had a good number of statesmen who knew how to craft good laws and provide inspiration to the young.

Now, we are told that the Senate is costing the taxpayers upwards of P3-4 billion a year. That’s serious money, as far I am concerned. Given the poverty in our midst, we are all obliged to make sure all that money is well spent.

How many of you out there can honestly say the current Senate is a good way to spend P4 billion of our taxpayer funds?

Of course the House is an even bigger problem. But we need a legislature somehow and that’s the price we pay for democracy. The question I am posing is whether we need another chamber to satisfy the objectives of a democratic government. One chamber should be more than enough.

One other problem is the high cost of getting elected to the Senate which requires a national campaign. That is why it helps if you are an Enrile, an Angara, a son of Erap or a daughter of Binay. Also, if you are a Bong Revilla or a Lito Lapid or a Tito Sotto. Could someone as brilliant as Arturo Tolentino, from humble roots, ever be elected to the Senate today?

We should convince as many voters as possible to consciously junk known names, specially those from political dynasties, and take a chance in electing less known names who prove themselves worthy during the campaign. There are a number of those good unknowns in the running now. Maybe what we need to reinvigorate the Senate is a complete change in the names we normally vote for.

Every time I think of the P3-4 billion expense, I wonder if that kind of money is better spent for scholarships to worthy students without means for higher education. Isn’t that a better investment in our country’s future than supporting the bunch now called senators of the republic?

EDSA and the city

PhilStar reader Roberto Lim e-mailed his reaction to last Monday’s column.

Hi, I read your piece on the Philippine Star. It was a very interesting piece, but sometimes I wonder if any amount of infrastructure is the ideal solution. Basically, Metro Manila is a set of adjacent cities with now indistinguishable boundaries. Effectively, it’s just one really big city.

I always thought the better solution would be to stop developing Metro Manila and use the money to establish new modern cities in parts of the Philippines with a lower population density located far from the current Metropolis. Tarlac and Batangas come to mind.

Instead you are seeing Metro Manila now actually swallowing up its provincial neighbors which will result in adding them to the big indistinguishable glob of concrete.   

The wife

Sonny Pulgar sent this one.

One night, this guy goes into a bar and asks the bartender for a drink. Then he asks for another. After a couple more drinks, the bartender gets worried.

“What’s the matter?” the bartender asks.

“My wife and I got into a fight,” explained the guy “and now she isn’t talking to me for a whole 31 days.”

The bartender thought about this for a while. “But, isn’t it a good thing that she isn’t talking to you?” asked the bartender.

“Yeah, except today is the last night.”

Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @boochanco