Crisis of confidence

The good news is that the lower house of Congress has finally recognized it has credibility problems. The bad news is that some of its members believe that the problem can be solved by a more aggressive Public Relations (PR) campaign. They are wrong in this regard. Not even the most expensive and topnotch spinmeister can solve its credibility problem. Not if its members continue their petty wrangling over the pork barrel. First, they could not agree to scrap it completely and would like to retain 60 percent. Then in a surprising reversal that looks too good to be true, they tell the people they are axing, instead of rolling out, the entire barrel. And when the public is just beginning to give them the benefit of the doubt, some of its members again denied that the budget will have no pork anymore. A brewing revolt against the house leadership over the pork is now in the offing as some disgruntled members grudgingly declared that there was no agreement to abolish it. They said that the only agreement reached at the caucus is to adopt the line item budgeting system. In other words, it is the same old "lechon" presented in a more attractive package. Unfortunately, such bickering only aggravates their credibility problem as it merely re-enforces the people’s belief of an attempt to deceive them. Such uncomplimentary reputation cannot simply be erased by the most effective PR campaign especially if its roster is full of traditional politicians including one that treats his seat in Congress as a mere toy to be discarded and retrieved at his whim and caprice.

The credibility problem is not really confined to the lower house alone. The entire officialdom in the political branches of the government apparently does not enjoy anymore that kind of people’s confidence enough to inspire stability. Trivial politics and bickering still dominate the discussions between the chambers of Congress, between the Legislative and Executive Branches and between the Central Government and the local government units as they discuss the adoption of various measures to ease the fiscal crisis, each one unwilling to give up the largesse they presently enjoy. The sense of urgency is completely lost in their harmful clash over the total scrapping of all kinds of pork barrels, or the use of the line item budgeting system, or the reduction of the internal revenue allotments of the local government units or the imposition of additional taxes. Meanwhile the time bomb that will blow into smithereens our already shaky financial foundation keeps on ticking making a lot of people a little bit more edgy and precariously teetering on the verge of desperation. Their glimmering hope of seeing for once that rare display of exemplary statesmanship and leadership by example is fast fading away.

In times like these, one cannot help but entertain once more an idea long simmering in the back burner and blowing hot and cold, now and then – the shift from the present presidential unitary form, to the parliamentary federal system of government. In a parliamentary system where there is a fusion of the legislative and executive branches, the individual pork barrel allocations of the legislators that have nothing to do at all with legislations, are no longer necessary for the simple reason that the Cabinet members charged with implementing their pork projects are also members of the parliament. In other words there will only be single pork barrel for the Legislative and Executive departments merged into a unicameral parliament as compared to the existing bicameral legislature separate and distinct from the executive department each with pork barrels of their own. This is the best cost cutting move that can be done as there will likewise be savings in operating expenses by eliminating one chamber of Congress.

In a federal system, on the other hand, the problem of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) will be solved if not totally eliminated. Each federal government will have its own budget based on the revenue generated within their territories. This is perhaps the most effective way to achieve countryside development and the dispersal of business and economic ectivities outside Metro Manila. Every federal unit will more or less be on their own and not dependent on the Central government. There will be a healthy competition among them to attract investors and stir economic development in their territories. The strongest magnet for this purpose is none other than good governance which is more feasible in a smaller, compact and contiguous territory.

When everything in the present system seems to flop, changing it may be a better alternative even if the shift is quite drastic and untried. It is better to have tried and failed than not to have tried at all.

* * *

E-mail: jcson@pldtdsl.net