Some people, it seems, have built a bustling cottage industry out of creating the direst scenarios for next May’s elections.
This week, a bunch of leftists who have surprisingly resurrected as advocates of clean elections came out ringing alarm bells alleging that 1.7 million ballots intended for the ARMM do not have security markings. It was as if the sky was falling.
By a stroke of fortune, I was with Comelec spokesman James Jimenez for a television taping when the morning news about those ballots broke. Jimenez calmly and clearly explained to me that all those ballots had the security markings required by law. What they did not have was the additional security marking decided upon by the National Printing Office (NPO) just as those ballots were printed.
The additional security markings are not an essential safety feature. They are for the use of the NPO. These are not the same as the ultraviolet security feature prescribed by law. In short: the ARMM ballots are safe.
But the leftists born again as electoral watchdogs would not be stopped in their hysterical grandstanding. To cover up their false alarm (that only one broadsheet bought into), they started demanding that the Comelec sign a “covenant” taking responsibility for any failure in the automated electoral process.
By law, the Comelec is responsible for the conduct of elections. Needless to say, any flaw in the process is its responsibility. The demand for a “covenant” is completely contrived.
There are two more sustained scare scenarios that alarmists use to entertain themselves. The first has to do with the failure of new technology to be used, either because the machines cannot be delivered or they will fail to transmit or that they are susceptible to sabotage. The second has to do with widespread power failure on election day.
The first scenario is contrived as well. The counting machines are stand-alone setups. Meaning the failure of one machine does not imply the failure of the whole system. If the machine fails in one precinct, we can simply count the ballots by hand without upsetting the entire system.
The entire automated poll system is redundant and protected by the most advanced digital security systems available. If the transmission fails anyway, I suppose hard copies could be, in the worse scenario, be delivered by hand. That will imply, at most, a day’s delay in the national canvass.
The second scenario of large-scale power outages might seem more believable, considering we are now experiencing rotating blackouts in the Visayas and Mindanao. One congressman from the opposition won ample media mileage by issuing a call to grant President Arroyo emergency powers to deal with the apparent energy lack that threatens election day procedures.
The immediate weakness of this particular scare scenario lies in the fact that every ballot counting and data transmission kit comes with its own power supply. The system does not have to depend on the grid.
I asked my friend, former Napocor president Guido Delgado, about the likelihood of massive power outages on the day of voting. Guido replied with a whole briefing paper on the power situation.
In sum, the paper demonstrates there will be sufficient power supply on election day. Power reserves in Luzon may be considered generous if all out generating facilities are in operation. Reserves in the Visayas and Mindanao may be tight; but they should be manageable to ensure the smooth flow of elections.
All the energy experts will tell you that electricity demand is high on weekdays and moderate on weekends. Rotating blackouts happen on weekdays usually — but only when some of the generating plants are taken out for repairs, maintenance work or refurbishing. Even if some of our hydroelectric generators are performing below capacity because of the current drought, the whole system still delivers enough for weekend demand.
Although elections are held on a weekday, the demand volume will be similar to those on weekends because that day is a holiday. That means blackouts will be unlikely.
Guido reviews electricity supply and demand patterns in the Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao grids. On that basis, he puts forward a number of recommendations to ensure adequate power supply during the electoral period.
Most of the recommendations are practical. Guido suggests that our energy authorities mandate that all repair and maintenance work be completed by the end of April. He also recommends that technical and communications personnel of the generating plant be put on high alert, with all vacation leaves cancelled from May 3 to 16.
He points out that the rotating blackouts we are now experiencing are due to a number of plants being taken out of the grid for maintenance work. There is no real shortage of existing generating capacity.
For the Luzon grid, it should suffice to build up water levels to full capacity at the Kalayaan facility on the eve of elections. All agencies must now be commanded to stock up on spare parts and build up inventories of coal and bunker fuel. As an additional measure, we could implement the Interruptible Load Program through the Electronic Ancillary Services or the WESM, encouraging private generating capacity to contribute to removing some of the demand load on the grid.
There a number of other specific suggestions for beefing up the Panay grid, so far the most vulnerable. We do not have the space to list them all here. The long-term solutions to our power situation I could discuss in a future essay.
The important point, however, is that the scenario of massive outages on election day is highly improbable.