Enough of Congress’ ‘freeloader legislating’

It’s sensible that President Noynoy Aquino vetoed the Centenarian Bill. For, it carried an onerous proviso that grants 75-percent discount on all purchases by centenarians.

The rider was deemed unfair, for it set no safeguards against abuses, or tax breaks for shop owners. It would have negated the noble aims of the Centenarian Bill, and incited disdain for citizens who reach the ripe old age of 100.

The bill’s intents were worthy: to honor and care for centenarians, and grant them outright cash benefit of P100,000 on the 100th birthday. But the 75-percent was just too much. It would have come from the shop owner, who would get nothing in return. Imagine a store that sells goods and services especially for senior citizens. The 75-percent off would have driven it out of business. Imagine the car dealer having to sell the centenarian a P1-million SUV for only P250,000. Imagine the hotelier having to charge the centenarian only P1,000 a day for the P4,000-suite, and the old man stays for life.

That’s what’s wrong with our Congress: it has this propensity for “freeloader legislating.” A senator or congressman authors a bill for personal cause, like reelection. Yet somebody has to bankroll the enacted benefits, and it’s not him but the hapless taxpayer or businessman. The freeloading legislator reaps the applause, popularity and votes, but lets someone else foot the bill.

In the case of the Centenarian Bill, it backfired. The freeloading co-author senator and congressman are now blaming each other for it. The latter says it’s because the former tried to outdo him by raising his 50-percent proposed discount to 75. The former says it’s the latter’s fault for not including anti-abuse and tax clauses. And they’re both lawyers!

Aquino vetoed three other bills: the Magna Carta for the Poor, the Internally Displaced Persons Act, and the lowering of height requirements for policemen, firemen, and jail guards. He said they contained “killer provisions” that would have made them impossible to implement. The enactments would have made the authors re-electable for being so caring of the poor, the refugees, the life-risking public servants. But those would have ended up as dead-letter laws too: unenforceable and infeasible for hazy funding and arbitrariness.

The recently passed Kasambahay (House Helpers) Law also was “freeloader legislation.” It laudably aims to raise the housemaids to the level of salary men, with social security, medical, and housing benefits. But the authors had to insert monthly minimum wages of P2,500, P2,000, and P1,500, depending on the locale. That gave tightwad employers an excuse to lower the maids’ higher old salaries, on the pretext that they now have to deduct SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG contributions. Heaven knows how many needy barrio lasses will now be turned away by better-off kin in the poblacion, out of fear that taking them in and sending them to school, in exchange for helping around the house, would also obligate them to pay minimum wages.

Aquino didn’t veto that rider, probably because the Kasambahay Law passed just before Election 2013. But happily he rejected dozens of other bills of local application. Most were to reclassify municipal streets, newly named after the legislator-authors’ departed parents, into national roads. Those were the height of self-serving, “freeloading legislation.” The authors wanted the fame and honor of streets with their names, but not the responsibility of repairing and maintaining them. And they took kickbacks from the paving of those streets.

“Freeloader legislation” costs the taxpayer big. Operating in 2012 on a budget of P9.37 billion, Congress passed 179 national and local laws. Meaning, it cost P52 million-plus to pass a law. In not one of those were the freeloading senators and congressmen ever required to put up the enabling funds from their pockets or pork barrels.

*   *   *

The video camera in the coast guards’ patrol boat that recently clashed with a Taiwanese poaching craft was there to record the truth. It was meant to capture acts of daring and wrongdoings. And it did. The vid reportedly shows the coast guards chasing and firing at the intruder — but also laughing as if in a turkey shoot. It tells that both sides were at fault, but one was graver.

All police cars, motorcycles, and precinct front desks also must be equipped with video cams. More so since patrol cops soon will be tasked under a new law to check suspected drunk or drugged drivers. Too, Metro Manila authorities will arm patrolmen with Taser high-voltage stun guns for protection against goony motorists.

Videos of cops going about their work will show if they’re doing it right, or just shaking down helpless citizens. Best practices will be taped for replication; malpractices can be used as evidence in criminal or administrative cases.

The cams will deter motorcycle cops from wasting taxpayer money escorting showy politicos’ convoys or countless funerals daily. They can also record if criminals fight back, flee, or offer bribes.

The police always advice shop and homeowners, building and school administrators, even churchmen, to install CCTVs in their premises, for security. They must follow their own counsel.

*      *      *

That new law on stricter gun ownership will not curb armed crimes. Only tougher crime busting will.

Responsible gun owners license their firearms; criminals don’t. The mere act of registering a firearm deters the owner from using it for bad. The police know that, yet make all sorts of excuses for not seizing over half-a-million loose firearms. Cracking down on legitimate gun owners will only drive them to illegality — like non-renewal of two-year licenses.

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

E-mail: [email protected]