Doable solutions

After smelling like roses for much of 2024, all the impressive investigation conducted by the House and Senate committees went up in smoke in the final weeks of December.

This was due to public indignation over the 2025 budget that turned out – after just a few session days at the hands of the bicameral conference – to be a barely concealed outlay meant to finance patronage and the election campaigns of Marcos 2.0’s super majority allies in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Overnight, the skewering of the Dutertes and their minions in the bloody war on drugs, the scandals over fake Pinoys and Alice Guo were eclipsed by indignation over the budgeting hocus-pocus that led to substantial cuts in funding this year for education, health, agriculture and the conditional cash transfer, among others.

Instead the proposed funding for these sectors was shamelessly diverted to the new congressional pork barrel, to the unconditional cash transfer under the Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita or AKAP (P21 billion for congressmen, P5 billion for the Senate) and to government crooks’ favorite source of kickbacks and ghost projects, the Department of Public Works and Highways.

*      *      *

During the regime of the elder Ferdinand Marcos, the so-called martial law babies were often faulted for being apathetic toward the abuses of the dictatorship. Even the Catholic Church, in those years of martial law, was also seen to have turned a blind eye to the abuses, pursuing instead “critical collaboration” with the regime of “FM.”

Today, because of advances in communication technology, public indignation over government abuses can be expressed instantly. And at least people don’t seem to be apathetic toward the PPP budget (pork, patronage and plunder) for 2025.

With lawmakers’ abuse of the power of the purse plumbing the depths of shamelessness, people are expressing outrage.

That indignation, however, must be tapped and expressed properly, with the issues at stake communicated clearly to the greatest number. Also needing clarity is what can be done to correct the abuses. Viable alternatives and doable measures must be presented.

It’s easy to say enough is enough. But what can be done, beyond bashing the crooks online? There must be both low-hanging fruits that will quickly assuage the indignation as well as long-term goals for sustainable change.

There are calls to push back and prevent the institutionalization of impunity in the misuse of public funds. The question is how.

Yes, people are mad over the 2025 budget, among other things. So what will people do about it?

*      *      *

Former Senate president Franklin Drilon has suggested that all pork barrel-type funds and those inserted at the last minute by the bicam, outside the National Expenditure Program (NEP) prepared by the executive, can be classified as FLR or “for later release” – ideally after the midterm elections in May, if only to ensure that people’s money will not be used for anyone’s campaign.

University of the Philippines Economics professor Cielo Magno is proposing a public audit of AKAP funds and the rationalization of protection programs.

On One News’ “Storycon” yesterday, Magno, a former finance undersecretary, also urged people to continue public discussions on the issues and to express their opinions on social media, so that public awareness of tax issues can be heightened.

It’s not enough to identify the problem; a solution or alternative must be presented. And the solution must not only be doable, it must also address the most basic concern of ordinary folks: what’s in it for me?

When criticizing the way the government is being run (to the ground), there must be a ready answer to the question: do you have a better idea?

There must be compelling messaging about the superiority of creating sustainable livelihoods and financial independence over seasonal ayuda whose amounts may be depleted in just one day, or in one drinking spree.

Nuances of “what’s in it for me?” can then be tossed in, such as how much of one’s daily wage / monthly pay, gasoline and cooking gas expenses go to the government, which is why everyone has a right to demand honest and efficient governance.

The nuanced messaging can then explain, in colloquial terms, why health care coverage is so inadequate; why emancipation from poverty seems like Mission: Impossible; why Pinoy kids, after spending years in free basic education, still can’t grasp the concept of fractions, or string together one grammatically correct sentence in either Filipino or English, beyond “what’s your name” and “how are you?”

If the messaging is muddled, mass protests against legitimate issues may be dismissed as the usual noise from people who are simply mad at everything – mga taong galit sa mundo.

*      *      *

Digital technology has facilitated the speedy exposure of wrongdoing and questionable behavior.

At every AKAP or AICS distribution, the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) – which insists that politicians have nothing to do with the unconditional dole-out programs – can mandate video recording and perhaps even livestreaming of the event, to show who are the epal politicians trying to take personal credit for the distribution of tax-funded cash aid.

The Commission on Audit can use private sector expert support in assessing the implementation of flood control projects – or whether the projects exist at all. The COA in general needs a capacity boost.

Budget officials say nowhere in the 2025 General Appropriations Act does it state that senators and congressmen will have a say on AKAP distribution. This is also what DSWD officials have been saying.

Disbursements of AKAP and related funds must also comply with budgeting rules and requirements, according to executive officials. Taxpayers will hold them to their word.

Public awareness of the utilization – or potential misuse – of people’s money has been heightened. The momentum must not be lost.