 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| Can Roco Beat FPJ? By Antonio C. Abaya January 14, 2004 Viewer Ross Tipon sent us his analysis of a presidential survey conducted by Ibon Data Bank from December 1 to 14. In a five-way race, the results were: Poe 26.08%; Roco 22.46%; De Castro 14.46%; Arroyo 10.50%; Lacson 10.41%. Poe�s margin over Roco was 3.62%. In a four-way race, the results were: Poe 31.84%; Roco 30.55%; Arroyo 11.96%; and Lacson 10.67%. Poe�s margin over Roco shrunk to 1.29%. In a three-way contest, the results were Poe 35.80%; Roco 35.28; and Arroyo 12.31%. Poe�s margin over Roco shrunk even more to 0.52%. Statistically, Poe�s margin over Roco in all three scenarios, but especially in the last two, is insignificant, since the margin of error of these surveys is usually three percent. In other words, Poe and Roco, at least in the Ibon survey, are in a dead heat. Additionally, I would like to comment that the withdrawal of De Castro from the race (as he did to be the vp partner of GMA) saw his 14.46 points move to Roco (8.1), Poe (5.8), Arroyo (1.5) and Lacson (0.3). In the theoretical withdrawal of Lacson, his 10.67 points in the four-way race moved to Roco (4.7), Poe (4.0) and Arroyo (0.4). In an even more theoretical withdrawal of President Arroyo, her 12.31 points in the three-way contest would likely move mostly to Roco as this would be largely from the middle class. This, of course, are the results of just one survey and have to be corroborated by those of others. And it is still too early in the game to make definitive conclusions. But, to answer the question-title, yes, Roco can theoretically beat FPJ if both Lacson and Arroyo withdraw. But would they? It is conceivable that Lacson would withdraw if he were to realize the futility of his candidacy. And if he were to withdraw, he would almost certainly explicitly ask his followers to throw their support behind Roco, if only to get even with Sen. Angara who outmaneuvered him (Lacson) out of the LDP nomination in favor of the mute and elusive FPJ. Lacson has presumably other ways to get even with Angara in the future, but for the moment this is the most effective and the only non-violent way for him to do so. Would President Arroyo withdraw in favor of Roco? Highly unlikely. Her ratings in the more independent polling organizations (Social Weather Stations and Pulse Asia) are only three or four points higher than in this surveys of Ibon Data Bank which, being part of the communist movement, has ideological reasons for contributing to her political demise. But as incumbent president, she enjoys unlimited exposure in media (which, of course, can work the other way if her future exposures are connected to disasters and yet more exposes of government corruption). And she has the formidable resources of the government at her command, which the miniscule parties in Roco�s Alyansa ng Pag-Asa cannot match. Furthermore, the recent decision of the Supreme Court nullifying the contract for the automated counting machines to be used in May 2004 works in favor of PGMA. By forcing the Comelec to revert to the manual counting of ballots, the SC decision has unwittingly opened the doors for the Sulo Hotel Operations Group, Second Edition, to intervene creatively in the tabulation of returns, something that would have been difficult to do in an automated count. In an automated count, results can be known in 24 hours. Fears of automated cheating are grossly exaggerated, since there are hard copies of the ballots which can be counted manually in every precinct or municipality where the automated results are challenged or suspected of being fraudulent. In a manual count, the full results are not known until three weeks after the balloting. This long period of suspense is when wholesale cheating occurs at the municipal level, especially in, but not limited to, Mindanao, where certificates of canvas are shamelessly doctored for fat fees before being transmitted to Comelec headquarters. This was the experience in 1992 and 1995 (and even going back to 1949) and could well be repeated in 2004, given the decision of the Supreme Court. An enraged Raul Roco has called for a totally new Comelec to replace the commission that bungled the ACM contract, and many people will support him on that. Certainly a Comelec that claimed success in the registration of voters overseas, even though less than five percent complied, has a pitifully low criterion for what constitutes success, which does not encourage confidence in its management capability. But Roco does not want any postponement of the May 10 elections. This is unrealistic. A new set of commissioners would need at least two months just to familiarize themselves with the staff, inventory the assets, establish and fine-tune operational procedures, and attend to endless complaints. If we have confusion now, we will have total chaos in May.***** KAPATIRAN�s Nandy Pacheco called up to deny that they have given up trying to play a role in the 2004 elections, as I had written last week. They are continuing what they are doing, whatever it is, while they wait for the Comelec to approve their registration as a political party. Why not follow Brother Eddie, who filed his COC even while Comelec was still processing the registration papers of his Bangon Pilipinas? Kapatiran prefers to do things one step at a time, Nandy explained. ***** The bulk of this article appears in the January 24, 2004 issue of the Philippines Free Press magazine. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �Can Roco Beat FPJ?� Bravo and more Bravo, Tony. You are doing great especially in the history of our country being written. Let us pray we have a good president after the elections. And then let us ALL rally for the success of that man or woman. The way the Japanese support their chosen leader. Tony Joaquin, [email protected] January 15, 2004 ���������������. At the point of being makulit, I'm trying to grope with what Gandhi or some other oriental sage once said about the things that threaten mankind: Progress without compassion Politics without principle Wealth without work Economics without ethics Power without responsibility Authority without accountability Policy without transparency Religion without understanding Spirituality without empathy Maybe we should add democracy without sincerity. I try to define democracy not to be the rule of the majority but the people's free abidance to universal truths & principles that all men are created equal, are entitled to pursue excellence, fulfill, if not even exceed, one's potential, not take advantage of other's weaknesses, ignorance, sincerity & naivete & looking after everyone's concern even if it means a fair diminution, not an unjust deprivation, of personal gain. Democracy in the Philippines goes as far as self-interest & the institutions that will allow those in power to serve their vested interests in an unbridled & opaque manner free from sanction; this is the same as saying it is not a democracy at all. We fought Marcos because he was un-democratic & dictatorial. However, un-democractic practices aren't limited to dictatorships but to serving the powers that be over the people�s (consumers first, workers� second & capital third) interests. Instead of enabling & empowering democratic institutions meant to serve the common good, they serve instead vested interests, the highest bidders. That is our case. The pursuit & attainment of public office is designed with vastly diminished accountability to the people who vote or pay taxes. It is to the parties, here & abroad, who provide the resources, fair & foul, to successfully garner position by either election or appointment. Hence the accountability is indeed no longer to the people but to sponsors, backers & financiers. The priority of public office, for pragmatic reasons, is for dividing the spoils of war not only among the victors but even to those who may obstruct or undermine their authority & make the pursuit of vested interests difficult. Because such is the system, the common good & the people's welfare take a back seat. The natural consequence will be underdeveloped public goods & services because the bureaucracy owes allegiance, before anyone, to patrons, not to the people; hence, all the oaths of public office become moot & academic. The vicious cycle is fueled by patronage in the acts of charity that is hoped to substitute social justice. Rent-seeking undermines honest-to-goodness, value-adding entrepreneurship. Justice will not be dispensed equitably & blindly. Those who have less in life will have even less of it over time unless they are able to get a pass to the games & play by the rules of largesse, rent & extortion. Why else is poverty creeping steadily? The global economy? Come on, every business & economy is affected but those with the right policies overcome the threats & still excel. Population growth, our democratic form of government? A democratic South Korea has had a faster population growth rate than a dictatorial North Korea & for obvious reasons! Now, there's a better comparison than Singapore & the Philippines! Thailand has left us in a cloud of dust. Vietnam is now starting to overtake us. Uncompetitiveness? The nations who have now overtaken the Philippines in agriculture learned from us. We lost a head start there because of smug assurances of markets, wrong priorities, misdirected strategies & wrong policies. Our labor & industries are uncompetitive? The OFW exodus continues because other nations are willing & able to hire them at better rates & take their know-how, the most vital ingredient in industry more valuable than financial capital, with them. Xenophobia? Why can Filipinos still speak better English than what has been expected of us or manage to adapt to extremely different environments from the deserts of the Middle East to the hi-tech cities of the industrialized economies? Filipinos may not have the command of English but in the right environment have a command of their lives & destinies. Poverty, unrest, instability, underdevelopment... all these are the natural, logical flotsam & jetsam of this system we wrongfully call a democracy. It produces policies to protect & uphold vested interest first & foremost. The common good is a bonus. Better therefore call what we have a demo-crazy! Sorry for the lecture, but it's because I've lost hope as far as the current political leadership is concerned, from the top. However, I've seen grassroots efforts where the people themselves solved the problem using their own resources, practicing the democracy I define & putting to shame the empty promises & motherhood statements of trapos. My hope lies when I view things from the bottom. Unfortunately, many either don't believe they exist or don't even want to believe they exist. Worse, information asymmetry through media & policy treats them as piecemeal solutions, showcases & flagship programs rather than systemic solutions to the systemic problem we have. Worse still, politicians, both well-meaning & ill-willing, can kill these efforts off easily by depriving the people of that power to self-empowerment, by drowning them in favors: grants, soft credit, etc. At this point, I'm thankful that the grassroots� seeds have not just been planted, it has been sprouting & bearing fruit. I just hope they aren't poisoned by the current conglomerate of trapos, vested interests & organized crime (These days, it's hard to tell the difference). Then there are the opportunists waiting in the leftmost & rightmost wings. The leadership & their networks will self-destruct. �Let's wait until we seize it by force at their weakest point... para tayo naman� is so evident in their inconsistency of their spoken ideals & applied means. They just want a change in players, not a change in the rules. There really are differences in democracy as it is defined &, even more so, as it is practiced. I'm glad to announce that it isn't dead in the Philippines. However, I'm afraid to say that the status quo is doing a fine job in killing democratic institutions, if not treating them like the Nazi did the Jews in Dachau: fed enough to work as slaves, deprived not of life but of their dignity. By their words & actions, the current crop of leadership has made their stand very transparent & have justified their positions very eloquently & convincingly. Now, for ordinary people like us, it's not our choice where we stand. Do we choose to be sane for accepting the world, this reality, for what it is or, more accurately, what we have made it? Or do we follow the examples of men & women, torn & covered with scars who strove with their last ounce of courage ... to build the Kingdom that is already within us? Thank goodness not all have been crucified. Let's cast a mirror at the status quo to reveal to them what they really are. Let�s learn from the people who solve their own problems how things ought to be run. Then let�s show the status quo how it's done & earn the right to tell them to get out of the way. Joffre Balce, [email protected] January 13, 2004 MY REPLY. I do not know what article of mine this is in reaction to. But let me just reply to your question �Why else is poverty creeping steadily?� It is creeping steadily because the population is growing too fast and the economy cannot create enough jobs fast enough to absorb the growth in population. And the economy is not creating enough jobs fast enough because investors, both domestic and foreign, are not investing enough. And they are not investing enough here because they would rather put their money in China, Thailand, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, Malaysia and Singapore, where they can make profits better and faster than they can in the Philippines. The Philippines is a low priority country for investors because of 1) rampant criminality and lawlessness; 2) political instability; 3) poor and inadequate infrastructure; 4) high energy costs; 5) communist labor militancy; 6) a Supreme Court that meddles in economic affairs; 7) poor political leadership; 8) widespread corruption in and out of government. As for population growth rates in different countries, the 2003 Almanac and Book of Facts puts it at: South Korea 0.85%; Singapore 0.85%; Thailand 0.88%; North Korea 1.10%; Vietnam 1.48%; the Philippines 2.09% (actually 2.32% now). �������������������.. You're assuming Ibon's numbers can be taken at face value. I'll wait for SWS or Pulse. Ricky Carandang, [email protected] ABS-CBN January 16, 2004 MY REPLY. I did mention that IBON Data Bank, being part of the communist movement, has ideological reasons for putting President Arroyo in a bad light, and that its results must be corroborated with those of the more independent polling organizations such as Pulse Asia and SWS. �������������������� Dear Tony - Thanks for placing me on your email list. Your article on Roco was heartening...I keep telling friends to vote for Roco but they are concerned their vote might be "wasted" on a loser. Now I can tell them his chances are better than they thought. I will pass on your articles to some friends here and abroad who appreciate well-reasoned commentary on our political situation. Poch Robles, [email protected] January 16, 2004 �������������������� Dear Tony, Could I have your OK to reprint the article " Can Roco Beat FPJ " on PLDT.COM with full credits and links to TAPPAT.ORG of course. Hoping for your kind consideration, Gerry Kaimo, [email protected] January 16, 2004 MY REPLY. Sure. Just make sure you spell it right: www.tapatt.org. ����������������� RE: the share of human rights victims in the Marcos money. I think that this is important in the light of the bullying tactics that the Americans have been showing, as exemplified by their attempts to seize by judicial fiat the $680 million Marcos money and now their holding hostage of the Filipino telecom executives in Hawaii. The law that will authorize the setting aside of $200 million for the human rights victims should prohibit the payment of any amount to the lawyers of those victims in the US Court which tried to seize the money. It is elementary that the Court would not have unilaterally issued the order, without the application or request of those lawyers. The recipients of the money should before receiving it execute the undertaking to refrain from sharing any amount with their lawyers. This would be reasonable because money would be paid to them as a result of an act of our government and not by reason of the efforts of their lawyers. Any violation of that undertaking should be penalized by law. Our national pride requires that we should do no less. Very truly yours, Rene Torres, [email protected] January 18, 2004 Makati MY REPLY. I believe that not only the victims of Marcos� human rights abuses (who are mostly communist cadres), but also the victims of human rights abuses BY communists, both military and civilians, should share in the Marcos loot. See my article Rewarding Revolution. ��������������� Dear Mr. Abaya: Thank for furnishing me copies of your columns. I do appreciate it. I hope you'll continue to write about our politicians whose main interest is self. Our country is not going only to the dogs but dogs with rabies. By the way, are you the same Tony Abaya with the Philippines Herald before? Well, more power to you. Noel C. Pagsuberon, [email protected] January 20, 2004 MY REPLY. No. I am not. I wrote columns in BusinessWorld, the Manila Chronicle, the Philippine Star and Philippine Graphic Weekly, but not the Philippine Herald. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |