 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| Federal Fol-de-rol
By Antonio C. Abaya Written on April 28, 2008 For the Standard Today, April 30 issue My American Heritage Dictionary defines 'fol-de-rol' as 'foolish talk or procedure, or nonsense.' And that is what this recurring advocacy for federalism is: foolish talk and nonsense. Senate Minority Leader Nene Pimentel is principal author of a Senate resolution calling for a debate on Charter Change (again), for a revision of the Constitution to shift from a unitary to a federal system of government. And Pimentel wants this debate to happen before the presidential elections in 2010. The resolution was signed by eleven other senators: Senate President Manny Villar, and Senators Jinggoy Estrada, Francis Pangilinan, Edgardo Angara, Rodolfo Biazon, Pia Cayetano, Juan Ponce Enrile, Francis Escudero, Gregorio Honasan, Panfilo Lacson Jr.., and Ramon Revilla Jr. The resolution seeks to convene both Houses of Congress into a Constitutional Assembly (ConAss) to amend the Constitution before the end of President Arroyo's term in 2010. It seeks to convert the country into a federal union of 11 states: Northern Luzon, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog, Bicol, Minparom (Mindoro, Palawan, Romblon), Eastern Visayas, Central Visayas, Western Visayas, Northern Mindanao, Southern Mindanao and BangsaMoro. The motivation supposedly is "to spur economic growth." The implication is that economic growth is not possible, or is not fast enough, under a unitary state.. This is a lot of nonsense. The empirical evidence is that of the most successful countries in East and Southeast Asia, only one � Malaysia � is a federal union. The others � Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand � are all unitary states. So, contrary to what Nene Pimentel and his 11 apostles apparently believe, economic progress � even spectacular economic progress, in the cases of Japan, China and South Korea � is achievable and has been achieved under unitary states.. In fact, it can be argued that if Japan had chosen to become a federal union in the 19th century, ruled as it was by dozens of land-owning daimyos or feudal lords with their armies of samurai warriors, it would have been mired in endless civil wars, as it in fact was, between the competing daimyos, and would not have morphed into a world power. Fortunately for the Japanese, the Tokugawa shoguns, who had been in power since 1598, were finally replaced with the restoration of the Meiji Emperor in 1867. Under the unifying leadership of Emperor Mutsushito and a strong centralized unitary state, Japan became an industrialized world power. Japan defeated a weak China in 1895, annexing Formosa (now known as Taiwan) and Korea as a result of that victory, defeated Russia in 1905, entered World War I on the side of the Allies, and then challenged those Allies in World War II. Japan remains a unitary state to this day, the second biggest economy in the world for decades, until it was overtaken in the last few years by China, another unitary state. China itself remained a weak state even after it became a republic under Sun Yat-sen in 1912. As in medieval Japan, China � under the Mongol-based Manchu dynasty which had ruled the majority Han Chinese since 1644 � was racked by endless internal wars between competing feudal warlords. Even Chiang Kai-shek and his Kuomintang, who came to power in 1928, were not able to unify China. It was the strong leadership of Mao Ze-dong and the unitary state under the Chinese Communist Party that finally united the Han Chinese and gave them a sense of nationhood that was absent for centuries. And it was the re-embrace of capitalism and the profit motive, starting in 1979, by the pragmatist Deng Xiao-ping, that propelled China to its present pre-eminent status as an economic super-power. Pimentel and his 11 apostles should also know that the empirical evidence is that archipelagic countries, of which there are only three � Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines � are unitary states, rather than federal unions, for pragmatic reasons. Being made up of islands, they would be vulnerable to centrifugal forces if they were to spin off into federal unions. The example of Japan is cited above. Indonesia would likewise be threatened with disunity. The Indonesians have already lost predominantly Roman Catholic East Timor. It managed to keep rebellious Aceh. There are separatist movements brewing in Irian Jaya, Manado and Kalimantan, and predominantly Hindu Bali would also likely spin off, if the Indonesians were stupid enough to change to a federal union. Pimentel and his 11 apostles ignore or are not even aware of the fact that nations keep the political system that they started out with. They just try to make it better as the decades roll along. Can Pimentel and his 11 apostles cite even one example in the last 60 years of a country that switched from a unitary state to a federal union, or from a federal union to a unitary state? Or from the presidential to the parliamentary system, or from parliamentary to presidential? And suddenly achieved elusive prosperity as a result of that switch? They can't because there isn't any.. Even the federal union that was Yugoslavia broke up into pieces � Serbia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, after the death of its founder, Marshall Tito. Hundreds of thousands of lives were lost in that break-up, as the majority Serbs tried to keep the federal union intact, the bloodiest genocide in Europe since WWII. I am not aware of any country that can serve as an inspirational model for the Philippines. There were cases where the change was forced by revolution or invasion, such as the nations of Eastern Europe switching from parliamentary to a communist system after they were overrun by the Soviet Army in 1945-48, then switching back to parliamentary after their communist regimes collapsed in 1989. The empirical evidence is that nations keep the political system that they started out with. In the 1980s, there was a move in the Indian parliament to shift to a presidential system,, but the move did not prosper. The Israelis also amended the Westminster parliamentary model by having one of their prime ministers (Binyamin Netanyahu) elected by popular vote, instead of by the majority party in parliament, but they did not shift to the presidential system. Russia is slowly creeping from a presidential system to parliamentary. But this is just to allow Vladimir Putin to remain in power as prime minister after his non-extendable presidential term ended last March. Which, as I wrote in a column in late 2007, may be the model that President Arroyo may follow to remain in power beyond 2010' Supposedly oppositionist Pimentel would ironically be setting the stage for this to happen by pushing for ChaCha before the presidential elections of 2010. The Gloria in excelsis Dado chorus in Congress would likely interject: Since we are debating federalism, we might as well debate parliamentary also. Some people are so na�ve.. Pimentel and his 11 apostles are no doubt motivated by patriotic reasons when they advocate a shift to a federal union "in order to spur economic growth." But economic growth is a function of economic strategies, not of political systems. Our GDP grew by 7.3% in 2007 under our unitary state, better than the growth of Malaysia under its federal union. Of course, Malaysia has been out-performing the Philippines in previous decades. But Malaysia has also been out-performed during those decades by South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, all unitary states. The relative economic failure of the Philippines, compared to its neighbors, is examined in detail in my article Why Are We Poor? (Dec. 14, 2004): http://www.geocities.com/dapat_tapatt/whyarewepoor.html . In a nutshell, we are poor because a) in the late 1950s our Congress passed a Minimum Wage Law, which discouraged American firms from setting up factories here in the 1960s, preferring instead Hong Kong and Taiwan where wages, believe it or not, were lower than in Manila and where there was - and still is - no minimum wage law; b) in the 1970s, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, geared their economies towards the export of manufactured goods, which was the basis for their industrialization. The Philippines did not. In 2006, the exports of South Korea amounted to $326.0 billion, Singapore $283.6b; Taiwan $215.0b; the Philippines only $47.2b. c) in the 1980s, Malaysia, Thailand and Suharto's Indonesia followed the example of the original Four Asian Tigers and also geared their economies towards the export of manufactured goods. The Philippines did not. In 2006, the exports of Malaysia totaled $158.7b; Thailand $123.6b; Indonesia $102.3b; the Philippines only $47.2b. There is always a penalty for being late.. d) in the 1990s, most of Southeast Asia rode a tourism boom. The Philippines did not. In 1991, Indonesia and the Philippines drew one million tourists each. In 2007, Indonesia was attracting six million tourists, the Philippine barely managed three million. Vietnam, long a tourism laggard because of its war-ravaged infrastructure, drew 4.2 million tourists in 2007, overtaking the Philippines. Watch out for tiny Cambodia: it took in two million tourists last year.(Thailand attracted 13 million tourists, Malaysia 16 million in 2007.) e) even with its weak manufacturing sector caused by its failure to industrialize like its neighbors, the Philippines � led by President Ramos and Senator Gloria Arroyo - foolishly embraced free trade and globalization, even ahead of fully developed South Korea and Taiwan, causing many domestic producers to retrench or close shop in the face of unlimited imports, and throwing hundreds of thousands of Filipinos out of work, forcing them to look for jobs overseas. f) even with a weak average GDP growth rate of less than 3.5% per annum from 1983 to 2003, the Philippine government, except under President Ramos, failed to take measures to control its population, which grew by an average of 2.5% during the same period, leaving very meager economic gains, especially for the poorest of the poor. In 2006, our population growth rate has dropped to 1.91%. But look at our competitors: Malaysia 1.76, Indonesia 1.34, Vietnam 1.04, Thailand 0.66, China 0.65, Singapore 0.48, South Korea 0.39, Taiwan 0.24. (All statistics are from the 2008 World Almanac and Book of Facts). Because of poor, even stupid, economic strategies and policies, the Philippines has lost out to its neighbors, both in the ability to earn income for its people, and in the ability to conserve and spread that meager income to a rapidly multiplying population. That in a nutshell is the economic picture of the Philippines in the last 50 years. Any claim that this can be remedied simply by amending the Constitution to switch from a unitary state to a federal union is a lot of bull. Fol-de-rol. ***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org and in acabaya.blogspot.com.. To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �Federal Fol-de-Rol� Dear Kuya Tony C. Abaya, Very good presentation! Now Sen. Nene Pimentel has the floor. Let us hear what he has to say to this article. Leona Guera, (by email), Australia , April 29, 2008 (He never said anything. Maybe he does not know what to say. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya, It is about the right time to change our form of government from the present one to Federal Form of Government, and this is what I am saying which is different from what you are saying though. What you are saying is of course your personal opinion, but many of the people in Mindanao especially our Honorable Senator Pimentel, are saying different things, which are contrary to what you are saying. They lamented that the form of government the Philippine has is too much centralized in imperial Manila . With the national character we Filipinos have of �kanya-kanya�, the country is not progressing onward because all the developments are concentrated in only one place, Luzon . Over hundred of years since the First Republic that was declared in Kawit, Cavite majority of the people if not all, are suffering because the present form of government we now have that does not respond to the needs of the whole nation. Those who are in power are mostly coming from Luzon . Some of these people (of course not all) are the living example of corrupt government officials. They borrowed money from IMF and the World banks in the name of development but only for Luzon and few for the Visayan regions and NOTHING for Mindanao . Worst is, they do not spend all the loaned money in development, and why? Simple, part of the loan they put into their bank accounts and corruptions with impunity. Now who wants to sue me for what I am saying? After all I am not mentioning names. I am not alone in saying what I am saying anyway. If you want to sue me (why would I want or bother to sue you? ACA) it means you are suing hundred of thousands of Filipinos who are staying in Mindanao including the MILF and the MNLF people. And yet, we people from Mindanao must have to put our share in terms of paying taxes in order to pay the loan from IMF and the World Bank. While it is possibly true about what you are saying is right based on what you are thinking, it is equally true that the people of Mindanao are thinking rightly on what I am saying here. I am a Christian born and grew up among my fellow Mindanaons who are Muslims and Christians. I know that we have been neglected by the central government ever since; and so for this reason, I also have the right to speak allowed on behalf of my fellow Mindanaons who are not blessed to answer you. Enough is enough we from Mindanao are getting very impatient. It might be possible that not only the Moros or Muslims will alienate the too much centralized government but the Christians as well in the future. While it is not late we all have to come into our senses that Federal Form of Government is right for the Philippines and it is in the best interest of the Philippine Nation. Ross Feliciano, (by email), April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, for an economic argument against devolution in general, and against the Local Government Act of 1996 in particular, please see chapter 4 of my recent book, Strategy Demythicized: Why Today's Busines Models Fail to Deliver. The Management Association of the Philippines (750-1150, Local 08, Arnold) will be glad to send you a review copy. Regards. Nick Poblador, (by email), April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Congratulations on this historical tour de force. I don't know about a change in government, but we sure need a change in electoral system/money politics. Ciao Vic Lim, (by email), April 29, 2008 Faculty member, Asian Institute of Management wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: The people who are behind this proposal for the Philippines to adopt the federal system are guilty of a non sequitur if the underlying justification for it is "to spur economic growth." You have completely debunked their theory that a federal system is what the Philippines , a unitary state now, needs to achieve the kind of economic growth that will propel it to First-World status. There must be a sinister and Machiavellian motive behind this latest move. Mariano Patalinjug, (by email), Yonkers , NY , April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, Congratulations! This article is a wake-up call to all of us. More power to you. Hector Tarrazona, (by email), April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I was surprised why the motivation for the proposed switch to a federal system was "to spur economic growth." One reason which might make more sense is to change the method of electing the president and vice president by electoral college instead of by popular vote like here in the US . It might be useful to debate whether this method is more transparent than by popular vote and therefore reduce the chances to steal the election. Bert Peronilla, (by email), New Jersey , April 29, 2008 An avid reader from New Jersey wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, You are very right. Changing the system has no automatic effect to the economy. Maybe contrary in the first, because anything has to be changed, new formulated, adjusted to the federal states condition, new officials and offices have to learn the new rules etc. etc. That GMA would like such change is easy to understand, since then the still existing and sitting congress is still under her whip and of course would vote her to Prime Minister, with no more limitation. In addition, the new, old parliament could decide the time and date of local elections, giving the chance to extend their terms of office for years. And of course it is nonsense to think that in a federal, unicameral system there would be less corruption and graft. On the contrary, without a second chamber which can intervene and investigate at its own power, a Prime Minister with a majority in congress can wipe out any complaint. Look at the oldest democracies like Britain or Switzerland , no one is unicameral. In the Swiss system, one chamber represents the people and the other one the federal states (kantons) and at a poll, it needs the majority of votes in the majority of states. And it works well since hundreds of years, without a prime minister and one member of the seven Department-Chiefs gremium ( the government) acts as one-year representative President. It woks well, even with only one official state visit a year instead of a permanent roaming around President. Best regards. [email protected], April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony Abaya, I have received thru email your article titled �Federal Fol-de-rol� written on April 28 for the Standard Today April 30 issue. My reaction to the article is presented below. Senator Pimentel and the other 11 senators are advocating for shift to Federal Union form of government in order to spur economic growth. Your comment is that economic growth is a function of economic strategies, not of political systems, which I agree. In fact I would like to add that economic growth is a function of governance and productivity which are expressed in terms of economic strategies. The following table presents statistical data on several countries which I gathered through browsing in the internet. Countries Population Per Capita Corruption Perception Productivity density(per sq.km) GDP (US$) Index (CPI) US$ per person employed Malaysia 83 14,400 5.1 33,853 Thailand 116 9,100 3.3 16,011 Indonesia 134 3,700 2.3 8,664 China 140 7,800 3.5 13,419 Vietnam 253 3,503 2.6 7,406 Philippines 295 3,300 2.5 8,937 Japan 351 33,800 7.5 66,231 South Korea 493 25,800 5.1 51,931 Taiwan 642 29,500 5.7 66,614 Source: Wikipedia, free Encyclopedia ; Note: the CPI value of 10 means zero corruption. In order to make the data understandable, I tried to calculate the correlation of the variables and came up with certain trends which are as follows: 1. The higher the density of population, the higher is the per capita GDP with correlation of 48% and the higher is the productivity correlation of 53%. This trend is in accord with the 2001 UN report on population, environment, and development, that the world population during the period 1900 - 2000 grew from 1.6 billion to 6.1 billion persons or 4 times while the GDP increased 20 to 40 times. This pattern goes beyond 2000 with Japan , South Korea , and Taiwan having population density and per capita GDP much higher than that of the Philippines and the rest of Asian countries. 2. The higher is the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) which means that a value of 10 is corruption free , the higher is the GDP with correlation of 88.5%.and also the higher is the Productivity with correlation of 91%. Japan , Taiwan , and South Korea have the highest CPI with corresponding higher GDP and Productivity. I think that Senator Pimentel has knowledge on these statistics. (I seriously doubt it. ACA) In fact it is common knowledge that the country has poor governance and is considered as one of the corrupt countries in Asia.and that graft and corrupt practices lead to lower productivity and poverty. What Senator Pimentel might be thinking is that corruption will be reduced significantly in a federal union since the political economy of one union is controlled by the local elite and it is assumed or expected that most of the economic benefits and wealth generated therein will be enjoyed by the local population which is not happening at the present political system in which the center of political power and business interests are based in Metro Manila. (There is NO empirical evidence that there is less corruption in federal unions. India is a federal union, yet it is no. 3 among 13 Asian countries in the corruption perception survey of the Hong Kong-based PERC Ltd. Myanmar is officially a federal union, but it is one of the most corrupt among 179 countries in Transparency International�s 2007 survey. Your own table shows that the least corrupt countries in your list � Japan , South Korea , Taiwan � are all unitary states, not federal unions. ACA) But the question is that will the union�s political elite or elites will not resort to the same level of corruption as being done nowadays? It must be remembered that the present political elites have inherited the culture of political corruption that was practiced for more than a century since the Spanish colonial period; and that the patron-client relation which is still prevalent today has developed the culture of tolerance to corruption among the people. While there is no corruption-free countries in this world, the trend in the increase of depth and extent of the country's corruption is unmatched by countries who were once way behind the country�s economic development but which are now much ahead. Any deeply-rooted culture just like the Filipino culture of political corruption and patron-client relation that needs to be changed for the better will require much time and effort. I think Senator Pimentel should look at the reality that the shift to federal union requires a change in political culture that nurtures participatory governance and high level of productivity in order to spur economic growth and make us competitive and progressive in this era of globalization and trade liberalization. I hope this can contribute to the discourse. Thank you, Edmundo Enderez, (by email), April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony: Pimentel and his apostles maybe wrong or right(this possibility exists, correct?), but I still commend them for coming up with a solution rather than just condemning the problem. As for the other countries which the Filipinos should learn from, may I remind you that we as a people never learn from anybody? That whatever we learn, we bastardize and Filipinize? Look what happened to Catholicism and democracy? We, unfortunately consider ourselves as Tagalogs, Cebuanos, Warays, Ilocanos and so on before we acknowledge our being Filipinos which maybe justified considering we were named in honor of a syphilitic despot. Federalism may emphasize our curse of "tayo-tayo, sila-sila" but such maybe what we need. Why fight our nature? At this point, when Quezon's wish of being "run like hell by Filipinos" has came true so many times over, I am willing to give Pimentel's Federalism a chance. I mean, come on, what do the Filipinos got to lose? (Their country, for one thing. ACA) Their time in hell at this point? Kung sumablay, impierno pa rin. Dan Jimenez, (by email), April 29, 2008 (So show me one example of a country that suddenly achieved prosperity just by switching from unitary to federal. You have to present your case with empirical factual evidence, not with emotional or anecdotal guesswork. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I think most of the other senators merely signed the Resolution because it called for a debate on it. I surmise that they have not really made up their minds, so please don't be too harsh on them. We have no history of federated existence, and if this proposed federation succeeds, the Philippines would be the first as such to succeed. But I believe you're right. We won't be an example because it could be worse for this splintered country. Federated countries were originally autonomous states that combined into one union. This was the US case, independently established colonies. This was the case for Germany , where the states were even Republiks. This was the case in Malaysia , since they were ruled separately by sultans indendent of each other. This made it easy for Singapore to secede from Malaya in 1962. However, Malaysia 's central government is very strong, and the states have minimal powers. Indonesia is a perfect example of a federal system installed that went haywire, since they were not truly autonomous before. In 1949 the "states" recognized by the Netherlands to counter Indonesian independence became part of the United States of Indonesia but in 1950 it broke up on the throes of Balkanization. Chuck Carlos L. Agustin, (by email), April 29, 2008 President, National Defense Collage of the Philippines wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I agree with you that we shouldn't switch to federal form of government if our reasons are to spur economic growth. I believe that we need to modernize our industries and help those ailing domestic manufacturers and agriculturists to spur production levels for us to push for more exports. We can also offer those imported goods to place small manufacturing centers here to produce for the consumption for our country and our neighbors. At least, reducing their costs and bringing in more jobs. (we can't forget the fact that Filipinos love imported goods) BUT, I'll agree with them if their reasons to have a federal form of government is to unify a divided nation. We also cannot deny the fact that we are so divided that we are like a nation of immigrants like that of the US . There is so many dialects that we can easily misunderstood each other (eg. a Tagalog might assume a Cebuano is angry because of the tone of the conversation). Though, we can only wonder why these people suddenly agreed to shift to federal. Maybe it's their way of saying, "this is my fiefdom! Look for your own" Respectfully yours, Jerahmeel Fandrall Chen, (by email), Makati City , April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, Philippine federalism is one of those truly debatable issues, which is why I'm happy to throw my hat into the ring on this. Of the countries in far and southeast Asia that you mentioned in your article, one stands out as the exception in the group: Indonesia . That country is a basket case, I think you will agree, because like the Philippines , it is a nation forged by combining what essentially were many nations. The others on your list, however, have had strong national identities for centuries, some for at least a millenium. Until 1900 or thereabouts the Philippines was not really a nation. We were Ilocanos, Kapampangans, Tagalogs, Bicolanos, Visayans (with all the various sub-groups) and Moros. The country has always been an imperfect union, with Tagalog ascendancy having been forced upon the rest of the "country" by a central government that has been seen as elitist, uncaring and exploitative. (Mandarin was imposed by the central government on the rest of China , dominating dozens of other regional and local languages and dialects. So also was Bahasa Indonesia, Bahasa Melayu, Hindi, Farsi, Italian, Spanish, French, German, etc. ACA) The country's leadership and business elite seemingly care only about what Manila thinks. Lately, with the rise of Cebu, Davao and the Clark-Subic corridor, there has been a wider clamor for a decentralized government. The various regions increasingly look less and less to Manila for guidance in political, social and economic development. Strong regional identification, similar to what was prevalent in the pre-hispanic and Spanish times, is becoming more and more evident. Just as the United States could not have become one country with a unitary form of government, the Philippines is becoming more and more unruly, with the various regions asserting their right to a stronger say in governance. A people as diverse as Filipinos cannot really function well under a system where one of the tribes, the Tagalogs, rule all the other tribes, some of which actually outnumber the Tagalogs. A federal system, which grants regional autonomy to the various regions, i.e., budget powers, taxing powers, seats of government, etc., will empower the various regions. A race to preeminence may be one of the unintended consequences of federalism, with Cebuanos trying to outdo the Ilocanos, and the Kapampangans and Bicolanos insisting that they have a say in the outcome. I think federalism offers exciting possibilities for accelerating regional economic, political and social growth. I would carefully study this option before dismissing it outright. Cesar Lumba, (by email), April 29, 2008 (So what country shifted from unitary to federal and achieved universal happiness as a result? Yugoslavia ? ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Federalism may be good for big countries like USA , Australia with wide big land areas. It is not good for small countries like the Philippines . The Philippines is a very small even tiny country to federalize. With the independent mentality of Filipinos, if we federalize, we may have too many domains with too many officials and too many public servants to pay from too many taxations which will cause too much burden to the citizenry. Federalization of the Philippine archipelago is like Land Reform and CARP law that makes the units too small to be economically viable. We already have too heavy bureaucracy. Federalizing will more than double this bureaucracy. More than double the burden of the tax-paying citizens. We instead propose to change our legislators. Abolish the Congress. They are too many commissioners, Just retain the Senate, two for each of the 14 regions. So we will reduce our legislators to only 28. Good enough and manageable number. Rex Rivera, (by email), Gen. Santos City, April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I like your analyses.. The solution to the ills of the country is not the type of government Philippines has; it is the people who run the government that have become an obstacle to the growth of the country. I do not know why the country has to keep old politicians (Enrile, Pimental, to name but a few) who have many interests other than the country. It is about time that the term limits be considered above anything else in order to achieve a meaningful change. A new breed of leaders with a keen sense of vision and progressive mind is what the country needs. The country has to chart a new course or it will be left behind! Dr. Nestor P. Baylan, (by email), New York City , April 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr Abaya, Your article is correct to the core; I can not find an issue to disagree with. Your points-of-view are very convincing, logical --- and make a lot of sense. Yugoslavia is a prime model---of many model nations--- of a disintegrated federal state. I accept well the theory---and fact--- that federalism is a fragile system that can easily divide a nation into different competing states; that is from civil wars caused by conflicting ideologies and competing economies---not to mention greatly differing beliefs, culture, tradition, and religious thinking. I don't pass the idea that the Philippines should mimic the United States in thoughts of reshaping the current Philippine unitary system into federal state. Whereupon the Philippines is so fragmented by so many things, such as dialects, culture, regionalism and so much negatively influenced by colonial thinking; the United States ---although wide and large in scope as a federal nation--- is united by one language, blessed by temperate climate, and so proud of its founding heritage. Also I cannot find disagreement with your thesis that economic growth and wealth derive from smart economic strategies, and not from political systems. Your writing is a must-read to those debating and advocating for a different system. Pacifico Talens, (by email), Virginia Beach , VA , April 29, 2008 US Navy (Retired) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Your writings are true. Federal fol-de-rol it is!!! Please realize that the very Pimentel who authored this shift of government is the very vocal critic of constitution change. A sudden change from last month like stock market exchange Ha!ha! LOL. I see it in a different way, this is to discredit or to kill parliamentary change that the administration is screaming about. With this proposal brouhaha, this will be another headache of PGMA. It will let the administration do another plan to take the bait or continue with the original plan. Pimentel�s federal system is pro-chaos knowing our Filipino lagging attitude. We pray for change and now, when we see change, we�re scrambling to adapt the progress. God is confused already of what really Filipinos need/want. We see world-class expressway but we complain on tolls. America is the superpower both militarily and economically but their expressways, believe it or not, have tolls too. Taxes create great government. See Canada � see America , etc. Pimentel�s federal system is also dangerous knowing our Filipino �I am the best� attitude amongst different tribes/dialects/islands, plus the religion stuff. If this will push through, Bangsamoro will be another country� (no doubt about it because even Libya is interested:), then, the rest will follow especially those who have lots of minerals, gas and natural resources, etc. This is turning tired and beat up piece into more miserable pieces. One serpent into 11-headed corrupt leaders. Creating more congressmen/woman, state heads, suckers, leeches, mosquitoes and national treasury vampires. By authoring and signing this federal system will only mean that Pimentel and his 11 kingkoys LOVE PGMA to stay in power. If they won�t agree on PGMA�s own safer version of chacha/concon, then, their agenda is different and these self-satisfying gang lords are willing to spit on/at the Philippines and its people... and are willing to crash the archipelago into tiny pieces. The reason mainly is NOT for economic progress, BUT it is for the survival of the trapos and political dynasties in the 21st century. The government�s plan or their own version of chacha/concon is a lot safer. Let PGMA drive the wheel because it�s working!!! After all the turmoil, bogus survey, political noises and natural calamities, we still see progress (7.3 GDP in 2007). If not, then we may achieve even higher. PGMA is really serious about Infrastructures. No other president/s did it in decades with too much passion to see the REAL projects. She checks them personally!!! With all those world class expressways, rail systems and nautical highways, goods and services will be doubled and beyond. They cut time and saves money. People can�t feel the change/progress due to the population explosion. Family planning, people! Bishops, priests and Vatican should realize that when God said �Go and multiple�, there were only 2 people on Earth roaming around naked and food was vast. It is common sense!!! If Vatican can change river into sprinkle of water during baptism and animal sacrifice (old testament) into Mass ( Constantine �s pagan incense ritual is even included until now) during offering/celebration, bread into tiny waffles� then, they can change some stuffs as we face the future and beyond. Most of the Vatican/religious laws are man-made anyway. What�s screwed up is when the nuns and priests are teaching family planning. He!he!he! I suggest the poor couple with 12 kids to teach the young generations about family planning. That will scare them from copying them!!! PGMA is the only president who is demonized by media and politic attacks (locally and internationally) yet Philippines is doing great economically. Yeah, OFC�s remittance is one if the culprits of progress� but she and her economic thinkers put those dollars into great use. She�s the only president with the lowest rating in the bogus survey BUT she put infrastructure a first priority (foreign quality companies and with deadlines) and the projects are very very REAL. PGMA beyond 2010? Oh yeah! Sometimes you have to think that she is our own Vladimir Putin� and Putin is no saint either� Unless Fr. Ed Panliio and Tony Meloto will run� BUT If they are not sure winners, better stay with PGMA as our driver... Salamat po! LF, [email protected], April 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, Well pointed. The fol-de-rol or nonsense of Pimentel and his "11-Apostoles" (why not 12) suggests a political storm is about to devastate this land again, if we are not embroiled in it already. Your mention of 11-planned State, as proposed by the group, also suggests that we in the Zamboanga peninsula will be under the BangsaMoro State , where the ethnic minority will be given vast powers(as usual) over the Christian majority. My first question to Pimentel is this: Does he really believe his plans for a geo-political emasculation of cultural heritage in this region is the solution to his frustratic-ambition? We already had two (2) plebiscites to determine where the inhabitants of these provinces and cities in this region "wish to belong". And the people in the Zamboanga peninsula and even Isabela City in Basilan chose to stay out of the BangsaMoro Rule. Maybe Pimentel likes to promote a "Revolution-in-Reverse"? The second question is: In his state of mind, does Pimentel still dream of becoming "Head of a Regional State "? (That seems to be Nene�s motivation. ACA) Just thinking of charter change already evokes (connotes?) a continuation of abuse, of misrule, of steep corruption by a regime that show no remorse. We thought the job of Pimentel as the Senate's Minority Leader, is to keep a close watch of the administration's profligacy and its preponderance for abuse of power. My mind is in a whirl and I don't know what and whom to believe and turn to for guidance anymore. If he can explain to the people in the Zamboanga peninsula, for a start, what he can do for them once the debacle-in-reverse will commence, we want to hear it. NOW. Senator Pimentel and "the other 11 senators" who appear to support his ambitions, including the Senate President himself, must each explain their stand to US, the people, who elected them into office. We ask nothing less of them--THE SENATORS OF THE REALM. Jose I. Regino, (by email), Zamboanga City , April 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww NOTE. Because of limited space, this post may be truncated in acabaya.blogspot.com. It appears or will appear complete in www.tapatt.org. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww My Dear Ka Tony (Abaya): Your analysis of Fol-de-Rol is splendid. However, Ka Pule2 wishes to add that the principal reason why our country is so poor is its inordinate reliance on the English language in its conduct of government administration and in the educational system. Please consider the following: Subject: WHY THE PHILIPPINES IS SO POOR I wish to recall Rizal's "Indolence of the Filipino." In short, our national hero attributed that phenomenon to the manner our former colonizers -- with the combined sword and crucifix -- governed our forefathers. The prevailing conditions in our country, in the way our erstwhile leaders tried to govern us clearly indicate that we have not yet become truly independent, for over half a century now, notwithstanding repeated outpourings of enthusiasm every year since July 4, 1946; which was changed to June 12 by then President Diosdado Macapagal. If our nation's leaders could only be guided by the admonitions by Bro. Dr. Jose Rizal, particularly in the Seventh Chapter of El Filibusterismo, especifically in the matter of language, our nation could hope to be brought up from the cultual quagmire that we are deeply enmeshed. Our government's obstinacy in perpetuating the use of English in public administration and in the educational system has kept our society groveling in the quicksand of American contagion. Government leaders are blinded by the Washington propaganda that English language is the most desirable for us. It simply keeps us captive to the IMF-World Bank policy of ensuring the unhampered supply of cheap Filipino labor force to feed the needs of multinationals here and abroad. In effect, the policy perpetuates the pathetic condition of keeping the OFWs menial workers in the employ of other nations/races. We ought to be mindful, and guided by, the exhortations by our national hero -- Dr. Jose Rizal -- that "language is the thought of the peoples". History clearly shows that progressive countries educate their young in their native language. When the USA colonized our country through the so-called "benevolent assimilation proclamation" by President McKinley and enforced the teaching of English to children of school age -- with the attendant prohibiition for us to speak our own languages -- it was in effect the altruistic conquest of the Filipino mind. The more intelligent were taken in as government's "state pensionados" to pursue studies in the USA, and upon return to the home country, became the implementors of the Washington policy of keeping the Philippines an economic and cultural vasal of the USA. President Quezon started to wiggle out from the quicksand of US cultural contagion when he created the Institute of National Language, and proclaimed August 13 - 19 yearly as National Language Week. He merely floated a toy paper boat in the lake of Americanized culture. President Ramon Magsaysay ordered the translation of Philippine National Anthen into, Bayang Magiliw or "Lupang Hinirang"; and also the military commands into Filipino. Moreover, he instituted the practice of delivering in the native language his formal acceptance speech whenever a new ambassador presented his credentials as the envoy of his sovereign to the Philippines . But the "Guy" perished in a mysterious plane crash on March 17, 1957; in what the US-AID proclaimned as caused by metal fatigue! When President Corazon Aquino certified to Congress the urgency of creating the National Language Commission, and she also issued Executive Order No. 335 ordering the use of Filipino in official correspondence, she was hounded by a series of coup d'etat(s), and there was a stern CIA warning that she would not last her term. Significantly, a lady lawmaker from Cebu , possibly by means of external proddings, demanded in her privilege speech that Tita Cory withdrew her EO 335! The National Language Commission was established, nevertheless, but it was allotted only six-hundredths (0.06%) percent of the Dept. of Education budget, which rendered it inutile! There came about perhaps a secret understanding with the rank and file implementors of the order. Tita Cory survived her term. On July 15, 1997 President Fidel V. Ramos proclaimed August as national language month every year (Proc. 1041), but it was like the curse of Sisyphus -- pushing uphill the national language policy for one month, and then letting it slide down back to the plains for eleven months -- "for global competitiveness!" And so, our official language policy has remained -- urung-sulong -- or back-and-forth! But the most serious blow was when the CIA with the US marines, abducted President Marcos (et. al) to Hawaii and detained him (them) there until death. Marcos had issued an order -- a Memorandum to the Minister of Education and Culture, and all other members of the Cabinet, dated 17 January 1986 -- or just over a month before EDSA One erupted -- "To create the conditions in your respective ministries and other instrumentalities of the government for the optimal promotion and development of Fiipino as a national language. "Further the Minister of the Budget is directed to cooperate with the University of the Philippines in realizing the endowment of a Translation Center for the translation of major literary works into Filipino..." The memorandum was officially transmitted on 20 Janaury 1986 through a covering memorandum by Presidential Executive Assistant Juan C. Tuvera, to Minister Jaime C. Laya and others concerned. It is highly suspected that the vital directive might, or not, have reached its intended addressees, and/or probably intercepted by CIA surrogates in the government bureaucracy. To the Washington policy makers such audacity by a former Asian spokesman who, 20 years earlier, held the joint session of the US Congress spellbound when he delivered in excellent English, "An Asian Message to America -- Trustee of Civilization," was an act of sacrilege, a fatal error, if not a direct affront to the "IMF policy of insuring that English should remain as the Philippine language of administration and for instruction in the Filipino classrooms," according to Dean Apolinar B. Parale in his book, A Case for Filipino. It is very necessary for Congress to enact a law declaring Visayan and Ilocano as ALSO official languages of the country, and that after a certain period of time English shall cease to be an official language, and become, as other major languages of the world, an elective language of study in the schools. It would be also necessary for Filipino journalists and owners of the local periodicals to rethink their language policy, if they still value the meaning of patriotism, or love of Motherland. And this writer hereby appeals to the good reader to kindly visit � http://www.PetitionOnline.com/maBIni2 click this address, and just follow the prompts to endorse the Petition pending in Congress for the rationalization of our governments policy on language. Irineo Perez Goce -- a.k.a. Ka Pule2 , (by email), April 30, 2008 Marawoy, Lipa City , Batangas (The fact that Rizal wrote in Spanish and you write in English blows your entire argument to pieces. Additionally, economic growth is the result of correct economic policies and strategies, not of language. In the future, please keep your reactions within reasonable lengths. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr Abaya, Thank you so much for your kind effort in emailing me your column piece on the CONASS proposal of Aquilino.Pimnewtel Jr and company in the Senate. Pimentel's reason for his CONASS was allegedly for the adoption of a federal, in lieu of our present unitary, system of government. But seen from your mini-treatise against federalism, it really looks like these senators' CONASS thing is really a "political folderol" or some such inane, scatter-brain idea. Tunog asshole tuloy. Talaga namang nagmumukhang kenkoy ang mga naturingang senador na ito sa kagaguhan ng mga pinagsasabi nila. Well, you know Pimnetel. Federalism has been his life's obsession since way back when, as if it were the magic wand that would solve the country's ills. They don't even know what hit this country since January 2001--and the lingering effects it has engendered till now, and until such time that Gloria Arroyo and the Davide Supreme Court are taken care of. How then do we expect these so-called senators to divine the correct diagnosis and prescription for the country's economic ills, if they can't even solve the country's political crisis? In fact, they don't even know that their own institution, the Senate (and by extension, the entire Congress) has been EFFECTIVELY ABOLISHED (at least in so far as their oversight function is concerned) by the nine GLORIA ARROYO PUPPETS MASQUERADING AS SupremeCourt JUSTICES in regard to the 9-6 SC decision on Neri vs the Senate re executive privilege. Even a non-lawyer who's got a critical mind knows that the 9-6 SC decision on executive privilege is patently unconstitutional, for it gives the Philippine president the flimsiest of excuses to ignore any congress probe by merely waving the all-embracing executive privilege, merely by claiming that such probe endangers the security of the state. That's how absurd the 9 SC justices' reasoning is. See how hard put was its ponente in trying to justify the president's right to exercise executive privilege. Wala na, talaga. Hopeless na ang Pilipinas. e kayayabang pa ng mga congressmen at senador na mga ito, e mini-treatise lang ni Tony Abaya at iba pa, tulad ni Alejandro Lichauco e hindi na nila maintindihan. Jennifer Potenciano, (by email), April 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, There is an old American adage that says " if it works don't fix it". However, it appears that Pimentel and the 12 apostles are attempting to change it into something else, rather than fix it with some added improvements and tinkering that will do the job needed. It seems to me that the failure of the government as you alluded to in order to achieve first class status as a country has nothing to do as to whether it is a unitary or federal system. I do agree that the failure basically points to the government's inability to implement the right initiatives and programs to seize opportunities presented. Not being up on the fol-de-rol talks and discussions, I want to understand the one trigger that ultimately convinced Pimentel and the 12 apostles to endorse the change to a parliamentary system. Additionally, what are the expected, positive achievements this change will bring to the table? ( I have to be cautious with my comments. One of the 12 apostles is a very close friend of mine and has no prior discussion on this subject with him) First, I believe somebody should step up to the plate and be a hero and encourage Pimentel and the apostles to stop this nonsense and waste no more time and money. Rather, do some tinkering of the current system and develop a five point program to push the country's economy. Second, work on improving an image of trust and favorable investment perception to bring in the necessary investable dollars into the country's economy. Third, step up to the plate and control population growth to reduce the poor through education, practice and change in mind set. And finally, my prayers for good graces to the country I love. As the late Peggy Lee's song Is That All There Is says lets keep on dancing the fol-de-rol and perhaps the insanity is close enough to reality. Cheer, my friend. Life is too short. Oscar Apostol, (by email), lRoseville, CA. April 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww There's a semester's worth of intense coursework in this one article [email protected], April 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Japan and China are MONOCULTURAL and monolithic giants, that is why unitary system works for them. Philippines is multicultural and multilingual,diverse, multireligious. (Wrong. China is a multicultural country: 9.4% of its population are non-Chinese, a bigger percentage than the 5% of Filipinos who are Muslims., They speak their own languages, but also learn Mandarin in school, and they practice their own religions. ACA) Federal system is best for us, it brings tolerance and respect to the various ethnic groups in the country.The centralizing of power in Manila made manila the most highly populous and one of the highest population density in the world. The farther you are away from the center of power, the more resentful you are.Our Muslim brothers are the farthest from Manila . Take a look what happenned now? Manila is suffering the consequence of her greed by not sharing power through rebellion, uncooperation, resentment, and anger. Take a look at in every corner, there are lots of squatter colonies. Only the Tagalogs are flourishing in this unitary set-up. Why? Because their language is privileged? And the center of power is located in Tagalog speaking lands.Tagalogs think that they have more to lose in the federal set-up. (You obviously do not know that although Mandarin is the official language of China , there are 150 regional languages and hundreds of dialects spoken in the different provinces and regions. Among them are Cantonese, Macanese, Fookienese, Shanghainese. Hakka, etc. (Similarly, Bahasa Indonesia is the official language of Indonesia , but there are some 200 other languages and dialects in the other regions: Balinese, Javanese, Amboinese, Sundanese, etc. Even the French spoken in Paris , though the official language, is not the same as the French spoken in the provinces where people speak their own dialects: Breton, Norman , Languedoc , Auvergnois, Provencal, etc. (The same is true about Hindi in India , Urdu in Pakistan , Farsi in Iran , even Spanish in Spain , Italian in Italy , German in Germany . Each country has one or more official language/s, but also dozens, even hundreds, of other languages and dialects. Billions of people around the world do not harbor any inferiority complex just because their birth-language is not the official language of their country. Neither should you. ACA) No it isn't. It is just relieving the population pressure in their community by distributing wealth and power to the provinces. How can you convince someone who is from the squatter to return to the province, if there are no opportunities there in their home province.It is human nature, where the opportunities people will always go there. You can't stop them from moving its their human right. The long term solution: make the other side equally as green as Manila through federalization. This centralized system has made teamwork, cooperation, and brotherhood among Filipinos very impossible. Thus, hampering progress and industrialization Why? They feel they are being overpowered by someone else from a different linguistic group.This is especially true, if one hails from the Visayas and Mindanao where Tagalog language is seldom or never used at all. We have a different lingua franca here. (To claim that industrialization in the Visayas and Mindanao was hampered by Tagalog speakers is pure horse manure. My (Tagalog) father was tasked by (the Ilocano) President Quirino to set up the country�s first steel mill in the 1950s. He and his team put it up in Iligan City , Lanao del Norte. My father and his (Tagalog) business partners put up a shipyard, not in Metro Manila , but in Jasaan, Misamis Oriental in the 1970s. What did you or your father do to industrialize your town or barrio in Mindanao ? ACA) The irony about life is this: The more you hold on to something, the more it wants to break free, because you are suffocating them and choking them. But it is only when you let go, that quite amazingly they always come back.(Like the six states which chose to break away from the federal union that was Yugoslavia ? Hundreds of thousands of people were killed when the dominant Serbs tried to keep the federal union intact. ACA) This is the same irony with federalism. We are to "break-up" into smaller states, so that we can be again ONE country and "one nation" again. Set the provinces free, so that they want to be part of the Philippines . The argument raised below is still the same recycled Tagalista argument being raised on federalist. Anything new on the argument? (Tagalog became the dominant Philippine language because of the influence of Tagalog radio programs, Tagalog TV programs and Tagalog movies, not because it was imposed from Manila . In the 1960s, there was a Cebuano film industry, but it did not prosper and simply died away, leaving the Tagalog film industry dominant by default. ACA) Joemax Sencio Kiamco, (by email), May 01, 2008 (I grew up in a tri-lingual family. Our father [from Laguna] spoke to us in Tagalog. Our mother [from Cagayan de Oro City] spoke to us in Cebuano. And when we traveled or studied abroad, we wrote to each other in English. I eventually married my wife, who was from Zamboanga City but who did not insist on talking to us in Chabacano.. We have no chip on our shoulders about �Tagalog imperialism.� ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, As usual, well-said. I do not know what happened to these senators like Pimentel. Because of too much pork barrel, their whole body is saturated by fat that they are fully out of touch with reality. The reasons that you enumerated on why we are poor are very clear and yet none of these so-called elected leaders seems to acknowledge at least one of them. Regards, Marvin Valido, (by email), May 03, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi, Tony! When I joined the DILG after the EDSA revolution, I knew very early on, that my principal task was to formalize legislation that would provide autonomy to local governments. I felt very strongly then and even now, that people empowerment, symbolized by EDSA 1, could be given form and substance, if powers and resources are devolved from the national to local governments. That was clearly an objective I was going to aggressively pursue. And with all modesty, with a lot of guts and plain perseverance, I, together with a handful of friends and allies, managed to get our version of the Local Government Code formalized and presented before a Cabinet meeting where I asked that the bill be certified as URGENT to ensure expeditious discussion and approval in both Houses of Congress. I was fully aware that the legislation had to be approved by Congress before the end of Pres. Cory's term. I knew that if we couldn't get the Local Government Code enacted before her term ended, getting an authentic local autonomy bill would be an elusive quest. After President Cory's approval, the first step in the Congressional process was to get the Chair of the Committee on Local Governments in both the Senate (Sen Nene Pimentel) and Lower House (Cong Celestino Martinez) to fully adopt the bill which we had prepared and transmitted to Congress. That was done and the rest is now history. My point in narrating this story is that as a principal actor in getting local autonomy legislated, I am very disappointed, distressed, in fact, that what we had envisioned to happen, did not happen. Our dream of vibrant, responsible, participative and developed local communities did not blossom. Sadly, the local governments have become, much to my dismay, microcosm of the national government. Given the very sad experience we have with local autonomy, going full stream ahead with Federalism, might create more disorder and dysfunction, given the dismal state of governance, both local and national, in our country. I am for Federalism as I am a genuine believer in giving the people the power to plan and decide their own destinies. But the TIME IS NOT NOW! The country is in a mess where institutions have been corrupted and we are bereft of authentic leaders. We are not yet ready for Federalism. Perhaps, 10 -20 years from now when the country has matured and in good moral standing. Cesar Sarino, (by email), May 04, 2008 (NOTE: Cesar Sarino is a former Secretary of the Interior and Local Government. ACA) OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. |