 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
|
Instead of Federalism
By Antonio C. Abaya Written on May 05, 2008 For the Standard Today, May 06 issue It is unfortunate that Sen. Nene Pimentel chose not to reply to my article Federal Fol-de-Rol (April 28, 2008). As principal author of a Senate resolution calling for convening the Senate and the Lower House into a constituent assembly to convert the country from a unitary state to a federal union before the end of President Arroyo�s presidential term in 2010, his refusal to reply to a serious and detailed critique suggests that he does not really know or understand what he is advocating. My critique of his resolution rests on five principal grounds: a) it is a Trojan Horse to re-introduce a twice-defeated (in 2006-07) maneuver to shift to a parliamentary system, to enable President Arroyo to remain in power beyond 2010, as prime minister, similar to the maneuver of Vladimir Putin in Russia ; b) the resolution�s stated objective, �to spur economic growth,� is a no-brainer since, as I pointed out in my article, the Philippines� failure to develop as fast as its neighbors in the past 50 years can be traced to poor, even stupid economic policies and strategies, not to its being a unitary state; c) most of the successful countries in our part of the world � Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand � all achieved economic success as unitary states; only one - Malaysia � as a federal union; so there is nothing wrong with being a unitary state as long as the correct economic strategies and policies are pursued; on the other hand, a federal union with wrong economic strategies and policies would stagnate, e.g. autarkic and xenophobic Myanmar, under military rule since 1962. d) archipelagic countries � Japan , Indonesia , the Philippines � are unitary states also for pragmatic reasons: being made up of islands, they are vulnerable to centrifugal forces that would encourage secession and disunity. e) I challenged Sen. Pimentel to name even only one example of a country that shifted from unitary to federal � or from federal to unitary � and thus achieved prosperity as a result of that shift. He has not obliged. There are other reasons for not shifting to federalism, which I will articulate in due time. While most of my readers agreed with me, I will for the moment focus on those who disagreed, who argued from largely emotional reasons, without any basis in economics, history, geography, political science, ethno-linguistics or just plain common sense. These reactions, pro and con, appear in Reactions to Federal Fol-de-Rol. Such as, for example, the oft repeated lament that Imperial Manila is imposing Tagalog-based Filipino on the rest of the country. This is not a valid argument for federalism. Every country has one or two official languages ( Switzerland has three), and dozens, even hundreds, of other languages and dialects outside the capital region. China, for example has 123 million citizens � 9.4% of the total population � who are not ethnic Han Chinese, who speak their own languages and practice their own religions, but who are required to learn Mandarin in school, as are hundreds of millions of Han Chinese who are native speakers of Hakka, Cantonese, Hainanese, Shanghainese, Fookienese, and other regional languages and dialects. Bahasa Indonesia, the official language of Indonesia , is based on the language spoken in Riau in northern Sumatra . But there are millions and tens of millions of Indonesians who are native speakers of Javanese, Balinese, Sundanese, Amboinese, etc but who are required to learn Riau-based Bahasa in school. Even the French spoken in and around Paris is not the same French spoken in the other departements where the natives speak their own dialects: Breton, Norman , Alsacien, Auvergnois , Languedoc , Provencal, Limousin , Corsican, etc. However, they are required to learn the Metropolitan French of Paris in school. The same is true about Hindi in India, Urdu in Pakistan, Farsi in Iran, even Spanish in Spain, Italian in Italy, German in Germany, etc There is always a dominant language, which becomes the national language for practical reasons, and all other languages and dialects take subsidiary positions. Tagalog-based Filipino became dominant because of the influence of Tagalog radio programs (especially before the days of television), Tagalog TV programs and Tagalog movies, not because of �Tagalog imperialism.� In the 1960s, there was a Cebuano movie industry, but it never acquired a nationwide audience. It simply died away, leaving Tagalog movies dominant by default. (My siblings and 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. When we traveled or studied abroad, we wrote to each other in English. I subsequently married my wife, who came from Zamboanga City but who never bothered to speak Chavacano to me or our children. We have no hang-ups about �Tagalog imperialism,� even though none us can recall [or care about] the �pure Tagalog� that we learned in high school.) But I agree that Visayas and Mindanao are under-represented in the highest level of the power structure: the offices of president, vice-president and senator. Of the eleven presidents since Manuel Quezon, only three came from Visayas/Mindanao: Sergio Osmena of Cebu, briefly after the death of Quezon in 1944; Manuel Roxas of Capiz, and Carlos Garcia of Bohol. , Of the eleven vice-presidents, only five came from Visayas/Mindanao: Osmena, Garcia, Fernando Lopez of Iloilo , Emmanuel Pelaez of Misamis Oriental (an uncle of ours), and Teofisto Guingona of Surigao. But this can be remedied without going through the bother and expense of switching to a federal union. We would consume billions of pesos to change from a unitary state to a federal union, and additional billions of pesos to maintain that union. It would mean creating additional layers of trapos and bureaucrats to man state legislatures, state governments and state supreme courts. This would benefit existing political dynasties who would make sure that these positions are filled up by members of their dynasties, thereby strengthening feudalism in this country, similar to the situations in pre-Meiji Japan and pre-Mao China . In the present situation, these billions of pesos are better spent boosting food production so that we become self-sufficient in food and save millions of Filipinos from involuntary hunger and starvation This is infinitely more important than changing the political system. Which can be discussed later, but AFTER 2010, to prevent the Trojan Horse from sneaking in, with GMA crouching inside, scheming to become prime minister.. AFTER 2010, we should also discuss the election of senators on a regional basis, instead of the present election at large. If we were to assign two or three senatorial seats per region, we would be making sure that EVERY region is adequately and always represented in the Senate. In the present electoral system for the Senate, Metro Manila, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog and Bicol are over-represented, Mindanao and Visayas are under-represented, and Bangsa Moro is NOT REPRESENTED AT ALL. This scandalous state of affairs has been going on for decades. Is it any wonder that the Muslims want to secede?. Of the six or seven readers who disagreed with me, only one, Manuel Lino G. Faelnar, had done any research and based his arguments on empirical, factual grounds. Sen. Pimentel should hire him as researcher. I will respond to him in a future article. ***** 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. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �Instead of Federalism� More Reactions to �Rice Solutions� Senator Nene Pimentel need not respond to your article or commentary as it is not an official form. There are ethics in government service post that they follow and if anyone has some serious issues then one can always write an official note address to their office or perhaps schedule an official meeting. Perhaps a town square meeting would be nice so the government official can answer questions from the people. Neither Federal or Unitary State will only work unless the mindset and goals of the politicians are for the common good of our nation. It will take time, may involve civil unrest, reset of vlaues, revolution, killings, etc. etc etc to achieve the objective. Corruption will definitely ruin either Federal or Unitary format. Getting rid of corrupt politicians is not easy unless the law have the power to penalize the violators. If the judicial system is weak, I doubt any format of government will work. Until now I still doubt if our government officials really knew how to run a government. Some were taking crash courses in public service after they were elected but even then still doesn't sink to their minds the values, roles and responsibilities of their post they will occupy. For instance Sen Abalos, a politician and shrewed businessman at the same time. With this breed of politicians, I see no hope. Nonoy Ramos, (by email), May 07, 2008 (Which Sen. Abalos are you talking about? ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I have to assume that Senator Nene Pimentel must have read your thoughtful and incisive essay on Federalism as "fol-de-rol." I have a good idea why he has so far not deigned to respond to what was clearly a challenge to him, let alone rebut point by point the cogent arguments you advanced against the notion of a change from a unitary to a federal system of government for the Philippines, is that for his purposes the safer course was to keep mum. Responding to the case you persuasively made against the change Senator Pimentel advanced, let alone rebutting you point by point, is a rather risky business--as far as he and those who agree with him are concerned. The hard and brutal fact is that the reason why the Philippines has not achieved economic prosperity, let alone first-world status like Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, is not that it is a unitary state--and that, ergo, the quick-fix solution is to change to a federal system. To me that proposed solution is simplistic, wrong-headed, and fraught with all sorts of peril. Senator Pimentel's motive for the proposed change must lie somewhere else. I suspect that it is to make it possible for President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (whose term ends in 2010) to perpetuate herself in power as prime minister in a federal system. Mariano Patalinjug, (by email), Yonkers , NY , May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Great article, Tony. I am bothered by Pimentel�s move. Has the Senate been captured? Mano Alcuaz, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Kuya Tony C. Abaya, Thank you for such good efforts on this. A suggestion to share: for Senators, every province should have at least one and not more than 2twofor all provinces. I do not like 'by region' because it may result in a province not being represented at all. In the USA , every state is represented two senators as a 'compromise' during the debate of their constitution as proposed. We can do away with a lower house of assemblymen, etc. if we have a Senate, or the other way around, no Senate but Assemblymen only. Too many legislative bodies spoils the laws. Thanks again. More power to you, Kuya Tony. Leona Guera, (by email), Australia , May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I guess there is no need for research or data, empirical or otherwise, to understand that it's not the form of government or the kind of state that determines progress or lack of it (as in our case). It�s the kind of leaders that our kind of people choose as leaders that determines it. As you said, it's a "no-brainer" Elizur Militar, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. I think the most immediate solution to the country's political problem is the computerization of the election process, not federalism. As we all know, the more "counting " days there are for Comelec (ballots) , the more that the system is prone to, you know, make magic. I think, even if on a partial computerization, will greatly improve our system. I suggest nga, the whole of Mindanao . ... Secondly, only those with ITR's, college graduates and holders of business permits shall be allowed to vote. With this, wala ng Lito Lapid, Bong Revilla, Erap, Noli de Castro, Jinggoy, and other artistas will win.. Hinde na popularity ang maging gauge for winning but more on credentials. I just realized the disadvantages of federalism. However, maganda nga naman na magkarun ng regionalism eh.. Mangyayari nyan is that pagandahan nalang ng business policies ang mga probinsiya to lure investors. Malay natin, Davao can direclty compete na with China in terms of factories. I really would love to see this, yung maiinggit ang ibat ibang probinsiya and kanya kanyang paskilaban. How can this happen under the present set up? Mike Delgado, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww What the country need for now is a strong clean authoritarian government to discipline our politicians. I think this kind of government will not come from lawyers or the current politicians that we have today, especially among the legislators. They themselves are corrupted by their own CDF. I can easily understand them if they gave up their CDF and gave it to the social services or national social construction fund administered by a multi- sectoral body composed of 3 people representing the government, civil society plus one. Federalism is divisive for now and it is an old idea whose time has not come. Albert Banico, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I agree with you, Tony, particularly on the Trojan Horse point. They are walking right into the spider's web. Rodolfo Villarica, Ph.D., (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya: As I understand it, your primary objection to change to a federal system before year 2010 is what your called "Trojan Horse" manuever by President Gloria, following Russia 's Vladimir Putin. So, actually it's a scheduling problem. The rest of your "grounds" for opposing federalism are secondary in nature albeit valid. I was borned and raised in Mindanao (Misamis Occidental),and I can understand Senator Pimentel's advocacy for federalism. The so- called "Imperial Manila" mentality has pervaded the psyche of Mindanao inhabitants for so long. I heard one prominent Cebuano, Cebu City Mayor Thomas Osmena said that Manila looks down on people from Visayas and Mindanao . He is a great grandson of the Sergio Osmena Sr., the second president of Philippine Commonwealth. Indeed, because of the concentraton of polital and economic power is in Manila , the first and greater beneficiary of government programs are from Metro Manila and Luzon . Often times the southern Philippines has gotten economic crumps or has been neglected. The good senator coming from Cagayan de Oro has intended to manifest the frustration of the people of Mindanao . Yet, he should be decent enough to rebut your valid points if he believes he has superior reasons for federalism. To remain silent is to default leaving the impression that his advocacy for federalism is not serious and intellectually deficient. BTW, like you, my father was a Tagalog and my mother a Mindanawenia. Thanks for a good presentation. Beware of the Trojan Horse! Martin Celemin, (by email), Las Vegas , Nevada , May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, The federalism of Senator Pimentel is similar to Sen. Blas Ople when he declared to nam Muslim Mindanao, as if giving Mindanao to the Muslims. If worse come to worse, Christians and other faith believers will be driven out of Mindanao . Here comes Senator Pimentel, trying to parcel the Philippines into mini-states who some will opt to go free and independent from Manila government. We are sad for having genius politicians who have their heads in the skies and clouds and their feet hanging on air God have mercy and bless the Philippines with good inteligent and down to earth practical leaders with the right sence of thinking. Rex Rivera, (by email), May 08, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Professor Abaya, Thank you for sending me your article 'Instead of federalism". I appreciate you putting me in your mailing list. My name is Philip Ortiz, 48yo, a friend of Manuel Faelnar. I have lived in Manila for 40years and 8years in Bacolod City . My mother hails from Silay City , Negros Occidental. I am presently a philosophy professor, a violin professor, and a sugarcane planter. As my e-mail nick implies, I am a federalist. Nevertheless, I like the way you presented your arguments against federalism. It was clear, concise and CANDID. I am sure Fr. Galdon, SJ would be very pleased with your style of writing. (Why would he be pleased? I never studied under him. ACA) Be that as it may, I debate with you on several points: AA-My critique of his resolution rests on five principal grounds: a) it is a Trojan Horse to re-introduce a twice-defeated (in 2006-07) maneuver to shift to a parliamentary system, to enable President Arroyo to remain in power beyond 2010, as prime minister, similar to the maneuver of Vladimir Putin in Russia;- PO-Maybe, maybe not that it is a Trojan Horse, but I am willing to risk it. However, knowing the President personally I don't think she will want to remain in power after 2010. But if that is the price (that she remains in power) to move to a parliamentary system (I am also a parliamentarist) I am will accede to her being prime minister. There are many things I like about the parliamentary system: the feature of the shadow govt, the prime minister being chosen by parliament (not direct voting), to name a few. AA: the resolution�s stated objective, �to spur economic growth,� is a no-brainer since, as I pointed out in my article, the Philippines� failure to develop as fast as its neighbors in the past 50 years can be traced to poor, even stupid economic policies and strategies, not to its being a unitary state; PO : Perhaps you are right. But the economic policies I find are biased for the urban centers of the Philippines , basically for Luzon . Land Reform is a good example of such a narrow view of our economic and political culture. Land Reform should have been left to the Local Governments, or the provincial governments rather than making it a national policy. Land Reform might have worked in Luzon (being predominantly riceland), but not for Negros Occ. (being sugar). But most of us resent national policy makers who tell us what we ought to plant and cultivate, when they don't even understand the local/regional economic environment of the area. What I am saying, there are local problems that should be solved by the locals. For that reason, that's good enough to be federalized. But I also have other reasons. ( Negros Occidental has representatives in Congress. Why did they not speak out? ACA) AA: Most of the successful countries in our part of the world � Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand � all achieved economic success as unitary states; only one - Malaysia � as a federal union; so there is nothing wrong with being a unitary state as long as the correct economic strategies and policies are pursued; on the other hand, a federal union with wrong economic strategies and policies would stagnate, e.g. autarkic and xenophobic Myanmar, under military rule since 1962. PO: take note, Japan , China , Korea , Taiwan , share the same language and history (well not so much for the local native Taiwanese). (Not true. The Japanese speak Japanese, the Koreans speak Korean, The Chinese speak hundreds of regional languages and dialects, but they are all required to learn Mandarin in school. So are the Taiwanese. ACA) I strongly believe that the Philippine Islands do not share the same type of history. Negros was already an independent republic before Aguinaldo proclaimed indepence in 1898. Not to mention the history of Mindanao ! But at any rate, the unitary form of government that we have does not allow the provinces/regional areas to decide for themselves how to grow economically. For example: the diversion road to the new airport in Silay. Our local government was promised that if we supply the national government with the land for right-of-way, the national government will build and spend for the diversion road. Our local government bought the right of way from the respective landowners and presented the path where the road will pass, but the national government didn't like the path of the road, so the national government decided to look for another path. So question: what will the local government do with the land that they bought from the landowners? The local government now is forced to make a road coming from the local government's coffers. But there isn't enough money because the local government of silay city remits to the national government as much as 70% of their revenues. Which leaves less than 30% for operating expenses of the local government. Then the local government has to act like beggars and to humiliate themselves for the Internal Revenue Allotment. What a waste. (Again, your province has representatives in Congress. Why didn�t they speak out? ACA) AA: Archipelagic countries � Japan , Indonesia , the Philippines � are unitary states also for pragmatic reasons: being made up of islands, they are vulnerable to centrifugal forces that would encourage secession and disunity. PO : Secession-will that be so bad? Maybe just maybe it might be a good thing. But seriously, let me say that, in my opinion, a strong unitary government will encourage disunity. I don't know much about Indonesia , but I know there are many ethnic groups there. East Timor , being one of them. The question is with that situation: why didn't the national government simply grant them Independence ? About Mindanao , I think the whole island should be autonomous. Manila seems so far away, despite it is only 1.5 hours away by plane. The culture is quiet different. (My father was from Luzon, my mother was from Mindanao . We the children never suffered from any �difference in cultures.� ACA) AA: I challenged Sen. Pimentel to name even only one example of a country that shifted from unitary to federal � or from federal to unitary � and thus achieved prosperity as a result of that shift. He has not obliged. PO : I believe Prof. Faelnar did the work for Sen. Pimentel AA:Such as, for example, the oft repeated lament that Imperial Manila is imposing Tagalog-based Filipino on the rest of the country. This is not a valid argument for federalism. Every country has one or two official languages ( Switzerland has three), and dozens, even hundreds, of other languages and dialects outside the capital region. China, for example has 123 million citizens � 9.4% of the total population � who are not ethnic Han Chinese, who speak their own languages and practice their own religions, but who are required to learn Mandarin in school, as are hundreds of millions of Han Chinese who are native speakers of Hakka, Cantonese, Hainanese, Shanghainese, Fookienese, and other regional languages and dialects. Bahasa Indonesia, the official language of Indonesia, is based on the language spoken in Riau in northern Sumatra . But there are millions and tens of millions of Indonesians who are native speakers of Javanese, Balinese, Sundanese, Amboinese, etc but who are required to learn Riau-based Bahasa in school. Even the French spoken in and around Paris is not the same French spoken in the other departements where the natives speak their own dialects: Breton, Norman , Alsacien, Auvergnois , Languedoc , Provencal, Limousin , Corsican, etc. However, they are required to learn the Metropolitan French of Paris in school. The same is true about Hindi in India, Urdu in Pakistan, Farsi in Iran, even Spanish in Spain, Italian in Italy, German in Germany, etc There is always a dominant language, which becomes the national language for practical reasons, and all other languages and dialects take subsidiary positions. Tagalog-based Filipino became dominant because of the influence of Tagalog radio programs (especially before the days of television), Tagalog TV programs and Tagalog movies, not because of �Tagalog imperialism.� In the 1960s, there was a Cebuano movie industry, but it never acquired a nationwide audience. It simply died away, leaving Tagalog movies dominant by default. (My siblings and 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. When we traveled or studied abroad, we wrote to each other in English. I subsequently married my wife, who came from Zamboanga City but who never bothered to speak Chavacano to me or our children. We have no hang-ups about �Tagalog imperialism,� even though none us can recall [or care about] the �pure Tagalog� that we learned in high school.) PO : OK, fine. You have no problem with the language, but many of us resent that Tagalog is being imposed. You also downgrade such resentment because it is being "emotional". And so, may I ask, what is wrong with being emotional, specially about languge? If you read Wittgenstein, language is Being and Being is language (or was that Heidegger?). Professor Doctor Joey Dacudao and your best friend Atty Manuel Faelnar (I don�t even know Faelnar personally. ACA) can explain better how are languages are dying because of the strong imposition of the national language. In a separate e-mail, I will narrate how I felt as a second class citizen in ADMU because i couldn't speak tagalog well and how they ridiculed regional languages (remember that sakal, sakali movie?). Are we suppose to accept a national language based on pure mathematical rationality? That's like accepting Jesus as your saviour based on a logical syllogism, or like performing Beethoven based on the four forms of music. It simply cannot be articulated on the rational. There is an emotional component. In other words, "the heart has its reasons.... (But if billions of people around the world accept their countries� national language even though they speak their own regional languages at home, your emotional objection to Tagalog is not a rational basis for federalism. Should the Aetas, the Dumagats. the Tasadays, the Mabolos, the Kalantiaos, the Hanunoos, etc also demand their own federal states just because they do not speak Tagalog at home? Why don�t you set up an Ilonggo film industry � as there used to be a Cebuano film industry � and see how many people will watch your films. Tagalog films have no trouble finding an audience all over the Philippines, even in Ilonggo-speaking provinces. ACA) . AA: But this can be remedied without going through the bother and expense of switching to a federal union. We would consume billions of pesos to change from a unitary state to a federal union, and additional billions of pesos to maintain that union. PO : I don't think it will cost that much, but even that amount will make it worth the shift. AA: It would mean creating additional layers of trapos and bureaucrats to man state legislatures, state governments and state supreme courts. This would benefit existing political dynasties who would make sure that these positions are filled up by members of their dynasties, thereby strengthening feudalism in this country, similar to the situations in pre-Meiji Japan and pre-Mao China . PO : Now this really hurts. Is that how you regard local officials? That local officials are bereft of any intellectual acumen to rule? I guess your "Manila-imperialist" orientation is showing. Many local officials here in Negros are sincere politicians who want to work for the betterment of the province. But many are stifled or their scope is limited because of national impositions. I won't go to details right now, but you think that if left alone to decide for ourselves, the provinces will remain in the "feudal" area. Tsk, tsk, so that's how you think of non-Manila residents. (What makes you jump to that conclusion? Haven�t you heard of the Binay dynasty, the Cayetano dynasty, the Estrada dynasty, the Eusebio dynasty, the Asistio dynasty, etc? These are all vestiges of feudalism. Btw, there was a lot of cultural growth during the medieval and pre-mao era. (Yes, but neither China nor Japan became modern countries under feudal overlords. ACA) AA: In the present situation, these billions of pesos are better spent boosting food production so that we become self-sufficient in food and save millions of Filipinos from involuntary hunger and starvation This is infinitely more important than changing the political system. Which can be discussed later, but AFTER 2010, to prevent the Trojan Horse from sneaking in, with GMA crouching inside, scheming to become prime minister.. PO : Anytime is as good as any. If we wait after 2010 (which is just around the corner), we will have other problems. Then we will postpone, ad infinitum. At the moment, the defective form of government continues (well, yea, no government is perfect, i admit), AA: AFTER 2010, we should also discuss the election of senators on a regional basis, instead of the present election at large. If we were to assign two or three senatorial seats per region, we would be making sure that EVERY region is adequately and always represented in the Senate. In the present electoral system for the Senate, Metro Manila , Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog and Bicol are over-represented, Mindanao and Visayas are under-represented, and Bangsa Moro is NOT REPRESENTED AT ALL. This scandalous state of affairs has been going on for decades. Is it any wonder that the Muslims want to secede?. PO : So, why don't we just federalize? (Because it is not necessary. All � except one - of our successful neighbors are unitary states. That�s the empirical evidence. There is NO empirical evidence of a unitary state becoming prosperous just because it federalized. ACA) AA: Of the six or seven readers who disagreed with me, only one, Manuel Lino G. Faelnar, had done any research and based his arguments on empirical, factual grounds. Sen. Pimentel should hire him as researcher. I will respond to him in a future article. ***** PO : I enjoyed writing to Prof Abaya, and I hope we can have more of this dicourse. (Thank you, but I am not a professor. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I seem to recall back when, seeing an application form at the University in California asking what language one spoke and read. For the Philippines , it asked if our language was Ilocano. I guess the popularity of a language depends on who is the power that be or the application might have grossly mistaken language for dialect. Kit Soriano, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to �Rice Solutions� (April 24, 2008) Dear Tony, There will always be a food crisis because only a few people want to become farmers. Joel Magsaysay, (by email), Silang Cavite, May 04, 2008 Ilog Maria Honeybee Farms wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Today's (Sunday, May 4) Philippine Daily Inquirer has an article on how badly Haiti solved its rice crisis. To solve the unemployment problem, Magsaysay, then later Diosdado Macapagal, hired the unemployed to clean up the esteros. They were not given cash dol-eouts. Fritz Maramba, (by email), May 04, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony: We blame GMA and her cohorts for the shortage of rice in the Philippines . But here in the US we have rice shortage also but we don't blame Pres. Bush or any government official. I shop at a US military base and the rice shelves in the Asian section have been empty for the last two months, except for one-pound rice boxes. When asked, the commissary management just don't know when they can get rice (Calrose) for the base. Rudy Hermosa, (by email), Boston , MA , May 04, 2008 (The overwhelming majority of Americans are not rice consumers. If there were a shortage of wheat, or a sudden increase in the price of bread, Americans would complain and blame someone high up in the DA for it. Your commissary manager is not responsible for the supply of rice in the entire country. GMA is. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Response to Lawrence See Dear Tony, This is in response to the view of Mr. Lawrence Sese that the rice crisis is a diversion. Soaring rice prices are not meant to deflect the people's attention to the ZTE scandal and other GMA's missteps or mismanagement nor as Mr Sese's sees it as"a quick and convenient way for everyone to forget about the Senate Probe on ZTE-NBN, on Hello Garci, on Fertilizer Scam, on Macapagal Avenue scandal, etc. etc. etc. " When bellies get hungry, they fuel food riot. History is replete with revolutions ignited by hunger. GMA administration is aware that they have to respond to the rice crisis ASAP to avert a possible "peasant revolt" before things go out of hand. If you were in Haiti , Senegal , Morocco , Yemen , etc, where the magnitude of cereal shortage is so pronounced, you would be singing a different tune. Dr. Nestor P. Baylan, (by email), New York City , May 05, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony: With the neglect that the administration has regarded agriculture and our marine resources, it should dawn on all of us that the government's policy stands: IMPORT RICE, IF THERE IS NOT ENOUGH LOCALLY. So, this is not getting the Philippines and the Filipinos anywhere. This is the time for all of us to think of OUR ACTION PROGRAM FOR APPLICATION LOCALLY. What can we do individually to go over this hump, without government help? The urban centers, just as it was during the second world war (Japanese occupation period), will suffer with the insufficient supply of the staples, and the attendant high costs of food. But the rural areas will not suffer because the people there will eke out something for their daily food. And they will survive. I personally experienced that during the last war. The next presidential candidate, therefore, to succeed GMA must have a definitive policy for the management of a population that promises to grow to one hundred million (100,000,000) Filipinos by 1012, a shrinking agricultural area (given up to human settlements as residential subdivision and manufacturing or commercial areas), rising cost of foreign technologies for production, deficit-spending/increased borrowings of the government, and increasing energy costs which will never guarantee SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. Cross our fingers harder. Cheers Gil Santos, (by email), Makati City , May 05, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mang Tony, I really don't understand why the government has to go merry-go-round in addressing the rice issue. The money to be distributed to the poor can finance a project to cover a much wider constituency. It was always a question why farmers are not getting much subsidy. Why don't our grandstanding senators and congressmen make a law that will legislate farm gate prices of agricultural products like rice, hog, poultry, cattle, etc. This is to protect the farmers and even encourage more to go into farming. What is happening is that though prices of basic commodities in the market are skyrocketting, the farm gate prices remains absurd. As far as I understand, (I've got no time to check the recent situation), farmers in the US are earning quite good and they can even dictate market prices. In China, 2 or 3 years ago, when industrialization is so rapidly exploding and when people from inner provinces heard about good and stable earning from working in the factories swarmed the coastal province for jobs, they immediately took action. The Chinese government noticed that so many people are leaving their farms and migrating to cities where they can have stable earning. What the Chinese government did was subsidize agriculture to encourage people to go back into farming. Chinese went back to their provinces, and now are earning more aside from the fact that they do not have to stay in cramped dormitories in the factories and be with their families. Then there were labor shortage in coastal cities which the workers used to their advantage as they demanded higher wages, minimum wage in China has increased at least 50% for the past 3 years. Because of the labor shortage as well factories were forced to move to inner regions. Chinese are way so smart that they are now manipulating the whole world. And there is nothing wrong with it if we are to follow their lead. Edilberto Anit, (by email), May 07, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. |