A Matter of Trust: The May 10, 2010 Elections

In my last post before the May 10 elections, I contended that life in this modern age would be easy and comfortable if people trust one another. Life becomes difficult, stagnant and miserable if people operate on distrust.

Trust requires almost as a matter of necessity that those engaged in economic and social transactions will offer and give their best to their endeavor because that is the only way to guarantee and sustain a productive, stable, and meaningful relationship.

Trust was the raging issue during the last national and local elections.

On May 10, 2010, the Filipino people put in their right places the pessimists, the skeptics, and the doomsayers of the first automated elections in the country. The people put aside suspicion and doubts on the credibility and integrity of the entire electoral system and went to the polling places in droves, braving the burning sun or the downpour wherever they were found in the archipelago that fateful day. The voters’ turnout (38M) was high at 75 percent of the voting population. Many were dismayed though by the endless queues but a great number persevered to the end and experienced wholly or partially the novel way of voting electronically. And the entire nation was amazed –stunned by the quickness of knowing the results. By 11 p.m. the same day about 40 percent of the elections results were already made public and the ranks of winning national candidates were already established. Before midnight most of the elections in the local levels were already decided. In fact, in less than 24 after the close of the polling places, four presidential contenders already conceded defeat to the frontrunner. This was unprecedented in the 100-year history of Philippine politics. The gallant act added more credence to the integrity of the entire election exercise.

The many vociferous critics – journalists, opinion weavers, IT experts, church ministers and leaders, the business community, and the academics - were dumbstruck and were eating their words the day after. No doubt the operation of some PCOS machines experienced some glitches, but these were minimal and in most cases the kinks were ironed out before they could morph into a full-blown problem. There was no reported tampering of the machines, software hacking or hijacking in the transmission of the election results. It appeared that the system was almost foolproof as earlier assured by COMELEC and Smartmatic. There were, no doubts, some election-related violence, but they were very minimal, isolated and were effectively contained by the PNP and AFP and were only obtaining in places almost traditionally expected.

The last elections also displayed the ingenuity and resilience of the Filipino. Consider this. The Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machine in my precinct would disgorge filled up official ballots fed into it. It was replaced by another unit. But the same problem occurred. After about two hours of trouble shooting, it was discovered that the ballots in that precinct were oversize (wider) and were therefore rejected by the very sensitive PCOS machine. So what one of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEI) members did to resume automated voting was to cut some 2 cm off from the right side of every ballot before she would feed the same to the machine. This worked out but slowed down the process by some 30 or more seconds/ballot and had also sacrificed secrecy. But who cared about secrecy at that time when the important concern was for everyone’s vote to be counted.

At the interim, some 60 of us in that precinct bypassed the PCOS machine and dropped our ballots directly to the ballot box to save on time. Being the head of the Roving PPCRV Team who happened to be on the spot, I suggested, and the BEI and all political party watchers agreed, that we go manual in the casting of ballots until such time that the machine would become functional. We further agreed that BEI would later feed the manually cast ballots to the PCOS machine even in our absence for registration/counting purposes. We had to move on.

In many other precincts, the PCOS machines jammed after about 200 ballots had passed through it and disorderly piled up inside the ballot box and eventually blocked incoming ones. The right solution was to open the box and rearrange the ballots. This was tedious and rather time consuming. The common option resorted to was to press the ballots down with a stick or a handle of a broom.

By all indications, the last elections were still not clean and honest. Vote buying in various forms remained unabated. This continues to be a formidable challenge for the redeemed COMELEC and the entire Filipino people to address to next time around. What was solved by the automation was cheating right there in the polls and in the canvassing of results. We no longer heard of ballot padding, ballot box snatching, dagdag-bawas maneuvers, and garci-like manipulations in frustrating the will of the people. The speed of the automation process left no rooms for the scoundrels to operate.

After all has been sad and done, the most maligned government institution of the season, the COMELEC, as well as its hardware and service provider, Smartmatic, its deputized agents, the PNP and the AFP, were all vindicated. They did a fantastic and fabulous job of conducting an orderly, peaceful, swift and credible election in an environment that oozed with intrigues, distrust, mocking, and black propaganda. Kudos are also due to the dutiful teachers, the different volunteer organizations like the PPCRV, the ABS CBN Boto Mo I-patrol Mo, the Citizen Crime Watch, the CVOs and barangay tanods, and many others who all worked hard to insure that the last elections were something that we all can be proud of. Mabuhay ang Filipino!

Clean, Honest, Peaceful and Inexpensive Elections

Unless we can have clean, honest, peaceful and inexpensive elections we can never ever stop corruption in this country. Until we successfully get rid of corruption in all levels of government our country will never see progress and the people will continue to wallow in poverty.

Scandalously Expensive, Dirty

And Dishonest Elections

Election is essential in a political democracy. It is the process that translates into behavioral activities the democratic principle that the governed participate in their very own governance.

The process requires that some people run for elective posts in the government while the rest makes and legitimizes the choice through the ballot.

However, because our legal and moral norms are twisted, to run for an elective post in this country is to engage in a very expensive enterprise. The higher the position sought the greater is the expense to incur. So much money is needed to run and, much more, to win a campaign.

Consider for instance the current electoral contest for the presidency. Even prior the campaign period, i.e., from November 1, 2009 to January 31, 2010, six of the ten presidential aspirants already spent a total of P2.1B on TV ad spots to gain public visibility. And to think that these politicians are vying for a government post that offers a measly compensation of only P762, 300/annum!

Villar topped TV ad spending at P1.1B, followed by Teodoro, P407M, Aquino, P269M, Gordon, P245, Villanueva, P90M, and Estrada, P84M. With 30% discount mandated by the Election Code, these candidates may pay only 70% of the of the actual TV ad value. Yet that is still a lot of money and the campaign period has just begun. To remain in the public mind, it is estimated that a serious presidential candidate has to spend P2M /day for eight 30-seconder prime-time TV spot ads. For a country where 70 percent of the people are poor, the huge expense for media projection alone is already vulgar and scandalous.

Much more money is needed to litter the highways and byways with one’s avatar and promises, to finance provincial sorties, to contribute to local campaign funds, that is, to buy votes, and to grease to one’s favor the operations and activities of the military, the police, the media, the teachers and the COMELEC functionaries.

At the local level, election has become a field contest for the most effective strategy in the use of “gold, guns and ghosts” to win a campaign. Such that in recent memory the country had been rocked by political scandals and tragedies, the most abominable of them were the Jocjoc Bolante fertilizer anomaly, the “Hello Garci” election scandal, the missing Bidol and his election paraphernalia, which was eventually capped by the monstrous Maguindanao Massacre.

Election Spending, Corruption and Poverty

Pera’t Pulitika (PAP) came up with these estimates of the campaign expenses for the major electoral posts in the country based on its study of the 2004 and 2007 elections, namely: Presidential campaign, P2.5B – P5B; senatorial campaign, P150M -P500M; congressional campaign, P3M –P100M; gubernatorial campaign, P5M –P150M; and mayoralty campaign, P1M-P100M.

Take note that these ground estimates transcend the campaign spending caps set by law which is P10/registered voter for presidential positions (president and vice president) and P3/registered voter for all the rest of the positions, the total amount of which may differ on the size of each constituency. In other words, with a current voting population of 50M, a presidential aspirant is allowed by law to spend only P500M plus P250M from party contribution (P5/registered voter) or a total of P750M. At P3/registered voter, a senatorial aspirant is only permitted to spend P150M.

Although the regulations on campaign spending are unrealistic and never strictly monitored and controlled by the COMELEC, they have been imposed supposedly to level the playing field for candidates. The fact remains, however, that the cost of running for a political position is very prohibitive. And from the look of it, only the economic elite have actually the opportunity to participate and have the biggest chance to win elective positions in government.

The political race naturally spawns fund raising activities from various sources and in different forms the dire consequences of which may subvert and frustrate the national will. Politicians dip their fingers into sources of funds other than from their own pockets. For incumbents, funds may come from the coffers of the government through the like of the notorious fertilizer anomaly and through pork barrels and over-priced and sub-standard public infra projects that materialize few months before the election season. Contributions to the campaign kitty may also be solicited from big business, lobbyists, gambling and drug lords, and from big-time smugglers. It is also no accident that a year or so before and during elections, bank robberies, kidnappings and plain banditries become very pronounced in different parts of the country.

Our kind of political election evidently does not serve the purpose for which it is undertaken, that is, to produce democratic and socially responsive leaders and lawmakers to lead our country to progress and peace. Instead, it has become the mother of all corruptions that prostitutes our morals and values. It has become a nasty business where people trade their souls for some economic incentives. Decision-makings are thus compromised and governance is sacrificed in the altar of payback development. Sadly, the citizens have lost the moral ascendancy to criticize or demand anything right from the government because they are, in the first place, greatly responsible in putting the wrong people there. So long as corruption remains in our electoral process, our government will remain inefficient and ineffective in the delivery of public services. Consequently, the people will remain marginalized and dehumanized. And the cycle of poverty and corruption goes on and on to eternity.

Clean, Honest, Peaceful and Zero-Spending

Selection of Leaders

The only way to break the cycle of poverty and corruption is to have an honest and responsive government. We may be able to have this kind of government if we reform our electoral system by expanding and leveling the opportunity of participation and reducing to zero the spending for those who aspire for political posts. To do this, let us drop election as a method of choosing our leaders and replace it with selection through draw-lot method of pre-screened and qualified candidates to any position of leadership and decision-making in the government.

Basic Selection Policy

We envision an ‘electoral law’ that strictly prescribes the highest or best qualifications for any contested position of leadership and decision-making in the government. In this highly competitive and globalized world where we have remained laggards, we need leaders who do not only know how to read and write but must have the capacity to think creatively and critically, and must have the necessary experience to manage resources and to produce results. The higher the position sought the more stringent will be the qualifications required of the aspirants.

The primary role of COMELEC, or however this body to conduct the selection process may be called, is to screen the candidates to the various positions based on established qualification standards and to set up open, public and the most transparent draw-lot mechanisms in their selection. The church, the media, the academe, and civil societies may participate as watchdogs of the entire process.

Consider, for instance, the selection process in a municipality. Let us assume that the following qualifications are prescribed by law for the position of municipal mayor, vice mayor and members of the Sangguniang Bayan, to wit:

1. At least a college graduate
2. At least five years work experience, either as an employee, an entrepreneur, or as self-employed worker
3. Resident of the municipality for the last five years before the selection day
4. Mentally and physically fit
5. Not convicted of any crime punishable of one year imprisonment and higher
6. Shows willingness and commitment to serve

The COMELEC shall receive applications and screen applicants on the basis of the above qualifications. The CVs and supporting documents of aspirants to the different positions shall be submitted to the COMELEC one year before the selection day. The COMELEC shall find ways within six months to verify documentations and to conduct interviews of aspirants if necessary. After six months, it shall publish the names of qualified candidates and those who failed to qualify. Within the next five months, it shall settle and resolve protests on the candidacies.

The Selection Day

The selection of candidates employing a draw-lot method shall be held in a public plaza. An elevated stage that is visible from all sides and covered with closed circuit televisions (CCTV) shall be installed in the center of the plaza. A clear glass selection drum or tambiolo shall be placed in the middle of the stage for everybody to view. On the moment of selection, a COMELEC official shall show the name of every qualified candidate to the public via wide viewing screens and drop the ball bearing the name into the tambiolo. Once all the names of candidates, say, for a mayoralty position have been dropped into the tambiolo, it shall be closed and allowed to roll for five minutes. Afterwards, a mechanical arm shall pick up at random a name from the tambiolo and place it on a verifying machine for everybody to see. The person whose name was chosen in that random manner shall be declared by the COMELEC as the winner of the mayoralty post. The candidates for membership in the Sangguniang Bayan shall undergo similar process.

The selection method may also be applied in filling up other political positions, say, at the provincial and national level, with corresponding strategic modifications. The selection for higher positions may, for instance, be done by stages of elimination. Suffice it to say that there is a need to reduce time in the verification of the identity of the candidates, in assuring that all names of qualified candidates go into the process until eliminated or finally chosen, and in ascertaining that the conduct of selection remains random, public and absolutely transparent.

This method of choosing political leaders will certainly do away with mud-slinging, expensive self-advertising, vote-buying, terrorizing, and in degrading of the environment in the wanton campaign for votes. The preponderance to cheat and rob the government and the people to get back election investments may be greatly reduced if not totally eliminated. Therefore, the delivery of basic government services will also greatly improve. And this country will experience peace and finally march to progress.