Like all children and young adults, growing up for me was always shadowed by this massive question of identity. This question was made even harder for me by the fact that I was the child of immigrants – the world that existed inside my house was starkly different than that which existed just beyond its doors. The question was made even harder by being Filipino. We don’t fit into the typical Asian-American stereotype. Despite being the second largest Asian group in the U.S. second to Chinese, we are an invisible ethnicity. We are constantly thankful that we have escaped the poverty and corruption of the homeland, but we always yearn for the comforts of life at home. For some, the pride of being American has caused them to actively try to forget that they are Filipino and to teach their children to assimilate. For others, they will always consider them voluntary exiles in a foreign land. This question of identity dominates the Fil-Am psyche. Are we Filipino-Americans or are we Filipinos in America? What does that even mean and does it even matter?

This quest for identity has caused many of us to focus on carving out a definition and niche for Fil-Am-ness. Unfortunately, this quest often results in neglect of the Philippines itself. While I was in undergrad, it seemed the whole community of Filipino students on the East Coast was still searching for the history we never learned – the rudimentary data like the anti-colonial struggle and birth of our nation, the fact that a Filipino-American War even occurred, and the legacy of the Marcos years, which is when most of us or our parents left the Philippines. The story ended there.

When I went back to the Philippines after college, however, I realized that I was 20 years behind. Yes, Filipinos were aware of and valued the nation’s history, but there was an entire present to deal with. Increasing poverty, exploding population, labor export and brain drain, labor trafficking, deteriorating government institutions…the post-Marcos period has witnessed the Mendiola massacre, numerous coup attempts, rapid privatization, EDSA II, Hello Garci, and numerous other historical events and here I was still stuck on 1986.

Filipino-Americans need a way to connect with the Philippines now. They need a way to define themselves, not just in terms of the past, but also in terms of the present. They need a way to be proud of who our people are beyond a Pacquiao fight or a Black Eyed Peas concert. In fact, they not only want it, they crave it.

A few weeks ago I wrote an open letter to Feed the Hungry, a Filipino-American group based in the Washington, DC area. Without knowing much about them, I knew they were much more substantive than most Fil-Am groups in the country. Their activities consisted of more than parties and balls and cultural shows na pang magpapaporma lang. They had real programs and sought to deliver real services to Filipinos in need in the areas of health, education, livelihood and disaster relief.

The problem most Filipino and Filipino-American social service groups have is that of credibility. We have all heard of that priest who solicited funds for the poor and then built a 3-story house in the province, or that community association who spent member dues on a $60,000 Christmas party and a $500 donation to WowWowWee. I never, however, questioned Feed the Hungry’s credibility. Their website clearly featured activity reports, logs of expenditures and organizational strategies for keeping overhead low and transparency a priority. Furthermore, members of FtH were clearly individuals who understood the importance of credibility in a development context – many had careers at the World Bank Group/IMF.

What I did take issue with, however, was FtH’s choice of partners. Some of their outreach activities are done in partnership with the Committee on Overseas Filipinos, a sub-agency of the Office of the President. A photo of one of their recent outreach activities showed a young man with a t-shirt with “Office of the President of the Philippines” and the presidential seal clearly displayed. Me being myself and all, this clearly did not sit well with me. Also, being myself, I decided to contact FtH about it directly.

My argument was that even if all of FtH’s procedures were completely spotless, the same could not be said for those of the COF. While the FtH members were vigilant about any potential corrupt procedures among their partners, corruption occurs in hidden ways, such as procurement procedures, permit acquisition or location targeting. Furthermore, even if all of their activities were completely 100% corruption-free, the very presence of people from a presidential agency, with the agency’s and president’s names clearly on display, meant their activities could potentially feed populism, clientelism and electoral utang na loob. To me, these partnerships mirrored too many World Bank and IMF projects where a commitment to working directly with government all too often leads to ineffective, inefficient projects that can in fact be detrimental to political and social societies over the long term.

Most groups would have reacted either by ignoring me or with hostility, and I was bracing myself for such. What I received, however, was a well thought-out and heartfelt response, which led to a series of email exchanges where FtH leadership patiently answered all of my questions, and invited me to meet to talk more about the organization as well as brainstorm for new partnerships and approaches.

What became clear during the email exchange as well as the meeting was that this is a group of people that absolutely believe in the work they are doing, and that they do it energetically and emotionally, with joy and passion. What also became clear, is that this organization quite intelligently strives to ensure transparency, accountability and efficiency at all key stages in project implementation. Their interaction to COF was limited to acquiring data to assist in targeting communities, asking COF to help identify potential non-government partners for cooperation (who they later vet independently from COF influence) using COF office space to store goods, and allowing COF staff to volunteer to pack and distribute goods. They are careful to only engage young, junior COF staff and avoid the potentially tainted higher levels of leadership and management. Even more impressive and effective is the level of control and oversight that FtH maintains over all its funds and activities in order to ensure transparency, accountability and efficiency. There is also always someone from FtH who is physically present during outreach preparation and activities, FtH procures all of its materials independently (sometimes by staff personally trekking to Divisoria), and staff pay out of pocket for transportation and per diem costs.

What impressed me the most about this organization, however, is how open the leadership is to criticism and self-improvement. As an organization that has been in existence for 17 years with a respectable track record, they had a right to say, “Who the hell are you? We know what we’re doing,” as many such organizations do when faced with critiques. Instead, they invited me into their fold, sought to address my concerns, and have expressed genuine excitement at the prospect of exploring new strategies, approaches and partnerships. That in and of itself is a laudable achievement.

I was flabbergasted when I read FtH’s Executive Director’s response to one of my probing and presumptuous emails, “God Bless you. You may be the answer to one of my prayers — that the Youth with the kind of commitment and dedication you have for our Motherland be able, in the near future, will take our places (we are getting old).” As this generation of Filipino-Americans or Filipinos in America, or whatever name we choose to give ourselves seeks out our identity, I urge you to keep in mind two fundamental principles: 1) A defining characteristic of Filipino culture is the incomprehensible generosity our people exhibit. You see it every time you enter a Filipino household and the first question you are asked is “Kumain ka na ba?” You see it when you go out to eat with Filipinos and everyone argues over who has the honor of paying the bill. We all saw it in the wake of Ondoy when neighbors called each other to share their last half kilo of rice and their last thermos of water, all with not just a smile but joking and laughter. To be Filipino is to take joy in giving. 2) Who we are is defined by what we do.

For more information on Feed the Hungry, visit http://www.feedthehungryphil.org/.

I also sent it to them directly, but it might as well be an open letter as well.

The point: Good intentions, if acted on irresponsibly, can have devastatingly negative consequences. Working here for the past year has shown me in the very real terms of billions of dollars and millions of lives the harm that can result when charities and donor agencies throw money into situations without taking a moment to stop and think about the potential negative consequences.

Don’t give money to a charity just because it lets you pat yourself on the back and makes you feel like a good person. Think of the actual consequences. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have been informed by my colleague that she has been in contact with you regarding a fundraising lunch we are planning to hold at our workplace for the victims of the Ondoy and Pepeng typhoons. I am writing to inform you that, unfortunately, we have decided not to course the proceeds through Feed the Hungry.

While I fully appreciate Feed the Hungry’s commitment to keeping overhead costs low and ensuring transparency and efficiency in its operations, I’m sorry to say that I cannot extend the same level of confidence to your choice of partner in disaster relief implementation. While I understand that you have a relationship with the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) which spans several years, I would urge you to fully investigate and consider the integrity of the Commission to ensure their procedures are complacent to your high standards. If they are not, there are several non-partisan, Philippine-based, internationally reputable and effective charities that would be extremely excited to partner with you, such as Caritas, Catholic Relief Services, Philippine National Red Cross and the Philippine Jesuit Foundation.

As I’m sure you are aware, the CFO is an agency of the Office of the President. Its Executive Director, Mr. Dante Ang, was appointed to his position after serving as the personal publicist of President and First Gentleman Arroyo. The CFO Board of Commissioners is comprised of high-ranking cabinet officials. Thus, it can be said with substantial certainty that the CFO is not insulated from political leanings or interests.

Furthermore, there is reason to believe that money coursed through the CFO and various government offices it is affiliated with would be subject to graft and corruption. There is already a documented history of the current presidential administration indiscreetly spending foreign-generated disaster relief funds. In its 2006 report, the Commission on Audit disclosed that the president’s office spent money it had received for calamity victims in Leyte for expenses such as anomalous hotel costs and maintenance of the Malacañang golf course. (Reyes, UPI Asia) For the 2008 fiscal year, the Commission on Audit reports the Office of the President retained over Php 574 million in unliquidated cash advances and over Php 295 million outstanding inter-agency receivables due to the failure of management to monitor project implementation. (CoA, 2008 Audit on Office of the President) As I noticed that several of your board members and key staff are accountants, I’m sure these figures resonate with your organization. While the CFO had a comparatively paltry Php 304,100 in unliquidated cash advances, (CoA, 2008 Audit on Commission on Filipinos Overseas) please notice that the CFO LINKAPIL Program, which I understand Feed the Hungry usually donates to, is not subject to audit and thus not included in the cited report.

Exacerbating CFO’s questionable transparency are the other government agencies it coordinates with according to the LINKAPIL operational framework diagram. The National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) and the Department of Education have both been embroiled in high level corruption scandals over the past few years, such as the ZTZ-NBN scandal and the textbook procurement scandal. The Bureau of Customs and Department of Finance are regarded by several sources as common clearing houses for corrupt funds to be funneled to the first couple (see Rufo, Newsbreak). The CoA reports the Bureau of Customs ended FY 2008 with Php 3.3 billion in unaccounted-for funds.

It is obvious from your email that Feed the Hungry is concerned that as much of its contributions as possible go to the people, and not to illicit purposes. Especially in this time of crisis, it is of utmost importance that every cent possible be spent on effective relief aid. There have unfortunately been numerous stories circling around volunteer circles and documented in media of unscrupulous political authorities using donations for personal gain. Consistent is the condemnation of the budgeting activities of national government bodies. Just two days ago the Malacañang-proposed 2010 national budget was signed, which did not identify disaster relief and rehabilitation as national development priorities. The Office of the President has made it clear that they intend to source private and foreign donors for disaster relief. In essence, the administration plans to not use national development funds for their intended purpose, but instead to solicit donations for which the government can later take credit. (Pamintuan, the Philippine Star) On October 13, Pres. Arroyo issued an executive order creating a special commission and mandating that commission as a “clearing house” for all international assistance coming for typhoon victims with the NEDA and Office of Civil Defense forming the secretariat and Department of Finance Secretary Teves acting as one of the chairs. (Cheng, ABS-CBN) Although results are yet to be seen, the implication is that this is a move to consolidate executive control over receiving and releasing foreign aid.

Finally, while I laud you for your good intentions and exemplary actions, good intentions unfortunately do not always translate into good outcomes, and sometimes can translate into detrimental outcomes. As professionals who work to strengthen international democratic processes and the development of the global south, we both know that providing unrestricted foreign donations to a corrupt government does not strengthen democracy, but weakens it. It does not promote development, but hinders it. I once again praise you for your work and beg you to reconsider your choice of implementing partner in the Philippines. I look forward to working with you in the future for a more transparent, accountable and effective system.

May God bless you and your endeavors.

With utter sincerity and humility,

Cecilia Lero

Here I am at a hotel in Dubai, staying for 1 night on my way to Bangladesh. I was actually quite excited to stay in Dubai knowing that I would see Filipinos everywhere. It definitely came true. Their stories are not new or different than those I heard from returning OFWs at home or from  my English students aspiring to go abroad. Yet, they still don’t fail to hit me. I met one girl who in 2 years time had only gone home once on emergency – the emergency being when her mother died. She’s just from Muñoz, an area I know well and not far from our house in La Loma. Others work long hours – the same receptionist that checked us in at 7 PM last night is here again working since 8 AM this morning.

Mga bagong bayani, that’s what GMA calls them. And for once, she’s right. There is no lack of evidence proving that the money these brave and lonely souls send home is the onlyt hing keeping the Philippine economy afloat and keeping even more of our people from starving. Talk about foreign investment. Pero, what that means is kulang ang mga tao na naewan sa pilipinas para baguhin ang bansa. The best and the brightest, the masipag, the educated, are either working here serving foreigners or doing all in their power with the hopes of going abroad to serve foreigners.

Sama ba ako into that framework? I suppose in some ways, yes, in many ways, no. Pero sad talaga ang situwasyon natin when people who love their country are forced into economic exile. It’s a stark contrast to the mayabang and oblivious Fil-Ams who are all to happy to flaunt their blue passports or greencards. We’ve all got to work harder so our mga bayani can go home.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

EDITORIAL: Obama the sanitizer

Somebody at the National Security Council dropped the ball. On Thursday, President Obama is welcoming Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to the White House for his presidency’s first visit by a Southeast Asian leader. The choice of Mrs. Arroyo for this honor was a mistake because Mr. Obama is being used to give political cover for the Philippine president’s troubles back home.

Mrs. Arroyo’s domestic political position is precarious. A poll released June 8 by the Pulse Asia polling firm pegged Mrs. Arroyo’s public approval at only 26 percent. Street demonstrations against her are routine and growing in size. These protests are in response to a dubious mandate following a dirty 2004 election and numerous allegations of corruption against her family and administration. Her husband, Mike Arroyo, has left the country and used doctors’ notes to say he is too ill to obey court summons related to corruption charges.

The Philippines has become less free during Mrs. Arroyo’s 10-year presidency. According to Freedom House, “Corruption is extensive throughout the Philippine state apparatus, from the lowest to the highest levels. Bribes and extortion seem to be a regular element of the complex connections among bureaucrats, politicians, businessmen, the press and the public.” In Transparency International’s 2008 Corruption Perceptions Index, the Philippines ranked 141st out of 180 nations on a list in which No. 1 is the least corrupt. The level of Philippine corruption is tied with Iran and Yemen and worse than in dodgy places such as Libya and Nigeria.

The corruption problem is affecting Manila’s relationship with other allies. A senior Philippine official told The Washington Times that German Chancellor Angela Merkel sent Mrs. Arroyo an ultimatum last month that Berlin-Manila ties are at risk if the Philippines doesn’t pay $60 million owed to the German government for Manila’s new international airport. The Philippine government seized the airport and refused to pay a German company — which is partly owned by the German state — for its construction after revelations that the contract allegedly was laden with millions in bribes and kickbacks.

There are also serious human-rights abuses in the archipelago. According to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, “The Philippines ranks sixth worldwide among countries that fail to prosecute cases of journalists killed for their work.” Between 1992 and 2008, at least 34 journalists were murdered in the Philippines; there were convictions in only three of these cases. Four more members of the press were killed this June alone. Opposition voices regularly disappear as well.

On top of all this are machinations by Mrs. Arroyo to cling to power by setting aside next May’s presidential election. The president and her allies are pushing to amend the Philippine constitution to change the current U.S.-style presidential system into a parliamentary system whereby Mrs. Arroyo could serve as prime minister. This would allow her to circumvent the presidential term limit which prevents her from staying in office. This move, incidentally, is similar to the strategy strongman Ferdinand Marcos used to stay in power after declaring martial law in 1972.

The relationship between Washington and Manila is an old and important one. After the U.S. victory in the Spanish-American war in 1898, the Philippine islands were a U.S. colony for half a century and have remained a close ally in the six decades since independence was granted in 1946. The current Visiting Forces Agreement between the two countries allows U.S. troops on Philippine soil to help in the war on terrorism and to assist the Philippines with its fight against Islamic insurrection in the southern islands.

But the nation should be differentiated from its lame-duck leader. Welcoming Mrs. Arroyo to the White House only validates her troubled rule.

District Reps. that voted for 1109 that won with less than 50% of votes

District Reps. that voted for 1109 with smallest margins of victory in 2007 – Bottom 30

My Dear Fellow Ilonggos,

Please please DO NOT ELECT RAUL GONZALEZ as mayor.

Do I really need to explain why?

On May 19, 2009, the UN released the Concluding Observations of the Committee Against Torture on the Philippines’ report.

The entire statement of observations (it’s only 12 pages) can be found here: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/cobs/CAT.C.PHL.CO.2.pdf.

Some highlights:

Section A. Introduction

2.  The Committee welcomes the submission of the second periodic report of the Philippines, which, while generally following the Committee’s guidelines for reporting, lacks statistical information and practical information on the implementation of the provisions of the Convention and relevant domestic legislation. The Committee regrets that the report was submitted 16 years late.

Section C. Principle subjects of concern and recommendations

7. Torture and ill-treatment and insufficient safeguards during police detention …the Committee is deeply concerned about the numerous, ongoing, credible and consistent allegations, corroborated by a number of Filipino and international sources, of routine and widespread use of torture and ill-treatment of suspects in police custody…including:

a)   Failure to bring detainees promptly before a judge, thus keeping them in prolonged police custody;
b)   Absence of systematic registration of all detainees, including minors, and failure to keep records of all periods of pretrial detention; and
c)   Restricted access to lawyers and independent doctors and failure to notify detainees of their rights at the time of detention, including their rights to contact family members

9. Impunity…credible allegations of torture and/or ill-treatment committed by law enforcement and military services personnel are seldom investigated and prosecuted and that perpetrators are either rarely convicted or sentenced to lenient penalties that are not in accordance with the grave nature of their crimes.

The Committee reiterates its grave concerns over the climate of impunity for perpetrators of acts of torture, including military, police and other State officials, particularly those holding senior positions that are alleged to have planned, commanded or perpetrated acts of torture.

11. Human rights defenders and other individuals at risk …The Committee notes with concern the numerous documented reports of harassment and violence against human rights defenders that hamper the capacity of civil society monitoring groups to function effectively. The Committee is also concerned at reports that others are also commonly victims of serious human rights violations, including torture, ill-treatment, killings, disappearances and harassment. Among those so affected are indigenous rights defenders such as Lumads of Mindanao and Igorots of the Cordillera, trade union and peasant activists, journalists and reporters, medical personnel, and religious leaders.

12.  De facto practice of detention of suspects …The Committee is deeply concerned about the de facto practice of detention of suspects by the PNP and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) in detention centers, safe houses and military camps.

15. Prompt, effective and impartial investigations State  bodies lack independence to review individual complaints about police and military misconduct.

18.  Sexual violence in detention [There are] numerous allegations of cases of rape, sexual abuse and torture committed against women detainees by the police, military and prison officials/personnel. .. officials continue to place women together with male inmates, and that male corrections officers continue to guard female inmates in violation of agency regulations.

19.  Children in detention the Committee is concerned that a significant number of children remain in detention and at reports of a de facto practice of not separating children from adults in detention facilities throughout the country

21. Witness Protection detainees who suffer ill-treatment are often coerced by the police to sign waivers or statements to the contrary.

25. Domestic violence the Committee expresses its concern about the prevalence of violence against women and children, including domestic violence. It is further concerned about the lack of State-wide statistics on domestic violence and that sufficient statistical data on complaints, prosecutions and sentences in matters of domestic violence were not provided.

26. Human Trafficking the Philippines continues to be a source, transit and destination country for cross-border trafficking of women and children for sexual exploitation and forced labour. The Committee regrets the  very limited number  of cases of filing, prosecution, and conviction of perpetrators of trafficking with many of those cases being dismissed at preliminary stages.

As if we needed another reason to have nonviolent discipline.

This column appears every Thursday in BusinessWorld. The one below appeared on  June 11, 2009.
http://www.bworldonline.com/BW061109/content.php?id=144

STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVE
René B. Azurin

Obscene

Obscene is the word that best describes what the public saw. But it wasn’t a “gang rape” as some thought to describe it. What we saw were 174 whores spreading their legs or bending over in unison in exchange for stolen loot. What politicos will do to obtain releases of their pork barrel is obviously without boundaries. Unlike honest prostitutes just trying to make it out of poverty, these political whores will not only sell their bodies, they will hock their unprincipled souls. Mephisto must have had a good harvest that day.

Exactly what is wrong with a unicameral parliamentary system was showcased vividly with the airing of House proceedings where representatives belonging to the pro-administration majority bludgeoned the minority and rammed through passage of a resolution for members of Congress to convene as an assembly to amend the nation’s Constitution. If we had in fact a single-chamber parliamentary government, then it would be all over and the ruling politicos would already have what they desperately want.

After viewing the vulgar display of how politicos will so readily sacrifice public welfare to advance selfish interests, no thinking Filipino should ever consent to a system of government where those in power can screw the public with even fewer restraints than are now in place.

But what exactly was the object of House Resolution 1109? If it was in fact to effect the desired shift to a parliamentary form of government or an extension in the term of the president by removing the ban on presidential reelection, it did not really advance that agenda one bit. With no more time to waste for that enterprise to succeed before the scheduled May 2010 elections, the imperative move was to already take up and approve the proposed shift to a parliamentary system or, alternatively, the deletion from Section 4, Article VII of the present Constitution of the sentence, “The President shall not be eligible for any reelection.” Of course, we know now from House insiders that the pro-administration majority could not then muster the required three-fourths vote to pass such a charter-changing bill. That being the case, one must wonder why they bothered to railroad the insignificant resolution 1109 and risk stirring up the public prematurely and, for their purposes, unnecessarily.

In fact, allocating reasonable periods of time for each of the processes necessary to implement the desired charter change will lead to the conclusion that this change is virtually impossible within the required time frame. For it to happen, the desired charter-changing bill must be filed and approved immediately after Congress resumes its sessions on July 27. This means that they must, by then, be able to muster 220 congressional votes. The Supreme Court must then favorably resolve in record time the main legal issue that will be raised against the bill (the “voting jointly versus voting separately” issue) and dispose (likewise in record time) all incidents and motions for reconsideration, the Senate must quickly approve a bill calling for a plebiscite and approve a budget for the same, the Commission on Elections must immediately schedule such a plebiscite in the prescribed “not earlier than 60 days nor later than 90 days” thereafter, the Supreme Court must quickly dispose any legal issues that will be raised against the conduct of the plebiscite, the Supreme Court must also quickly dispose any questions raised to it during the canvassing of the results of the plebiscite, and the results of the plebiscite must be proclaimed by the Comelec without any significant delay. All this must happen either before any candidate files a certificate of candidacy for the May elections in November or before the campaign period for the May elections starts in February (this timing is another issue).

The sheer formidableness of the time (and other) constraints against a successful charter change initiative at this time has led some rabid proponents to entertain the notion that the required plebiscite can be done simultaneously with the voting for the May elections. Under this scenario, the charter change proposal will incorporate a transitory provision that will effectively say that, if the charter change amendment is approved in the concurrent plebiscite, then the winners in the May elections will occupy certain new positions consistent with the amended Constitution, e.g., senators and representatives become members of parliament. Certainly, the legality of this will again be questioned in the Supreme Court. It would be conceptually simpler, probably, if the proposed charter change amendment will simply seek to remove the ban on presidential reelection.

In the former case, Mrs. Arroyo must presumably run for Congress in the May elections so that she will be a member of Parliament if she wins in her district and the shift to a parliamentary system is ratified in the plebiscite. In the latter case, Mrs. Arroyo must presumably file what is essentially a conditional candidacy for president, to become operative if the removal of the ban on presidential reelection is ratified. In both cases, this seems to be uncharted legal territory and serious legal questions will definitely be raised. A related (and crucial) one will be whether Mrs. Arroyo must resign her current presidency to run under a potentially amended charter.

It seems to me unlikely that presidential strategists will place their bets on all these difficult issues getting resolved and all these twisted pieces falling into place in the available time. In truth, the enormity of the hurdles to be breached leads me to believe that charter change is not the real object of the exercise. Any competent strategist will not put into motion a series of events if the chances of the desired final outcome are virtually nil and the potential consequences of failure are serious.

What then are they thinking? If we assume that hanging on to power is the primordial and non-negotiable object, the more realistically attainable option is a declaration of martial law. Under the current Constitution, this only requires a presidential proclamation that “the public safety requires it”. This initial declaration of martial law can stay in force “for a period not exceeding sixty days” but Congress, “voting jointly” and by a simple majority vote, may “extend such proclamation… for a period to be determined by Congress”. Of course, a provision exists allowing any citizen to question before the Supreme Court “the sufficiency of the factual basis for the proclamation of martial law”. Notwithstanding, what is required from both Congress and the Supreme Court under this option is conceivably easier than what will be required of them for an amendment of the Constitution in the manner envisioned.

On this track, the martial law declaration must ideally take place because of widespread violence erupting as a result of disputes related to the May elections. A failure of elections can then be used to justify (or at least rationalize) the continued holdover of incumbent officials, including the president.

In the end, what all this means is that most of our politicians do not seek or occupy their positions of power because of principle or policy goals. They are there simply because positions of power allow them to put their snouts in the trough of political spoils. This is a tragedy.

A list of the congressmen who voted for Resolution 1109 is circulating in the Internet. Get a hold of this list so you will know who these political whores are. Then, you can choose to not play golf with them, not talk to them at social gatherings, and not vote for them come May. They must be considered enemies of the people.

(You may address reactions to this article to <editor@bworld.com.ph> .)