Power of the ‘Pork’
PerryScope
by Perry Diaz
The term “pork barrel” refers to the use of government funds that are intended to benefit the constituents of a politician in return for their votes. In effect, it is an institutionalized — and legalized — form of vote-buying. So, whoever controls the allocation of pork barrel funds wields immense political power.
In the nine years that President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has been in office, she learned how to use the power of the “pork” to keep her allies in line as well as to stop opposition to her self-perceived “god-given” mandate to rule the country. Indeed, the “pork barrel system” — officially known as Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) — has become the linchpin of her brand of “political patronage.”
Who gets the pork?
The annual allocation of pork barrel funds total about P7 billion with each senator getting P200 million and each congressman getting P70 million. It would have been easy for Congress to allocate the pork barrel funds in the national budget prorated equitably amongst the legislators and everybody would be happy. As a matter of fact, that’s how it used to be in the old days when legislators would get their fair share of the pork to spend on their pet projects for their constituents. But the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos took away the legislature’s “power of the purse” during the martial law days.
While the legislators’ pet projects are well-meaning and beneficial to their constituents, the lack of transparency and auditability gives rise to opportunity for graft and corruption. There are reports that some legislators demand kickbacks or commissions — as high as 50% — from contractors and suppliers. Corruption is more prevalent in public work construction projects where bidders could collude to fix their bids; thus, allowing kickbacks — or “tongpats” — to be embedded in their lump sum bids.
Gloria used the “power of the purse” to strengthen her political position and exercise sole discretion and total control on how pork barrel funds are disbursed, and how much each legislator would receive. In other words, the legislators are at the mercy of Gloria in getting their pork. If you were not in Gloria’s good graces, you would end up with nothing to spend in your district.
This led former Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Secretary Emilia Boncodin to accuse Gloria of practicing “selective release” of pork barrel funds which means that only those close to Gloria would get the funds.
Biggest pork barrel in history
In 2005, Gloria used more than P80 billion for pork barrel — that’s 10 times the normal amount! — for projects in which most were shrouded in mystery. More than half of this — P46.8 billion — were allocated for “Healing of Edsa I, II and III Funds.” When asked in a radio interview, then Budget Secretary Romulo Neri explained that the P46.8-billion “healing of Edsa wounds” fund included P29 billion for “back pension payments for retired Armed Forces of the Philippines and Philippine National Police personnel.” That’s a hell of a lot of money! Shouldn’t they be included in the Department of National Defense and Philippine National Police budgets? Or was it used surreptitiously to keep the military “loyal” to Gloria during the “Hello Garci” election cheating scandal and Edsa III uprising?
In 2008, former Speaker Joe de Venecia revealed that Gloria controlled the legislators’ pork barrel through her sons, Congressmen Juan Miguel “Mikey” Arroyo and Diosdado “Dato” Arroyo. According to De Venecia, the legislators couldn’t get their pork barrel approved by Gloria without her sons’ endorsements. It is no wonder then that several impeachment petitions against Gloria were defeated by her allies in Congress. Who would dare infuriate her and risk losing his pork?
Indeed, by controlling the pork barrel allocations of the congressmen, Gloria became the “Supreme Overlord” of the House of Representatives. Their mantra was: “What Gloria wants, Gloria gets.” And anyone who would buck her would get a kick in the back. De Venecia found that out when, in a swift act, he was unceremoniously ousted from the Speakership by his party mates whom he thought were his friends. Sorry, pal, but as someone once said, “There are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent self-interest.”
Abolition of the pork
In 2009, Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero introduced Resolution No. 900 “urging the Senate committee on Finance to cause the immediate review and accordingly propose the repeal or amendment of Presidential Decree No. 1177 and Book VI of Executive Order No. 292, specifically all provisions pertinent to budget preparation, disposition and management, with the end in view of reverting to Congress the power of the purse as prescribed by the Constitution.”
A few weeks ago, Escudero — a proponent of the abolition of the pork barrel system — said that Gloria “has been exercising her power to impound pork not because of any lofty purpose but to give out or withhold political favor to help her allies and to strangle her political opponents.”
Last year, Gloria released P459 million in pork barrel funds for infrastructure projects in her son Mikey’s 2nd district of Pampanga. This is seven times more than a typical allocation. But what is appalling is that Gloria is running for Congress in Pampanga’s second district and billboards were erected all over the district showing her picture wearing a hard hat, claiming credit for all the infrastructure improvements in her son’s district. Obviously, she’s using pork barrel funds for her congressional campaign. It may be deemed legal because it was part of the PDAF general appropriation. However, as Congresswoman Ana Theresia Baraquel commented, Gloria’s use of pork barrel funds was “improper” and “shameless” spending.
With Gloria running for Congress virtually unopposed, she could easily become the next Speaker of the House of Representatives. She’d then be closer to her ultimate goal of amending the constitution to change the form of government to a parliamentary system.
Is the country ready for a structural change of government? In my opinion, the country is not yet ready, not until we have a leader who has the best interests of the country and the people in mind. Right now, that leader has yet to emerge. But with 10 presidential candidates in the May 10 elections, there should be one that would rise above the others to take the biggest challenge of the presidency; that is, abolish pork barrel.
No pork, no fat.
corruption through pork barrel legalized under the name PDAF is only one among many; what we need is to introduce a justice system wherein the judges could not be corrupted by the few who appointed them; by allowing the jury (drawn from a list of ordinary but good citizens who are not lawyers and not a fraternity member of any of the accused nor of the presiding judge) to decide the verdict wherein the judge as only to facilitate the process for the jury to reach its judgement;
Let us reform the justice system by installing a Jury System!
corruption is inherent in a corrupt justice system ruled by a few!
Jury system is ruled by many;
Pork barrel use must be stopped, and the abuse will also stop. There should be priorities to be determined by impartial committees on necessary projects. Abuses are also done here in the US, but not as blatant as Phil.
Ben Oteyza
(Sent by email)
Thanks Perry,
Yes the ‘Pork Barrel’ system is a kind of bribe for those that play the game of politics and is supposed to be used for the constituents in theri regiob and/or infrastructure development projests. As pointed out “whoever controls the ‘Pork Barrel’
What happens is tha politicians who receive ‘Pork Barrel’ spend it like ‘Pigs’ for their own personal needs. (P 200 Million/congressman).
As pointed out, “whoever controls the allocation of pork barrel funds wields immence political power.”
The ‘Pork Barrel’ system should be abolished and instead allocated for all the different regions to spend only for the development and infrastructure of their communities. I know it is better said than
done, however the day should come when they baolish the ‘Pork Barrel’.
Best wishes,
Jaime Calero
(Sent by email)
Dear Mr. Perry Diaz:
I’ve been reading your Balita-USA reports in the internet. But, if I may give an unsolicited advice, please make your reporting more truthfully balanced, so as not to insult the intelligence of the majority of your readership, particularly out there in the USA or elsewhere abroad, who are, I’d say, in the Limbo as regards the real objective story behind some of your reported stories happening over here in our so politically divided country — all because of political biases and selfish vested interest.
Thank you! And God bless!
Yours in the name of fairness,
Bishop Jose C. Sorra
(Sent by email)
Dear Bishop Sorra,
Thanks for your comments. I was surprised when you said, “please make your reporting more truthfully balanced…” With all due respect, I refute your statement.
First of all, I am not a reporter, I am an opinion writer. I don’t report the news, I opine on the news. Secondly, I try to be as factual where facts are concerned and I try to balance my opinions as much as I could. However, my opinion is always based on the facts on hand and the premises of the issue.
If I sounded biased against Gloria, you’re right. In my opinion, Gloria has done everything to hurt the country, the people, and the economy. I have the facts and I’m willing to defend my opinions.
All the best,
Perry
The pork barrel issue is a crime, scandalous. Under whose presidency was this approved? No wonder politicians get into politics to enrich themselves. Imaging a senator serving a 6 year term; simple math translate to 1.2 billion; times 24 translate to 24.480 billion assuming everyone avail of their allocation. With say 250 congressman at 70 million each: wowwowee!!!! ….. this is too much heavy load for Juan de la Cruz to carry. Which is why the question I post; should we change the system to Parliamentary unicameral congress? Would transparency be more accessible in a Parliamentary government? I am sure that the politician themselves today oppose any change. They have to recoup their investment spent on election time. I would like to know if everyone received their pork or it’s a presidential prerogative to dole out . How about accountability? Is there any oversight or audit as to where the monies are spent? This to me is one reason to re-assess the beauty. of Parliamentary government.
Mark Alegre
(Sent by email)
To Opinion Writer Perry Diaz:
I’m sorry if I may have to ask whether to address you with Ms. of Mr., since I honestly ignorant if “Perry” is a nickname of a female or male. Please excuse my ignorance.
Anyway, I accept your clarification of being not a news-reporter but an opinion writer; however, I still believe that both have the responsibility to expose or address objectively the factual truth of the whole truth on a raised issue. And this certainly presupposes a diligent, exhaustive, and honest-to-goodness effort of an open-minded fact-finder in the field.
I certainly understand that reporters have the responsibility to simply report objectively bare facts;opinion writers who, as you said, opine on the news, have though a graver responsibility to his/her readership because of their privilege or license to editorialize or be judgmental on particular issues.
I don’t blame you if you admit that you may have sounded biased against GMA who, as you claim, “has done everything to hurt the country, the people, and the economy.” In such case,though,as an opinion writer, your readership might have to take your write-ups “with a grain of salt,” which to me isn’t healthy.
Every time I go to the US, Canada or Europe, many of our kababayans out there complain apparently about “mostly the negative news reports they read from our country.” Ang tanong nila, Wala na ba talagang nagagawang kabutihan ang ating pamahalaan? I guess, a balanced reporting of news items (positive and negative) is all what they expect; they seem to feel depressed when all they get are the “social or political dregs” from the gutter, so to speak.
Personally, how I wish opinion writers were all credible to read because they are trustworthy and nurse no biases,if you will.
May I share with you my experience of having been one of the five CBCP Bishops who addressed ‘graft and corruption’ in our country in October 2008 live before the media. We did it armed with objective facts and figures, and motivated not by biases but simply with the intention to rouse the current Administration, Congress,Judiciary, as well as the public and private sectors, from their apparent sinful lethargy. Walang personalan talaga. Apparently, the media pick it up and reported the matter constructively, and the people received the news positively. Indeed, clergymen and journalists have a common mission in addressing the truth (natural or supernatural); our only credential is our personal credibility.
If I may ask, are you based in the US or in our country? If in the US, you surely need good, honest and reliable researchers whose dug-out facts could stand court scrutiny.
For your info, I’m a Bishop-emeritus of Legazpi Diocese.I had been also once a UST Philet student in the late conservative ’50s — before you were born, I guess.
I just hope, you won’t really take it too personally my meddling (in good faith) in your very challenging job. As I said, I’ve always tried to keep myself posted with your BALITA-USA. Carry on and good luck!
God bless you and family!
Sincerely yours,
+ Jose C. Sorra,DD
(Sent by email)
Dear Bishop Sorra,
Thanks again for your comments. I like to engage in a healthy discussion of issues because it helps bring out the truth. Like the old adage says, “The truth will set me free.” This is also the journalists’ mantra. We seek the truth. However, the truth may be bitter, but it’s better.
As a opinion writer, I keep myself abreast of all the events and issues that I delve into. I do my own research and cross-check the facts from various sources to determine their authenticity and truthfulness. These facts provide the background for my analysis of an issue. Once my analysis is completed, I develop my opinion. In some cases, I give my recommendations as well.
Since I rely on reporters in getting the facts and reporting them, my background information in my articles can only be truthful to the extent of the reporters’ accounts on the issues. However, to protect my own integrity and credibility, I try to discriminate on the integrity and credibility of the reporters themselves. There are reporters who are notorious for writing “koryente” news. I avoid these reporters.
In my analysis of the facts, I use related and historical information available to me in the Internet, the present-day library of knowledge. In some cases I verify them through my contacts in the Philippines. It is during this analysis period that I can further filter out the truth.
In regard to my opinions on issues, I have been consistently accurate in analyzing the facts and forming my own conclusions. The feedbacks I’ve been getting from my readers would attest to that. However, like any other opinion writer, I don’t expect everybody to agree with my opinions. There is no such thing as “truthful” or “correct” opinion. It’s one man’s opinion and the reader can either agree or disagree. That’s the whole purpose of an opinion writer — to provoke the thoughts of the readers and let the readers draw their own conclusions. In more ways than one, an opinion writer influences the minds of the readers. That’s why we are also called “opinion makers.” And most importantly, they can influence government policy-makers including the President. In the past two years, GMA has reversed herself on several issues that the media — particularly opinion writers — had raised against her. Can you imagine what would have happened to the country if opinion writers had only written glowing and positive pieces on Gloria?
When I told you that GMA “has done everything to hurt the country, the people, and the economy,” I say that with all truthfullness. I can prove it. Actually, I’m thinking of writing an opinion on this issue.
Now since you raised the issue of “truthfulness” in my opinions, could you please tell me a specific issue where you believe I wasn’t being truthful?
You also said, “If I may ask, are you based in the US or in our country? If in the US, you surely need good, honest and reliable researchers whose dug-out facts could stand court scrutiny.” I’m based in the US, but that doesn’t mean that I can’t access information available to Philippine-based columnists. We all use the same information. And in some cases, share the same information with one another. Since I use publicly known facts most of the time, I don’t think that I have to prove my facts in court — facts are facts. Now, as far as my opinions are concerned, I don’t think any court of law would — or could — convict me of libel.
My weekly column, PerryScope, is syndicated in more than a dozen Filipino newspapers in the US and three other countries including the Philippines. It is also posted in numerous websites and blogs including my own, http://www.GlobalBalita.com.
I posted our email exchange under “Power of the ‘Pork’” in Global Balita. Please feel free to post you comments Global Balita.
Sincerely,
Perry Diaz
[...] a part of her 10-point pro-poor agenda.” Really? On February 3, 2010, in my article, Power of the ‘Pork’, I [...]
[...] here’s what I wrote in my article, “Power of the Pork,” a few weeks [...]
I agree with Mr.Perry Diaz and I disagree with Bishop Sora. Mr. Diaz’s disclaimer that he is not a newspaper reporter but an informative reporter is a valid excuse from the standpoint of validity of the substance he reports. Mr, Diaz reports the news as best and as close to the truth as he pereives it. As the saying goes, “perception is reality.” This does not mean, though, that because reporters are allowed certain inaccuracies in their reports that Mr. Diaz should be excused of being careless with the truth. I have been reading Mr. Diaz’s blogs about Gloria’s malfeasance as president and about the political situation in general in the Philippines and I find them credible. This opinion of mine is based on articles I read from the inquirer, which is the most credible broadsheet in the Philippines. As they say, two is better than one, referring to the news from the Inquirer and Mr Diaz’s information in his blogs to be greatly identical.
If Bishop Sora has information different from Mr. Diaz’s then he should divulge up front. Simply saying that the reports are not truthful or accurate does not prove anything. Presentation of the facts is required when one criticies another of inaccuraCY.
I look forward to reading more of Mr. Diaz’s blogs in the future. Also, I like reading the blogs of his journalist contributors.
Jess H. Reyes.
Subscribe
Advertising
Pages
Categories
Archives
Tags
Advertising
Categories
Recent Posts