A RELATIVELY obscure politician burst into the OFW scene recently when he was wrongly accused on an Internet forum of making uninformed comments against the pending absentee voting bill in Congress. His name is Francis G. Escudero of the NPC party, representing the 1st District of Sorsogon province.
Now, I know the Escudero name from the family's famous Villa Escudero resort outside Manila. From that, I realized that they were one of the old landed families of politicians. Indeed, Francis' father, Salvador H. Escudero III, was secretary of agriculture under both President Marcos and President Ramos. At the age of 32, Francis is in his second term in the House of Representatives. (To read his whole CV and see what he looks like, go to http://www.congress.gov.ph/profile/escudero.php). A graduate of UP Diliman's College of Law and of Georgetown University's Law School, Francis is obviously academically gifted.
A usually reliable OFW advocacy group summarized on the Internet what had been discussed at a SONA Forum at UP Balay Kalinaw on July 23, and incorrectly attributed all comments to Congressman Escudero! When I first read the summary, I was outraged, as were many other advocates of absentee voting. Indeed, a fellow columnist, Rene Q. Bas, even wrote a whole column on the issue entitled "Escudero – bitter harvest of OFW mail" (read the article here at http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2002/aug/01/opinion/20020801opi2.html). If only he and others had bothered to pick up a phone and ask Escudero what his stand really was on the AV bill.
The first inkling I got that Escudero had been wildly misquoted was a further posting to the OFW Internet forum by someone claiming to be close to Escudero, who went on to disclaim Escudero ever having said the things attributed to him. After reading that, I checked the House of Representatives website again and found that Escudero was one of the 42 co-authors of House Bill 3570 on absentee voting. How could someone who co-authored the AV bill suddenly turn around and tell a public forum that he was against OFWs voting abroad because they were not up to date on important issues back home? It all didn't add up!
To clear up the issue, I picked up my phone and called the office of Escudero at the House of Representatives yesterday morning, Aug. 1, and spoke to his chief of staff Eddie Valdez. He explained to me that Escudero had indeed attended the SONA Forum on July 23, but that all the comments attributed to him by the Internet forum were in fact comments made by various congressmen when the AV bill had been discussed in Congress. Escudero had only been relaying to those present what objections to absentee voting had been aired. At no time had Escudero discussed his own opinions on the bill, which by the way he supports.
This fatal misrepresentation caused many an OFW to fire off an angry letter of protest to Escudero. If only they had waited to hear from the congressman himself what he had really said and believed, all of this misunderstanding and bad blood could have been avoided.
Below I list each objection allegedly made to absentee voting by one congressman or another, and add an explanation afterward explaining why it is wrong:
1. Filipinos abroad cannot have a holiday to vote.
Most employers abroad would gladly give their Filipino employees the day off to vote in Philippine elections. Some employers might only give a few hours off to their Pinoy employees, but that should be enough to vote at the nearest Philippine consulate or embassy. For those in isolated locations, voting could be done via postal ballot or through the Internet.
2. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) already suffers from a lack of personnel for elections in the Philippines, so how can it send personnel overseas to oversee OFW balloting?
Those who crafted the absentee voting bill never planned for Comelec personnel to be deployed abroad during elections. Instead, a combination of Philippine diplomatic mission personnel and members of Filipino civic groups abroad would be in charge of setting up polling stations and running the whole voting process, from checking voters' identities with lists of qualified voters, gathering filled-in ballots, and possibly even doing preliminary counting of votes before sending the ballots back to Manila.
3. It is possible that foreigners could try to influence absentee voting. For example, a foreign boss could promote a candidate and blackmail Filipinos in company bunkers to vote for the person at the cost of, say, suffering a water shortage.
What would a foreigner have to gain from promoting one Filipino candidate over another? Not much really. Vote buying may be prevalent in some areas of the Philippines, but I feel OFWs are better informed about Filipino politicians and important political issues than your average citizen. This would be a hard one to pull off unnoticed.
4. Many OFWs have been away for a long time from the Philippines, and may no longer be up to date on local issues. How can they vote wisely?
With the Internet, mobile phones and satellite television, Filipinos abroad are more informed of issues back home than ever. While Filipinos are asleep in the Philippines, OFWs are reading the next day's newspapers' headlines on the Internet. Text messaging keeps Pinoys abroad updated with the latest news and gossip, while the latest news is seen live on the Filipino Channel. Many OFWs told me that they watched President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's State of the Nation Address live on the Internet through a video stream.
5. Absentee voting should be piloted in only one Asian country for a limited period of time. Its results can be studied and then a broader absentee voting law can be enacted.
OFWs have been waiting for an absentee voting law for 15 years! I don't think they can wait any longer after so much lobbying, organizing and pushing for this law.
I just hope the reservations voiced by some congressmen do not derail the absentee voting bill. Politicians who once backed it now seem to have lost interest in it, distracted as they were by the recent battle in the Senate between the opposition and administration senators. Now that the issue has been resolved with the defection of several opposition senators to the administration's side, perhaps politicians of all stripes could put aside their differences and approve the absentee voting bill in a show of non-partisan unity. OFWs would certainly be proud if they did.
* * * *
The US is going to get what it wants
ALL OF THE hullabaloo over the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA) still being crafted between the Philippines and the United States is not surprising. After all, from the terms of the agreement that have been leaked so far it seems that the US will be allowed to store weapons in the Philippines, build facilities in which to store these in, move troops through any Philippine port or airport, and build any runways or helipads that it needs. To worried nationalists, who only just got rid of US bases in Subic Bay in 1992 when a new bases treaty was not approved by the Philippine Senate, this must be a nightmare come true.
As I have been saying for months now, the US always intended on having its military be based in the Philippines again, if only for the country's strategic location in Asia and its Westernized and friendly population. The US government has learned through past experience that permanently basing US troops in overseas bases is expensive and bothersome to host countries. Forging MLSAs with various countries gives the US military the next best thing to actually having permanent bases, but without the resentment from local populations.
President Arroyo has tried hard to keep the MLSA out of the hands of politicians for fear that it would get bogged down in the Senate. That is why administration officials have been adamant in insisting that the agreement is just a low-level one between the Philippine and US militaries, not something more important like a treaty that would need to be ratified by the senates of both countries. This has led to verbal gymnastics, which have not always been 100 percent honest, concerning the terms of the agreements. A preview of what the Philippines can expect in the future were the just concluded Part I of the Balikatan 2002 joint military exercises with the United States, which lasted for a record six months, and saw US troops practically on the frontlines in Mindanao for the first time in history.
To avoid a major confrontation between Congress and the executive branch, President Arroyo must confide in her senators and allow them to look at the final MLSA before it is signed by the Philippines. Congressmen in the House of Representatives should also be allowed to review it and give the president their comments and suggestions. Consultation between the branches of government is the cornerstone of democracies, and it shouldn't be skipped in this case.
The truth of the matter is that the Philippines is in no position to deny the US what it wants. Of course, the country will benefit from training provided by the US military and equipment left behind by US troops. But the Philippines will also be exposing itself to danger when the US uses facilities in the country to launch attacks or operations against third countries. This will open up the Philippines to retaliatory terrorist attacks, and perhaps endanger Filipinos working abroad. But in this post-Sept. 11 world, where President Bush says countries must be "either with us or against us," the Philippines has no choice but to align herself with the United States. Neutrality is out of the question.
* * * *
Comments or questions? Email the author at [email protected]
* * * *
Visit the author's website at http://www.manilamoods.com to read past columns.
