Elections as usual

In this long season of bad news, there are only two developments that I consider relatively positive. One is that the elections pushed through at all, despite all those gloom-and-doom predictions that there would be no polls. The other is that voters appear to be junking showbiz personalities.

With voting over, we scavenge for items of good cheer. There’s precious little to make anyone feel good. Ninety-eight people died from election-related violence – the highest in 15 years – and we call that "relatively peaceful." The elections were described as "orderly," except for cases of ballot-snatching, harassment of poll watchers and the fiasco in Caloocan City.

We still have guns, goons and gold. For the guns and goons, the New People’s Army takes the cake – and the "revolutionary tax" money. Trailing the NPA are the political warlords. No, the warlords never disappeared, and they’re not fading away in the near future. When they grow old, the next generation simply takes over.

And the "gold"? The peso’s value has shrunk by nearly 50 percent since 1998, but it can still buy votes. It’s part of elections as usual in this country. The vote buying goes all the way down to the barangay level. And the barangay officials know how to spread the money around. Oh well, the nation can use some redistribution of wealth.

If the cheaters can’t buy votes, they buy the canvassers. That’s what everyone must guard against. From dagdag-bawas or vote shaving and padding, we now have bawas-bawas.

There’s cheating going on, but there are also plain sore losers. In this country, all candidates either win or are cheated (with the exception of Dante Liban, the first to concede). If we had something like the Bush-Gore cliff-hanger here, we’d have EDSA IV.

The Commission on Elections will be deliberating on electoral protests until 2004, although at the rate the Comelec is going, it may take till 2007.

* * *

The defeat of showbiz personalities is good news, especially since the handful of survivors appear mostly to be those who have always been against Joseph Estrada, such as Pampanga’s Lito Lapid. But this is tempered by the fact that many of the showbiz stars were bested by traditional politicians.

I see this as another sign of voter desperation. Ferdinand Marcos made Filipinos suspicious of all brilliant, charismatic traditional politicians. After Marcos, we had this notion that the nation’s best and brightest could also turn out to be the best and brightest crooks. We tried the sincerity and honesty of Corazon Aquino, the work ethic of Fidel Ramos, and finally slaphappy entertainment courtesy of Joseph Estrada. Yet here we all are, still in Asia’s backwater, the poor getting poorer, the middle class still middling, the rich getting richer. Where do we turn for salvation? We junk the comedians and action stars and go full circle, back to the traditional politicians. And the Marcoses are unbeatable in Ilocos Norte.

What happened to "new politics"? It was a nice idea but half-baked, and the administration wasn’t beyond using tested formulas either. The administration didn’t field movie stars, but it helped that two of its senatorial candidates happened to be the husbands of superstars.

If President Arroyo wanted a 13-0 sweep, why did she field some of the weakest candidates in her senatorial slate? I think it was less naiveté than a settlement of political debts for EDSA Dos. But what a costly debt payment it’s going to be.

Since everyone knew who the weak candidates were (except maybe the bets themselves), the administration coalition could have at least given the candidates media-savvy handlers. But the candidates seem to have been left to fend for themselves.

* * *

It also helped the opposition that the Catholic Church was divided over the administration’s slate. The Church couldn’t endorse a 13-0 slate with "Mr. Condom" Juan Flavier in the People Power Coalition.

The Church was also divided over the treatment of Erap and his supporters. That the Church has been losing political clout since EDSA I became evident when the Protestant Fidel Ramos won the presidency in 1992 (endorsed by the devoutly Catholic Cory Aquino). Later, Flavier won a Senate seat despite a strong Church campaign against him. And of course Erap, who was everything that the Church didn’t like in a president, won by a landslide. EDSA Tres showed the Church how big a flock it has lost.

What does the Church do with its lost flock? Either it sits around waiting for these people to see the light, or move to win them back. The way I see it, the Church is trying the second tack. It will have to move quickly and use special persuasion since there are other religious groups out there, which take care not only of the spiritual but also temporal needs of their followers such as employment and shelter. In this cynical age it’s no longer enough to threaten people with eternal damnation if they don’t toe the Vatican’s line. When you don’t know where your next meal is coming from, heaven can wait.

In a way we should be happy that while Filipinos still believe in God and prayer power, Church influence in politics is waning. This could lead to a genuine separation of Church and State, and perhaps an effective family planning program. On the other hand, groups such as the Iglesia ni Cristo and El Shaddai, because of their solidarity, are emerging as potent power blocs that every administration must contend with. Every piece of good news has its downside.

* * *

There was one interesting development yesterday. Sen. John Osmeña announced he was leaving the opposition and would henceforth consider himself an independent in the chamber.

No matter how the senatorial race turns out, I expect more politicians to start distancing themselves from Erap die-hards in the coming months, and to eventually coalesce into a distinct group. There will always be sympathy for Erap, even if he is ever convicted and sent to the national penitentiary. But sympathy is different from political support, which is a fickle commodity.

The moderates in the opposition will have to stay away from their allies with a tendency toward grandstanding, violence and extremism. These moderates are the ones we can rely on to provide constructive opposition, who won’t mind working with the administration if they know it’s for the nation’s good. These are the ones with vision, with an eye to the future and their place in history.

If we get this kind of opposition, it will be good news. But keep your fingers crossed. In this land of dramatic surprises, good news today can turn bad overnight.