How to win before the elections

While some oppositionists are having a field day speculating on future cheating, there is another form of cheating that is passing unnoticed. Why? Because it is not called cheating, it is called forecasting. Forecasting in itself might be innocent activity, but when it is coupled with a warning that anything other than the predicted results would be unacceptable, then it becomes a different matter altogether. It is cheating in another shape and form. The dishonesty comes from false claims on who will be voted upon even before a single vote has been cast. As we have recently seen in the last few days, SWS and Pulse Asia following closely behind are forecasting the top three winners in the senatorial race: Loren Legarda, Manuel Villar and Francis ‘Kiko’ Pangilinan. Look no hands. No tapes. No erasing fluids. That is neat.

I would not really mind but the history of politics in this country tells me a cautionary tale. The three can be said to be one of a type. They have been molded for public acceptability but sadly also to be used as Trojan horses. And Trojan horses carry hidden unacceptability. We have a duty to resist the machination.

They are not the only politicians that can be made into Trojan horses. But if the three are, as SWS and Pulse Asia have predicted the front runners, that means their minders are looking beyond this year’s May elections. They are looking into the 2010 presidential candidates when any of the three will be or can be made into the anointed one. Loren Legarda’s campaign gimmick with the no.1 attached to her name conditions an unguarded public that she will be no. 1 except that we do not know where the gimmick ends and the forecasting begins. Manny Villar makes a lot of noise for being a self-made man but does not say how his business fortune was saved by becoming a politician. Well, ex-Harvard alumnus Senator Pangilinan, is memorable for his role as ‘Mr. Noted’ since that was his only answer to critics during the proclamation debates in Congress.

Still, they are not the worse of the lot. My complaint is not so much about their unworthiness but how Filipinos are advertently being disenfranchised by foisting such candidates as vehicles of an agenda. It has less to do with the democratic choice than it is with the continuing domination of vested interests whether local or foreign. The hypocrisy reeks but too few understand and among the few who understand, even fewer will take the challenge of battling strategies that do not help us to use a metaphor, become our own man.

It happens all the time. But you can chart the patterns and find that the end result of all these interventions is simply to thwart progress of this county in the guise of good. Someone or something out there just doesn’t want us to succeed, want us to continue being dependent and underdeveloped. Mind you all this is done in the name of democracy.

The same public said to be politically ignorant for Charter change are now made to look perspicacious enough to discriminate and vote for the ‘best’ candidates. It is good that the Palace is unfazed by these surveys and has reminded voters what elections are for. It is about addressing the basic needs and concerns of the people and not about taking advantage of their ignorance, if I might add.

On the alleged scientific methods being used, I would prefer surveys in the mold of the NAES 2004 National Annenberg Election Surveys in the US. They were behind the largest academic election poll ever conducted with 100,000 interviews. It lasted for more than one year to come up with a wide range of political attitudes about candidates, issues and the traits Americans want in a President.

It emphasized on the effects of media exposure — campaign commercials and news from radio, television and newspapers. It also measured the effects and other kinds of political communication, from conversations at home and on the job to various efforts by campaigns to influence potential voters. That is when I can respect a survey not money making schemes to use polls to influence rather than to reflect public opinion. It is well known that polls can be manipulated to give a false picture of public opinion. We have to resist the popular belief that polls are reliable because it follows that if polls are believed to be reliable and useful, the public could be misled by unreliable surveys.

From Irineo ‘Ernie’ Amagsila, formerly in the Engineering department of Westinghouse: he broke the silence of his retirement to send word that he hopes the Filipino nation will come to its senses and "revisit nuclear energy" by de-mothballing, rehabilitating, upgrading and commissioning PNPPI. Before doing this however, he says a full-blown and no-holds-barred technical forum open to everyone must be conducted with resource speakers from Westinghouse (Toshiba), G.E. and other foreign entities involved in nuclear energy.

"All safety concerns must be threshed out including waste disposal. And then when everyone is convinced after "a second look minus the hysteria, the hyperbole, the half-truths and the untruths" has been done, an emergency legislation or any similar legal means to temporarily waive the Charter prohibition must be passed to start the revival of PNPPI." He adds that he would answer any question on the issue.

He worked at BNPP from ground breaking up to the hot functional test of the Reactor Coolant System at which time the plant start-up by NPC has begun. "I am speaking now solely as an engineer. I am not condoning the contract negotiation anomalies but I can assure everyone that the construction of PNPPI was technically above-board and followed the exacting standards of US NRC and IAEA."

Contrary to the misinformed critics, the large number of FCNs (field change notices) testify to strict quality control because any change no matter how insignificant like moving a non-safety related panel board a foot or so from its design location was mandated to be documented. Neither was PNPPI an "old, discredited model" but a two-loop PWR plant has been found to be the safest basic model based on operational data unlike the BWR which has been phased out in the US. What becomes "old" but not unsafe — I repeat not unsafe — are the safety control systems, which due to advancing technology are upgraded to say from analog to digital or even nano systems.

My e-mail is [email protected]