Mental dishonesty

By Greg Macabenta

As surely as night follows day, every single presidential candidate in the 2010 elections will vow to end corruption and dishonesty in government and will swear to uphold the law “without fear or favor” or, in the words of Erap Estrada, in his inaugural speech, “Walang kaikaibigan, walang kama-kamaganak.”

And while they’re saying this, every single one of these would-be candidates has been merrily running circles around the law. Not really breaking it. Just bending it and making a mockery of it.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about, turn on your TV sets and watch those “non-campaign” commercials that sure as hell look, sound and smell like political campaign pitches.
Sure, sure, none of those spots is saying outright, “Vote for me!” but it shouldn’t take a genius to guess what these spots are saying. Even an idiot can tell.

Of course, we know why our moral, crusading, honest, incorruptible, pure as driven snow presidential wannabes are doing this. They think that the Comelec rules on election campaigning are unreasonable. They think the gag on delivering messages about the qualities of candidates doesn’t make sense.

So what do they do? Instead of amending the law through the logical congressional process, they simply use the great Pinoy talent of “palusot.” Finding a loophole and getting away with it.
At least, Rep. Teddy Boy Locsin is realistic enough to acknowledge the idiocy of the rules although he is careful not to knock those who have been bending them (I wouldn’t be surprised if he has bent the rules himself). He has filed a bill in Congress that would make the rules on early campaigning more reasonable and logical.

But to go back to this penchant for bending or running circles around the law. It has become such a national habit that nobody notices it anymore. Besides, it’s so easy to rationalize breaking or bending the law, especially when you see national leaders, from the president to the members of Congress to the sages in the Supreme Court, conveniently justifying the means to their ends.
Having seen these presidential candidates start their campaigns with such mental dishonesty, is there any reason to believe that they will change their ways when they assume office?
I frankly doubt it.

I think we will all have to resign ourselves to the harsh reality that we will be electing to the presidency and the vice-presidency people who have no compunctions about bending the law to suit their objectives. Oh yes, they may even do that “for the greater good of country and people.”
The only question is, who will do it less often. Or, putting it another way: Who will be doing MORE GOOD, while breaking or bending the law.

This brings me to the choices that are left to the electorate, based on the current list of would-be presidential and vice-presidential candidates: Aquino-Roxas, Estrada-Binay, Teodoro-Manzano and Villar-Legarda.

You may ask: What is it that qualifies these individuals for the highest offices in the land?
Frankly, that may not be the question to ask, but, rather, “Who shouldn’t be elected to the highest offices in the land?”

Apparently, the Philippine electorate has a better idea of what they do not want in the next president, rather than in the qualities that the ideal candidate should possess.
From talking to prospective voters and pundits in Manila and in the US, it is clear that the first thing they don’t want to see occupying the presidency is anyone answering to the name of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. By extension, they don’t want anyone who is associated with her.

This is the monkey on the back of Gilbert Teodoro. It is doubtful that the charms of Edu Manzano, as vice-presidential running mate, can effectively lighten that burden for him.
If it is a truism that Pinoys have a penchnt for “palusot,” it is even more true that quic pro quo is the rule in politics and every politician is a wheeler-dealer. The only difference is the degree of wheeling and dealing. On that score, it is likely that that Teodoro has made a commitment to protect the interests of Arroyo if he should become president.

He can attempt to deny this in private conversations, but it is doubtful that he will ever distance himself from his patron. .Of course, that’s not necessarily the kiss of death for his presidential ambitions. Anybody who thinks that the administration party will not try to do a Garci II is a simpleton. And when that happens, Teodoro could be the next president of the Philippines.
Stung by the many scams and cases of plunder in government, the voters also don’t want someone who is perceived to be corrupt or who is suspected to have made his fortune under dubious circumstances.

If one were to look at the credentials of Manny Villar, he certainly appears better prepared to manage the affairs of the country than either Teodoro, Estrada or Aquino. His success as an entrepreneur is testament to his brilliance as a businessman. But it may also be a testament to his genius as a backroom manipulator.

Despite the efforts of several of his colleagues in the Senate to give him a clean bill of health in the face of the accusations hurled against him by Ping Lacson, Villar continues to carry a monkey on his back in connection with his real estate fortune.By avoiding the accusations and brushing them off as political vendetta, Villar leaves himself wide-open to doubts about his integrity.
Can someone whose wealth is under a cloud and is spending billions on his campaign be expected to keep his hands clean if he ever becomes president?

If Villar were running for president in America, you can bet that he would be roasted over live coal for this. He is lucky to be campaigning in the Philippines where the media depend mainly on press releases and innuendo.

Then there’s Erap Estrada. Assuming he overcomes the legal impediment to his candidacy, what can we reasonably expect from someone who has already shown us what he is capable – and incapable – of doing as president? Isn’t this like watching one of his old movies where we already know the ending?

This brings us to Noynoy Aquino and Mar Roxas. No monkeys on their backs, except perhaps for the unresolved problem of Hacienda Luisita for the former.

Do they deserve to be president and vice-president? I guess we’re talking here of the lesser evil. Because they too are guilty of mental dishonesty with their non-campaign political campaigns.
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

FROM THE CAPITOL: Save the UC

By Senator Leland Yee

Despite pleas and protests from students, the University Of California Board of Regents yet again voted to dramatically increase student fees. The 32 percent fee hike comes just two months after the Regents raised student fees 30 percent and handed out exorbitant pay raises to several top administrators.

The move also comes one month after Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed several bills to protect public funds at the university. SB 86 would have prohibited executive pay raises during bad budget years at the UC and the California State University. SB 218 would have brought greater financial accountability to UC and CSU campus auxiliary organizations by subjecting them to the California Public Records Act. SB 219 would have helped rein in waste, fraud and abuse by providing university employees with the same whistleblower protections as other state employees.

Governor Schwarzenegger and Board of Regents are allowing top executives to live high on the hog while students suffer. It is unconscionable for the Governor to cut funds to higher education while allowing the UC administration to act like AIG. In 2009 alone, the UC Regents have approved approximately $9 million in executive compensation increases. Yet, the UC administration only points to the state budget for the need to raise student fees.

Certainly the state needs to prioritize funding for education and that is why I voted against all such budget cuts and will continue to do so. However, it is intellectually dishonest for the Regents to simply blame the state budget for student fee hikes while they are lining the pockets of executives. Executive pay should be the first thing on the chopping block, not students.

In a September interview with the New York Times, UC President Mark Yudof, who receives nearly $1 million in salary and perks was asked, “What do you think of the idea that no administrator at a state university needs to earn more than the President of the United States, $400,000?” Yudof responded, “Will you throw in Air Force One and the White House?”
Unfortunately, this is the type of arrogance and cavalier attitude that plagues the university. California deserves better from their public university leadership.

Russell Gould, chairman of the Regents, today told the Sacramento Bee that student objections do not influence his decision-making and that student fees must be increased. However, students and workers have long called on the Regents and Yudof to use other options rather than student fee hikes. Such suggested options include dipping into the $7.2 billion Short Term Investment Pool; redirecting some of the $1.6 billion that UC received last year in gifts and donations; cutting the salaries of the thousands of UC executives and top administrators earning 6-figures; cutting the $350 million in bonuses given to employees making more than $200,000 annually; or freezing new positions such as “Vice Chancellor of Research” and “Chief Quality Officer” that pay upwards of $420,000 per year.

“UC has reserves in the billions of dollars that could be tapped, or UC could redirect its fundraising abilities, or use other sources of income such as the highly profitable medical centers, or call for a mild pay cut for the thousands of six-figure administrators,” said Jelger Kalmijn, President of the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE-CWA 9119).

“UC is sounding the alarm bells of financial ruin and rushing to push the economic crisis on the backs of UC students, patients and workers” says Lakesha Harrison, President of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME 3299), which represents patient care and services workers. “But to many of us, this is another example of UC administrators’ misplaced priorities and lack of accountability to the public.”

In a time when many are going through economic hardships, increasing student fees becomes just another burden for many students. While maintaining a full-time schedule in school, many are also forced to take one, sometimes two or three, part-time jobs in order to support themselves and pay for their education. We must continue to let our voices be heard and let the Regents know that these actions are not okay and unfair for students.

FROM THE CAPITOL: Save domestic violence programs

By Senator Leland Yee

Last week, I was joined by domestic violence prevention leaders to announce legislation to help save domestic violence programs and shelters statewide.

You might recall two weeks ago, funding for these programs were completely eliminated by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a line-item budget veto of the Department of Public Health’s Domestic Violence Program, which was scheduled to provide $16.3 million (a 20 percent cut from last year) to 94 domestic violence shelters and centers throughout California.
It is absolutely vital that we keep domestic violence shelters open. In last month’s budget vote, I voted against cuts to the domestic violence program. The Governor’s veto increases health care, law enforcement and other costs to the state, but more critically, it puts victims of domestic violence and their children in grave danger.

Tara Shabazz, Executive Director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence (CPEDV) is appalled to see the Governor eliminate funding to vital programs that saves lives. “The Governor is balancing the budget on the backs of our state’s most vulnerable citizens. Funding must be restored by any means necessary; together with Senator Yee, CPEDV has found a potential solution to these disastrous cuts,” she said at a press conference.

My legislation, which is supported by statewide and local domestic violence prevention agencies, will allocate $16.3 million from the victims’ compensation fund (which has a current balance of $136.2 million) to the Domestic Violence Program. I will also be introducing a second bill to allow domestic violence agencies greater flexibility in how they allocate their funds.

“This is a bipartisan issue that Californians care about,” said Beverly Upton, Executive Director of the San Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium and Partners Ending Domestic Abuse. “We must bring these dollars back to the domestic violence shelters and those who work in the trenches everyday to keep California safe.”

The Domestic Violence Program funds allow local agencies to provide emergency shelter, transitional housing, and legal advocacy, as well as assistance with restraining orders, counseling and other vital support services. Domestic violence shelters are often the only thing standing between victims and grave physical danger, and California’s communities cannot sustain their loss.

According to a national census of domestic violence services, in just one day, over 7,700 requests for services went unmet due to a lack of resources. When the resources do not exist for victims to receive domestic violence services, they are often left with no choice but to risk their own lives by returning to their abusers.
* * *
If you are a victim of domestic violence or if you want to report an incident of domestic violence, call the 24-hour-a-day toll-free National Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), 1-800-787-3224 (TDD) or the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence at 1-800-524-4765.

TELLTALE SIGNS: Cory’s advice to Fil-Ams

By Rodel Rodis

When ABC TV reporter Alan Wong asked me what Filipinos lost with the death of former Pres. Corazon Aquino, my immediate response was “our moral compass, our guiding light.” I thought of Cory as Jawaharlal Nehru once said of Mahatma Gandhi, “the light has gone out of our lives and there is darkness everywhere.”

But Nehru also added that “the light that has illumined this country for these many years will illumine this country for many more years, and a thousand years later, that light will still be seen in this country, and the world will see it and it will give solace to innumerable hearts.”
What was this “light” that has gone out of our lives? The August 2, 2009 editorial of the Philippines Daily Inquirer expressed it best:
“It was the light of liberty, the unquenchable flame of democracy, the light of optimism and faith in the Filipino, snuffed out in her husband’s case by an assassin’s bullets, but which lit so many more little flames, so that it dispelled the darkness that had engulfed the country since 1972. It was a light that could not be extinguished by coups and natural disasters, by the mocking of those who saw in her merely a woman, merely a widow, merely a person trying to return power where it belonged—in the people’s hands, to do with as they chose."

When her husband, Ninoy Aquino, was assassinated in 1983, Cory took up the banner of resistance from Ninoy and stood up to the brutal dictator. When she ran for president, Marcos belittled her for being “a common housewife with no experience”. She defiantly replied: "Yes, that's right, I have no experience in stealing, in cheating and in killing political opponents." The battle was joined. In the end, the more experienced candidate fled the country when People Power redeemed the Filipino people’s dignity.

After assuming the presidency of the Philippines , Cory Aquino visited San Francisco on September 23, 1986 and spoke to 4,500 members of the Filipino community at a banquet held at the Moscone Center . As chair of the committee which hosted the largest banquet ever held for a visiting head of state in San Francisco history, I was privileged to sit close to her as she spoke of her fondness for our City:
“ San Francisco has a special place in my heart. It was the cool, clear air of a free San Francisco that put the color back in my husband Ninoy Aquino’s cheeks when he arrived here after seven long years of imprisonment. It was here that Ninoy spent much of his convalescence after his triple heart bypass. This is the home of many of Ninoy’s and my most ardent supporters and friends, the home of many of the most vocal and active opponents of the dictatorship.

The Filipino-American community here constitutes one of the largest bases of support for People Power in the Philippines . Even though you are thousands of miles from the Philippines, you took to the streets, you held your own rallies, you let the world know your beliefs and contributed to the groundswell that eventually brought victory to the forces of freedom and democracy in the Philippines.”

President Aquino asked for our Filipino community to help the Philippines not just by sending money remittances and balikbayan boxes to the Philippines but in a more politically sophisticated way:
“You can help by becoming a strong political force in your adopted country and using that force to influence your adopted country’s attitudes towards your mother country. Follow the lead of the Jewish-Americans who, despite being a small minority, form an indispensable pillar of a strong and independent Israel . Surely they are no stronger, no smarter, no more imaginative or dedicated than you are. They may be more organized, more politically oriented, more helpful to each other. And certainly they work hard at keeping America ’s interest in Israel alive at all levels of society - in business, in education, in government, in the arts and sciences.

And so must you with respect to the Philippines . You must guard the image of the Filipino that the February Revolution burnished so brightly. You must guide those joining your ranks so that you enhance the image of Filipinos here. All impressions of you, American though you might be, will hark back to the Philippines.

Strive for political power in this country. Unite. Learn from the new Philippines how people, acting together, have made the difference at home. You too can make a difference here, for your own betterment and that of generations to come.”

Cory also asked us to educate ourselves and our youth about our history and our provenance, our heroes and our pride: “Be proud of your roots. Do not let your children or your grandchildren forget that they came from a land that produced Rizal, Bonifacio, Mabini and yes, Ninoy – men who could stand shoulder to shoulder with the best that this country or the world has produced.”

Not only men but many women too, like Cory Aquino.
(Send your comments to Rodel50@aol.com or mail them to the Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue , San Francisco , CA 94127 or call (415) 334-7800. For past columns, log on to: Rodel50.blogspot.com)

VIRTUAL REALITY: Remembering Ninoy and Cory

By Tony Lopez

Among today’s Filipino journalists, few, if any, can perhaps match the length and depth of my coverage of Ninoy Aquino and his widow, Corazon Co-juangco Aquino. Every year too, during the martial law years, Ferdinand Marcos granted me an exclusive interview, something no journalist at that time had the privilege. So I heard both sides of the political fence. I have seen the folly of the past, I see the present in that light, and I can perhaps anticipate with some confidence, the wisdom of the future.

The only thing I missed was visiting Ninoy during his three years of exile in Boston. I didn’t have the time to do that.

My Asiaweek reportage of Ninoy’s assassination and his funeral is the best there is at that time. Every single copy of the 10,000 copies printed of the assassination and the funeral issues was sold out on a single day, a publishing record for a foreign weekly. I covered extensively the six years and four months of the Cory Aquino presidency. This is an important point to consider because I will do later an analysis of the Cory Aquino presidency.

As a journalist, I had my first glimpse of Ninoy when I was a business reporter of The Manila Times. The senator used to drop by the Times offices in Florentino Torres Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila, bringing merienda to the editors and staff of the paper and its sister publication, Taliba. Ninoy had a way with newsmen that readily captured their friendship, if not support. He assiduously cultivated the political backing of Chino Roces. The Times then had greater circulation than all the other newspapers combined.

When martial law was declared in September 1972, I lost my Times job but quickly joined two newspapers, the newly formed Times Journal and the Mainichi Shimbun, Japan’s oldest daily. Three years later, I joined Asiaweek, then a struggling Hong Kong-based weekly which was later acquired by The Readers Digest and then, Time Warner of New York, as a sister company of Time Magazine.

As a foreign correspondent, I covered the Aquino trial for subversion, rebellion and murder. Covering Ninoy was something that required courage in those days. No Filipino journalist wanted to read nor publish his press statements. You would never know whether the military was shadowing you on the way back to the office from the hearings of the military tribunal which Ninoy refused to recognize and which had a decidedly anti-Ninoy bias. In 1977, the opposition leader was later convicted and sentenced to die by musketry. Upheld by the Supreme Court, this conviction, I believe, laid the foundation for Ninoy’s assassination by the military on August 21, 1983. With daylight murder, the military in effect executed Ninoy’s death sentence six years later. Whatever doubts the military had about killing Ninoy were removed by that conviction.

Ninoy was jailed for seven years and seven months. During Christmases and some special occasions, he was given extended furlough (a privilege never given the jailed Joseph Estrada) and he would stay at his Times Street home in Quezon City. He gave interviews and welcomed select foreign correspondents like me with a warm heart and an even warmer hospitability. On more than one occasion, he would ask Cory to make coffee for Ninoy and me, with some cookies too. That was Cory, the dutiful, uncomplaining housewife. In a dozen years, she would be president of the Philippines.

Being a former journalist himself, a very good writer and the most dynamic of political leaders at that time, Ninoy made good copy. (Jose W. Diokno and Jovito Salonga claimed to be more brilliant but they had intellectual arrogance; cancer-stricken Diokno confessed to me at his hospital sickbed that the first time he met me, he wanted to punch me, because of the way I asked questions; while Salonga lectured me on the phone that no one could rival him in terms of prosecutorial talent).

During my visits at his Times Street house (it had so many rooms where Ninoy could conduct meetings simultaneously yet separately with different groups of people), we would retire to a small private room for my interview.

Ninoy made me feel very important with the exclusive uninterrupted attention he gave me. There was a time he typed his answers to my anticipated questions para di ka na mahirapan, he said. Then, he would ask me questions on the situation, in the political and security context. He accepted the fact that he was a captive of the military and that Ferdinand Marcos was his jailer. There was another time, he gave me several poems typewritten and autographed by him, regalo ko sa yo, he said.

STREET TALK: Power did not consume her

By Greg Macabenta

The propaganda torpedoes whom the Marcos machinery mustered for the snap election in 1986 pounced on the obvious inadequacy of Corazon Aquino to foil her candidacy, summed up in the derisive quip: “She is just a housewife.”

This was a stark contrast to the credentials of Marcos who was routinely described as brilliant. But that “quality” was his undoing. We had had enough of brilliance used for corrupt and self-serving ends. We were convinced that honesty, integrity and good intentions w ere all our country needed to right the wrongs of the Marcos dictatorship. We were also convinced that, with democratic institutions restored, the rest would logically follow. Economic recovery. A triumph over poverty. Reforms in government. Efficiency in the bureaucracy. The return of civic responsibility. The dismantling of fiefdoms.

Sadly, we were wrong.

Cory Aquino's enduring legacy is that she lived true to her mandate of restoring freedom and democracy. In doing this, she never faltered. In the face of the temptation that the current occupant of Malacañang and her minions in Congress have found irresistible, Cory insisted on the inclusion of a no-reelection provision in the new Constitution and graciously turned over the enviable powers of the presidency to her successor.

We will always remember Cory for that act of nobility and patriotism, and will forever be grateful. No one can argue that she was the moral20force our country needed, at that precise point in our history, to dismantle the authoritarian structures and heal the wounds inflicted by Marcos. Neither can anyone question her own personal integrity, her courage in the face of several coup attempts, and her commitment, long after she had left office, to the causes for which our people have continued to struggle.

But she was unprepared for the charlatans, schemers, leftists, separatists, militarists, business monopolists and plain crooks, criminals, opportunists and incompetents who besieged her presidency. She had to deal with groups and individuals whose interests would not be served by reforms - and many of them prevailed. Worst of all, she had to deal with certain members of her own family.

Cory Aquino will be remembered and honored for being the beacon that lighted the way for our people. The outpouring of grief over her passing is testimony to the affection that the nation has for her, in contrast to the derision being profusely hea ped on Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
The fact is that, Arroyo has done many good things for our country, even if she could not resist exaggerating some of them in her annual SONA. But the scandals identified with her tenure are what she will be marked for. That should serve as a warning to those who abuse power. History will be their ultimate judge. To paraphrase Mark Anthony in his eulogy to Julius Caesar, the evil that Arroyo and her co-conspirators have done will live after them. The good will be interred with their bones.

On the other hand, the failings of Cory’s presidency should also serve as a warning to those of us who continue to believe that good intentions are all we need to solve our country’s many problems.

Indeed, we are so naïve that we are readily impressed by Motherhood promises and clever slogans, good looks, sweet talk and “star power.” While we acknowledge that it takes medical expertise to become a doctor, knowledge of jurisprudence to become a lawyer, and specific skills to qualify for a vocation, we have this inexplicable impression that it only takes charm, good intentions and Pure Unadulterated Honesty and Integrity to become president of the Philippines. We refuse to acknowledge the wisdom of the Peter Principle.

We place a lot of importance on likeability and outward humility, typified by the comment of one employee in Congress who was asked why she chose then Congressman Chiz Escudero as a likely presidential contender: “Mabait kasi.” (Because he’s nice). This also explains why, despite his impressive record of performance, Dick Gordon scores so low in the polls. “Kasi, mabigat magdala.” (Because he is heavy-handed.)

We are fascinated by the Robin Hood syndrome. We don’t mind public officials stealing from the rich provided they give to the poor. We are willing to tolerate corruption if mitigated by performance. “Nagnanakaw nga, pero may ginagawa namang mabuti.” (He may steal but, at least, he’s doing something good .”) We rationalize our own bad habits by voting for the candidate who possesses all of them in generous measure, “Pero may pagmamahal sa mahirap." (But he loves the poor). Which is why Erap Estrada continues to rate high in the surveys.

Lee Kuan Yew would never win in a Philippine election. And even if he were to win, he would have to survive assassination attempts and would have to deal with more than the seven coup tries that beleaguered Cory.

I admire Cory Aquino for the same reason that millions regard her with such affection. But I was also critical of her throughout her presidency, for what she lacked as a chief executive and for being unwilling to wield the power that could have dismantled the business, political, social and religious structures that weighed down the country. Like it or not, a strong man is what we badly need. But one who will not become power mad, as Marcos was.

I understand that Ninoy would have been such a strong man, had he become president. But would he have been consumed by power? We will never know. We do know that about Cory. She did not allow it. Would Ninoy also have threatened to jail his own relatives, in the manner of Lee Kuan Yew? Who knows? We do know that Cory could not.

A first person account, by someone who had no reason to exaggerate to me, is about Ninoy explaining to him what he would do about corrupt officials. According to this narrative, Ninoy said that he would not hesitate to line up the crooks before a firing squad, to serve as a warning to others.

Perhaps, with Cory’s compassion and her rare ability to hold power without being consumed by it, all she needed was a measure of her husband’s ruthlessness to have enabled her to achieve the other important objectives of the People Power revolution, aside from restoring democracy.
I mourn the passing of Cory Aquino. Witnessing so much opportunism, so many instances of abuse of power, so much dishonesty and the absence of a sense of shame among those caught redhanded, makes her passing so grievously felt.

My fear is that the qualities that endeared her to all of us are so compelling that, in the forthcoming presidential elections – assuming there will be one – we may forget, once again, that being loved is only one essential part of being president. Knowing what to do and getting them done, despite the risk of being unloved, is the other essential part.

Unfortunately, this is the very argument that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has been using to justify the unjustifiable. But, unlike Cory, power has gone to Arroyo's head..
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

FROM THE CAPITOL: California’s budget

By Leland Yee

Two weeks ago, the California Legislature made major revisions to the 2009 State Budget in order to fill an additional $23 billion shortfall. In all, the Senate approved 30 bills that resulted in billions of dollars in cuts and several major policy changes. The Governor signed the package of bills last week, but only after several line-item vetoes were made.

Historically, I have voted against cuts to education, social services, and healthcare as well as any weakening of labor or environmental laws, again voted no on all such cuts and policy changes. Out of the 30 budget bills, I voted against 13 of the bills, including all cuts to local government, education, human services, and healthcare. I also voted against new oil drilling off California’s coast and against several administrative changes to programs for the poor and disabled.

Despite the Legislature’s approval of the budget package, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger continues to favor attacking children’s health insurance, state assistance to the elderly and disabled, and now the state’s AIDS prevention program rather than recommending the closure of tax loopholes for corporations and the wealthy.

The Governor’s budget line-item vetoes once again demonstrate the ideological divide between Republicans and Democrats. This budget was a ‘goodie bag’ of Republican principles, of which I could not support. While the budget solves an immediate and critical problem, the long-term impacts of these cuts will have dire consequences.

We should not be passing the budget on the backs of seniors, students, the poor and disabled. These vulnerable individuals are suffering enough during this economy and need our assistance more than ever. I am deeply disappointed that new revenues, including taxes on the rich and oil severance, were not even put up for a vote.

I have fought to protect California’s coast and prevent any new offshore oil drilling. In 2005, I authored and passed with bipartisan support legislation declaring California’s opposition to any weakening of the federal offshore oil drilling moratorium.

Any additional offshore oil leasing and production would degrade the quality of our air and water, threaten endangered species, adversely impact our marine resources, and further hurt our economy. The protection of California’s coastline is vital to our wildlife and our economy – especially commercial fishing and tourism – which annually contributes over $50 billion to the state’s economy.

As the cuts made to this budget begin to affect our state agencies and its programs, many Californians will be left strapped, with fewer resources available. Feel free to contact my office at (415) 55707857 and we will gladly direct you to a program that can provide the assistance you need.

VIRTUAL REALITY: SMC: Emerging infrastructure giant

By Tony Lopez

Meralco shares hit a high of P302 per share on Wednesday, July 29. The speculation is that Ramon S. Ang, the president of San Miguel Corp. (SMC), has challenged Manuel V. Pangilinan, the chair of the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT), to buy him out so the latter can buy control of the country’s largest utility distribution company.

If Pangilinan bites the bait, it will drain his financial resources. As of July 29, Meralco was worth P326 billion. Ang says his group controls 43 percent of Meralco, which could be valued at P140 billion, far more than PLDT’s equity of P111 billion.

SMC vs. PLDT. Ang vs. MVP. This is clearly a tussle of titans. Meralco seems like the first of what could be several battles between the two groups in a large-scale war over control of the country’s infrastructure networks—in utilities like power, telco and water, in roads and tollways like the North and South Luzon expressways and their extension lines, and in the exploitation of the country’s natural resources like mining.

San Miguel is just now gaining traction as it undertakes its biggest diversification and expansion in its 119-year history. It will become the largest conglomerate in the Philippines and the biggest infrastructure company. It has bought chunks of Meralco, Petron, Liberty Telecoms, and the consortium that will build and run the Tarlac-La Union tollway (SMC wants to hike its stake to 51 percent). It is looking at other acquisitions.

Infrastructure—power, water, telco, highways and mining—is the best business of the 21st century. It is a necessity for a country that is now middle class and has a huge appetite for big-ticket items on its way to full industrialization and modernization.
“Beyond seeking profit,” explains SMC Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. “we want to be in industries that serve as the backbone of our country’s development, and impact the lives of Filipinos in a meaningful way. We are committed to this vision because we have complete confidence in our country’s potential.” “We are well-placed to literally fuel the progress of the nation,” he added.

Payback can be quick and substantial. SMC bought the 27 percent chunk of the GSIS in Meralco for P90 per share, three years to pay. The cost to SMC: P40 billion. Together with allies, SMC claims to control up to 43 percent of Meralco. At P302 per share, the 43 percent is valued at P144.65 billion.

Petron, meanwhile, has risen 52 percent in market value giving SMC a paper gain of P9 billion in just eight months.

SMC’s 27 percent in Meralco is worth P90.8 billion, giving the beer and food conglomerate a clean profit of P50.8 billion, assuming Meralco remains steady at P300 a share. Share price, however, has nosedived to more reasonable levels. Assuming SMC makes a capital gain of P40 billion, that’s still more than double its P19.3-billion net income in the whole of 2008.
The P40 billion can finance SMC’s other acquisitions and diversification moves. Like the $1.1-billion Laiban dam water project, which Ang believes can supply up to 5,000 million liters a day, half of the water needs of Metro Manila in ten years. He says San Miguel will charge only P18 per cubic meter, below what the Ayala-owned Manila Water and the MVP-Isidro Consunji-owned Maynilad Water are charging now.

There is money in water. Manila Water got a rate increase of 50 percent per year for five years from the government enabling it to more than double the rate MWSS was charging when it awarded the concession to Ayala in 1997.

At that time, the West and East water concessions were estimated to need $7 billion to develop. Ayala invested only P27.3 billion in the last four years (far below the P175 billion or half of the peso equivalent of $7 billion) and brought up net worth from P5.1 billion in 2004 to P14.5 billion in 2008. Market cap is P31.57 billion.

Laiban dam also has the potential for a 1,000-megawatt power plant where SMC can make even more money. Power plants are usually guaranteed profits.

The P180 (P200 before President Gloria Arroyo ordered a reduction) that the Manila North Tollways charges now for the Balintawak to Dau leg used to be only P25. Toll at the Manila South Expressway also rose ten-fold with the private concessionaire. That, says Ang, is highway robbery.

For his part, Pangilinan’s infra vehicle is the Metro Pacific Investment Corp. (MPIC). The PLDT-MPIC group has invested in Maynilad Water Services, in joint venture with DMCI; mining with a 20 percent stake in Philex; and the Manila North Road tollways.

Already, PLDT-Smart is the country’s largest wireless phone provider. Ang is challenging that leadership with a phone service, which he says could be 80 percent cheaper. Now, that’s public service.

VIRTUAL REALITY: Is it Erap vs. Noli?

By Tony Lopez

Will the May 2010 presidential election be a fight between Vice President Noli de Castro and former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada?
That seems to be the emerging trend, based on a survey conducted May 4 to 17, 2009 by Pulse Asia. Noli de Castro led the pack with 18 percent of voters picking him, followed closely by popular young Sen, Francis “Chiz” Escudero, 17 percent, and Estrada, 15 percent.

The survey involved 1,200 respondents and has a three percentage-point margin of error. That means de Castro, Escudero and Estrada are in a statistical tie for first place.

An Erap-Noli tussle is possible only if the ousted former president were allowed by the Supreme Court to run. Estrada thinks the Supreme Court will have no choice but qualify him to run based on the doctrine of sovereign will of the people.

In second tier are: former Senate President Manuel Villar Jr, 14 percent and Sen. Manuel Araneta “Mar” Roxas 2nd, 13 percent. In the third group are single-digit presidentiables: Sen. Loren Legarda, 7 percent; Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay, 4 percent; Sen. Panfilo Lacson, 4 percent; Sen. Richard Gordon, 1 percent; telco tycoon Manuel Pangilinan, 1 percent; Chief Justice Reynato Puno, 1 percent; and Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, 1 percent.

Estrada thinks Noli de Castro is the administration’s frontrunner candidate. That being the case, the vice president could be defeated only if the opposition were united. If the opposition cannot unite, the former president threatens to throw his hat into the ring.

Since the likelihood is that the opposition will never unite—it has never done so since the 1985 snap election won by Ferdinand Marcos by the official count and claimed by Corazon Aquino in a People Power revolt—Estrada seems to have geared up for a big showdown with de Castro. Among all opposition candidates, the former movie actor in 180 films and veteran politician of 32 years, has gone to the most number of places and touched base with the most number of voters in his so-called Pasasalamat sa Bayan sorties.

The former broadcaster is tops among E or lowest income voters—25 percent vs. the second placer, Erap with 19 percent. Noli is also first among the D class—17 percent, vs. 16 percent for Escudero and 15 percent for Erap. Young Chiz, however, is the leader in Metro Manila with a formidable 26 percent. Noli is a poor second with 15 percent, Villar third with 14 percent, and Erap, the original masa president, fourth with 13 percent.

Sen. Mar Roxas is the first choice of Visayans with 22 percent, followed closely by Villar, who claims his mother is from Iloilo, with 20 percent. Noli is third with 18 percent, Escudero fourth with 15 percent, and Erap a distant fourth with a paltry 6 percent.

Erap thinks 2010 is still anybody’s game. So does Pulse Asia.

“Filipinos are still divided when it comes to their choice of their next president,” the respected pollster said. “If the May 2010 elections were held today, five individuals would garner about the same percentages of votes cast. These are de Castro [18 percent], Senator Escudero [17 percent)], Estrada [15 percent], Villar Jr. [14 percent], and Mar Roxas [13 percent].”

In Metro Manila and the best-off Class ABC, Senator Escudero (26 percent) is the top presidential bet. In Mindanao, former President Estrada (27 percent) and Vice-President de Castro (21 percent) have almost the same voter preferences.

The five presidential leading candidates also enjoy nearly the same levels of electoral support in the rest of Luzon (13 percent to 18 percent) and the most numerous Class D (14 percent to 17 percent).

About one in three Filipinos (34 percent) is voting for his/her preferred presidential bet because of the candidate’s being helpful to others, particularly the poor (27.3 percent) and OFWs (6.6 percent). Having many accomplishments is cited by just 11 percent.

A candidate’s being clean or not corrupt is cited by 7.1 percent, one’s goodness as a person (i.e., being mabait or mabuting tao) is mentioned by 5.6 percent, and one’s being a fighter (i.e., palaban) is identified by 5.4 percent as the reasons for favoring a presidential bet.

A third of respondents cited other attributes like: intelligence (5.0 percent), being a kababayan or townmate (3.0 percent), good intentions for the country (2.5 percent), independent or may sariling disposisyon (2.4 percent), good at what he/she does (2.3 percent), pro-people or makatao (1.9 percent), knowledgeable in the management of governmental affairs (1.8 percent), strict (1.6 percent), hardworking (1.6 percent), having the ability to fulfill promises made and other things (1.3 percent), loyal (1.3 percent), used to poverty or being poor (1.1 percent), young (1.1 percent), and approachable (1.0 percent)

FROM THE CAPITOL: Reining in the Arrogance of UC Administrators

Amendment would Protect Student and Taxpayer Dollars

By State Senator Leland Yee

In 1879, the University of California Board Of Regents were granted autonomy on most issues related to the management of the institution and thus rarely subject to public oversight. As a result, statutory laws are generally not binding over the UC, leaving an appointed and unresponsive board with exclusive authority to run the UC in a manner often not reflective of the will of the people.

Last month, I proudly joined UC students and employees to introduce bipartisan legislation that would bring much-needed public oversight, access, transparency, and accountability to the University. Senate Constitutional Amendment 21 would allow the voters to decide if the UC Regents deserve to maintain their autonomy and circumvent the tenets of good governance.
As an alumnus of UC, I believe it is long overdue for the UC administration to stop conducting the business of the public university system as if it were a private club. Only five other public universities in the country have a similar status, with UC receiving the greatest level of autonomy. This governance model – developed during the days of the horse and buggy – certainly should be revisited.

All too frequently, the University has violated the public trust, most recently when the Regents approved double digit compensation hikes for two new chancellors, with each earning over $400,000 in addition to the many perks and benefits enjoyed by these executives. Such compensation packages far exceed those earned by even the President of the United States and the Governor of California. In the same meeting these salaries packages were approved, the Regents significantly raised student fees and precluded public comment by holding the meeting via teleconference.

Despite several attempts to reign in such egregious actions, the questionable conduct continues – public records request are denied, workers are disenfranchised, high executives are granted “golden parachutes” and then immediately rehired, whistleblowers are retaliated against, and contracts are kept secret and often not put out to a competitive bidding process. In the case of the UC Retirement Plan, the management contracts were given to firms owned by family members of the UC Investment Advisory Committee. These high-priced pension consultants replaced professional university financial staff who managed the plan with far greater success.

The need for SCA 21 has never been greater. While students are hit with huge fee increases, top UC administrators receive exorbitant salary hikes. The UC Regents use Californians’ hard-earned tax dollars for luxurious holiday jaunts, to reward family and friends with lucrative public contracts, and to even install a dog run for one chancellor, while simultaneously allowing thousands of workers to live on poverty wages. In these tough economic times, California residents have been asked to sacrifice. Our state budget and our residents cannot afford to furnish university executives with lifestyles like that of the rich and famous.

Please join our bipartisan coalition supporting SCA 21 that will restore the luster of the University of California as an invaluable public asset, ensure taxpayer dollars are not used to line with gold the pockets of university bureaucrats, and create the oversight necessary to ensure the Regents keep the public interest at heart.

STREET TALK: The lesson of the hardboiled egg

By Greg Macabenta

You can learn a few things from the most unexpected situations. One of our sons asked my wife how to make a hardboiled egg.

Her reply: “Don’t put the egg in the water when it is already boiling. It will crack. Put it in the water just as it is beginning to heat up. That way, the shell will get used to the gradual increase in temperature up to boiling point.”

That was an Aha! moment for me.

Aha! So, that’s what the logic was behind the “revelation” of the departed Injustice Secretary Raul Gonzales about the distinct possibility of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo running for parliament in her district in Pampanga, should the system of government be changed.

That seeming foot-in-mouth statement of Gonzales was made so masterfully in that you couldn’t tell if he had made it up out of resentment at being dislodged from his cabinet post or if he was revealing a well-kept strategy of the Malacañang Department of Dirty Tricks or if it was a candid conjecture based on a purely hypothetical situation.

But, like the hardboiled egg being immersed in gradually heating water, the Gonzales statement or revelation or conjecture hardly created a stir amidst the uproar already caused by the railroading by the Lowest House of Resolution 1109 calling for a Con-Ass.

What has actually begun to happen in Manila, despite the sound and the fury of activists and oppositionists, is a process of either resignation to or increasing militancy against a move that, if the Senate is to be believed, is an exercise in futility.

But, you see, even the seeming nonchalance of the Senate, purportedly an independent body whose very existence is threatened by the introduction of a parliamentary system of government, may be part of the hardboiled egg strategy.

We should not overlook the fact that Arroyo is not entirely without allies in the Senate. You can also bet that those senators who are interested in becoming president will not mind being persuaded by Malacañang to look kindly on Arroyo should the presidential election actually happen.

In an extremely expensive presidential campaign, the persuasiveness of millions of pesos cannot be ignored.

Besides, if you check out the financial backers of some of the so-called “leading presidentiables” – the ones with double digit ratings – you will realize that these financiers have not been averse to playing ball with the Arroyo government – otherwise, how would they have survived and prospered in the years that she has been in office?

But what about the merger of Lakas and Kampi? Wasn’t that proof, as Arroyo put it, that the administration was preparing for an election?

The skeptics have pointed out, of course, that she didn’t specifically say “presidential elections,” as if it mattered much. Even if she did speficy that type of election, nothing would stop her from changing her mind and, to paraphrase Miriam Defensor Santiago, cutely admitting, “I lied.” Didn’t she change her mind before, when she declared that she wasn’t running after the term she had inherited from Erap Estrada had expired?:

On the other hand, you can also bet that, while Arroyo and her strategists are applying the hardboiled egg technique to prepare the minds of the people and the political opposition for the possibility of a charter change,20the same strategists are laying the groundwork for Plan B, which is for a presidential election to actually be held.

They are making the preparations for the presidential elections very obvious – what could be more obvious than the Lakas-Kampi merger – while making their Con-Ass moves just as obvious, the better to totally confuse the people.

This is part of the hardboiled egg strategy. The masses and even the media will eventually conclude that the Arroyo and her advisers have become confused and no longer know what they’re doing. That is designed to prompt the people and the opposition to let down their guard.
In fact, the clearest indication that the opposition’s guard is down is the fact that it s leaders are allowing themselves the luxury of intramurals. They are so confident that Arroyo or her anointed presidential candidate will be easy to defeat because of her extreme unpopularity, they’re beginning to lose sight of the fact that their ranks have begun to be infiltrated.

Plan B is already operational. Moves have already been taken to soften up leading presidential candidates with campaign resources in exchange for leniency on Arroyo and her cabal, in case of an opposition victory. Because politicians are the way they are – all subscribing to the classic principal of the late Senator Eulogio Rodriguez, Sr. that “politics is addition” - these candidates don’t mind talking to Arroyo’s emissaries and keeping their options open to making a deal. Of course. Plan C is operational as well, which is to ensure that the administration candidate for president will win – in case such a presidential candidate becomes absolutely necessary.

Now, what’s this about Arroyo running for congress after she relinquishes the presidency? According to this scuttlebutt, this explains her frequent visits to Pampanga – something, speculators say, she had never done before.

That, of course, is also part of the hardboiled egg strategy, which is to get the people used to the idea that she may actually want to hang on to power, any kind of power, but not necessarily as prime minister.

Is Arroyo as congressman to be counted as20Plan D?

Yeah, why not? The more plans people and the media attribute to Arroyo, the more confused they will all become. With so many options confronting them, they will begin to feel vulnerable and will be more amenable to a quid pro quo.

The idea is to reach a point, quite like the hardboiled egg, when nothing she and her cohorts do will shock or even surprise.

That’s when Arroyo will make the move of all moves, whether Plan A, B, C or D, designed to ensure that she will either remain in power or will be guaranteed immunity. At that point, her opponents will be more concerned with their interests, especially if profitable, than with exacting their pound of her flesh..

And the Filipino people will not complain – or crack up – because they will have become hardened to the harsh realities of an unprincipled politics - just like a hapless egg.
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

FROM THE CAPITOL: ReformTheUC.com

By State Senator Leland Yee

In 1879, the University of California (UC) Board of Regents were granted autonomy on all issues related to the management of the institution and thus subject to public oversight on some budgetary matters. As a result, statutory laws are generally not binding over the University of California, leaving an appointed and unresponsive board with the exclusive authority to run the institution in a manner that reflects or rejects the will of the people.

Two weeks ago, I proudly joined University of California students and employees to introduce legislation that would bring much-needed public oversight, accountability, and transparency to the University of California. Senate Constitutional Amendment 21 would allow the voters to decide if the UC Board of Regents deserve to maintain its autonomy and be able to ignore laws passed in response to actions that seek to circumvent the tenets of good governance such as the recently approved exorbitant pay hikes for UC San Francisco and UC Davis executives.

The UC Regents and the UC Office of the President – supported by their numerous and well-compensated lobbyists and public relations representatives – are again fighting this commonsense reform, just as they have deliberately undermined every reasonable effort to correct their previous acts of misconduct. Unsurprisingly, the UC administration is attempting to characterize this effort as a takeover by the Legislature. And like many of their assertions through the years, their attempt at a public relations sleight of hand is both false or misleading.
The fact is the Legislature can enact statute that affects policies at the California State University as well as for the State’s community college system, yet the CSU and our community colleges are still fully administered and managed by the Board of Trustees and the Board of Governors respectively. SCA 21 would simply establish that the voters and taxpayers of California – via the Legislature - enjoy a similar relationship with what is now a completely unaccountable Board of Regents. Simply stated, the UC Regents would no longer be able to ignore legislation attempting to rein in their arrogance and excesses.

As an alumnus of UC Berkeley, I say, enough is enough. It is time for the UC administration to stop conducting the business of the public university system it oversees as if the UC was a private club. Only five other public universities in the country have a similar status, with UC receiving the greatest level of autonomy. This completely outdated model results in the Regents thinking they are above and beyond the law and the will of the people of California. They continuously violate the public trust with no respect for the students, faculty, workers and taxpayers.

The University has been plagued by numerous and all too frequent scandals over the years, most recently when the Regents approved double digit compensation hikes last month for two new campus chancellors, with each earning over $400,000 in addition to the many perks and benefits enjoyed by these executives. Such compensation packages far exceed those earned by event the President of the United States and the Governor of California. In the same meeting these salaries packages were approved, the Regents significantly raised student fees and precluded public comment by holding the meeting via teleconference.

To combat the egregious lack of public oversight over the Regents, I have launched reformtheUC.com. There you have the opportunity to contact your local elected officials and get them on board with the effort to bring accountability to this multi-billion dollar institution that affects the lives of all Californians. In addition, you can become a fan of this effort on Facebook. Your support will be vital in this effort, so get online and let your voice be heard.

STREET TALK: The swine flu and heroism

By Greg Macabenta

I understand everyone is concerned over the swine flu pandemic in the Philippines. But that’s nothing compared to the national illness being spread by the swine in the House of Reprehensibles (yes, that’s what the abbreviation Rep. before their names means.).

And we know who the swineherd is. She is Mistress of the Piggery by the Pasig where the trough is and where the pigs converge to gorge themselves.

With such disheartening news coming out of Manila, it was such a great relief to attend the first Gawad Kalinga Global Summit in Boston, Massachusetts from June 12 to 14.

It was a Gathering of Heroes.
Even those who would otherwise have been classified as villains back in the Philippines were at their heroic best during the three-day gathering of GK advocates and volunteers from all the world.

Most of the delegates were based in the US, but there was a large delegation from the Philippines that included Vice-President Noli de Castro; Senators Kiko Pangilinan and Migz Zubiri; Congressman Rufus Rodriguez; Agriculture Secretary Arthur Yap; Metro Manila Mayors Jojo Binay of Makati, Freddie Tinga of Taguig and Jun Bernabe of Paranaque; Governors LRay Villafuerte of Camarines Sur, Sally Ante Lee of Sorsogon and Victor Yap of Tarlac; provincial Mayors Dennis Go of Gerona, Tarlac, Tito Arion of Daet, Camarines Norte; and Sonia Lorenzo of San Isidro, Nueva Ecija; and Brig. Gen. Natalio Escarma III, Marine Corps Deputy Commander and Commander of the Marine Forces in Southern Philippines. There were two other provincial mayors, one from Iloilo and the other from Southern Leyte whose names I failed to note.

Among the former cabinet officials present were Nonong Cruz, DND, and Cito Lorenzo, Agriculture. Lorenzo is among the key movers of GK.

There were also delegates from Malaysia, Colombia and India and a large delegation from Singapore, which will host the next summit in 2010. The Colombia and India delegates said they would like to adopt the GK concept in their home countries.

Friday and Saturday, June 12 and 13, were spent on GK testimonials, an exercise in restoring faith in men and hope for the nation.Both days saw the public officials talk about the impact of GKon their respective constituencies and their own efforts to adopt the “GK Way” in their governance.

The unspoken rivalry between Makati, Taguig and Parañaque as the most progressive Metro Manila cities with enlightened policies and comprehensive social services for their residents was obvious in the presentations of Binay, Tinga and Bernabe. They all spoke with pride of their respective accomplishments. Despite my cynicism, I noted that the claims were grounded in fact.
I must confess to being partial to Makati and to Parañaque, being a resident of the latter and having created the slogan for the former (“Makati – mahalin natin. Atin ito”) over two decades ago. But after listening to Tinga speak, I could not help being impressed.

Another truly admirable presentation was that made by Gov. LRay Villafuerte of Camarines Sur (“Just call us CamSur”). The young son of a traditional politician, Luis Villafuerte of the Lowest House of Congress, dispelled the old saying that one cannot expect good fruit from a tree of questionable qualities (of course, the elder Villafuerte washed his hands of responsibility for the reprehensible plot to railroad the Con-Ass, so maybe he deserves some credit).

In the few years he has been in office, LRay Villafuerte, who currently chairs the League of Provinces of the Philippines, has transformed his province into one of the most progressive in the country, and the fastest growing in terms of investments, tourist traffic and revenues In recognition of his accomplishments, he was named Outstanding Young Pe rson of the World by the Junior Chamber International for Business and Entrepreneurship and conferred the TOYM Award for Entrepreneurship in Exports by the Philippine Jaycees. He also received the Tourism Entrepreneur of the Philippines Award from the Department of Tourism and the Philippine Center for Entrepreneurship.

In subsequent conversations I had with Jojo Binay and Jun Bernabe, I pointed out the contrast between what I had heard from them and what was routinely written about the national government, specifically about the occupants of Malacañang and Congress.

“The real hope of the nation are the LGUs,” said Binay. “If, at the city and municipal level, there is progressive governance and a delivery of social services, the provinces will follow suit. And the rest of the country will also be progressive.”
To say that Binay provides adequate social services to his constituents is actually an understatement. Makati has a hospital and a university for its citizens and even the squatters who have been relocated to a 3.2 hectare location in San Jose Del Monte are entitled to unheard of privileges.

Unlike other cities that ejected their squatters, relocated them to far-flung places and left them to fend for themselves, Makati has allowed former “informal settlers” to avail of the city’s social services, including free education.

A project of GK and the Makati government, the “Dreamland” will have 480 homes in a community complete with a school, a medical clinic and a chapel. Makati purchased the land and provides the civil works and community facilities while GK handles project management, as well as the spiritual and moral guidance required to truly transform the former slum dwellers..
In his presentation, Binay said that the city has provided attractive tax incentives to private companies that have contributed to the project, such that, in one pledging session alone, they raised P11 million.

Despite owning a home in Parañaque for the past 41 years, it was only at the GK Global Summit that I met Jun Bernabe, a junior of the multiple-term mayor Florencio Bernabe, Sr. But he impressed me with his vision for the city and its improved services.

I acknowledged that I actually had a pleasant experience at city hall on my last trip to Manila. I had decided to apply for a senior citizen’s card, having heard about the many privileges enjoyed by people in that age category. I had expected the usual long wait and disinterested over-the-counter attitude of the stereotypical government employee. But not in that instance. When I asked how I could apply for the senior’s card, I was ushered by a clerk to another office in a far corner of the building and entrusted to a team that immediately attended to my needs. In 15 minutes, I had my senior’s card, along with literature on privileges and how I c ould avail of them. Two other mayors who should have been present at the GK event and would have bared impressive city histories were Sonny Belmonte of Quezon City and Bayani Fernando of Marikina. They, too, have proven the validity of Binay’s thesis that true progress and reform can happen at the local level.

One can argue that the Gawad Kalinga Global Summit simply allowed the government officials present to show their “good side” but that they inevitably have their “bad” side – the side of kickbacks, overpricing, ghost employees, monopoly of businesses and the rackets and every conceivable sin attached to politicians.

But that, precisely, is what I find admirable in Gawad Kalinga and its founder, Tony Meloto.
Two years ago, at the 10th Filipinas Magazine Achievement Awards – which usually confers the honor only to Filipinos in America – we made an exception of Tony Meloto . We gave him an Award for International Achievement.

In doing so, I pointed out that, while Meloto is a bona fide hero, his real heroism is in his ability to bring out the heroes in everyone else.

Maybe, Meloto should be asked to clean out the Pig Sty by the Pasig.
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

VIRTUAL REALITY: Time to buy stocks

By Tony Lopez

Banks have reduced the in­terest rate they offer for deposits, from an average of 2 percent before the current financial crisis to half a percent this year. The shenanigans of the Legacy Group of businessman Celso de los Angeles have become public knowledge. Pre-need plans have gone out of fashion, thanks to Legacy, the failure of CAP and the controversy behind Pacific Plans. Insurance also offers doubtful outlets for investment following the losses of AIG, mother company of the Philamlife group in the Philippines. AIG lost a whopping $61. 7 billion in the last quarter of 2008, the biggest quarterly loss in US corporate history. AIG has received $170 billion in US government loans and capital infusion, yet is giving away huge bonuses to its officers and employees (using American taxpayers’ money). Not surprisingly, Obama is outraged, and so is the American public.

Amid this backdrop, investing in Philippine stocks is suddenly an attractive option. Stocks are selling at nine times the earnings of their companies. Ayala Corp. sells for only five times expected income. If you can wait for two years, there is a good chance you can double your money if you buy stocks now.

Companies listed in the Philippine Stock Exchange represent the country’s largest, the crème de la crème of local business. Many have been around for at least 100 years and are venerable names–like, Ayala (175 years old), Bank of the Philippine Islands (157), San Miguel (119 years old), Meralco (90 years), Philippine Long Distance Telephone (81 years), Tanduay (71 years), and even SM (51 years old). These companies have seen wars and revolutions, survived ups and downs, ridden booms and busts. In other words, they are stable.

Meanwhile, the economy, is projected to grow between 3 percent and 4 percent this year even while two-thirds of the world is in recession.

There is plenty of money. Banks are awash with cash. People have money. Filipinos save an average 28 percent, as a ratio of GDP, equivalent to P2.1 trillion. Filipino expats, ten million of them, remitted $16.4 billion in 2008 on top of the $15 billion they remitted in 2007. In January 2009, they remitted $1.3 billion, up 0.1 percent from January 2008. The Arroyo administration has plenty of cash, with P330 billion in stimulus plan. That money is now being spent on infra and transferring cash to the poor.

Beginning this year, corporations will make an additional 5 percent on their income as a result of the reduction of the corporate income tax to 30 percent from 35 percent. Also, says PSE President Francis Lim, “corporations are now subject to higher corporate governance standards. There is transparency and accountability in large-scale projects.” Lim has worked on a number measures to improve the attractiveness of the stock market and encourage more savings, by workers and would-be retirees. Among these reforms are: the Real Estate Investment Trust or REIT, the abolition of the documentary stamp tax and the IPO tax, the PERA Law, and the Corporate Recovery and Insolvency Act.

The REIT law grants incentives to property companies that have a regular stream of income and declare 90 percent of that as dividends, provided at least 30 percent of their ownership is held by the public thru listing in the PSE. The dividends declared are not taxed.

The PERA Law encourages workers to set aside P100,000 every year (P200,000 for families) for investment in listed stocks. All income from this investment is tax-exempt.

Both the REIT and the PERA Law seek to tap the vast savings of OFWs for investments in the stock market. OFWs remit only a third of their total income and keep the rest because there are just few outlets for their savings if they remit everything to the Philippines. The Corporate Recovery and Insolvency Act provides for orderly bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings for corporations.

The overall effect of these proposed reforms is to encourage more investments in the stock and increase the number of corporations going public. This will spur investments, the formation of more corporations, the setting up and expansion of businesses, resulting in a dynamic and fast growing economy and greater wealth benefits to a wider segment of the population.

FROM THE CAPITOL: UC Eligibility Proposal

By State Senator Leland Yee

On December 9, the University of California (UC) presented to California legislative staff a proposal to modify eligibility standards for freshmen students. Upon reviewing their proposal the Joint Asian Pacific Islander (API) Legislative Caucus along with various community partners are urging the UC Board of Regents to postpone the confirmation of UC eligibility requirements. We are requesting more studies and public hearing to ensure the proposal will fulfill the University of California and California State Legislature’s commitment to diversity.

The new admissions proposal would affect the racial and ethnic makeup of UC’s eligibility pool. The percentage of Asian Pacific Islanders in the eligibility pool would shrink from 32.6 percent to 25.5 percent, including both guaranteed applicants and entitled to review applicants. The UC has not made available sufficient information on how or what aspects of the proposal would cause this decrease.

In a letter to the UC Regent, the Joint API Legislative Caucus has requested a more thorough evaluation of how the new SAT Reasoning Test conforms to the UC testing policies needs to be conducted. A formal evaluation is necessary to ensure that the decision to use aptitude tests over achievement-oriented tests does not adversely impact low-income and minority students.

The state’s Master Plan for High Education directs UC to select first-time freshmen from the top one-eigth (12.5 percent) of all graduates from California public high schools. The UC’s new eligibility proposal would significantly change which and how many high school graduates are eligible to attend the university. It would depart from the Master Plan’s target eligibility pool, increase uncertainty about who would be accepted, and affect the racial-ethnic makeup of UC’s eligibility pool.

California is and has always been a diverse state and it is evident in all of our UC campuses. I hope the Board of Regents recognizes the effort that it took to get us to this point, and does not brush it away with new policies that will have uncertain results.

STREET TALK: Criminal justice, Philippine style

By Greg Macabenta

Depending on which newspaper you read, Ping Lacson is either guilty as sin as the alleged mastermind in the liquidation of PR man Buddy Dacer and his driver, or the predictable target of criminal justice, Philippine style because of his relentless campaign against corruption in the Arroyo administration.

Reynaldo Berroya is either a seeker of justice or a vengeful former jailbird-turned-public official who wants to get even with Lacson.

Raul Gonzales is either acting true to stereotype as Gloria Arroyo’s hatchet man, ready to swing the ax on Lacson’s neck, or a do-nothing justice secretary who can finally score on a high profile target.

Don’t bet on knowing the truth anytime soon. First of all, the above scenarios are not necessarily “either-or.” Despite the seeming contradictions, there could be some truth to all the premises.
Surely, Ping Lacson didn’t develop his Dirty Harry reputation by being the chairman of the church choir during his stint as a police officer. Too many anecdotes portrayed him as a berdugo, they couldn’t all have been based on the fertile imagination of Carlo Caparas or the cinematic exploits of FPJ.

But he has also been a real pain-in-the-behind for Arroyo, her husband and her cabinet. It should be no surprise to anyone that their avenging angels are going after Lacson with every piece of evidence they can muster, whether truthful, half-truthful or fabricated.

Berroya is a former jailbird, thanks to Lacson. It is believable that he is also a seeker of justic e, especially if it means dishing it out to a sworn enemy.

Raul Gonzales is, without doubt, Arroyo’s hatchet man, but if he truly can convict a high profile target like Lacson, that would be a feather in his oft-tarnished cap.

In other words, it really shouldn’t matter if Lacson is prosecuted for reasons of political vendetta. If he is proven guilty, that would still be an achievement for an administration that has allowed too many obvious thieves to get away.

Having said that, it should also be noted that the criminal justice system in our country operates at several levels.

There is the press release level, which comes in two versions. That of the accuser and that of the accused. In advertising, the number or frequency of commercials or ads released for a brand is referred to as its “share-of-voice.” In the battle of press releases between the accuser and the accused, the applicable reference point is called “share-of-pocket.” The more reportorial and editorial pockets lined, the greater the share-of-voice.

At this level, also, the parties involved all manage to sound convincing, sure of themselves, ready to submit to lie detector tests or face investiga tors, prepared to back up leaked information with incontrovertible proof and, naturally, all vowing to see that justice and the truth prevail.
To the uninitiated, this can all sound so confusing. They couldn’t all be telling the truth, but which side is lying? This is where share-of-pocket and share-of-voice count, with the second being a logical consequence of the first.

This is all based on the principle that “He who buys the most media support gets to be believed,” a variation on Joseph Goebbels’ theory that a lie repeated often enough will be taken for the truth.

Then there is the second level where the backroom negotiations occur. Oftentimes, it’s a game of blackmail and counter-blackmail.
I’ve got the goods on you.

Oh yeah? I’ve got the goods on you, too.
I’ll pin you down first.
Do that and I’ll expose all the skeletons in your closet.
Maybe we should talk this over.
Yeah, maybe we should.

The next day, both accuser and accused appear before the media to announce that “It was all a misunderstanding.”

Peace follows – until one of the parties decides to double-cross the other. Then the excrement once more hits the fan.

And then, there’s the third level, which is where the truth really is.
The trouble with the truth in our country is that it implicates too many people, not just one or a couple. Oftentimes, the accuser turns out to be as dirty as the accused, not to mention several others who would not have been drawn into the case if those involved had been more reasonable – that is, if they had agreed to just talk things over.

This is the reason why most celebrated cases involving high ranking officials and prominent personalities are never resolved, after reams of press coverage and pompous announcements by authorities. The collateral damage is considered unacceptable.

It is often at the second level where these cases end up. The quid pro quo is what results. The accusers and the accused who are also often the blackmailers and the blackmailed agree to back off and leave each other’s skeletons in their respective closets.

If this were not the case, why haven’t those who claim to have the evidence in hand made their findings public? If they have the goods on Lacson, what’s keeping them from ordering his arrest?
On the other hand, if Lacson is as blameless as he vigorously claims to be, why doesn’t he have affidavits from the very same persons who are said to be implicating him, clearing him of any involvement?

And why did these police officers go into hiding in the first place?

Frankly, I don’t think the protagonists in this shadow play really want the truth to come out. I think they would all rather agree on a détente. No more corruption exposes by Lacson and no more ambition to become president. No more anti-Lacson inquisitions by the Arroyo government and all the grisly cases simply left to gather dust.
Such is criminal justice, Philippine style.

(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

TELLTALE SIGNS: What goes around

By Rodel Rodis

When the news article about my Ninth Circuit case (“Cops can’t be sued in ‘counterfeit’ arrest”, San Francisco Chronicle, March 10, 2009) appeared in the paper's on-line edition (sfgate.com) more than 98 comments were published in the first 24 hours.

One of the first comments came from “Akit” who wrote: “Let me get this right... the Walgreens manager used the special marker to prove its authenticity, and it was authentic. But they still called the cops who arrested him for being a fake? If the cops were smart, they would have used the marker to test it themselves, and wham! Can I get my change for my purchase? Problem solved.”

A comment from “szander” echoed the same sentiment: “So the manager at Wallgreens used a special pen to determine that the bill was legitimate and called the police anyway? Why, then, was the guy arrested after it was proven that the bill was authentic? That sounds incompetent to me.”

Quite a number of comments asked why I did not sue Walgreens instead. Well I did. In fact, as a result of my lawsuit, Walgreens fired the manager (Dennis Snopikov) and hired a Filipino, the first to be promoted to store manager in San Francisco. Walgreens also issued a public apology and paid my fees.

The transcripts of the 911 taped call of the Walgreens manager revealed that Snopikov had merely expressed a suspicion that the bill may be counterfeit, he did not claim that it actually was a fake. It was the police officers who jumped to that conclusion without conducting any investigation and that is why I sued the two police officers who were responsible for my false arrest (Sgt. Jeff Barry and Officer Michelle Liddicoet).

In their depositions, two of the San Francisco police officers who arrested me (Liddicoet and James Nguyen) stated that they thought the bill looked genuine to them when they examined it. In fact, at the police station, after Nguyen removed my handcuffs and informed me that the Secret Service had verified that the bill was genuine, Nguyen even boasted to the other police officers that he knew all along that the bill was genuine.

Liddicoet and Nguyen also claimed in their depositions that my false arrest was the result of a mix-up. The first two SFPD police officers to arrive at the scene, Sgt. Barry and Officer Barbara Dullea, reported a Code 4 - “situation was under control” (SUC)- to Liddicoet and Nguyen who unfortunately, they said, understood Code 4 to mean “suspect in custody” (SIC) and expected to see the suspect already in handcuffs upon their arrival. However, when they entered the store and saw it wasn’t the case, they proceeded to place me in handcuffs.

That’s the Keystone Cops “plainly incompetent” version.

The real story is that Sgt. Barry, the first officer to arrive at the scene, had a personal beef against me dating back to 1998 when our sons were 3rd grade classmates in a parochial school. While we were discussing a school policy, Barry started complaining about a City College policy of not allowing campus police officers to carry firearms on campus. He believed that this policy placed his brother-in-law at risk for his personal safety. As I was a City College Board member then, he wanted me to change the policy but I disagreed with his view.

So when Sgt. Barry saw an opportunity for payback five years later, he just couldn't resist it. He told Liddicoet (who had just arrived at the scene and who had asked him for a status update) “Oh it’s that lawyer, he hates cops”. (Honestly, I don’t). Liddicoet replied, “Don’t worry, Sarge, I’ll take care of him”. And take care of me she did.

Although Barry was the first to arrive at the scene, I didn’t recognize him because I was speaking with the store manager at the time. After I was placed in handcuffs in the backseat of the police car, I overheard an officer come up to Liddicoet who was seated in front of me and whisper to her: “Make sure my name isn’t on the police report, ok?” LLiddicoet replied "Yes, Sarge". I couldn’t see the face of "Sarge" as it was dark but I kept asking myself throughout the ride to the Taraval police station “Who is Sarge and why doesn’t he want his name written on the police report?”

So when I saw the police report which included Sgt. Barry’s name (Nguyen wrote it), everything finally made sense. Wow, I thought, this officer can carry a grudge.

The Ninth Circuit’s March 9, 2009 decision means that police officers like Sgt. Barry now have the power to arrest anyone that they have a personal grudge with and people like me can’t sue officers like Barry. It’s no longer a qualified immunity, it’s now an absolute immunity.

My long-time critic, Roy Recio, cheered the Ninth Circuit decision in an email to me a few days ago because, he wrote, “This is what you deserve”. The question is not whether I deserve it but whether Recio deserves it. He may one day find himself falsely accused of a crime and arrested even without probable cause. To make sure that it doesn’t happen again to anyone else and to compensate him for the embarrassment the false arrest may have caused him, Recio may file suit against the police officer. Ironically, his suit would then be thrown out of court because of the decision he is now cheering. If that happens to Recio, I promise I won’t email him to gloat that what goes around, comes around.

(Send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or mail them to the Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127. For those wishing to read the two Ninth Circuit decisions in my case, just log on to Rodel50.blogspot.com and click the links.)

VIRTUAL REALITY: Battle of the Titans

By Tony Lopez

There seems to be an undeclared war of the corporate giants. It is the race to create the Philippines’ mega conglomerate—the largest company in terms of scale and diversity of operations, combined sales and profits of its operating units or divisions, geographic reach, locally and globally; employment of manpower, technology and resources, and visioning for its businesses during the balance of the 21st century.

At the starting gate are three major groups—San Miguel Corp. under Chairman and CEO Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. and President and Chief Operating Officer Ramon Ang, Ayala Corp. under the brothers, Chairman and CEO Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala and President and COO Fernando Zobel de Ayala, and Manuel Pangilinan of the First Pacific Group of Hong Kong of the Salim Group of Indonesia. First Pacific, in turn, has controlling interest in two large Philippine companies—the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) and Metro Pacific Investments Corp.

Not to be ignored are three other large conglomerates, Henry Sy Sr. of the giant retailing chain SM and banking’s No. 1 Banco de Oro, George SK Ty of the Metrobank Group and Toyota, and Lucio Tan of PNB and Allied Bank, Philippine Airlines, Fortune Tobacco and Foremost Farms.

Two major developments triggered the Battle of the Corporate Goliaths. One is the US financial meltdown, which has spiked recession in two-thirds of the world and at the same time, created vast opportunities for mergers and acquisitions following the sharp declines in asset values.

The other is the massive expansion, almost overnight, of the San Miguel Group which has spurred a reaction from its rivals and would-be rivals, notably the Ayala Group of the venerable Ayala family and the First Pacific Group of Pangilinan and Antoni Salim.

It is a game of dominance and the stakes are high. They include control of major businesses in the Philippines, such as manufacturing, telephony, energy (from production, distribution, and supply and marketing of allied services and products), real estate, banking, water resources and the employment of and future of technology in these fields.

The race winner will determine how products and services will be produced, packaged and marketed and define the market and needs of the future.

San Miguel acquired significant stakes in Meralco and Petron and immediately, Ayala Corp. headman Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala recalled his top generals CEOs from Ayala Land Inc. and Globe Telecoms to headquarters to think of strategies and major acquisitions. The Ayala Group has piled up $500 million in investible funds to deploy.

For his part, Manny V. Pangi-linan has bought 10 percent of Meralco to observe how the San Miguel group will operate in the electricity distribution monopoly. MVP can provide a second opinion to Ramon Ang’s innovative ideas.

San Miguel has been acquiring all kinds of telephone technology—landline, wireless and broadband.

Becoming integral to wireless technology is global positioning system technology, knowing the location of your subscribers and customers, where and when they go to which particular place—at home, in the office, at the shopping mall, parking lot or car repair shop, coffee shop or restaurant, or in the neighborhood.

Crunching such mobile data and sensing consumer patterns will give a distinct advantage to a consumer product company like San Miguel in deploying its products and services. Wireless technology is also giving rise to technology platforms that deliver vital services, like health care, a field in which telco taipan Manuel Pangilinan has been investing heavily. Pacemakers and vital health signs can now be monitored wirelessly, thanks to mobile phone technology.

This early, San Miguel Corp. is studying how to pipe broadband data to the electrical outlets fed with electricity by Meralco, a recent acquisition, using the technology of Qtel, a recent partner. Pangilinan already uses Meralco posts to string PLDT’s landlines into households.

San Miguel, Ayala and Pangi-linan will fight it out in the next battleground—water, for which a major shortage is emerging.

On still another front, the winner and the major players in the race for No. 1 will have a say in the selection of the country’s leaders and the future and direction of the economy which has become middle class with per capita GNP income of more than $2,000.

So far, San Miguel has gained the upperhand. San Miguel Corp. has acquired 27 percent direct equity in Meralco plus another 10-percent owned by groups friendly to San Miguel Corp. for a total of 37 percent. San Miguel Corp. also has an option to buy 50.1 percent of Petron Corp., the country’s largest oil refining and marketing company.

E-mail Tony Lopez at biznewsasia@gmail.com

STREET TALK: Accusers and accused in Santa Banana

By Greg Macabenta

In the Central American Republic of Santa Banana, the ends of justice are always met.

Yes, they are always met with raised eyebrows, a snicker and a chuckle, a smirk and a frown, a puke and a spit, or with gales of laughter.

Nobody takes Senate Blue Ribbon Co mmittee investigations, impeachment charges, warrants of arrest, accusations of graft and corruption, even buy-bust stings (a-la FBI in the US) seriously.

In fact, even when somebody gets caught red-handed – literally with his pants down – he manages to get away with it by vehemently and vigorously denying it.

Politicians have become particularly adept at this, having had a lot of practice by cheating on their wives, being caught red-handed, denying it and getting away with it.

“Aha! I’ve caught you with your pants down with this woman!”

“What woman???? What woman???” (Meanwhile, the woman dashes out of the room.)

“What woman???: Do you see a woman in this room???” (The wife sees no woman in the room and gives up in exasperation – she then cheats on the husband to get even).

And so, when a politician or the husband of President Gloria En Excesses Deo is accused by such venerable institutions as the Worldwide Bank of rigging the biddings on infrastructure projects funded by the international body and the bank shows documentary evidence to the authorities, all he has to do is vehemently and vigorously deny it. Then his allies in the Senate demand that the accuser provide proof.

“Here’s proof!” th e bank declares.

“What proof? What proof? Is this proof?” the allies of the accused ask with raised voices into the television cameras. “Thats only hearsay. You must produce solid proof!!!”

In Santa Banana, there is no such thing as the authorities following up a lead, investigating suspicious conduct and eventually coming up with airtight evidence. No sir. The accuser has to do all of that. So, if you’re not prepared to spend loads of money gathering evidence (and risking your life doing it), you better follow the advice of the Mafia dons, “Fuggedaboudit!”

In the end, nothing comes out of an accusation and the whole case is eventually forgotten. Of course, in the case of Worldwide Bank, it decides not to fund infrastructure projects in Santa Banana anymore, but then it is accused of discriminating against a poor, defenseless, T hird World country.

Then, there is the Santa Banana Senate which holds this regular showbiz extravaganza called the Blue Ribbon Committee hearing.

This is the favorite publicity platform of politicians intending to run for the presidency. It always gets a lot of media coverage and the members of the committee are able to wear their best looking suits (it’s sweltering hot in Santa Banana, but the politicians love to wear suits because they think they look good in them) and ask pointed questions like the DA’s in Hollywood films.

Of course, the responses are preditable. All the accused has to do is to either declare outright innocence, deny any involvement or invoke presidential executive privilege. Prying information from them becomes an impossibility.

E-mail Greg Macabenta at gmacabenta@hotmail.com