NO LIMITATIONS: Suffering and the Smiling Filipino

By Ted Laguatan

Filipinos often claim that the Philippines is the only Christian country in Asia - which is really no longer true. Papua New Guinea and East Timor are now also predominantly Christian countries. Some Filipinos seem to think that God favors them in some way because they are Christian. Maybe in some profound sense - they may be right.

Ninety two percent of Filipinos are Christians. Eighty one to eighty five percent are Catholics. In a deeply spiritual sense, maybe God favors Filipinos. True Catholic belief sees suffering as a way to heaven. Some of the greatest Catholic saints have gone through incredible sufferings: painful illnesses, persecutions, tortures, disappointments, humiliations, martyrdoms. Catholics are taught that they can offer their sufferings to God which results in many blessings.

Catholics believe that the suffering and death of Jesus Christ is the most important event in the history of mankind. It healed the breach caused by sin between man and God. In Catholic mystical theology, undeserved suffering is connected to Christ's sufferings - which brings forth much good.

The belief is that the acceptance and willingness to undergo sufferings in imitation of Christ bears fruit not only in the life of the individual sufferer but also in the lives of others. As such, it is not only a question of accepting suffering that come's one's way but also deliberately seeking self imposed suffering at times - especially during lent.

Millions of Filipinos suffer so much because of government corruption, ignorance, malnutrition, slum housing, crime infested surroundings and general poverty. An estimated one third of our people goes to bed hungry at night. Perhaps it is this deeply embedded Catholic belief about the virtue of suffering in the Filipino psyche that enables him or her to be so resilient - to endure so much. The Filipino somehow manages to remain smiling no matter how dire his circumstances may be.

This resiliency and gentle toughness are also probably there because of his great faith in a loving God - that somehow, God will see him through all these sufferings and that it will be all right in the end. This simple faith and trust in a God Whose love will make all things right is also deeply installed in the Filipino psyche - unquestionably a beautiful part of Filipino culture.

His relationship with God also provides him (or her) the "bahala na ang diyos" attitude that enables him to brave loneliness and dangers in distant cold or desert lands and strange foreign cultures: to find work that enables him to feed his family back home - or to send his children or younger brothers and sisters to school - so that they may have a decent future.

It's incredible how one sees so many smiling Filipino faces in the midst of devastated drowned houses, cars or crops after a major typhoon. When typhoon Ondoy smashed the Philippines in September 2009, it was fascinating to see on TV news the smiling faces of Filipinos wading their way through deep flood waters with their children and belongings. I saw the same kind of smiles in the face of evacuees fleeing from the wrath of Pinatubo when it exploded. It's as if they're saying: "Its okay - we'll survive this no matter what. God is with us."

In the midst of disasters, even if their houses are damaged, their cars wrecked, their furnitures and household appliance ruined, their crops ruined, their businesses affected - Filipinos still manage to smile.

I have seen similar disasters in the United States and other countries. I had not seen any smiling faces amidst flood waters or tornado or earthquake wreckage. Of course, that's understandable, who can smile in the face of so much pain and sufferings?

The Filipino can.

Note: The California State Bar honors Atty. Laguatan as one of only less than 29 US lawyers officially certified continuously for over 20 years as an Specialist/Expert on US immigration law. He also does business, accident injury and death cases. San Francisco Bay Area info: 455 Hickey Blvd., Ste. 516, Daly City, Ca 94015 tel. 650-991-1154 fax 650-991-1186 Email laguatanlaw@gmail.com

VIRTUAL REALITY: China will dominate the world

By Tony Lopez

Chinese President Hu Jintao was lionized in Washington and DC when he made a three-day state visit to the United States January 18 to 20.

Said the New York Times on January 21: “Unlike Mr. Hu’s previous trip five years ago, when he was not accorded full honors and a series of gaffes marred the visit, this one seems to have gone exactly according to script—which is how Beijing likes largely ceremonial events like state visits.
There was a 21-gun salute, a gala dinner, and a live news conference that went about as well as could be expected for the press-shy Mr. Hu. Business deals were signed, a small child was hugged, and a major speech was delivered.”

The visit echoed the Chinese Communist Party’s buzzwords—stability, harmony, cooperation.

“The positive, constructive, cooperative US-China relationship is good for the United States,” beamed an obviously pleased Barack Obama opening the joint conference with Hu at the White House East room, January 19. The US President noted that “we’re now exporting more than $100 billion a year in goods and services to China, which supports more than half a million American jobs. Our exports to China are growing nearly twice as fast as our exports to the rest of the world, making it a key part of my goal of doubling American exports and keeping America competitive in the 21st century.”

“Cooperation between our countries is also good for China. China’s extraordinary economic growth has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty,” Obama added. He attributed that growth to the Chinese people and also, “to decades of stability in Asia made possible by America’s forward presence in the region, by strong trade with America and by an open international economic system championed by the USA.”

Responding, Hu was less effusive and less detailed. “China-US cooperation has great significance for our two countries and the world,” the Chinese president agreed with Obama. “The two sides should firmly adhere to the right direction of our relationship; respect each other’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and development interests, promote the long-term sound and steady growth of China-US relations, and make even greater contributions to maintaining and promoting world peace and development,” he declared.

“China is firmly committed to the path of peaceful development and a win-win strategy of opening up.

China is a friend and partner of all countries and China’s development is an opportunity for the world,” Hu concluded his opening statement at the press conference.
The message of both the US and China seem to be—we need each other. We both are important to each other, to Asia, and to the rest of the world.

Clearly, however, China is going to be the dominant country in this century.

In a study, banking giant HSBC predicts that between 2010 and 2030, China will have the highest per capita income growth, 227 percent, even as the growth of its working population will slow down because of its one-China policy.

By 2030, projects another venerable bank, Standard Chartered, China will become the richest nation with 24-percent share of GDP, twice the US share.

Accordingly, China has been behaving like the sure winner in the superpower race.

“Strip the charm from Chinese diplomacy and only the offensive is left,” sneers The Economist in its January 15 to 21 issue. “Sino-American relations are at their lowest ebb since a Chinese fighter collided with an American EP-3 spyplane a decade ago,” the respected magazine said.
China has unveiled a new anti-ship missile and a stealth fighter jet whose development US Defense Secretary Robert Gates thought would take years the Chinese to do. Well, the stealth fighter jet was tested just when Gates was in China. Until then, only the US had a stealth fighter jet. Relates The Economist:

“Sino-American relations have been deteriorating for a year. On his first visit to China in 2009 President Barack Obama was treated with disdain, and the Chinese government reacted with fury when he sanctioned arms sales to Taiwan that were neither a surprise nor game-changing and saw the Dalai Lama—also routine for American presidents. China broke off military-to-military contacts and officials suddenly stopped returning American diplomats’ calls.”

In Asia, “China has more forcefully asserted sovereignty over great swathes of the South China Sea. It overreacted after a Chinese trawler rammed a Japanese coastguard vessel in contested waters controlled by Japan. It got into a spat with India over visas for Kashmiri residents. And it failed to condemn the North Korean sinking of a South Korean corvette and the shelling of a South Korean island.

Even Africa, once extremely friendly to China, is having doubts. Anger in Zambia is growing over Chinese managers who shot at mine workers.”

Warns The Economist: Don’t underestimate America . . . America is certainly losing clout in relative terms, but it will remain the world’s most fearsome military power for a very long time.”

FROM THE CAPITOL: Protect Language as a Civil Right

By Senator Leland Yee

While speaking one’s native language is protected in cases of employment and housing under state law, such protections are not provided under the state’s civil rights act, which prohibits discrimination within business establishments. This is why I reintroduced landmark legislation to prohibit businesses from denying service to a patron because of the language he or she speaks. Two years ago, then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed similar legislation.

Like Senate Bill (SB) 242 which was introduced in 2009, SB 111 would add protections for language, which prohibits discrimination within business establishments.

The issue for SB 242 originally stemmed from a proposed policy announced in 2008 by the Ladies Professional Golf Association (LPGA) to suspend players who do not speak English. Despite there being no relevance to the sport, the LPGA claimed that it was important for players to be able to interact with American media and event sponsors. Ironically, many of the sponsors are international companies and a number of the tournaments are not held in the United States. No other professional sports league in the United States has such a mandate.

Recently, a similar case occurred at Delano Regional Hospital in Kern County. Filipino medical staff and workers were singled out and given direct instruction not to speak Tagalog or other Filipino languages, even during their break times.

It is quite disheartening that in the 21st century any organization would think such a policy is acceptable. Discrimination based on national origin and ethnicity will not be tolerated. Individuals have a right to speak their native language when it is not affecting their work or in this case, the care of patients. Speaking one’s language is clearly protected by federal and state law.

The workers at Delano Regional Medical Center deserve greater respect from the hospital’s management. It is particularly discriminatory to single out Filipino languages over others. It is an insult to the professionalism of Filipino American medical workers throughout the State who work to keep the people of California healthy and well.

Workers at the medical center have filed a suit against the hospital, the passing of this bill will ensure that such discrimination will not happen again. It will give individuals freedom to speak their own language within business establishments without unwarranted discrimination.

Although the LPGA rescinded their proposal after objections over 50 civil rights organizations, hospital management has yet to rescind the policy. While their case is likely covered by existing law, SB 111 may strengthen their case as such protections would also be covered by the Unruh Civil Rights Act - the state’s main civil rights law – which prohibits discrimination within business establishments, generally to protect patrons from not receiving service based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, and sexual orientation.

SB 111 would prohibit a business from adopting a policy that requires, limits, or prohibits the use of any language within a business establishment. The bill allows a language restriction to be imposed as long as notification has been provided of the circumstances when the language restriction is required. SB 111 does not impose any additional requirements on businesses other than to respect the dignity and diversity of their patrons.

STREET TALK: MBCs Integrity Certification System

By Greg Macabenta

President Noynoy Aquino’s vow to cleanse the government of corruption will soon get a major boost. You see, whenever people talk about fighting corruption, the only ones put on the carpet, the dogs who need to be fumigated and rid of lice, are the public officials. The other players in the Corruption Game are hardly ever mentioned. And yet, we all know, where there are bribe takers, there are bribe givers.

Now comes the Makati Business Club, announcing that it is launching the “Integrity Initiative” in cooperation with the European Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines.

According to this news item that I read a few days ago, the new MBC executive director, Peter A. Perfecto, in announcing the initiation of this very laudable undertaking, stressed that it is “high up on the agenda” of the organization.

According to Perfecto, MBC plans to get Philippine businesses to “sign on to an integrity pledge where the CEOs will ban bribes, conduct ethics training and improve the transparency of financial reporting.”

This specifically refers to “big public-private sector projects” for which bids will be sought.
The MBC plans “to establish guidelines and internal mechanisms to guard against corrupt practices.” The result will be an “integrity certification system” that will be used by the government in screening bid participants. In other words, the equivalent of a Good Housekeeping Seal.

I guess it’s fair to assume that only those companies that are “certified” to be of unquestioned integrity will be allowed to bid on government projects.

This is fantastic! Can you imagine a bidding process where only those who have passed what, hopefully, will be a stringent “integrity screening process” will be allowed to participate?
Wow!

Without meaning to cast aspersion on the members of MBC, or on the Philippine business community as a whole, we have to hope that there will be enough “qualified bidders” after such a rigid screening process.

I’m reminded of the old joke concerning the mayor of Manila who issued a directive to the Manila Police Department (this was before the PNP took over) to the effect that ugly people should be picked off the streets of the city and brought to the Luneta. There they would be lined up before a firing squad and shot.

The following day, not one member of Manila’s Finest could be found out on the streets. Neither was the mayor.

Perhaps a reality check is in order. I assume that a very high IQ (Integrity Quotient) will be established by MBC, otherwise, why bother with such a program at all? But before these very high standards of honesty and integrity are enforced, perhaps Perfecto and the directors of MBC may want to subject their member organizations to a gradual cleansing process, pretty much the way tap water is made to go through a purification process before it is certified safe to drink.
Perhaps the board of MBC can first announce an Integrity Amnesty for all businessmen and corporations, not just members of the club. Those who want to take advantage of it should be required to fill out a form in which they will confess all the instances where their integrity was below MBC standards.

Of course, the members of the board of MBC and the officers of their respective firms will lead by example. There will be no recrimination. No gossiping. No questions asked.

In fact, Perfecto will kick off the process of exorcising the Demons of Corruption by declaring, “Let him who has no sin among you cast the first stone.”

Having done that (and it is assumed that no one will dare cast the first stone among the members of MBC), all those who desire to avail of the Integrity Amnesty will undergo an Integrity Retreat, similar to the Cursillo.

They will all be contained in one dark hall, so dark that they cannot recognize each other. They will then be asked to confess their sins aloud, shouting them out and asking for forgiveness. Every single transgression will be declared, the instances when they rigged bids, bribed government officials, agreed to pad the cost of public works projects, cheated on their corporate and personal taxes and, otherwise, contributed to the culture of corruption in the country.
Having done that, they will then be submerged in a pool spring water, where every iota of corruption in their entire being will be washed away.

Having gone through that process, they will be made to swear over a stack of Bibles that they will, henceforth, live lives of honesty, integrity and nobility. After that, they will be blessed by the bishops (who, themselves, will undergo their own cleansing process).

All the “graduates” of this process of cleansing and fumigation will be entitled to the Integrity Amnesty, all their past corrupt practices being forgiven and forgotten.

Only at that point will it be realistic for MBC to institute the “integrity certification system.”
Admittedly, setting the Integrity Quotient too high may be a turn-off for some members of MBC. I think it is reasonable to allow some flexibility.

For instance, cheating on wives or husbands or having more than one of either should not be included in the list of forbidden practices – unless, they have a direct impact on the BIQ (Business Integrity Quotient).

Cheating on one’s golf scores may also be forgivable, a precedent having already been set in this regard. A public official was accused of cheating on his golf score, yet was allowed to occupy his integrity-sensitive position.

There may be other exceptions that the MBC board may want to consider. In the United States, government officials, especially those who are in a position to grant favors, such as contracts or advantageous legislation, are strictly prohibited from receiving free tickets to concerts or major sports events or expense-paid overseas trips or privileges and favors that could unduly influence them.

Now, we know that little favors and privileges like these are normal in our beloved country and no one ever makes a fuss over them. Surely, ringside tickets to a Pacquiao fight in Las Vegas, plus plush hotel quarters and an open tab on food, drinks and girls, aren’t too much to give a politician. Didn’t the husband of the past president himself justify such perks?

And, surely, spending several thousand dollars on a dinner in New York doesn’t qualify as abusive, if the folks who are wined and dined are important officials of the country. Again, didn’t the past president justify that, too?

As one client of mine put it, when I was still working with an ad agency in Manila, “Anything that’s consumable is forgivable.” That, of course, refers to gifts of food and drinks.

Besides, in this age of multimillion peso (and multimillion dollar) kickbacks and overpricing, a night out, even with a harem, is small change.

So, there.
Hopefully, Peter Perfecto and the MBC board will succeed in their announced campaign to curb corrupt practices in their dealings with government and in their plan to establish their “integrity certification system.”

We will all watch and wait with bated breath.
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

VIRTUAL REALITY: Tetangco’s tough act to follow

By Tony Lopez

Bangko Sentral Governor Amando M. Tetangco Jr. hosts the annual cocktail reception for the banking community recently. It is Say Tetangco’s way to thank the banking industry and, probably, to express his valedictory.

Press reports indicate at least three people could be BSP governor Bank of the Philippine Islands President Aurelio “Gigi” Montinola 3rd, and two deputy governors of BSP—Nestor Espenilla and Diwa Guinigundo.

Brilliant but unassuming, Montinola epitomizes the best in a commercial bank CEO. He made the Ayala-owned Bank of the Philippine Islands immensely profitable by recasting its stodgy image and making it more inclusive with its focus on consumer banking rather than corporate, and by charging the more reasonable interest rates and bank fees.

In fact, in this decade of the 21st century Montinola sees financial accessibility and inclusive banking as the main trend, along with increasing Asean regional integration, continuing development of capital markets, and greater penetration of Internet and mobile banking. The Ayala group has the first-mover advantage in mobile banking.

Still, among the worst Philippine central bank governors were those who used to head private commercial banks. Jobo Fernandez (1984 to 1990) punished the economy with unheard of 44-percent interest rates that forced the economy to freeze. Joey Cuisia (1990 to 1993) forced the state to absorb more than P400 billion in foreign exchange losses of the private sector, which made the wrong bet on the peso. So huge were the losses that the old Central Bank had to be phased out (I didn’t say it went bankrupt) and a new Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas had to be established as the central monetary authority and to hide the losses.

The best central bank governors were insiders or those who spent years in public service. Like Miguel Cuaderno, governor from 1949 to 1960. He presided over the Philippines’ rise as the second most prosperous economy in Asia, after Japan.

Or locally educated Gregorio Licaros Jr. (governor from 1970 to 1981) who stabilized the peso and the payments systems in the first foreign credit crisis of the 1970s and rescued the Philippines from recession after the Great Flood of 1972.

Or Harvard-trained lawyer Gabriel Singson (1993 to 1999). He ushered in major reforms that enabled the Philippines to ride out the adverse effects of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis.
And of course, you have the economist Tetangco who has masters in public policy and administration from the University of Wisconsin. He has spent 37 years at BSP.

Tetangco’s record is a tough act to follow. “We delivered on our mandate to provide stability that helps ensure balanced and sustained economic growth,” he says.

Under Tetangco and Team BSP, the central bank controlled inflation, brought down interest rates, strengthened the peso, boosted foreign reserves to record high ($62 billion by end-2010), stabilized the banking and financial system, and in a way, saved the Philippines from recession in 2008 and 2009 even as two-thirds of the globe was gobbled up by the worst economic slowdown in 80 years.

For ordinary Filipinos, taming inflation meant increased purchasing power, which partly explains the boom in malls and consumer spending.

More important, BSP’s inclusive banking or micro finance program meant reaching out to what is called the Bottom of the Pyramid, the 90 percent who are mainly poor and yet constitute the majority of the population.

The Philippine economy has posted 47 consecutive quarters of growth beginning with the first full year of President Joseph Estrada in 1999. Of those 47 quarters, 22 were scored during Tetangco’s watch when the GDP averaged annually—for the first time in a long while—5.4-percent growth.

With population growing at 2 percent per year, the economy was growing at 3.4 percent (5.4 percent minus 2 percent), the first time that economic growth exceeded population growth rate. The result is significant, if not dramatic, per capita income growth.

The year just ended was a particularly good year. The economy expanded by 7.5 percent in the first three quarters of 2010, the best growth rate in 22 years. For the first time, the value of economic output, plus income from abroad (the gross national product) hit P9 trillion, which at P44 to $1, is worth $204.5 billion. With a population of 94 million, the country has per capita income of $2,175.5, more than double from the $967.3 in 2001 when President Arroyo became president.

BSP’s work is measured usually in three pillars—prices, the balance of payments, and the stability of the banking and financial system. “We did quite well insofar as the three pillars of central banking are concerned,” Tetangco asserts with justifiable pride.

Inflation went single digit—averaging 3.8 percent in January to November. The payments system, in surplus by $13 billion, a record, inspires confidence. The banking system is sound and stable. Foreign reserves are $62 billion. We are rich.
Congratulations, Gov Tetangco.

FROM THE CAPITOL: Promoting Child Safety

By Senator Leland Yee

In effort to continue to promote child safety in our state, I reintroduced a measure to help make California ski slopes the safest in the nation for kids last week. Among the provisions of Senate Bill 105, all minors would be required to wear helmets while skiing and snowboarding.

Last session, then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an identical measure – SB 880 – but vetoed a companion bill that called for ski resorts to develop and publish safety plans.

Enactment of SB 880 was contingent on the signing of AB 1652 – authored by then-Assemblyman and now Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones – and thus the helmet mandate did not go into effect. This year, I introduced the bill as a standalone measure.

It is imperative that we do not have another ski season in which children are left at such serious risk. California’s ski slopes are perhaps the last area of recreation where we do not have basic safety standards in place for children.

Despite repeated warnings from public health experts, professional athletes, and ski resorts, each winter brings news of hundreds of unnecessary tragedies for the failure to wear a helmet. SB 105 will significantly reduce instances of traumatic brain injury or death for such a vulnerable population.

According to the National Ski Areas Association, 19 of 38 people who died on ski slopes in the 2009-2010 season were not wearing helmets at the time of the injury.

SB 105 will also require resorts to post signs about the law on trail maps, websites, and other locations throughout the property. Following the lead of California’s bicycle helmet law, SB 105 will imposed a fine of not more than $25 on the parents of children who fail to wear a helmet while skiing or snowboarding.

In signing this piece of legislation last session, Schwarzenegger wrote: “This measure will help prevent avoidable injuries to children while engaging in dangerous activities. While I am signing this bill to demonstrate my support for this measure, I recognize that it will not take effect”
Last year, the Dr. Phil Show focused on the need for greater helmet use by children while skiing and snowboarding. On the show, Dr. Phil McGraw announced his support for my legislation, stating, “I think this is a very timely and important issue to address as kids do dangerous things, and as adults, we have to use our foresight to protect them from themselves,” said McGraw.

Half of all skiing deaths are caused by a head injury. Recent studies show that when helmets are used, the incidence of traumatic brain or head injury has been reduced 29 percent to 56 percent. The Federal Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) has found that more than 7,000 head injuries per year on the slopes in the U.S. could be prevented or reduced in severity by the use of a helmet. The CPSC study also showed that “for children under 15 years of age, 53 percent of head injuries (approximately 2,600 of the 4,950 head injuries annually) are addressable by use of a helmet.

How can California not set minimum standards for children’s ski safety when the data is so conclusive that helmets save lives and reduce severity of head injuries? We correctly do not allow parental choice for car seats and seat belts or basic vaccinations for children attending schools; nor should a helmet for kids on ski slopes be optional.

This legislation has been supported by the California Psychological Association, American College of Emergency Physicians, California Brain Injury Association, California’s Children’s Hospital Association, California Chiropractic Association, California Hospital Association, California Ski Industry Association, California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Psychiatric Association, California Travel Industry Association, Children’s Advocacy Institute, and the National Academy of Neuropsychology, among others.

STREET TALK: More Bark Than Bite

By Greg Macabenta

Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska who was vice-presidential running mate of Republican presidential bet, Senator John McCain, is on the crosshairs of U.S. opinion makers.
Last fall, in her website, Palin featured 20 congressional districts targeted for Republican takeover in the November mid-term elections. To dramatize her point, she showed the Democratic members of Congress on cross hairs. Among them was Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona.

Last Saturday, Giffords was shot in the head by a lone gunman who also killed six others and wounded 14 in the shooting rampage. This happened at a shopping center in Tucson, Arizona, where Giffords had set up a booth at which she met with her constituents. Giffords is still in critical condition but has shown signs of slow recovery.

President Barack Obama and Washington officialdom paused for a moment of silence last Monday, as they and the rest of America struggled to understand what could have prompted 22- year-old Jared Loughner to go on the killing spree.

There are indications that Loughner had purposely sought out Giffords. According to government prosecutors, before he took a taxi to the shopping center, he had scrawled on an envelope the words “my assassination” and “Giffords.”

While the gunman is reported to have a history of mental instability, some opinion makers are wondering if the rampage may have been triggered by the increasingly inflammatory rhetoric being employed by conservative talk radio hosts, as well as Sarah Palin, during her election campaign sorties and in subsequent media appearances, Palin does have a tendency to be over-dramatic, making up lack of substance with motherhood statements and hellfire-and-damnation rhetoric. But Palin’s language is benign compared to that used by conservative talk radio commentators who, almost literally, call for the scalp of those they consider liberals.

As a result of the Arizona shooting, some Democratic lawmakers are considering new legislation that would include members of Congress in current laws that restrict images and language that threaten the president of the United States. Rep. Robert Brady (D) of Pennsylvania is said to be preparing a bill that would outlaw the use of threatening language against lawmakers.

Is there a red flag here for Philippine public officials who have become targets of the increasingly vitriolic rhetoric of radio and TV commentators and newspaper columnists?

I don't think so. If we are to go by past experience, it is unlikely that the average Pinoy will be agitated enough by commentaries to be motivated to assassinate any public official, even those who have become virtual media whipping boys, like the members of the Supreme Court.

In fact, in our country, the reverse is true. The public officials are the ones who are known to liquidate media commentators and opinion makers, as well as political enemies.

The assassination of Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto wouldn’t have happened in the Philippines. Pinoys do not seem to have the kind of temperament that would drive us to pick up a gun and hunt down and kill a public official, no matter how corrupt or incompetent.

We love to make loud noises against crooked public officials, but in the course of our railing and ranting, we let off steam and, subsequently, lose interest.

In the first place, it takes us a loooooong loooong time to get really outraged over even the most brazen official abuses. Small wonder, it took centuries before we could mount a revolution and sustain it enough to achieve a measure of success.

In the case of Marcos, it took a combination of Ninoy Aquino’s assassination, the breakaway of Ramos and Enrile, the rhetoric of Cardinal Sin and the support of civil society for the EDSA revolution to explode.

But, even in this historic display of People Power, which awed and impressed the entire world, we could not sustain our passion enough to see genuine reforms through and to punish those whom we perceived to have abused us.

Indeed, we seem incapable of the passion and the fanaticism that characterized the French Revolution. I don’t think anyone of us can imagine lining up official thieves and plunderers at the guillotine.

This is what makes us such a remarkable people. We are imbued with the talent for hospitality and friendliness, the virtue of charity and compassion, the inability to hold a grudge, the readiness to forgive and forget.

The politicians have a word for it. Uto-uto.

I can’t think of the English equivalent for that word. But it means being easily led around by the nose, sold a bill of goods, made happy and satisfied with consuelo de bobo, and fried in our own lard.

Even our commentators and opinion makers in media are like that. You can count on the fingers of one hand those can sustain their outrage against such obvious objects of disdain as Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

The politicians and public officials know this only too well. They know that, no matter how grievous their abuses may be, they can always count on the Pinoys to forgive and eventually to forget.

Thus they have no compunction about plundering the country and committing all kinds of violations against the citizenry. They know that after all the sound and the fury, the people will cool down, lose interest, and even forget what it was they got so mad about. And, thus, the politicians know that they can plunder and inflict abuses all over again.

In America, I’m often asked to explain the psychology of the Pinoy.

How can we stage a revolution and drive leaders out of the country for having abused us and robbed us blind, and then welcome them back and elect them to high office again?

How can we eject a supposedly corrupt and incompetent president, like Erap Estrada, and then give him the second highest number of votes in the last presidential elections?

How can we accuse an incumbent president, like Arroyo, of every conceivable violation of the public trust and yet allow her to remain a power behind some of the most important offices in the land?

In the aftermath of the Arizona shooting rampage, my response is simple enough:
“Our bark is worse than our bite.”

No wonder, we are abused over and over and over again.

(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

VIRTUAL REALITY: On Cebu Air, AirAsia and SMB

By: Tony Lopez

Cebu Pacific’s share price has taken a beating following an announcement that Tonyboy Cojuangco’s group has tied up with the region’s pioneer and biggest, AirAsia, to operate budget flights in and out of the Philippines.

A subsidiary of giant JG Summit, Cebu Pacific made its IPO debut on October 26 at an offering price of P125 per share—a rather huge overprice considering that the airline made money only in the year preceding its IPO despite having been a low-cost carrier for over a decade.
At the time of its IPO in October 2010, the P125 price gave Cebu a market cap of P76.65 billion. At about the same time in October, San Miguel Brewery, a real monopoly with 95 percent of the local beer market and more than a hundred years of consistent profitability, was valued by the market at only P125.36 billion, a premium of 63.5 percent over Cebu Pacific which has an unsustainable near-monopoly of budget flights.

True enough, hitting a high of P133.50 after its listing, a gain of 6.8 percent from the offering price, Cebu’s share price has steadily nosedived—reaching a low of P82 on December 17, the date AirAsia announced its intention to operate in the Philippines. At P82, Cebu is a loss of 34.4 percent from its P125 offering price and a loss of 38.57 percent from its high of P133.50 per share. Today, at P111 per share, Cebu stockholders are losing money at the rate of 11.2 percent. The airline is valued only at P68.68 billion, down P8.65 billion.

In contrast, SMB has risen dramatically scaling a 52-week high of P31.95 per share before correcting to P29.90 on December 28 after languishing at around P9.93 for several weeks prior to the run-up that began in mid-November 2010. Today, SMB is worth P453.83 billion, a massive gain of P300 billion, or 197 percent in less than two months. The market is valuing SMB for what it really is—a strong monopoly, no rivals, robust cash flow, and a history of consistent consumer focus. EBITDA [earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization] is about P80 billion in 2011. (Disclosure: I don’t have SMB shares).

If you invested P1 million in Cebu Pacific in October, it would be worth just P890,000 today. If you placed the same P1 million in SMB in October, it would be worth P3.65 million. In October, your Pl million could buy a Toyota Innova. This month, P3.65 million can buy you a late model BMW 3 Series plus some change to buy a Rolex classic watch.

Cebu Air’s business model is flawed. It is easy to replicate. That is why news of the entry of AirAsia readily sent jitters to the market, prompting investors to dump the stock. On December 17, the day the share price sank to its record low, more than 3 million shares were sold valued at P326 million, 5 percent of the company’s market cap. Another 5 percent, or P353 million were unloaded the following day, December 20 as the stock recovered to P105.

Besides, I think consumers are beginning to get fed up with Cebu Air’s shabby treatment. Cebu hates autistic children. It hates doctors carrying transplant kidneys. It hates half-full flights. So it combines two half-full flights flying within three hours of each other into a single full flight. The problem is that it doesn’t bother to inform the passengers of the two flights beforehand that their flights had been consolidated.

You are a passenger in the first flight. You learn about the cancelled flight. So you check in for the second flight. You will be charged for late check-in—for a flight that has been cancelled! That’s how unreasonable Cebu Air is.

The most successful low-cost carriers are those that treat their passengers fairly and decently. Like Southwest of the US. And AirAsia. To its credit, despite cost-cutting and late entry into budget flights, Philippines Airlines has remained true to its promise of treating its passengers well.

Air Asia has disrupted the airline business in every country it penetrated, offering fares discounted by 50 percent. Its entry has meant low-cost carriers accounting for 49 percent of domestic flights in Australia, 34 percent in Thailand, and 59 percent in India, according to figures by Forbes Asia, which named Air Asia founder and CEO Tony Fernandes its Businessman of the Year 2010.

Fernandes launched AirAsia in 2001 as a no-frills airline patterned after Ryanair of Ireland. Today, according to Forbes, AirAsia has 8,000 employees, 100 planes, over 100 million passengers a year, and 140 routes, with hubs in Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. The Philippines is the only major Southeast Asian country where AirAsia does not operate. AirAsia makes about 23-percent net profit for every $100 of revenue.
So now, let the dog fight begin.

FROM THE CAPITOL: Fresh Start to a New Year

From Senator Leland Yee

January 1, 2011 marks the start of another New Year. As another chapter is written in our memoirs, we can reflect on the events of the previous year, recalling all the events that made it one to remember. While we walk through the memories, let us also take the lessons learned to make this New Year an even better one.

As we embark on this New Year, we think of what good things we would like showered upon ourselves, our families and friends. As a Senator representing the largest Filipino and Filipino American population outside of the Philippines, I am proud to be an ally for the community. In the years I’ve spent serving this community I’ve had the pleasure to meet many Filipino and Filipino Americans and create lasting friendships. As an immigrant child myself, I have great admiration for the many individuals who strive to work hard in order to create a better opportunity for themselves and their families.

There is a long history of strength and perseverance in the Filipino and Fil-Am community. Every day, Filipinos across nations go out to work in a wide range of jobs. They volunteer in countless ways to improve their communities. They raise their children, provide for their families, and help to keep this great country running. As we enter this new year, I am confident that together we will be able to overcome any hardships that may come in the way and will be able to collectively achieve out goals and accomplishments for this year.

In the start of my second term as Senator of the 8th Senate District, I am committed to serving my constituency. My office has many things in store for the community. We will continue to provide the services essential to the community and provide the assistance needed to help you. Look for information in the coming months on community events and opportunities in the district, including our annual Community Breakfast in San Francisco and San Mateo counties, and the annual Richmond District Health Fair.

Another event in store is yet another celebration for Filipino-American History Month. As you recall, the California State Legislature passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 48 in 2009 to officially declare that month, and every October thereafter as such. Over the course of the month, I enjoyed the company of friends in the Filipin American community to celebrate this momentous occasion and I look forward to celebrating again with the community. I hope that you will join me again as we celebrate the history, culture, traditions, and heritage of Filipino and Filipino Americans in the United States.

STREET TALK: The Grateful Pinoy

By Greg Macabenta

“Ingrato!”
To be called that is to be a pariah in our country.

Gratitude is considered an enduring virtue among us, as a people. It said in the same breath with loyalty, faithfulness, constancy, nobility, the Bayanihan Spirit.

Because we owe our community for the good life we live, and we owe God for his blessings, and we owe our parents for raising us, and our country for nurturing us, we are sworn to be ever grateful to them and to demonstrate this in thought, word and deed.

Gratitude is the underpinning of the dollar remittance bonanza that keeps the Philippine economy above water. Overseas Pinoys feel they owe a debt of gratitude to their parents and relatives, which they must repay with financial support.

Gratitude is also the glue that keeps the extended family intact, and the reason why Filipino parents need not worry about saving up for retirement, the way senior citizens in America do. We feel we owe it to our parents to take care of them in their old age. Because American children are left on their own upon reaching the age of maturity, they don’t consider themselves as indebted to their parents as Pinoys are.

Unfortunately, this virtue of gratitude also happens to be one of the most formidable obstacles that Noynoy Aquino must overcome if he is to fulfill his vow to rid our country of corruption.
In many cases, there will be no win-win option for him. In order to pin down and convict some of the culprits, he may have to be ungrateful or disloyal to them. Even his own relatives may not like him for it.

Gratitude is one of the main causes of corruption in our country. We are grateful to a fault. We feel compelled to repay a debt of gratitude, whether right or wrong. For good or ill.

Take it from Clarita Garcia, wife of accused multi-million peso plunderer, Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia (who is probably “very grateful” to certain quarters in the office of the Ombudsman for a controversial sweetheart plea bargain).

In explaining to U.S. authorities the unexplainable wealth amassed by her husband, she stated, quite candidly: “My husband… receives gifts and gratitude money from several Philippine companies that are awarded military contracts to build roads, bridges and military housing….my husband is the final signature for funding the contracts…My husband will always thank the person that provides the gratitude. If someone stops by the house with a gift or gratitude, my husband insists that their name and telephone number be taken so they may be called and personally thanked.”

“Gratitude money” may sound like a less vulgar way to describe a bribe, certainly more innocent sounding than “kickback” or “padulas” or “lagay.” But it’s just as destructive.

Despite all the vows of Noynoy Aquino and his fellow “reformers” to “go after the crooks” and to “clean up the bureaucracy,” the harsh reality is that the culture of gratitude will likely prevail. It is simply against the nature of the Pinoy to be ungrateful.

Indeed, a Chain of Gratitude links nearly sector of Philippine society and of government, influencing the way decisions are made, contracts are awarded, the law is enforced and alliances are sealed.

Civil servants owe their jobs to a padrino who is either a politician, a local official or a very influential businessman. So, why shouldn’t they show their gratitude by giving them special treatment?

Jueteng lords are grateful to local officials and police authorities for their unhampered operations. The officials are, in turn, grateful to the gambling lords for their wealth and their profligate lifestyle.

Princes of the church are grateful to politicians for their patronage. Parish priests are grateful to gambling lords for their donations. The politicians and gambling lords are, in turn, grateful to the church officials for their prayers and blessings.

Politicians are grateful to their big business financiers for their campaign funds. The financiers are, turn, grateful to the politicians for the public works contracts and for bending the law and the rules in their favor.

Businesses are grateful to the BIR and customs officials for the growth of their enterprises and their huge savings in taxes. The officials are, in turn, grateful to the businessmen for the payoffs.

The Game of Gratitude operates above the law, under the law and around the law. Everything is possible, allowable and negotiable in the name of gratitude. In fact, one does not even need to directly owe somebody in order to express appropriate gratitude. In our system of compadres, ninongs, ninangs, kamag-anaks, kaklase, ka-propesyon and ka-shooting range partner, we have the equivalent of America’s Old Boy network.

It is pervasive. And because it is so effective, the process of establishing a Chain of Gratitude doesn’t happen by accident. It is done according to a grand design. Through intermarriage. Business partnerships. Political alliances. Wedding and baptismal sponsorships. Golf club memberships. And even religious affiliations.

Of course, the fastest way to gain other people’s gratitude is with loads of money. Gratitude can always be bought. For instance, the members of Congress are grateful to the president for approving their pork barrel allocations. The president, on the other hand, is grateful to the solons for their cooperation and support.

The most grateful was Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who was spared several impeachment attempts with the support of a grateful House of Representatives.

But in our culture, money isn’t the only factor that strengthens the Chain of Gratitude. Once a relationship is established, the mutually beneficial relationship becomes personal and intimate, and so does the corresponding gratitude that comes with it.

Thus, it is considered an act of treachery for one to allow his loyalty to be bought by a higher bidder. The debt of gratitude to the original benefactor is often stronger than the lure of cash.
Gratitude also influences the perception of right and wrong. In our culture, it is sometimes more right to break or bend the law than to allow the arrest or conviction of someone to whom a debt of gratitude is owed.

And, of course, there are always ways of rationalizing the way the law is bent or interpreted or even misinterpreted.

This brings us to the series of decisions that the members of the Supreme Court have rendered that appear to favor their benefactor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Are the justices of the Supreme Court simply being grateful? And isn’t it the right thing to do?

After all, how can a Supreme Court justice bear the shame of being dubbed “Ingrato”?

(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)