VIRTUAL REALITY: 39 years after, the lessons from martial law

By Tony Lopez

THIRTY-NINE years ago this month, Ferdinand E. Marcos declared martial law. The day was September 21, a Friday in 1972 but it was two days later, September 23, when Marcos announced it.
I was a victim of martial law. I lost my cozy Manila Times job as a senior business reporter and construction editor. The Times then had 70 percent of the market, more than the circulation of the three other dailies combined.
By October 1972, I had joined the Mainichi Shimbun, Japan’s oldest newspaper, as Manila stringer, to help locate the Japanese straggler Hiroo Onoda, after his colleague was killed by army soldiers on Lubang island the previous month, September. Onoda surrendered in March 1974.
I also joined The Times Journal in 1973 and became its business editor in 1976, the youngest business editor then. In 1978, l joined Asiaweek and became its senior correspondent for 25 years. My Asiaweek work gave me my TOYM in international journalism.
The martial law rule regime had a healthy respect for foreign correspondents. On the other hand, the military censors didn’t understand business journalism. So I thrived—both as a foreign correspondent and as a business journalist.
Looking back, I see martial law was about leadership and taking charge.
In the early 1970s, Philippine society was riven by discord and class war. Only 100 families, the oligarchs, ruled the economy and its politics. Social inequity was revolting. Communist guerillas were active in the countryside. Muslim separatists were arming themselves, using petrodollars. The communists were about to overtake South Vietnam and from there, it was feared, leap-frog to the rest of Southeast Asia.
Marcos was the subject of assassination plots. Marcos deployed the powers of the presidency against his enemies and the enemies of the state.
Martial law enabled Marcos to impose strongman rule for nine years, from September 1972 to 1981 when he was supposed to have lifted it, and to rule by decree for 14 years, from September 1972 to February 1986 when he was ousted by a four-day Church-backed People Power revolt that eventually inspired some 30 other countries ruled by despots to return to democracy.
Was Marcos’s martial law bad? The answer is yes and no.
Yes, because martial law destroyed the Philippines’ carefully cultivated image as the show window of democracy of Asia.
But that democracy had been made fragile by a greedy economic and political elite and by a widening gap between the rich and the poor which a nascent but growing communist guerilla movement, inspired and funded by Red China, and by a stirrings of self-determination by an even more impoverished Muslim population, tried to exploit to their advantage.
Yes, because martial law led to many abuses and human rights violations never before experienced since the four years of the Japanese occupation.
Martial rule also freed the military from the barracks to intervene in purely military affairs and share power with the civilian government.
After martial law, no president was ever safe from coup attempts and military destabilization. Marcos had one coup—a very successful one, leading to his ouster. Corazon Aquino had nine, all unsuccessful with two of them bloody, and Joseph Estrada had one, also very successful.
No, because martial law was in the main, good for the country, especially during its first five years.
It instilled discipline among the people, much unlike today’s matuwid na daan concept of President Benigno Aquino III. People went home early and spent more time with their families. The drug lords were checked by the televised killing by musketry of a notorious drug syndicate leader.
More than 200,000 firearms were seized from private hands. Private armies were disbanded, almost overnight. With the ensuing peace and stability came the economic payback.
In 1973, the Philippines produced a rice surplus. In 1974, the country scored its highest ever, by then, annual GDP growth rate of 9.8 percent.
With the commodities boom, exports ballooned. Martial law conditions enabled the country to cope with the debilitating effect of the first major global energy crisis, the quadrupling of the price of oil in 1974.
In 1975, Marcos granted naturalization to ethnic Chinese businessmen by decree.
“It allowed droves of ethnic Chinese to become citizens in a few months’ time, simply upon the dictator’s signature, empowering them to own lands and enter industries constitutionally banned to foreigners, thereby releasing their entrepreneurial energies,” wrote Inquirer columnist Rigoberto Tiglao in his Sept. 22 column, “Demystifying Marcos’s martial law regime”.
Marcos united the elite economic and political class. He united an archipelago of 7,017 islands.
Tiglao wrote: “For the Castillian-descended elites, Marcos reminded them of a dictator they admired: Generalissimo Francisco Franco who defeated the Spanish communists.”
“The Sorianos’ and Ayalas’ conglomerates grew by leaps and bounds during martial law. It was our economic and ideological elite that embraced and supported the martial law regime, and made up its main pillar—more than the military,” concluded Tiglao, a self-confessed communist guerilla during the martial law years.
The lesson to draw then from Marcos’s nine years of martial law and 14 years of rule by decree: Leadership and taking charge.
Interviewed by this writer shortly after he was sent into exile in Hawaii, Marcos said one of his legacies was “saving the Philippines from communism”, which was then leapfrogging from Vietnam into Indochina and into the rest of Southeast Asia.
Of course, in 1975, Vietnam fell into the hands of the communists. The Vietnamese didn’t export communism. Instead, they buckled down to work and adopted the capitalist system.
Today, Vietnam grows better economically, attracts more foreign investments and draws more tourists than the Philippines. Vietnam’s secret? Leadership and focus.
One other lesson of martial law: An incompetent president does as much damage as a corrupt but capable president. Yet, Filipinos look kinder on incompetent presidents than corrupt and competent ones.
Perhaps, in the next ten years, Marcos’s presidency will be seen in a better light and show him for what he really was—a very good but flawed president.

STREET TALK: Harnessing Overseas Filipino Media

By Greg Macabenta

The Commission on Filipinos Overseas, chaired by Sec.Imelda Nicolas, is holding the Global Summit of Filipinos in the Diaspora at the Philippine International Convention Center.  The three-day conference (from September 27 to 29), organized in cooperation with U.S. Pinoys for Good Governance (USPGG) and National Federation of Filipino American Associations (NaFFAA), is an ambitious effort to harness the potentials of overseas Filipinos for national development.
NaFFAA, of which I used to be national chairman, is the largest coalition of Filipino organizations in America. USPGG, with TLC Beatrice CEO Loida Nicolas Lewis and lawyer-activist Rodel Rodis, as chair and president, respectively, started out as U.S. Pinoys for Noynoy-Mar, which campaigned actively for the Aquino-Roxas tandem in the last presidential elections. It metamorphosed into its present structure on the premise that, having helped PNoy win, Filipino-Americans should help him succeed.
While overseas Filipinos – both OFWs and those who have become either permanent residents or naturalized citizens of their adopted countries – have already been actively helping the Motherland, mainly with billions in remittances, there is still much that they can do for the Philippines in the areas of health, education, investments, technology transfer and tourism development. This is the thrust of the Global Summit.
But to be in a better position to help the Philippines, overseas Filipinos need to be empowered in their adopted countries – socially, economically and politically. In the U.S. this is being achieved, although laboriously. In Europe, the Middle East and around Asia, most of our kababayan are still trying to emerge from servitude, reminiscent of the Pinoy experience in America in the early 1900s.
An empowered overseas Filipino community can be a potent force. This was demonstrated in the lobbying efforts in the U.S. Congress that resulted in the passage of benefits for Filipino World War II veterans, and in the support given to then Philippine Ambassador to the U.S. and now Secretary of Foreign Affairs Albert del Rosario in his fight to keep the Philippines in the investment portfolio of CalPERS. Medicare portability, the Save Our Industries Act and the Spratleys controversy are three issues of importance to the Philippines that Filipinos in the U.S. are now actively focusing on.
Tourism promotions is one major concern where an empowered overseas Filipino community can be of great help.
In this regard, overseas Filipino media – mainly newspapers and TV - can be among the most potent vehicles for helping achieve empowerment – but only with a better appreciation of their tremendous capabilities and how to put them to effective use.
There is a lot of talk about exploiting New Media, but this is a field that still needs to be fully understood and mastered. Social media, dominated by FaceBook, is still like a Tower of Babel, with sometimes-heroic and mostly-clumsy attempts at communications management mixed with a flood of irrelevant chatter.
On the other hand, overseas Filipino print media and TV are just waiting to be put to proper and effective use.
I’m delivering a paper on this topic at the Global Summit. My thesis is simple enough. If you’re a Pinoy newcomer in a foreign country and you want to know how you can meet your kababayan or where you can buy bagoong or eat Jollibee or how you can send money or a balikbayan box home, you only need to pick up a Pinoy newspaper. You can find them, whether you’re in Tel-Aviv, Singapore, Sydney or London and most especially if you’re in California, New York or Chicago.
Pinoy media, particularly the international TV operations of GMA Network and ABS-CBN, will also keep you abreast of the latest showbiz gossip and the political circus in the Philippines.
But if you want to know about vital issues in your adopted country that affect you as an overseas Filipino, you’re out of luck. You’ll hardly pick up any stories in overseas Filipino media on developments in the White House or on Capitol Hill or in the parliaments or state assemblies or city halls that are written or reported in terms relevant to you.
Overseas Filipino media should logically be skewing mainstream news to your needs, but they don’t. They’re too busy telling you what’s happening in the Philippines. ABS-CBN produces Balitang America and its equivalent in Europe, the Middle East and Australia, which report on news and issues relevant to the Filipino communities in their specific coverage areas. But these are limited efforts and only serve to underscore the unmet needs of overseas Pinoys.
The mainstream media report the news in general terms. Whether or not they specifically affect you as a Pinoy is up to you to figure out. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attack, most Filipinos in the U.S. failed to appreciate the impact of the Patriot Act on them – in many cases, to their grief.
The bottom line is that, instead of helping Filipinos assimilate and integrate, Filipino media tend to perpetuate their status as mere visitors and strangers in their adopted countries.
Small wonder that, in America, where over 40 percent of people of Filipino descent are U.S.-born, the youth know very little about their parents’ Motherland.
For mainstream societies and governments in countries where Filipinos reside in large numbers, Filipino media should be the logical source of information on the Philippines and our people. Filipinas Magazine, published by Mona Lisa Yuchengco for 13 years and by me for almost five years, did exactly that. It told of Filipino achievers in the American mainstream and generated pride among young FilAms. Unfortunately, the magazine lost too much money and had to close down.
As far as I can tell, only Filipino Reporter in New York has taken steps to build a link with the mainstream. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and State Governor Andrew Cuomo both write regular columns in the newspaper.
Years ago, Alex Esclamado, as publisher-editor of Philippine News, used his newspaper as a bully pulpit to promote the interests of the Filipino community, including farm workers’ rights, equitable benefits for Filipino World War II veterans, and the right of Filipino doctors, accountants and other professionals to practice their professions in the U.S. He got results.
Unfortunately, overseas Filipino media have difficulty surviving, even under benign economic conditions – worse, in recessionary times. Understaffed and underfunded, they take the point of least resistance and resort mostly to “download journalism” or picking up stories from online editions of Manila publications. Not surprisingly, only Pinoys are interested in them. Why would the White House or Capitol Hill be interested in Pinoy showbiz tsismis or the inquisition in the Philippine Senate?
In these times, when our government can use every available resource to promote Philippine interests abroad, efforts should be undertaken to tap overseas Filipino media. Hopefully, the Global Summit of Filipinos in the Diaspora will appreciate their potentials and take the necessary steps to harness them.
The Commission on Filipinos Overseas may be the logical government agency to take on this challenge.
(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)

FROM THE CAPITOL: Access to Sterile Syringes

By Senator Leland Yee

As the California State Legislative Session came to a close two weeks ago, legislative members await Governor Jerry Brown’s signature on hundreds of bills. Of those, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists have joined AIDS and hepatitis prevention advocates in urging Governor Brown to sign legislation which I authored and introduced to allow pharmacies to sell sterile syringes to an adult without a prescription.
Currently, 47 states allow pharmacists to sell syringes without a prescription. Most states amended their laws in light of overwhelming evidence that criminalizing access to sterile syringes led drug users to share used ones, and that sharing syringes spread HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C and other blood-borne diseases that can live in a used syringe.

Under an existing pilot program, pharmacies in Los Angeles County, San Francisco, and some other parts of the state have been allowed to sell syringes without a prescription. This bill, Senate Bill 41 would extend this program to allow pharmacists throughout the state to participate.

 AIDS and hepatitis do not recognize county borders and thus our current policy is not nearly as effective as it should be. It is imperative that the Governor signs SB 41 into law to help reduce healthcare costs to taxpayers and save lives.

Because most states do not require a prescription for syringes, diabetics who visit our state may not even have a prescription and come here assuming they can purchase needles at a pharmacy. This bill will ensure those diabetics or others who need syringes for health purposes will not be stranded here in California without the ability to administer life-saving insulin and other medicines.

The approach in this bill has been evaluated extensively throughout the world and has been found to significantly reduce rates of HIV and hepatitis without contributing to any increase in drug use, drug injection, crime or unsafe discard of syringes. In fact, there is not one published study that refutes these findings.
Sharing of used syringes is the most common cause of new hepatitis C infections in California and the
second most common cause of HIV infections. The state Department of Public Health estimates that approximately 3,000 California residents contract hepatitis C through syringe sharing every year and another 750 cases of HIV are caused by syringe sharing.

These diseases are costly and potentially deadly. Hospitalizations for hepatitis B and hepatitis C cost the state $2 billion in 2007, according to a report by the California Research Bureau. The lifetime cost of treating hepatitis C is approximately $100,000, unless a liver transplant is required, and then the cost exceeds $300,000 per surgery. The lifetime cost of treating HIV/AIDS is now estimated to exceed $600,000 per patient.

SB 41 has been supported by the San Francisco AIDS Foundation and Drug Policy Alliance. As well as the AIDS Project Los Angeles, American Civil Liberties Union, California Hepatitis Alliance, California Nurses Association, California Psychiatric Association, California Retailers Association, County Alcohol & Drug Program Administrators, California Medical Association, California Pharmacists Association, Walgreens, Rite-Aid, City and County of San Francisco, Health Officers Association of California, and Equality California, among others.

Last year, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a previous version of this bill, SB 1029.

NO LIMITATIONS: Half Filipino-half Jew

By Ted Laguatan

The most famous part Filipino-part Jew person in the world is comedian Rob Schneider. I understand he has a Jewish father and a mother who is half Filipina and half mixed Caucasian.  That makes him 1/4 Filipino 1/2 Jew and 1/4 something else. Very funny and talented guy.

Another celebrity with Jew-Filipino blood is Hailee Steinfield, the talented multi-awarded  actress  who was nominated  in the 2010 "True Grit" film as Best Supporting Actress.   I came across two other not so well known part Jew part Filipino individuals in the Internet and that was it. There were none others that I could point to.

Apparently individuals with Jew-Filipino blood are extremely rare on this planet.   I did meet a couple of Filipinas married to Jews but they did not have any children. So far,  for the many years that I have lived,  I have yet to personally meet a person with Filipino and Jewish blood. I am sure that they would mostly be found in the Philippines and New York  where Jews and Filipinos live - but relatively few compared to the rest of the population.

However, around the second week of November this year, for the first time in my life, I will meet a half Filipino-half Jew individual. His Filipino blood comes from me and my wife and his Jewish blood comes from his father.

Yes, the first half Filipino-half Jew person that I will be meeting in my life will be my first grandson.
The Old Testament  refers to the Jews as "God's chosen people" - perhaps because among other things, the Messiah Jesus Christ, would come from them.  I am fascinated, excited, thrilled and honored  by the prospect of having a grandson who  comes from an ancient race from which my Lord came from.

 

Who knows if within him, he carries the genes of the great patriarchs, prophets and personages like Abraham, Moses, Joseph, Isaiah,  David, Solomon, Blessed Mother Mary and her great humble husband Joseph or great thinkers, writers and artists like Karl Marx, Benjamin Disraeli, Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Marc Chagall, Hannah Arendt, Woody Allen and so many others.

 

However I entertain no expectations on him being super bright or super talented even if genetically and potentially, on both his father and Mother's side, the genes that make that possible are prevalent. Every child is a blessing and being bright, talented, handsome or pretty are mere incidentals which should not be a factor on whether they should be loved and nurtured as they need to be.

But I do wonder what he will be like when he grows up to be a man. Will he be concerned about Filipino issues? Or will he be more concerned about Jewish issues? Or both?

It really makes no difference what particular issues he gets involved with - as long as it relates directly or indirectly to the sacred issue of being involved in trying to create a better world. Over dinner a couple of nights ago in a  San Francisco Thai restaurant,  his Jewish grandfather and grandmother who were visiting from Arizona - agreed with me that what is important in a person's life is to live a meaningful life.  We all understand "meaningful" as synonymous to helping others.

Our grandson will certainly have no lack of  role models. His Jewish grandfather who retired from the World Bank some years back now volunteers his time helping the needy in fixing or repairing their houses whether it be carpentry, plumbing or electrical problems. His  psychologist Jewish grandmother helps many with her counseling work. His own father was a peace corps volunteer in Thailand teaching various technologies to rural Thais to improve the quality of their lives.

On the Filipino side of his family, he will also have role models including a lawyer grandfather who will try to teach him to love God above everything else, to love his fellowmen as himself and absolutely be committed to truth and  justice.

He will probably have his own special talents and probably be funny too at times like Schneider. He might formulate some hybrid delicacies unique to his species like bagel adobo sandwich,  Bangus gefilte or mango strudel.

His father and mother have yet to decide on a name.  Of course that decision is for them to make.  "Benigno", "Bayani" or some other Filipino name may not be bad choices coupled with  his Jewish last name.
 Even before my daughter met my son in law, she had already converted to Judaism. Initially, I was very much bothered when she told me of  her pending decision as we raised her as a Catholic and all of  her education was in  Catholic schools. I told her to seriously consider what she was doing.

However, I do know that God works in strange ways and He certainly is far wiser than me. It is Him who must ultimately determine how He will lead my daughter to Him - not me. I should respect His way. What we believe in is a product of our own experience. Our spiritual journey is a continuing process that goes on as we go through life. What counts is our sincerity and openness to truth.

My  belief that Jesus Christ is God is the result of personal experiences that I have gone through that have led me to this conclusion.

I had not caused these experiences. But neither do I think that they were accidental. They were  part of God's plan for me. He may not have the same specific plan for my daughter or others - but that does not mean He will not bring them to Him through some other way.

A few days after my daughter told me she was converting to Judaism,
I told her: "If you sincerely believe in your heart that this is the right thing for you to do in order to truly love God, then you must do it. In anything where you sincerely truly believe that you are doing the right thing, you must be true to yourself. Even if it means going against my wishes, you have to be true to yourself."

 

I believe that when a person sincerely seeks to know and love God, as he or she journeys on through life in search of God's truth - God Himself will find a way for him or her to eventually arrive at His truth.

That is why I am no longer bothered that my daughter had converted to Judaism.  Neither am I bothered when she tells me that  my grandson will have the same religion. As his  mind and character develops, he  will be more curious about his being half Filipino and also about his grandparent's Catholic religion.

He will also wonder how his lolo arrived in the U.S. from the Philippines with only fifty dollars but somehow managed to go to a good law school  and become a lawyer.  I will definitely teach him the value of being courageous and taking risks when you are fighting for something worth dying for.

If he grows up with the thought of living a meaningful life, sincerely loving God above everything else and a commitment to truth - God will lead him through paths unique to him and eventually to a place in God's heart.

 Note: The California State Bar honors Atty. Ted Laguatan as one of the best immigration lawyers in the U.S. He is one of only 29 lawyers officially certified continuously for more than 20 years as an Expert Specialist in Immigration Law. He also does accident injuries, wrongful death and complex litigation. For communications: (San Francisco Area) 455 Hickey Blvd. Ste. 516, Daly City, Ca 94015 tel 650-991-1154 fax 650-991-1186 email laguatanlaw@gmail.com

VIRTUAL REALITY: The Constitution is under siege

By Tony Lopez

THE 1987 Constitution is under siege. The reasons are economic, political and social.
Economic because in Asia, the Philippines has lagged in economic growth behind countries which were once poorer and didn’t even exist on earth during the mid-1960s.

Many areas of the economy are reserved for Filipinos who lack the capital and the technology in the herculean task of building the country’s physical infrastructure.

Modernizing the economy will require at least $5 billion in annual foreign direct investments. We don’t get that.
In a good year, FDI ranges between $2 billion and $3 billion. The year 2010 was exceptional. $7.85 billion in FDI was recorded, a record, and most of that came during the first half, and into guess what—beer.
Political because a President with awesome powers is not good if he or she is incompetent or corrupt or both. The political system has become corrupt beyond repair.

Estimates indicate up to 40 percent of the national budget is stolen. Nearly every institution has been corrupted—the police, the military, Congress, the Executive, and of course, the Judiciary. Even the Catholic Church has not been spared. Social because the disparity between the very rich and the very poor is scandalous and revolting. Officially, a fourth of the population is poor. Per surveys, up to half of the population say they are poor.

Wage earners shoulder up to 98 percent of total individual income tax collection. The very rich contributes just 2 percent.

Only 100 families control the politics and business of this country. Who or what is to blame for this massive failure in economic, political and social reformation? The Constitution, of course, if you believe analysts.
First, the Constitution, they say, is wordy. It is more than 26,000 words, and more than three times the length of the 1935 Constitution, which was a good charter, with 8,524 words.

The US Constitution has only 8,000 words and America became a superpower. Brevity thus is wisdom. It spells economic progress.

Second, the Constitution is too nationalistic. Many areas that should be open to foreigners are closed. Like telephony and media. But media and telephony have converged. Nowadays, you cannot distinguish between a TV set and a cellphone. Both carry the same functions.

Economist Dr. Bernardo Villegas recalls that in the 1950s, the Philippines was one of the most developed economies in Asia. Next to Japan. From 1950, things turned for the worst for the Philippines.
By 1973, Villeges notes, Korea and Taiwan were above us. By 1996, we were literally, “at the bottom.” BY 1996, the Philippines was “The Sick Man of Asia”.

Villegas says “we’re the worst” on the “Ease of Doing Business.” In FDI flows in 2010, “we are the least attractive among these Asian countries—China $100 billion, Indonesia $13 billion, India $37 billion, Malaysia $7 billion, the Philippines $1.8 billion. Vietnam, with per capita income that is lower than ours, attracted $7 billion.

True, the Philippine has had credit ratings upgrades—by Moody’s, Standard and Poor, Fitch and Japan Credit.

Villegas quotes a foreign observer from Singapore who says “physical prudence and good credit ratings are important, but the country needs to do more for sustainable growth.”

Restrictions and red tape

A World Bank study of 87 countries on investing across borders showed the Philippines imposed foreign equity ownership restrictions in more sectors than other countries.

The study also noted that it takes more than 17 to 80 days to establish the foreign-owned limited liability company in Manila, much slower than the average for East Asia and the Pacific.

Another problematic area was arbitration where it takes around 135 weeks to enforce an arbitration award. “This is a very independent outside assessment of what we are going to talk about,” says Villegas wryly.
Jose Almonte, a retired general and an intellectual, agrees that we should change our mindset on protectionism. He explains: “Our wealth can now be generated or created not within our borders but in cooperation with the nations all over the world. So, if we have to change the constitution, I think we have to reach the human mind.”

“What kind of constitution will we write? How can we take advantage of the work in terms of creating wealth in this country? What kind of constitution is that?”

Almonte says “we need to re-educate the entire nation on how we really plan to build this nation so that our politicians can react accordingly. “He suggests a few reforms that will trigger all of the reforms to change the entire system. (1) Let us live our core values. Who are we? Who is the Filipino? Can we answer that? If we cannot answer that it is because we never live up to what we think.”

“When President Estrada used his presidency for personal purpose, he degraded the entire nation for that matter. When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, for instance, gave out symbolic contributions to Iraq, that’s all right, but for the purpose of protecting her politics, the world did not understand that. So, how did they look at us?”

Almonte warns that the Philippines is nearing the status of a failed state. That is what happened in the Middle East, he says. And the rulers were overthrown. “I think our situation is very serious,”Almonte says.
On the other hand, the Philippines has plenty of money:

Firstly, the economy is huge domestically—95 million people, the 12th largest consumer market on earth.
Secondly, Filipinos have plenty of money. Per capita GNI (Gross National Income) is $2,829—the highest ever in our history. Multiply that by 95 million and you have a $269 billion economy, the 44th largest among 192 countries.

Thirdly, Filipino expats remit at least $20 billion a year, equivalent to P860 billion, half of the government’s national budget and almost 10 percent of our GDP of more than P9 trillion. Most of the $20 billion is stranded—meaning it doesn’t go to productive uses. According to Bansan Choa of I-Remit, the $20 billion represents only a third of the actual annual earnings of Filipino expats.

Our OFWs make $60 billion a year—enough to pay our foreign debts—in one, single voucher. Petty cash, in other words.

Fourthly, the savings rate of Filipinos has exceeded 27 percent—that is, 27 percent of P9 trillion or P2.4 trillion, which is 40 percent more money than the government can assemble for its national budget.
Fifthly, the Philippine commercial banking system has P5 trillion in deposits. Only about P3 trillion has been ploughed back into the economy as loans.

Most of the remaining P2 trillion is parked, at the Bangko Sentral because a government IOU is better than any triple rated IOU of any Tomas, Dikyo and Harry.

Finally, the Philippines has $75 billion in reserves, more than enough to pay for our $60 billion foreign debts and pay for 11 months of imports.

FROM THE CAPITOL: Transparency In UC and CSU

By Senator Leland Yee

After a three year legislative battle, our tireless efforts paid off as Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill to bring greater transparency and accountability to California’s public higher education institutions – University of California, California State University, and the state’s community college system.

Senate Bill 8, which I authored and introduced, will ensure UC, CSU and the community college auxiliaries and foundations adhere to state public records laws. Under SB 8, all financial records, contracts, and correspondence would be subject to public disclosure upon request.

The bill also protects the anonymity of donors except in situations where there is a quid pro quo in which the donor receives something from the university valued at over $2500 or in which the donor receives a sole source (no-bid) contract within five years of the donation. Anonymity would not be provided to any donor who attempts to influence curriculum or university operations.

Finally, we will have real transparency at our public universities.  While this law does not technically go into effect until January 1, I am urging the UC and CSU to immediately begin complying and providing sunshine to the actions of their foundations and auxiliary organizations.

The most recent scandal of an auxiliary organization made national headlines last year when the CSU Stanislaus Foundation negotiated a speaking contract with Sarah Palin. Students found parts of her contract as well as shredded documents in a campus Dumpster after CSU refused to disclose her compensation. After a lawsuit filed by CalAware, a judge ruled that the CSU acted illegally and forced them to disclose the full contract.

Despite overwhelming bipartisan support, my two previous legislative efforts were vetoed by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.  This has been a long fight, but I am proud of our coalition of open government advocates, students, faculty and workers who have stayed so persistent in helping protect the public trust.

“We are delighted that the governor agreed that the activities and operations of these quasi-public entities should be brought out of the shadows,” said Jim Ewert, General Counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association. “CNPA also thanks Senator Yee for his dedication to the issue and persistence over the last three years to ensure that these entities operate transparently.”

“Senator Yee deserves special thanks for his tenacious efforts on behalf of the faculty, staff, and students of the CSU,” said Lillian Taiz, a CSU professor and President of the California Faculty Association. “Three years of hard work and dedication have finally culminated in a very real victory for transparency and accountability.”

For years, foundations and auxiliaries of our state’s public colleges and universities have been able to hide billions of dollars from public scrutiny. According to the CSU Chancellor’s Office, in 2009, 20 percent of its $6.7 billion budget, or $1.34 billion, was held in their 87 auxiliaries and foundations.

Incidents at several campuses across the state demonstrated the need for increased public oversight and accountability provided by this legislation.  At San Francisco City College, a campus executive has been indicted for using money from the San Francisco City College Foundation for personal and political purposes.  At San Jose/Evergreen Community College, the Chancellor was found to have engaged in lavish travel and other examples of financial impropriety that prompted her resignation. Since local community college campus auxiliaries are already subject to the CPRA, these instances of waste and abuse have led to the parties being held to account.

In April, longtime open government advocate Richard McKee passed away. In his honor, I have named SB 8, “The Richard McKee Transparency Act of 2011.”

Rich McKee was one of our state’s strongest champions for open government.  His passion helped ensure greater public access and accountability of government agencies throughout California. Whether you knew Rich or not, you benefitted from his activism. Our democracy is significantly better because of the work of Rich McKee and that is why he will be so greatly missed by all those who care about government transparency. This bill is a fitting tribute to his legacy.

STREET TALK: No, It’s Not Been Easy Selling Chickenjoy

By Greg Macabenta

I would like to see Ramon Jimenez succeed as Secretary of Tourism. Because he’s an advertising colleague. Because I would like to see Noynoy Aquino succeed (having created one of the key concepts that helped him win the presidency). And most of all, because I’m a Pinoy. With that said, I hope Mon will take my comments in the spirit they are being given.

I assume he needed a memorable sound bite when he quipped that selling the Philippines as a tourist destination will be “as easy as selling Chickenjoy.” So typical of an ad man with a creative bent.
 The harsh reality, however, is that selling Chickenjoy and the whole Jollibee concept in an overseas market like the United States hasn’t been all that easy. But the analogy may yield some lessons for our country’s tourism promotion efforts.  

When Jollibee began to lay the groundwork for its U.S. entry, its international marketing manager sought the advice of Carlos Go, CEO of the Seafood City Supermarket chain (now the largest Filipino-owned retail chain in the U.S., with an impressive presence in Northern and Southern California, Las Vegas and Seattle).  At the time, Seafood City had only expanded from its base in San Diego to Los Angeles, but it was already seen as a model for successfully operating in the U.S. market.

 Carlos suggested that I join the meeting (I've been a Seafood City consultant since its San Diego days). He felt I could share some valuable insights, especially on how to avoid the pitfalls suffered by such major Philippine brands as San Miguel Beer and Sarsi.

 We learned that Jollibee planned to go after the American mainstream market, dominated by McDonald’s. After all, it had outdone McDonald’s in the Philippines. Why not use the same success formula in the U.S.?
We politely suggested that Jollibee should first build on its logical consumer base, the Pinoys. That would allow the company to gain a steady footing, before crossing over to the mainstream – if at all.

“Pinoys are already in our pocket,” said the marketing manger. “Besides, our first store will be in Daly City where they make up over 30% of the population. That’s why we feel we can afford to focus on the rest of America.” 

“You can’t presume to automatically own the FilAm market,” I cautioned. “You might want to learn a lesson from San Miguel and Sarsi.”

Sarsi had been a miserable failure in the U.S. (a story worth telling separately). San Miguel concentrated its marketing efforts on the U.S. mainstream, believing that Pinoys were “in the bag.” But it failed to make a dent in a market dominated by Anheuser Busch and Miller. Worse yet, a research study commissioned by San Miguel U.S.A. revealed that the brand only ranked fifth among imported brands drank by FilAms. One of the reasons was the company’s failure to nurture its relations with the community.

In 1990, as CEO of Advertising & Marketing Associates, which had a pioneering branch in the U.S., I headed a team that helped San Miguel reconnect with FilAms across the U.S. This resulted in a volume growth of 27% in one year. But when Barton Beers, a major distributor, took over the distribution and marketing of the brand, it took the Pinoys for granted again. The gains were wiped out.

At any rate, Jollibee went ahead with its original plan, even hiring a mainstream PR agency to handle the launch. When it opened its first store in Daly City, there were long lines for days. But the customers were mainly Filipino.

 Inexplicably, after the initial media burst, the brand was not given the same aggressive marketing support that had made Jollibee a phenomenal success in the Philippines. Not surprisingly, even the Pinoy customer lines soon dwindled and dwindled…and dwindled.

 A year later, Arnie Balague, Jollibee’s head of U.S. operations, admitted to me that they should have listened to our advice.

 "Now, you're just part of the scenery with hardly any top-of-mind awareness,” I said. “If someone wants a burger, McDonald’s first comes to mind. Some chicken? It’s KFC. Spaghetti? It’s an Italian restaurant."
“But we can’t afford advertising,” said Balague “We only have one store.”

“You’re not investing in a store,” I said. “You’re investing in a brand. Unless you do, you won’t be able to build a chain.”

It would take almost another year before Jollibee found its bearings. Unlike Sarsi, Jollibee management took a reality check and learned from it. Among other things, it accepted the wisdom of building on its logical consumer base and invested in advertising and promotions. It thus began to expand, first in Northern California and then in Southern California, then on to other states.

For some reason, however, it has gone back to depending on the Field of Dreams theory (build it and they will come). There has hardly been any advertising or promotional support. Fortunately, Jollibee also saw the advantage of building strategic alliances. From originally insisting on stand-alone stores, it now goes wherever Seafood City opens a facility, thereby benefiting from the customer traffic.

 In this regard, Mon Jimenez could take a cue from Robert Kwan, the sharp entrepreneur who built the Chow King chain. Shortly after Robert opened his first Chow King store in America, he realized that it wasn’t possible to simply transplant his success formula of good-food-quick-service-reasonable-price. He faced a Catch 22 situation (which is another marketing case worth telling).

 But Robert was wise enough to acknowledge that he needed someone more familiar with the market to make his venture succeed. He arranged to make the Seafood City group  master licensee of Chow King for the U.S.  After  a few bumps, Chow King began to take off (Robert subsequently sold the business to Jollibee).

I suppose Jollibee still wants to cross over to the American mainstream. And it could succeed. But not without a product makeover and, most certainly, not without investing in demand creation.

 I’m sure that, as a seasoned marketing practitioner, Mon can relate these marketing cases  to his new challenge of selling the Philippines abroad. It’s not entirely an apples-and-oranges analogy.

He also has to cope with such issues as lack of awareness and negative consumer perceptions, needs and expectations, product improvements and new product development,  improved customer service, a formidable competitive environment, the imperative of advertising and promotional support and the challenge of a limited marketing budget.

Unfortunately, on top of that, he also has to suffer the plague of patronage politics, the scourge of special interests, and a media sector with a habit of sensationalizing problems without providing solutions. And he will have to deal with the Philippine travel and tourist industry which is used to being spoon-fed, demanding “action” and “results” from the government but unwilling to put its own money behind those demands.
 Frankly, selling Chickenjoy overseas is a much easier challenge.

 And yet, at the end of the day (to use a PNoy cliché), Mon Jimenez has no choice but to create magic out of what he has, and win some victories before the nitpicking pundits and special interests begin ganging up on him.

 He can, of course, be assured that I’m rooting for him, along with many of his ad industry friends. And if Mon thinks he can pick up a few tips from folks who have had to break into the U.S. market with nothing more than spit, prayer and bubble gum – and have managed to run circles around much better funded mainstream competitors – we’ll be happy to help.
 It’s our country, too.
 (gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)