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)

FRMO THE CAPITOL: Better Healthcare for California

BY SENATOR LELAND YEE

Last week in Sacramento, the Assembly Business and Professions Committee approved two public health bills that I authored, Senate Bills 1106 and 1029.

On a 6-4 vote, the committee approved SB 1106 to require sample prescription drugs received at a doctor’s offices to be accompanied with written information regarding the drugs similar to what is normally received at a pharmacy.

It is vital that consumers receive written information regarding dosage and potential side effects on sample drugs. This bill will reduce lawsuits, illnesses, and deaths. Because these sample drugs are often dispensed to low-income families who may not have insurance to cover the costs of prescriptions at pharmacies, the poor are disproportionately affected by this inequity in law. All families, especially children, deserve and need this vital information, whether they are getting medicines from a pharmacy or their doctor’s office.

A study conducted by the Journal of Family Practice found that instructions accompanied the dispensing of sample drugs only 47.8 percent of the time and were predominantly verbal in nature.

The study states, “Dosing appeared to be the main focus, and little to no attention was given to more detailed information, such as whether the medication should be taken with meals. Drug interactions were not routinely discussed.”

Manufacturers regard samples as a promotional tool. Pfizer alone dispensed 101 million samples worth $2.7 billion in 2007, according to the company. Merck dispensed 39 million samples worth about $356 million; Eli Lilly, 33 million worth $67 million; Wyeth, 52 million worth $64 million; Baxter International, 33,000 worth $7 million and Abbott Laboratories 16 million worth $32 million.

In 2006, the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine reported that medication errors injure 1.5 million people annually. The report addressed labeling of prescription drugs and found that there has been a growing unease among health care providers and others about the way free samples are distributed, the lack of documentation of medication use, as well as the bypassing of drug interaction checks and counseling that are integral parts of the standard prescription process when received through a pharmacy.

On a 6-2 vote, the committee also approved SB 1029 to allow pharmacies throughout California to sell up to 30 sterile syringes to an adult without a prescription. SB 1029 is supported by doctors, pharmacists, and AIDS prevention advocates.

California is one of only three states that still prohibits pharmacists from selling a syringe 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.

This is an effective public health measure which is proven to reduce health care costs to taxpayers. It is a moral and fiscal imperative that this bill becomes law. Access to sterile syringes is a vital component of a comprehensive strategy to combat HIV and hepatitis. This approach 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 2004, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation to create a five-year pilot program to evaluate the safety and efficacy of allowing adults to purchase and possess a limited number of syringes for personal use. Under the pilot program pharmacies in Los Angeles County, the Bay Area and some other parts of the state have been allowed to sell syringes. This bill would extend the sunset and allow all pharmacists throughout the state with the discretion to sell sterile syringes without a prescription. SB 1106 and SB 1029 are key bills that will better the healthcare system for many Californians. Both bills will next be considered by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

NO LIMITATIONS: Notes on President Noynoy’s Inaugural

BY TED LAGUATAN

Manila, Philippines. The US Pinoy delegates were understandably as excited as young children on a field trip. They got a special group invitation to the inaugural for having supported President Noynoy in the US. I chose not to go. I figured I could see more on TV. I also wanted to avoid the fierce mid-day Philippine heat. I caught up with the US Pinoys that evening in the inaugural celebration at Sofitel (formerly Philippine Plaza) Hotel.

“We were soaked with sweat. We did not expect it to be so incredibly hot!” they complained.
“Well, at least you’re now a part of history.” I half seriously answered.

It is unusually hot in the Philippines these days. Maybe former Vice President Al Gore, apostle of global warming who was recently here, brought the overpowering heat with him as a prop and accidentally left it.

Even President Noynoy and Vice President Jejomar Binay, were continuously wiping the sweat of their brows when I was watching them on TV during the ceremonies.

About half a million people attended. Despite the heat, there were smiles all around – reflecting the nation’s mood and thoughts: the end of a corrupt administration and hopes for a better government and a better life for Filipinos. The TV cameras showed one flashed image that stood out in my mind – a very pretty young woman in yellow hugging with perfect ease a small child also wearing yellow close to her breast and holding a yellow umbrella with her right hand which protected both from the sun - gracefully and slowly swaying in rhythm with the music being played on stage. Beautifully surreal - like a Madonna and Child painting. She looked so beatifically cool not showing any signs of being affected by the intense heat - happiness reflected on her face.

------o------

Protocol required the appearance of outgoing president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Her role was to ride in the same car as President Noynoy to the grandstand, do a final review of the representatives of the different military branches, salute and walk to a waiting car that would take her away. I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her as people booed, some shouting “Go away.” or “Sulong.” (“scram”)___as soon as they saw her and until she boarded the takeaway car.

I wondered how she felt when she heard those words. Does she still feel anything? Guilt? Shame? Or has she armored herself against these feelings? “They’re just envious of me because I had the guts to do what they could not.”; “I’ve got more money than they, who cares what they think?”; “Wait until I become Prime Minister.” Did she have these thoughts as people booed her?

I also felt sorry for the country because Arroyo had so much opportunity to do good but is now perceived instead as having enriched herself and her husband through corruption. She even sought to stay in power for the sake of being in power – even showing scorn and bad faith by making numerous midnight appointments and leaving government coffers empty. She says “Let history judge me.” It is not history which will judge her. Even history can be manipulated. It is God who will judge her. But I never lose hope in human beings. Hopefully, she finds a way to redeem herself by doing some really good things for her fellow human beings.

------o------

One other reason I decided to watch on TV aside from avoiding the hellish heat - was to observe the eyes, facial expressions and gestures of President Noynoy as he delivered his inaugural speech and listen carefully to ascertain whether or not his tone and manner of speaking and voice inflections indicated a sincere belief in what he was saying. I know I could observe better watching on TV as the cameras usually zooms on a speaker’s face. They did.

Having been a trial lawyer for many years, I have developed a very good sense of how sincerely a person believes in what he is saying. Politicians or their speech writers can easily compose lines that they know their audience wants to hear. But whether or not they really believe in what they are saying is another matter.

“I will not be able to face my parents and you who have brought me here if I do not fulfill the promises I made.”

“My parents expect nothing less, died for nothing less than democracy and peace. I am blessed by this legacy. I will carry this torch forward.”

I watched the expressions on the president’s face as he said these words, watched his eyes become teary and noted his gestures, tone of voice and inflections. There was no doubt in my mind that he sincerely meant what he was saying.

----o----

Shortly after his speech, the child of destiny headed for Malacanang riding alone at the back of a black Mercedes? What thoughts may have crossed his mind on the way to the palace?

Lining the streets along the way were huge yellow banners one after the other bearing either the portrait of his mother or father with the words “Salamat po.” (“Thank you.”). Surely, thoughts of his martyred father and his late president mother entered his mind and he must have shed a tear or two as he passed and saw these banners: “I have just been sworn as President and without the two of you, this would not have happened.”

As he rode farther away from the inaugural site, he must have viewed the usual scenes of everyday life along Manila’s streets: homeless raggedly dressed families here and there living under shady trees, ordinary people walking along the sidewalks, beggars, cigarette vendors, sidewalk peddlers, tricycles, “karitons” (wooden push carts), small shops, students in uniforms, policemen directing traffic.

A deeply religious man like his mother, he must have prayed: “Lord, can I really bear the heavy burden of serving all of my people. I will surely need your help.”

------o------

The next day, during the conference at Sofitel titled “Overseas Filipinos for Good Governance” we received a call from Malacanang that the President would see us at 3 P.M. Tour buses took our 170 or so delegates and family members or guests to the palace - some seeing it for the first time. We were brought to the main receiving room and served juices, small sandwiches and some picka pickas. As soon as the President appeared, the delegates were like Elvis fans trying to get close to their idol. I watched from the back quite amused at the shoving, pushing and positioning. I’ve watched similar phenomena many times including watching supporters and admirers shoving and pushing to get close to Noynoy’s mother Cory when she was newly installed in Malacanang.

The protocol officer announced that the president welcomed having pictures taken with the group. The group was too big so that it had to be split into several groups. More intense pushing and shoving as so many wanted to be pictured close to the president. A short woman, about 4’10 was shrieking: “I won’t be seen! I won’t be seen!” as taller people covered her from the photographers. President Noynoy heard her as she was close enough and pulled her saying: “Halika, ditto ka sa harap ko.” (“Come, stay in front of me.”) She was jumping with joy after___ smiling as if she hit the jackpot. Not inclined to push and shove, I opted out from the photo ops and instead talked to the palace waiters and servers. Some had been there for as long as the nine years plus term of ex-President Arroyo and hoped that they would not be fired. I do not think that they will be except maybe for a few for understandable security reasons.

The happy group went back to the buses – each with his own story to tell. One woman tripped in her rush to get near the president and was sad that she did not get to speak to him. Another triumphantly declared that the president recognized him. Still another was proudly showing the signature of Noynoy that she got him to sign. The happiest of all was the 4’10 woman.

Atty. Laguatan is one of a few lawyers whose expertise in immigration law is officially certified by the California State Bar. He also does accident injuries and wrongful death cases. For communications: 455 Hickey Blvd., Ste. 516, Daly City, California 94015 or 101 California St. Suite 2450, San Francisco, California 94111. Tel 650 991-1154. Fax 650 991 1186. Email laguatanlaw@gmail.com

STREET TALK: Walking the Talk

BY GREG MACABENTA

A large delegation of overseas Filipinos, mostly from America, attended the inauguration of President Noynoy Aquino (I still have to get used to referring to him as P-Noy, but then, I never referred to Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as GMA). These were the same people who organized a volunteer group called US Pinoys for Noynoy-Mar or USP4NM, and actively campaigned for the LP team, raising funds, holding town hall meetings, calling up relatives in the Philippines, getting out the overseas votes and watching the canvassing at their respective Philippine consulates to ensure an honest count.

Having helped Noynoy win, these Pinoys, spurred mainly by love for the Motherland, want to help him succeed. For this reason, they decided to transform their informal group into an instrument for good governance. In Manila, they converted USP4NM into an organization called Overseas Filipinos for Good Governance.

The sparkplugs of this idealistic undertaking are former chair of TLC Beatrice International, Loida Nicolas-Lewis; San Francisco community leaders Rodel Rodis, Ted Laguatan and Charito Benipayo; Northern California businessmen Rolland Baldo and Mike Macapagal; and Southern California USP4NM convenors, Wally Reyes and Rocio Nuyda. There are many other formidable personalities in the delegation: Dr. Philip Chua of Chicago, Gus and Ethel Mercado of Texas, Ninoy Aquino Movement originals Gloria Navarrete and Fred Aquitania; Professor Gil Ramos of New Jersey; and delegates from the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Saipan.

For two days, on July 1 and 2, they will hold a conference at the Sofitel Hotel to get formally organized, meet with government officials, businessmnen, leaders of civil society and Manila media, and discuss the ways by which they hope to contribute meaningfully to the success of the incoming administration. Being a loyal camp follower, I have fflew in with the group and spoke at the conference, as well as acted as moderator in a panel of key media practitioners.

Expectedly, everyone is gung ho, afire with fervor, ready to charge into the fray, and willing to devote time, talent and treasure to the cause of good governance. Of course, there are the usual cynics and kibitzers who are betting that all of that rah-rah-rah and sish-boom-bah will soon fade into a whimper after the novelty of the electoral triumph has worn off and the harsh realities begin to set in. That, according to the cynics, will be just about the time that the new president will wake up to the fact that delivering on his campaign promises is a verrrrrrry tall order. Indeed, after decades of mismanagement, official abuse and incompetence, turning our hapless country around is easier said than done.

But, just as the Filipino people have placed a lot of hope on P-Noy, I have a lot of faith in the people behind this good governance group. They certainly are not lacking in sincerity and determination. Most of them also belong to the same Quixotic bunch that decided, some 13 years ago, to set up a national organization that would work to achieve socio-economic and political empowerment for Filipinos in America, something considered an "impossible dream." But, against daunting odds, the National Federation of Filipino American Associations (NaFFAA) was born, it has survived and it has won some modest triumphs on the road to that difficult goal of empowerment.

While there was a moderate dose of unsolicited advice for P-Noy coming out of the conference, some of them bordering on the presumptuous, there are, in fact, many things that can be done by both overseas Filipinos and the average Filipino citizen. Alex Lacson's best-seller, "12 Little Things Every Filipino Can Do To Help Our Country," is a good starting point (too bad, Alex would have made a considerably better senator than some of the dolts and goldbrickers who won).

Of course, Alex's suggestions are the basics. There are problems that require more aggressive measures, beyond simply being a good citizen. The times call for more activism, for more direct action, for being Good Governance Vigilantes.

No amount of sermonizing will solve the cancer of corruption and convert people who have grown filthy rich from breaking the law. In Tagalog, they call that santong dasalan (persuasion). What is needed is santong paspasan (punitive action).

The new government has vowed to go after the crooks and criminals of the Arroyo era, including Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo herself. That is well and good. Throwing some big names in jail should put the fear of God in the political, business and criminal syndicates that hold this country hostage. But that's dealing with the past. What needs to be done is to create an environment in which prospective bribe-takers, extortionists, swindlers and crooks, including those in judicial robes, are confronted by the imminent threat of public exposure.

In addition to a media community that has become increasingly vigilant (but still needs to do much more), ordinary citizens can play a key role in holding public officials accountable. In this high-tech age, with everyone owning a smart phone-cum-video-audio-recorder-camera, catching an extortionist and a bribe-taker redhanded and exposing proof of ill-gotten wealth, like the unexplained US residence of presidential son, Mikey Arroyo, is the easiest thing to do. The incriminating materials can be loaded on YouTube or FaceBook anonymously and exhibited to the entire country and the world. This is the closest approximation of The Sting, an effective device in the American justice system that has succeeded in catching thieving politicians and government officials en flagrante.

Of course, it follows that those in the office of the Ombudsman who cannot recognize a criminal act if it bites them on the nose, should first be impeached.

That's the punitive part. There are many positive things that all of us can do. We only need to be inspired by Tony Meloto and the miracle of Gawad Kalinga. Or the decades of dedicated work by the American couple, Dan and Nancy Harrington of Books for the Barrios, that has seen tons of books delivered to the poorest schools in the most remote corners of the archipelago. Or the ambitious project called GILAS, supported by Globe Telecom and Smart, which would provide Internet access to all the public schools in the country. Or the annual medical missions from America, mounted by Filipino doctors who have not forgotten that they owe much to the Motherland.

In America, a great deal can be done by FilAms who care for the country. Promoting the Philippines as a tourist destination is the easiest thing to do - provided that we also take responsibility for making our tourist spots clean, presentable and safe.
FilAms can also do much to promote Philippine interests in Washington DC. A few days ago, Loida Nicolas-Lewis led a delegation to meet with Senators Charles Schumer and Kristen Gillibrand on Capitol Hill to appeal a plan of Schumer to file a bill that would tax call centers established overseas by US companies. If this passes, call center operations in the Philippines will be badly hit.

For years, a coalition of FilAm organizations lobbied the White House and Capitol Hill for the passage of the veterans equity bill. A $98 million benefits package was finally signed by President Barack Obama on his first year in office due to these efforts. Recently, the Philippine embassy called on the FilAm community to write to their congressmen and senators to ask for support of the SAVE Bill that will benefit the Philippine garment industry.

In the final analysis, however, the most meaningful way that we can help create a New Philippines is by committing to create a New Filipino. This brings us back to what Alex Lacson has suggested. To achieve meaningful change, we must begin with ourselves. We cannot ask others to change unless we, ourselves, are willing to do it.

This is something that I have written about in the past. Whenever I am asked how stealing can be reduced, my response is simple: "Don't steal. I don't. That's two less thieves." Someone paraphrased it for me: "Don't break the law. I don't. That's two less lawbreakers."
Of course, like the promise to end corruption, following the law to the letter is easier said than done.

Back in the early 70's, as a senior vice-president of Advertising & Marketing Associates in Manila, I was told to enforce a policy that penalized three instances of tardiness with suspension without pay. Told that this applied even to managers, I protested. I pointed out that managers did not charge overtime and worked even on weekends. But HRD insisted that rules were rules and had to be enforced without exception. Three vice-presidents were short-listed for suspension. But before I threw the book at them, I decided to check my own attendance record. As it turned out, I was as guilty as they.

Faced with this fact, I decided to write a memo to myself, suspending me for three days without pay. When my boss asked me what I was doing, I replied that I was simply enforcing policy.
When I suspended the VPs, along with myself, they accepted it without a complaint. The unreasonable policy was subsequently stricken off.

Do we, as a people, deserve the change that we are asking President Noynoy Aquino to institute? Only if we have the will to demand it of ourselves.

There's a saying in America that sums up what we need to do, if we really want to help this new government to succeed. We shouldn't simply talk the talk. We must be willing to walk the walk.
Even if it hurts.

(gregmacabenta@hotmail.com)