Political collaboration

Political collaboration – May 31, 2004 is my column for today.

Misery

Is there nowhere in Manila where one can buy Vicks Nyquil and Dayquil?

Is “flu” an alien word? Why is it if I go to Mercury or Watson’s and I ask for flu medicine, they look at me like I’m from Mars?

Finally, do not eat oysters in May.

Obstruct and disrupt

The amendment offered by Senator Angara was along the lines that the Comelec would be requested to provide a list to buttress whatever information is already contained in the certificates of canvass with Congress. Upon referral to the sponsors of the rules governing the canvassing, the sponsors declined to accept the amendment. Angara then questioned the integrity and word of honor of the Senate President and the Speaker who, he said, had assured him in a meeting during a suspension of the session, that they were all for the Angara amendment and that they didn’t see any problem with the sponsors of the rules accepting the amendments.

The Senate President and the Speaker both explained that while they had undertaken to support the Angara amendment, the rules’ sponsors, after initially being inclined to support the amendment, had now rejected the amendment, and could not be compelled to do so now in session.

After an intervention by Sen. Arroyo which further heated matters, Sen. Angara continued to impugn the integrity of the by now rather sheepish presiding officers.

Then Sen. Sotto rose and stated that since their attempts at constructive cooperation had been thwarted, and since Sen. Angara’s demands for the sponsors to explain why they reversed their initial undertaking to support the Angara amendment, the opposition no longer found itself bound by its previous pledges to cooperate with the majority.

What followed was a swiftly organized rebellion by the minority. Rep. Dinangalen called for the roll to be called to determine the presence of a quorum. The senate had one; eventually it proved that the house lacked a quorum. The difference was spelled by 10 representatives walking out of the hall during the calling of the roll.

A last ditch (and dangerous, had it succeeded) effort to salvage the situation was made by Rep. Espina of Biliran, who asked if the leadership could not compell the attendance of those who had walked out. Dinangalen countered this by pointing out that the moment the lack of a quorum is determined, the session must be immediately suspended. The Speaker agreed. The alternative would have been to send the sargeant-at-arms to basically arrest the rebellious oppositionists and physically compel their return to the session hall.

Hopes of passing the rules governing the canvassing of returns today have therefore been dashed.

It will be obstructionism and disruption from here on unless some major ego massaging takes place between now and 2pm today. The opposition can now add one more piece of evidence to its long dreamed-of desire to lay the groundwork for turning the 2004 canvassing into a dark twin of the 1986 canvassing.

Questions of precedence

Questions of precedence – May 27, 2004 is my column for today.

Errata: Flag days begin tommorow, not today.

In ABS-CBNNEWS.COM, theres an editorial explaining the necessity for a canvass in plenary instead of by committee.

Shut up! No, you shut up!

Female spectator tells Dilangalen to ’shut up’ – May 26, 2004

Dinangalen: “Shut up!”

Gonzalez: “Shut up!”

Dinagalen: “No, you shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!”

*gavel bangs*

Tee hee hee hee.

Echoes

In Then and now – May 26, 2004, Conrado de Quiros echoes Luis Teodoro in wondering why civil society and the rest don’t seem to be upset with what’s going on.

In ABS-CBNNEWS.COM, Ben Lim demands we modernize our system of counting votes.

While in ABS-CBNNEWS.COM, Fr. Joaquin Bernas, leading constitutionalist, weighs in on the issue dividing congress at the present time -and offers a middle path that may prove acceptable to both parties.

My response to yesterday’s inconclusive debate: the Communists and the opposition both prevented the process being railroaded, so all is well.

Hoorah for Angara and Pimentel

Angara and Pimentel have brought up two crucial points:

Angara -debate the questions independently: first, will there be a committee? And if so, then the rules.

Pimentel -run the session as a joint session, don’t allow each chamber to debate questions independent of the other chamber.

Now comes a big mess.

Are we headed for a walkout by the opposition?

Hoorah for Dinangalen

Rep. Dinangalen raises an important and crucial quiery in response to the Majority Floor leader: until such rules as may be approved to govern the canvassing are passed, what rules govern the session? This was in response to the Majority Floor Leader’s position that parliamentary inquires aren’t allowed because canvassing is the order of the day.

Then the Majority Floor Leader replied eventually that some rules apply, and some don’t; Dinangalen then said specify which rules apply then. The Majority Floor Leader replies: that will be determined on a case to case basis.

Not being a parliamentarian, I’m inclined to agree with Dinangalen, who is obviously trying to prevent the session being railroaded…

Hoorah for Sanlakas

I’m listening to DZRH on AM while watching ANC and Channel 4 on TV as the joint session of Congress begins….

I never thought I’d say hoorah for Sanlakas, but their representative had a point. All stations should be compelled to broadcast the proceedings, and set aside scheduled programming. Since all TV and radio media have congressional franchises, they can be compelled to institute programming in the public interest.

Playing tag with censors

In MSNBC – Webmaster finds gaps in China’s Net you can read an extensive article about how freedom of speech advocates try to keep one step ahead of Communist censors.

Next Page »