Let’s start with Neri and executive privilege: A timeline courtesy of the PCIJ.
My column today is A color of constitutionality The Inquirer editorial today is In aid of transparency, My column was less enthusiastic than today’s editorial about the compromise offered by the Chief Justice: Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J. who, by all accounts, was coaching the legal team arguing the Senate case, wasn’t pleased, either, but tried to make the best of it in A case of delicate balancing -but all have been overtaken by events.
The problem is of course, something that came as a surprise yesterday evening: Senate rejects SC compromise on Neri.
(see also, Senate rejects compromise: Conditions set by SC seen as crippling legislature) I’ve been mulling over the reasons why the Senate decided to harden its position and rebuff the Supreme Court. I think the Senators decided they are operating from a position of strength, legally and politically speaking.
By all accounts, going into yesterday’s oral arguments, the Supreme Court was split, 7-7, on Neri’s petition. The effect of such a vote, if it had taken place, would have been to deny Neri his petition. However, revealing, in essence, a party-line vote would have discredited the Supreme Court, because it would have shown that even clearly significant cases are now reduced to which justice is loyal to the President, or not.
For that reason, it would have made sense for the Chief Justice to throw the ball back in the Senate’s court, hoping it would clarify the extent to which Neri intended to be obstructionist. The Palace, for its part, faced with a sure loss if the Supreme Court had voted, could also look forward to a reprieve, while Neri in the meantime could invoke executive privilege, get into trouble with the senators, and have the whole thing end up back in court.
By which time, a new Justice would have been appointed, thus further firming up the administration’s numbers in the high court.
The Senate, though, in rejecting the compromise offered by the Chief Justice, and which has therefore puts pressure back on the court. The Supreme Court can now proceed to drag its feet: SC needs time for final ruling on executive privilege.
Lawyer Teddy Te, for one, is happy over the Senate’s decision (see his blog, Vincula):
After nine hours of orals, the Supreme Court Chief Justice offers a compromise–perceived by Malacanang to be “solomonic”, which should already put you on guard–to the Senate: 1. Neri will testify at the Senate, 2. he will not be arrested anymore, 3. but the three questions he had invoked “executive privilege” against will not be asked anymore and will be considered asked, and 4. each and every time he invokes executive privilege, the issue will be tossed back to the Court.
My first reaction was that it was a “cop out” by the Court, after strong decisions on press freedom and showing strong resolve against EJK and ED with amparo and habeas data. Later on, after speaking with very reliable sources, it made sense–though I still didn’t agree with the compromise; my sources told me that the CJ and Justice Carpio felt outvoted by the Gloria people in the Court and feared a loss had they insisted on a decision–so to avoid a loss, the CJ offered the compromise. One step backward, two steps forward–was it Lenin who said this, or Tommy Manotoc? Yes, it made sense but it still left me with a bad taste in the mouth.
If the Senate approved the deal, Gloria wins, hands down and the Senate loses, big time. The power of the Senate to summon witnesses would be severely impaired and the dictator gets away with silence on the three questions that directly place the ZTE deal at her doorstep.
I am glad that the Senate FINALLY acquired a collective spine (did that include you, Joker?) and some collective sense of identity and history and said, “thanks, but no thanks.” I hope the SC addresses this issue and, despite the lifting of E0 464, rules that its invocation under those circumstances was not proper and that Neri SHOULD answer those 3 questions.
This explains, to my mind, why the Palace slams Senate’s ‘arrogance’ for rejecting SC proposal. The compromise could have hidden the party-line vote it had in the Supreme Court; and it bought that most precious of political commodities, time. But, since anything is possible, it could also happen that an irritated Supreme Court, piqued by the Senate’s rejection, could then simply decide in Neri’s favor.
In the meantime, returning to Fr. Bernas’ piece, some problems now arise:
If no compromise is reached, will the court require Neri to appear at the Senate? Neri has claimed that he has the right not to heed the Senate’s call.
Should the court require Neri to appear, it would mean that for the court, the current Senate inquiry is not one where President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo may prevent a department secretary from appearing, as provided for in Article VI, Section 22 of the Constitution.
Rather, the court would be saying that the current Senate inquiry is one in aid of legislation under Article VI, Section 21.
In Senate v Ermita, the court said that only the President and justices of the Supreme Court are exempt from summonses to an investigation in aid of legislation. Neri is neither the President nor a justice of the Supreme Court.
Should Neri still refuse to appear, in effect he would be claiming a right analogous to the right of an accused against self-incrimination. An accused can completely refuse to take the witness stand.
But if Neri is required to appear, the court would be saying that his situation is more analogous to the right against self-incrimination of a witness who is not an accused.
A witness who is not an accused may raise the defense of right against self-incrimination only when an incriminating question is asked. He has no right to refuse to take the witness stand altogether.
By analogy, the court would be saying that Neri may raise the issue of executive privilege only when a question he deems to be against executive privilege is asked.
It should be remembered that executive privilege belongs to the President and to no one else. At most, it can be claimed by the executive secretary by express authority of the President.
Hence, Neri must be able to show that after prior consultation with the President, he was instructed to claim executive privilege.
Whereupon, following the teaching of Senate v Ermita and in accordance with the tenor of the questions posed by the justices on Tuesday, Neri will be asked what exactly he is seeking to hide behind executive privilege.
At this stage, and as already mentioned during the Tuesday hearing, it may become necessary for the court to examine in chambers the secret sought to be guarded by the executive for the purpose of determining whether indeed the matter can or should be legitimately kept from the eyes of the public.
After all, the Senate has to be properly informed if it is to legislate intelligently, and the public generally has a constitutional right to be informed of matters of public concern.
Moreover, as already admitted in the Tuesday hearing, criminal matters are not covered by executive privilege.
Meanwhile, the story behind this news item –Arroyo revokes EO 464 after meeting with religious leaders– I found out last night. No one was supposed to know the President was going to meet her allied bishops, particularly the ones from Mindanao, at the Discovery Suites. However, the media was tipped off and reporters camped out. This meant that attendees were observed coming and going. And that the President ended up making her announcement sooner than planned. Speaking of bishops, Patricio P. Diaz dissects recent statements by the Catholic hierarchy.
In the meantime, Senators also want Memorandum Circular 108 scrapped. Check out smoke’s comparison of E.O. 464 and M.C. 108.
When he does publish a book, it will a doozy. Read Lito Banayo’s growing feeling of Déjà vu. Meanwhile, the plot thickens: Arroyo not just witness at NBN-ZTE deal signing: and Another China contract missing.
And Gail Ilagan has some interesting observations concerning Lozada’s abduction.
Economic news: Poverty worsens between 2003 and 2006, according to the National Statistics Coordination Board. (see Poverty worsens despite growth and Poor Filipino families now number 4.7 million and More Filipinos below poverty line ) In his blog, [email protected] comments on the figures. In his column, Peter Wallace says that while government claimed 7.3 percent GDP growth last year, the real figure is about 4.8 percent growth. See also Inflation surges to 5.4% in February and NEDA expects to record growth slowdown in Q1.
How do foreign analysts go about determining risk in the Philippines? Read Forecast that Arroyo will survive has ‘large margin of error’ – analyst.
In the blogosphere, Phoenix Eyrie, Reloaded, is at the very least, ambivalent about opposition to the President. Spring Roll is confused by recent events. Mandaluyong High School says, let’s think positive. Splice and Dice thinks that the issues gives people a chance to seize the day. blackshama believes the old People Power is dead, long live whatever replaces it.
Observations from a Lowly Traveller is looking forward to migrating. Bayan ni Kabayan looks at the Neri chart.
No more TGIF rallies.
Suggestion: if you’re desperate for employees to join up, make it a manic Monday. or Tuesday, when there are no deadlines.
We can can it Summer Revolution.
John,
you’re a brainwashed eltist. The equality people desire are under the law, not social or financial equality. The All-Resign move will pave te way to electoral reforms. How can you have electoral reforms eh puro taga political clan ang Congress?
Just a repeat:
COMMUNISM will never be popular and will never ontrol this country. This is a religious country and obsessively so, unlike vietnam and China.
Ooops, looks like John is playing us for fools. How anyone in this country ruled by mestizos can be a national socialist is beyond me.
ha ha, awaiting moderation cos I used the word mestizo.
or not, maybe it was fools.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Ooops, looks like John is playing us for fools. How anyone in this country ruled by mestizos can be a national socialist is beyond me.
Heads up, the powers that be are now doing the old, “there are terrorist in your ranks so for your protection you cannot attend rallies” technique again.
John, fuck you! you get that? i’ll repeat it again, fuck you! and i don’t give a damn if your feathers are ruffled by my rough language. you’re a half-baked intellectual with nowhere near the capacity to understand all those books and ideologies you mentioned.
you are the jerk without a clue!
and don’t be alarmed at a little moderation. your posts will go through once manolo approves it. it’s there to appease manolo’s mine sweeper’s flavor of the day. i’ve been moderated A LOT more than you, so just sit tight and wait for your posts to be approved.
national socialist? what crack are you on? a socialist who idolizes Hitler-led Germany? who also wants dissenters shot? did you just wake up one day, picked up some ideology books and took some terms and fancied yourself an intellectual?
go barf in the toilet and suck it all back in. you are not fit to disparage Randy David.
i can see good developments here, people are now going to the supreme court and senate for resolution. And Gloria is giving in to demands ( this is the reason why I believe she is not really that bad ) Wala na munang people power, resignation and rallies. OK? Lets allow the system to work. Dito siguro mas maganda if Observe closely how the existing system works and look for flaws. Then correct it/them through legislations…
The most interesting revelation is the clear difference in thinking between Mar Roxas and Manny Villar. I think Mar tried to seize the initiative in his ongoing battle with Villar by pushing the compromise. In that he was being shortsightedly political. Villar is beginning to look presidential. And if he succeeds in re-establishing the place of the Senate by throwing off the oppressive yoke of the Supreme Court, he will deserve it.
ricelander, i think what Wallace is saying is that the decrease in I is likely because of the increase in smuggled goods which eats into legitimate imports. So unlike legitimately imported oil, smuggled Oil is not accounted for in GDP (i.e. not deducted).
cvj, sorry I seem to have missed that but still it’s essentially just an accounting problem which we could theoretically adjust by calculating figure for smuggled oil if we want to see a more reflective figure. But note what he says next:
“Capital equipment imports, which indicates growth of business and new business being created, declined by about 14 percent in volume terms.”
Btw, i am wondering if “savings” in smuggled goods would not find its way in the other variables. Can you work it out?
Btw, i am wondering if “savings†in smuggled goods would not find its way in the other variables. Can you work it out?
CVJ
It’s like this:
Assuming my oil import would be P50M if I buy legitimately but I could get the same for P10M through smuggling so I patronize a smuggler instead. My “savings” of P40M where will it go? Unless I bury it underground or keep it in a safety deposit box inside my home, or deposit it somewhere in the Bahamas, somehow it will show up in the equation, won’t it?
Side-note: from the Alston Report (page 15)
Imports are NOT domestically produced and do not get counted into GDP.
The Senators if confident of the Impartiality of the Members of the SC, would have agreed to the Compromise, but time and time again, the Members had been voting along Party Lines, Split in the Middle and only the Chief Justice to break the deadlock. What was the use of hours and hours of oral submission, questioning and whatnot if the voting is predictable?? I think I tend to agree with DJB about the SC also needed to re-examine its role, or misrule in the total dysfunctions of Governance..
some wannabe economists have been insisting that in this forum.
“The most interesting revelation is the clear difference in thinking between Mar Roxas and Manny Villar. I think Mar tried to seize the initiative in his ongoing battle with Villar by pushing the compromise. In that he was being shortsightedly political. Villar is beginning to look presidential. And if he succeeds in re-establishing the place of the Senate by throwing off the oppressive yoke of the Supreme Court, he will deserve it.- DJB Rizalist”
======================================================
I like this, I think we should be doing more of these. start scrutinizing the presidential. They are our future any way. So we better start we better start the selection process.
———————————————————
Political Analyst here was saying that one of the effective trick done by Hilary that delivers her tripple win in Ohio, Texas And Rhode Islands was the issue that Obama escape media scrutiny. While almost everything on her was scrutinize since she was a first lady , then as senator and then as Presidential nominee.
Rego, and the biggest issue today was who leaked that info about Obama posturing on NAFTA as confided to Canadians officials? He was using the issue for his campaign in Ohio where thousands lost their jobs due to NAFTA, but a Boom for Texans..Oppositions here were asking the Government to ask the RCMP to investigate who leaked the info to AP.
Voice from the past:
GOOD MOVE, BAD MOVE
By Ricardo Saludo (Asiaweek:1999)
What makes a good power move? Or a bad one? No, devils and angels have nothing to do with it. Power has one objective: to make things happen, whether good or evil. What things? Whatever the power wielder wants. So one test of a good power move is whether it had the effect it was supposed to have. At the start of Manila’s People Power Revolution in 1986, Asiaweek asked Ferdinand Marcos whether there would be a curfew. He promptly ordered one. But nobody paid attention – a clear failure of clout. Indeed, blatant flouting of Marcos’s word just accelerated the implosion of his authority.
Which brings us to a second criterion for power moves: Did it enhance or erode the wielder’s clout?
Ricardo Saludo is now Gloria’s Cabinet secretary
This talk of civil war and/or revolution is giving me the creeps. I am very scared, just like some of you here in this blog. But if it’s going to happen, there’s nothing that you or I could do about it now. The rubicon has been crossed already I suppose. And the present situations are now calling for the unthinkable.
Here are the present facts:
1. The AFP is divided
2. The House of Representative is a lapdog
3. The Supreme Court is showing its true color
4. The Executive Branch does not have the support of the people
5. The price of prime commodities is skyrocketing
6. The potential of hunger is in the horison
7. The grumbling of the populace is widespread
As it stands now, of the institutions available in a democracy, only the Senate is standing that can be relied upon by the people.
I am a person who don’t believe in superstition, or in prayer. But I am praying now that I am wrong.
Me, I dont dwell much on civil war thoughts. Its been with us ever since Marcos eh. Sometimes, people are just sowing fear, scare tactic you know which is very common in politics. Some sectors resot to that trick to get what they want. I believe that the best that we can do is to keep our composure and really be very discerning on everything that is happening.
comment lang po sa GDP,kung marapatin
tama hindi domestically produced kaya di kasali sa domestic production; Oh, what a conundrum.
Not part of GDP,but still it is in the equation for computing GDP.Hmmmm… Ayoko magmarunong pero natutiuwa ako eh.
medyo me sabit sa analysis nung “I “in one of the comments
pinaghalo ang imports sa gross investments kaya instaed of
GDP= C+I+G(X-M) naging
GDP= C+I+G(X-I)
just an observation
As far as i know, there is no such estimated figure for smuggled oil (or any smuggled item) that can be used to adjust GDP. The accounting problem is the essence of the overstatement of GDP. The following is the reason. Using the equation for GDP…
GDP=personal Consumption+capital Investment +Govt ExpenSe+(eXport-Imports)
…and your example in the next paragraph of smuggled oil.
Scenario 1: Without smuggling, the imported oil will be reflected in two places:
– personal Consumption will be 50 million (plus profit) assuming all the oil is sold in the same year.
– Imports will also reflect the 50 million.
– The net effect to GDP of the 50 million import would therefore be zero.
Scenario 2: With smuggling
– personal Consumption will be 10 million (plus profit) assuming all the oil is sold in the same year.
– Nothing will be reflected in imports.
– The net effect to GDP of the 10 million smuggled oil woiuld therefore be overstatement of GDP by 10 million.
You’re right, the 40M savings in your example will not be reflected in GDP if he keeps it in a safety deposit box, at home or deposits it in a foreign bank.
The 40M ‘savings’ will only be reflected in GDP if he spends it in something else that is produced domestically.
Just wanted to share this article from the economist. Reminds me about earlier discussions on our lack of a national brand. It’s also interesting how South East Asian countries are so much alike in terms of political-economic history and structure.
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10760174
@jeg
dammit! you beat me to identifying the first oxymoron on this thread. we can add it to mang djb’s ‘liberal fascism’.
Rego, on U.S. elections: Looks like the press honeymoon period with Obama is over.
“i can see good developments here, people are now going to the supreme court and senate for resolution.”
Rego, don’t you understand the utter stupidity of bringing everything to the Supreme court? When Congress does this, it means they are not doing their job. It means they are dragging their arses. It means they are powerless to do anything themselves.
When you go to the supreme court it is not a development. It is the exact opposite.
Carl,
Yeah read it in news yesterday too. But I still wanted to see more proof that that is happening. maybe at elast week.
Its really a very very interesting contest. I was never into US politics before as I thought I was just here to make money and travel around. But this Clinton-Obam contest is drawing me much into it before. Taking so much of my time but Im very happy to learn a lot about their politics though.
Another observation, hindi ko kasi maturuan ang sarili na mag isip independent of others…
One says he is a self professed national socialist,yet is asking us to ponder about bloodbath,correct me if I am wrong is it not being a national socialwachamacolit is synonymous to being a neo-nazi?????
define national socialsim,please enlighten me.Or please give me a clue.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
another on the gdp equation using the oil example.
That example is only good in the world where the produce is either smuggled or unsmuggled oil.
When we talk of gross, combined na yan o consolidated o halos lahat na ng cponsiderations nacapture na.
For the sake of discusion siguro pwede.
pero consider this too. Di ba ngayon halos lahat ng economy big or small ay Exporting using components they import.
Yes even China, Kaya even the mighty China is not immuned from the uS recession. Because their exports are also import driven yari din sila,matitikman din nila kahit saglit ang epekto.
Since we imported less and smuggled more,one thing happened some of the smuggled goods if you can include pirated dvds to those helped drive consumption too.
Thgat equation is not a simple balancing act by concentrating only on one factor.
Baka me magsabi na di kasali ang oFW dollars sa pag compute ng GDP o sige na tama ka na pero hanggang ngayon ito pa din ang driver ng consumption dito, whether we like it or not.Until when this will happen,ewan natin.
On government spending,it may be big pero kung puro overpriced at disadvantageous spending din naman ,mataas nga gdp,para saan pa.
We need to spend on education (kaya siguro me cyber ed) and infreastructure(kaya siguro me zte)
On investments,same thing kung puro hot money lang din e di temporary permanent yan.
Now on exports, again it is import driven, at least most of them are.
Now,it does not matter what our GDP rate is,it is not based on policy making anyways.Good morning!
Brian,
You over read my comments read it back pls.
mlq3, i agree with your observation that necessarily, there are times when a president CORRECTLY invokes executive privilege but since he/she is unpopular, the invocation is assailed. conversely, a president may unjustly and incorrectly claim executive privilege but because he/she is so loved and trusted by the public – that come hell or high water and whatever she wants to do, she can do no wrong. this is exactly why the “rule of law” is essential in every democratic society. in the event of controversy, the law, as determined by appropriately empowered authorities, i.e., the sc, will ultimately decide what is legal and proper and what is not. the “public” on one hand, and the president on the other, can choose to disregard the law at their own peril, e.g., anarchy or rule of force.
in the particular case of pgma, i’m certain that she is aware that her political enemies (and part of the population that her enemies were able to bring to their side) do not approve of her invoking the privilege. as if she was not hated already, she would be hated even more. but it’s really not about her. it’s about the office of the presidency whose sphere of authority she has an obligation to protect and preserve, with all means at her command, for all the future presidents coming after her. unlike you, i don’t believe her action would do her office any harm. on the contrary, i think she is strengthening it. as i see it, pgma is in a unique position of exercising political will unhampered by considerations of winning a re-election. i think that her only immediate concern is how she will be judged by history and that she would not do anything, if she could help it, to undermine that judgment.
speaking of “gridlock”, i think we need a little more statesmanship among our senators rather than brinkmanship. let’s not kid ourselves as to their real motives – the “discovery” of a smoking gun with which to nail the president. and they will risk an unnecessary constitutional crisis, or political gridlock, to persist in that nebulous quest.
@rego – i just asked pilipinoparin in the other thread why asian-americans, inluding fil-ams, are supporting clinton instead of obama. wouldn’t obama do more or at least be more sympathetic to your immigrant causes there in the u.s. makes me wonder?
i think we need a little more statesmanship among our senators rather than brinkmanship. let’s not kid ourselves as to their real motives – bencard
some senators will push to the edge but not near enough to try to weaken the constitutional successor vp noli, if he doesn’t commit to their cause, or destroy the chances of anybody chosen by gma.
Bert: “As it stands now, of the institutions available in a democracy, only the Senate is standing that can be relied upon by the people.”
Maybe just one of the few remaining ones. Most have already been destroyed since 2001. For me, the Senate (despite its own failings) is doing its mandated job as part of the mechanism for check and balance.
Without it, the whole system is like a living hell. No wonder some would like to see it abolished. It’s probably the last bastion of opposition voice to a calloused, greedy, power-obsessed megalomaniac govt under this pretentious lady.
speaking of “gridlockâ€Â, i think we need a little more statesmanship among our senators rather than brinkmanship. let’s not kid ourselves as to their real motives – the “discovery†of a smoking gun with which to nail the president. and they will risk an unnecessary constitutional crisis, or political gridlock, to persist in that nebulous quest.
=========================================================
sooooooooooo true, bencard!!!!!!!
maginoo,
‘i just asked pilipinoparin in the other thread why asian-americans, inluding fil-ams, are supporting clinton instead of obama. wouldn’t obama do more or at least be more sympathetic to your immigrant causes there in the u.s. makes me wonder?’
Experience is the main issue not immigration. Immigration is just a side show not the main event.
maginoo: Asian-am’s preference for Hillary versus Obama.
(1) I doubt that Koreans (and Asian “yellow’s”) have already forgotten that blacks torched their businesses when blacks rioted against the whites during the “Rodney King”/Can’t-we-all-get-along incident. (2) Victimization-cum-Entitlement”/”the-world-owes-us” is something that Latinos, Asian and even African immigrants may not be able to relate to, and Obama-the-Democrat may appear to be from this thinking versus Colin-Powell-the-Republican. (3) Clinton is much better known to the Asian-am community.
Another fiery movie, coming up!!!!
———————-
FITNA, by Wilders
AMSTERDAM (Reuters March 6, 2008) – The Netherlands is to raise its national risk level of a terrorist attack to “substantial,” partly due to a new film made by a politician that is expected to be critical of the Koran, media reported on Thursday. The justice minister is expected to send parliament an updated threat assessment later in the day, also citing a heightened terrorism threat level around the world, unnamed cabinet sources told ANP news agency.
The level had been at “substantial” before as religious and racial tensions simmered after an Islamic militant killed director Theo Van Gogh in 2004 over a separate film he made accusing Islam of condoning violence against women.
The Dutch government has warned the latest film, expected to be released this month by right-wing politician Geert Wilders, might spark unrest and economic sanctions similar to the reaction seen after Danish newspapers published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in 2006.
Wilders has given few details about the film he is calling “Fitna,” an Arabic term used in the Koran and sometimes translated as “strife.” He has called the Koran a “fascist” book that incites violence and said it should be banned.
. . .
No Dutch broadcaster wants to show the new film, the Volkskrant newspaper reported on Thursday, meaning Wilders will probably launch it on the Internet and at a news conference in The Hague, tentatively scheduled for March 28, ANP reported.
A majority of Dutch people want the film to be broadcast even though they fear it will stoke tension with Muslims and harm relations with Arab nations, a poll showed on Wednesday.
Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen met ambassadors from Muslim countries on Wednesday to discuss the film and stress that the government did not share Wilders’ views. He asked them to make sure that Dutch citizens and buildings abroad are protected.
…
maginoo,
Im not really as supporter of clinton. to me either candidate is good for me. I cannot voter here yet you know becuase im not a citizen yet ( and dont have plan to apply for citizenship so far)
I just like that comeback thing that Hilary just did last week. That liking has nothing to with my being a Filipino or asian.
As far as immigration, I believe both are pro legalization of elligal immigrants. So it really doesn’t matter much who got teh nomiations.
Actually I find their platform almost the same. And that could be one of the reason why people is having difficulty on deciding whom to vote. I said it before, that if I were to vote, I will vote for Hilary this year and vote for Barrack after 8 years. Hilary is already 61 so this is her last chance, while Obama is only 42 so 8 years from now he will 50. He willbe very much prepared for president.
Regarding the change thing that Obama is talking about in the campaign. I dont think he will be able to turn around America that radically. Just like Pilipinoparin, I believe its more like rhetorics.
I believe the most practical approach is to use Hilary first. Do her kind of change and get Obama later to improve whatever change she has implemented.
That way they both make history and Americans got to experince a woman president and a black president ina span of 16 years
As far as immigartion, I think both of them has
the senate did the right thing. indeed, it will set a precedent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
countdown continues… DAY 8
Kung experience din lang aang kulang ke Obama…
kung di makuha ni obama nomination ;to gain that experience kailangan tanggapin nya ang VP kung ioffer sa kanya.
Another issue here is the economy, thanks to the advisers of Clinton to highlight the problem of the economy,by coaching Clinton to remark that It’s the economy,stupid!
Itong problema na ito,sa tingin nila Hilary would be the one to lift them out of the pits.
Tama po ba mga Fil-am na kapatid?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On brinkmanship.
May I ask that how can,just allowing the SC to decide with finality lead to the brink of disaster?para naman sana,me Pinoy Jurisprudence naman tayong pagbabasihan di na lang palagi yung Nixon scenario.
teka di ba dati brinkmanship at satemanship sa diplomatic environment lang,ngayon obviously hindi na ganun ang kaso tulad ng gridlock dati sa traffic lang.
My, my, the admin guys have suddenly gone from Siraulo Crazy Mailed Fist Stance to an Angelic Harp Appeal. But from the experiences we had in the years of lying, story-spinning, repression, abuses and other nefarious deeds, we will not be deceived this time around. There are at the very least 53 issues to be answered many of them having multiple sub-issues: bayanikabayan.blogspot.com/2008/02/blogswarmers-of-our-race-unite-gloria.html (dated Feb. 24, 2008)
RP Economic Growth a Pipe Dream?
Here’s something from oblivious leisure time patriots and callous ex-Filipinos-turned-brown-primates…
ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Philippines-Critical-Dev-Constraints/critical-dev-constraints.pdf
And here’s more:
—————–
ADB: RP growth among most inequitable in region
by Anthony Ian Cruz
The Arroyo administration’s much-touted “highest economic growth†is “among the most inequitable†in the region, according to a new report of the Asian Development Bank which also said government corruption continues to hamper development in the country.
In an 83-page study “Philippines: Critical Development Constraints,†the ADB downplayed Malacañang’s declarations of an economic take-off, saying that “while growth has picked up in recent years, with the economy in 2007 posting its highest growth of 7.3 percent in the last three decades, both public and private investment remain sluggish and their share in gross domestic product has continued to decline, raising the question of whether the current economic momentum can be sustained.â€Â
“In per capita terms, the growth was even less favorable,†said the ADB, pointing out from 1961-2006, “per capita gross GDP grew 1.4 percent annually compared with 3.6 percent in Indonesia, 3.9 percent in Malaysia, and 4.5 percent in Thailand.â€Â
The low per capita GDP growth has resulted in a slow pace of poverty reduction and high income inequality.
The government yesterday reported that 26.9 percent of families in 2006 were below the official poverty threshold.
“In 2003, about 25 percent of Philippine families and 30 percent of the population were deemed poor and, in 2006, the Gini coefficient of per capita income – at slightly over 0.45 – was among the highest in Southeast Asia,†said the ADB.
The Gini coefficient measures inequality of income or wealth distribution.
The ADB study also said corruption and governance issues are among the biggest stumbling blocks to attaining long-term and equitable growth.
“Poor performance on key governance aspects, in particular, control of corruption and political stability, has eroded investor confidence,†the ADB said citing several international studies and surveys suggesting that “the Philippines’ ranking in the control of corruption and maintaining political stability has worsened.â€Â
According to the ADB, “the Philippines has scored lowest among countries with similar per capita GDP levels on control of corruption and political stability since 1996, and on rule of law since 2002.â€Â
STABILITY SLIPPING
The country has also “lost momentum in controlling corruption, and has allowed Vietnam and fairly soon, Indonesia, to pass it. In the case of political stability, the Philippines has slipped, particularly relative to the 1998 level,†the ADB added.
The ADB explained that political problems comparable to the 1980s, which caused a decline in foreign direct investments, have not disappeared “in sharp contrast to surges in Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand†that have cleaned up their governments and instituted reform measures.
The report said “instability was manifested in a number of political events in 2000, 2005-2006, and 2007 that sorely tested constitutional processes.â€Â
“The perception of worsening corruption was found to partly explain the low investment rate in the Philippines. Poor governance was also found to translate into higher lending rates, reflective of premiums for worsening corruption, political instability, and internal conflict, acting as disincentives to private investment. A key reason for weak revenue generation – leakages in revenue collection – is rooted in persistent corruption and patronage problems,†said the report.
The report argues that governance concerns underline other critical constraints. For instance, corruption undermines tax collection and reduces resources for infrastructure development.
“Similarly, the political instability hinders investment and growth and reduces the tax base,†said the report.
TIGHT FISCAL SITUATION
The country’s fiscal situation also “remains tight despite the government making good progress to reduce deficits and aims to balance its budget in 2008.â€Â
“It said that much of the reduction in fiscal deficit has been driven by deep cuts in spending on social and economic services and sale of government assets,†said the report.
The ADB also noted “declining public and private sector investments in infrastructure†which has led to “inadequate and poor infrastructure and bottlenecks†that raised the cost of doing business in the country and eroded the competitiveness and attractiveness to both foreign and local investors.
“Per capita paved road length for the Philippines is roughly one-sixth that of Thailand and one-fourth of Malaysia,†said the report.
Poor infrastructure and weak investor confidence have led to weak flows of foreign direct investment (FDI), the report said pointing out that the Philippines only got FDIs worth $1.1 billion in 2001-2006, compared with $6.1 billion for Thailand and $3.9 billion for Malaysia.
It said the country’s lower FDI “partly explains a smaller and narrower industrial base compared to its neighbors whose share of manufacturing in GDP is 34.8 percent in Thailand and 30.6 percent in Malaysia. The Philippines’ record is 23.5 percent.
IMPACT ON POVERTY
In a statement, ADB chief economist Ifzal Ali said “targeting and removal of the most critical constraints will lead to the highest returns for the country. It will spur investment, which in turn will lead to sustained and high growth and create more productive employment opportunities.â€Â
“This would ensure that the fruits of development are shared by all,†Ali added.
The United Opposition said government figures showing an increase in the number of poor Filipinos is the best argument for President Arroyo to resign.
“Her misplaced economic policies and the massive corruption have led us to this situation,†said UNO president and Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay.
He said Arroyo has consistently justified her stay in power by citing the supposed gains in the economy under her term.
“Now that government figures show that she has failed to improve the lot of million of Filipinos, and has in fact increased the number of poor Filipinos, it’s time for her to go,†he said.
The National Statistical Coordinating Board said Tuesday that poverty incidence in the Philippines worsened to 32.9 percent in 2006 from 30 percent in 2003.
ONLY ARROYO ALLIES
Binay said the only ones benefiting are Arroyo cronies and business associates, and political allies “who make millions in kickbacks and juicy government contracts.â€Â
Sen. Mar Roxas bewailed the rising incidence of poverty from 2003 to 2006 as reported by the NSCB.
He said this only shows government is busy covering up anomalies and neglecting its duty to provide relief for the public in the midst of rising prices of oil and other commodities.
The NCSB figures, he said, clearly showed a disconnect between the financial markets and the grassroots economy, and a widening gap between rich and poor. From 4 million poor families in 2003, this went up to 4.7 million in 2006.
The National Economic and Development Authority on Wednesday said poverty worsened because of increasing prices of commodities and the insufficient income of the citizenry, with “external factors†like high oil prices playing a role.
good morning barangay butlug
there is no end to these lip and text services, its been years since last election and you’re still here dicussing the same single issue- ouster of a sitting president..
shrinking constituency? maybe in imperial manila(its not RP), stoppage of political machinery? not quite, only if you watch ANC
maybe this barangay uses something different.. no more rallies, no more senate investigations, no high falutin’ political discussions, no quick fixes, look for long term reforms
and Ms Pamintuan’s column says use the money trail stupid(mine)…use all your resources, networking doing this rather than facing your laptops for hours after hours on endless discussions
excerpts..
When the supposed fountain of truth turns out to be dry, what do we do?
Senators  or interested parties  can put together teams of capable, dedicated and hardworking lawyers and financial experts who can uncover the money trail. That trail can be more incriminating than the truth as told by witnesses, some of whom have dubious credentials.
There is no substitute for painstaking hard work; there are no quick fixes here. Solid evidence must be dug up, to pin down those who have salted away wealth amassed illegally. That wealth must be confiscated and the guilty punished.
There must be Filipinos out there who are still fired by idealism and a desire for long-term reforms, who will go beyond Senate testimonies to produce the evidence that will pin down the guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Seminars given :
1) Soap Making
2) Hair Dressing
3) Post Mortem Cosmetology
4) Pedicure, Manicure, Alot*
5) Astrology 101: Madam Auring Divination Techniques
*alot – bisaya for gupit
Inggit lang kayo?! 🙂
bago sana nag expose’ si lozada, ito sana ang kanyang ginawa. he should have painstakingly collected concrete evidence. kayang kaya niya kasi insider siya. sayang, mapupunta na naman sa wala. di mo malaman tuloy if he’s a parrot or a patriot. sila-sila nag ka onsehan?
There must be Filipinos out there who are still fired by idealism and a desire for long-term reforms, who will go beyond Senate testimonies to produce the evidence that will pin down the guilty beyond reasonable doubt. – James
I couldn’t agree with you more…