Skip to content
post thumbnail

The choices we make

Congress is not a charitable institution to distribute ayuda or dole-outs, guarantee letters, or recommendations for employment. Nor is it an institution for lawbreakers or those who'd twist the definition of political dynasty to justify the existence of multiple family members in public office.

By Tita C. Valderama

Mar 4, 2025

4-minute read

Share This Article

:

The results of recent pre-election surveys for preferred senatorial candidates in the May 12 elections are quite depressing.

It has been said that the decisions we make today determine our future. Looking at the list of the likely winners in the surveys, I can’t help but shake my head and wish to have a pleasant surprise on election day for the best candidates to make it to the “Magic 12.”

From the results, it is obvious that popularity — or is it notoriety in some cases — that survey respondents consider the most important criteria in choosing their preferred candidates. Name recall, entertainment value, dynastic influence, public image or pretenses, and wealth appear to overshadow the more worthy qualifications of background or expertise and experience on the job, actual performance record, and genuine commitment to public service.

At this time when more people consider themselves poor, given the ever-increasing prices of basic necessities and more people losing their jobs, the country needs more qualified leaders to craft policies and programs that can ease poverty, generate more jobs, and provide better opportunities to a larger segment of the population.

We should all be reminded that the primary job of a senator is to craft legislation to address policy gaps, improve existing laws through amendments, scrutinize the annual budget of the national government, and exercise oversight functions, including the conduct of inquiries in aid of legislation, to hold erring officials accountable.

The Senate, or the entire Congress, is not a charitable institution to distribute ayuda or dole-outs, guarantee letters, or recommendations for employment.

Senators and congressmen are lawmakers. Congress is not an institution for lawbreakers or those who’d twist the definition of political dynasty to justify the existence of multiple family members in public office.

We often hear Congress being described as an august chamber or a hallowed institution. How I wish those mentioning these descriptions knew exactly what the words mean and lived by them. The dictionary defines august as respected and impressive, distinguished, eminent, venerable, illustrious. Hallowed means consecrated, revered and honored.

It is not a place to utter curse words, comb mustache, point fingers at invited resource persons, or engage in a shouting match with another senator or a guest during public hearings or plenary sessions.

A Senate seat is not a position to be inherited by another member of an influential or rich family that promises to fight for the poor but ends up taking advantage of poor people while their businesses grow and expand.

It seems that long before the election period, most of the candidates needed to be oriented on the job descriptions of a senator. Voters, too, have to be informed that not everything they see during the live-streamed public hearings and plenary sessions in the Senate is what the senators should be doing.

Of the top 12 candidates emerging in the pre-election surveys, 8 to 9 belong to political families. Of the three to four who are not, two are considered proxies of a political dynasty, and one did not even want to discuss his legislative agenda, saying he has not been elected yet.

Of those in the “winning” circle in the surveys, I would have wanted to vote for one. But then, when the election period neared, the candidate apparently set aside his anti-corruption advocacy upon joining a ticket endorsed by and including aspirants tainted by corruption scandals and even justifies the failure of a leader to deliver on a campaign promise that made him win votes in the previous election.

I have come across people who said they will not cast their vote in the upcoming elections for the lack or even absence of good choices among the candidates leading in the surveys. Many said they have a few candidates in mind, but it is unlikely they could make it higher in the ranking.

I always tell them to give their candidates a shot; they might make it. It has been said that “the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

For those of the same thinking, it may be worth it to also remind them of another saying, “Almost any decision is better than no decision at all.” Let’s be counted, even if our preferred candidates are nowhere near the top of the list in the surveys. Survey results can be wrong. Always remember that the choices we make determine our future.

The views in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of VERA Files.
This column also appeared in The Manila Times.

Get VERAfied

Receive fresh perspectives and explainers in your inbox every Tuesday and Friday.