FEDERALISM WITHOUT TEARS

For The Bohol Tribune

In This Our Journey

NESTOR MANIEBO PESTELOS

Last Thursday night, I arrived home in time to watch former Senator Aquilino Pimental, Jr.,  being interviewed on TV 5 about the talk of the hour, the adoption of the Federal form of government by the incoming Duterte administration.

Being a long-time advocate of federalism, along with former UP President Jose Abueva, the Senator looked and sounded like an elderly statesman, as in the old days. This time, on this TV show, he seemed to have a perpetual grin on his face. He brought his decades-long advocacy to this level in which he predicted that in two years’ time, legislation would put in place the Federal Republic of the Philippines.

His thick crop of white hair, more pronounced and visible now, and familiar slightly hoarse voice, bestowed on him the same gravitas as in those days when he was introducing bills in the Senate, one of which became the much-discussed decentralization law of 1991.  

That law actually was a breakthrough in the advocacy to give local governance and, by extension, their local communities, greater say in the management of their affairs.

Prior to that law, there were victories achieved in the creation of development councils at regional, provincial, municipal/city and barangay levels which oddly enough, under martial law,  have provided mechanisms for greater participation of sub-national levels of governance in the planning and implementation of projects.

Several decades later, under the decentralization law authored by Sen. Pimentel, responsibilities for key programs in agriculture, health, tourism, and other sectors were devolved to the local level. He himself acknowledged that not enough financial resources have been given to local governments to be able to implement these programs.

He said that under that law, local governments are getting only 20% of revenues collected. In contrast, under a federal set-up, local governments would get 80% of total revenues and other income generated from other sources.

With this larger share of income, local governments will take care of building their schools, hospitals, and other infrastructures, and run their services. At the national level, the Government will take care of security, diplomacy, and overseeing the maintenance of standards for health, education, social welfare and other services. Provinces will be grouped into Federal States with Metro Manila as the seat of the Federal Government.

Greater administrative and financial authority will be devolved to sub-national levels or States and a capital designated for each cluster of member provinces. Sen. Pimentel sees no problem in creating this institutional framework. Asked on who would take care of States which are relatively more disadvantaged resource-wise than others, he said a Bank would be created where these States could secure loans.

Politically, he sees federalism as solving Muslim Mindanao’s propensity to secede. Under Federalism, it will be granted its own State to run and manage without dismembering the Republic. Federalism is the long sought-after solution to the Mindanao conflict which has cost so many lives over the years of struggle and conflict among Filipinos.

This line of thinking by Sen. Pimentel and others in his group, which now has expanded to include other political parties, validates the significance of federalism at this stage of our national life. We must be aware, however, that federalism has two faces. After listening to Sen. Pimentel, I refer back to the digital notes I made some time back when decentralization was first talked about among colleagues involved in participatory development.  

I will pick some relevant notes for this column –

I find as quite relevant what Donna Barry of Penn State University has said on the subject of federalism in relation to democracy and markets in her paper, “Two Faces of Federalism”:

“In the past 15 years, research on newly democratic countries has come to reflect two increasingly divergent views of federalism. For one school, the division of powers among two or more levels of government provides a critical anchor for developing democracy and markets. For the other school, federalism creates yet another set of problems that new democracies must somehow overcome.”

On the threshold of new changes in our form of government, it is best to reflect on both the benefits and perceived disincentives in adopting federalism. First, on the benefits:

“For its proponents, federalism provides a number of political advantages that help to strengthen democratic governance. One is responsiveness. Where regional governments possess substantial authority, they can react more quickly and effectively than central governments to satisfy the preferences of the local citizenry. Central governments, in this view, are simply too large and too slow to identify and respond to all of the diverse demands of citizens in different regions.

“A second advantage is that federations provide more opportunities for meaningful citizen participation in public decision-making below the central level Public participation, in turn, should increase the accountability of regional and local officials. Citizens have more opportunities and more incentive to choose their representatives and to monitor their work.

“With expanded participation comes a third advantage – increased political competition. Regional- or state-level elections multiply the potential “entry points” for new candidates and parties, and thus provide additional opportunities for representation of diverse groups and interests. In newly democratizing countries, the opportunities are especially important for opposition groups. As a result, increased participation and competition make it less likely that new democracies will revert to old authoritarian modes of rule.

“Advocates of federalism also see important economic advantages as well. One advantage is that regional/state governments compete among themselves to attract business, investment and skilled labor. Such competition typically makes it costly for any government – central or regional – to impose excessive regulations or taxes. And the less the government regulation, the more effectively the economy can develop.

“In other words, economic competition across regions helps to limit the role of government in the economy. If one regional government imposes higher taxes or excessive regulations, businesses and investors will seek another region with less burdensome restrictions. And if a regional government is ineffective in providing public services – such as education or public safety – then residents with the most valuable skills will move to regions that perform more effectively. In this sense, citizens, businesses and investors all ‘vote with their feet,’ i.e., they move to regions with more effective public services and less burdensome government involvement in business.”

In this era of globalization, there is a push towards decentralization: “Increasingly open trade and investment flows demanded smaller and more flexible organizations that could adapt readily to changing market conditions – in government as well as in business. For regional governments, dependence on the center thus became a serious economic disadvantage.”

On the other hand, here are some observations and insights from “real world” federalism and decentralization as cited in the paper:

-Any region that pursues economic reform by itself is unlikely to solve economic problems that are essentially national in scope. And many regions face concentrated costs – for example, the closing of a major factory has far more impact at the regional than at the national level. As a result, many regional governments have appeared unwilling to support needed but painful economic reforms.

-In some cases, regional governments have pursued policies directly at odds with the center’s. Thus federal governments seeking to limit government spending and maintain monetary discipline have faced regions with expanding government payrolls and rising budget deficits. The problems have been even greater where subnational governments have had the power to borrow money to finance government spending. They could spend with impunity, while leaving the federal government to rescue them from default.

-Regions may pursue policies that are popular locally – such as providing government jobs, overspending and the like – but at the expense of effective management of the economy as a whole.

-Since regions typically have few tax sources of their own, they may end up relying on a “quasi-fiscal” strategy to raise revenues… Such regions impose a variety of regulations, licensing requirements and other devices as a way of raising revenue indirectly. But the various fees raise the fiscal burden on businesses and citizens, and make government finances less transparent. The end result is to undermine economic development.

-Regions that require residency permits, for example, or impose other similar rules, limit mobility of labor. Regions that require government purchasing to be limited only to internal suppliers may end up spending far more, or compromising on quality or fit. Regions may also adopt protectionist strategies that shield local enterprises from central taxes and regulations… Thus regions may compete with each other, but in ways that undermine rather than enhance the country’s overall economic performance.

- Another view suggests that federalism simply multiplies the number of governments – and number of government officials – with the power to demand bribes, kickbacks, or other forms of payment.

-A third view suggests that regional governments face more problems in promoting transparency of governmental activity. Given their limited resources, regional governments often find it difficult to publish full and timely information about their activities on a regular basis. It is typically far easier to find information on government policies and performance for countries as a whole than for individual regions. And if information is lacking about state/regional government activity, then there are fewer opportunities for citizens to hold their government accountable.

- State governments added more employees to their payrolls, ran substantial budget deficits, and borrowed with impunity – leaving the federal government to bail them out. Central government efforts to control inflation and promote sound fiscal policies were thus impaired by the inability to constrain regional governments.  

According to one assessment, devolution [in one country] had created “predatory federalism” that undermined federal government’s economic policies.

On account of these negative experiences, the paper notes:

“… now the prescription for reform emphasized a combination of more centralized government and privatization of public services. Newly democratic federations have attempted to follow suit, by imposing more fiscal discipline.”

These observations have been derived from the experiences of what have been termed as Third Wave countries or new democracies, but they may be relevant as we embark on a yet unchartered course towards Federalism in our country.

Indeed let us have Federalism without tears by anticipating constraints and lining up options to address them more systematically which will serve as better than resorting to sloganeering and reciting “hugot” lines. ###

NMP/27 May 2016/5.38 p.m.

LEARNING FROM THE DRUG REHAB CENTER RUN BY DAVAO CITY LGU

For The Bohol Tribune

In This Our Journey

NESTOR MANIEBO PESTELOS

When I opened my Facebook page early Tuesday morning, I was greeted by three posts shared by a high school classmate and close friend, Isabel Losloso-Rivera, who has lived in the US for decades. She actually posted them in our high school alumni website, QPHS Mahal Ko; QPHS means Quezon Provincial High School, located in the provincial capital, Lucena City.

Like the rest of us in our Class 1958 batch, Isa is on her 70s and has several grand-children and dotes on them. Some of her posts understandably enough are about the seemingly endless parties she attends or helps arrange for her Apos. Filipinos the world over seem to have adopted the term Apos-tolic for all these activities which have something to do with caring for grandchildren

Isa helps raise funds for the advocacies of our NGO here in Bohol. The three posts she shared which I read this morning are all related to our current advocacy that Government agencies and civil society organizations must seek ways to either work together or complement funding and staff resources to put up community-based drug rehabilitation centers.

The existing 30-client drug rehab center in our province, put up by two private entities from Ozamis City and Minglanilla, Cebu, even if fully operational, will not make a dent on the current drug addiction problem in Bohol. We need more than one center or an expanded one to cope with the problems created by the illegal drug trade which has taken seemingly secure root in the province during recent years.  

It’s important that those in local government to be all ears to what is being announced by the Duterte administration prior to the formal take-over of Government next month. That’s why the three posts shared by my high school classmate, Isa, are quite important, specifically in relation to the campaign against illegal drug use that the Duterte government considers as top priority.

The first post is about the announcement by the President-elect that he would start the war against drugs right at the barangay level. He says the “inutility” of barangay captains accounts for the “flooding and proliferation of drugs” and the problem starts from there because they know who are involved but do nothing about it.

He will create the equivalent of a citizens army, something like the Home Guards in the fifties, the Barrio Self-Defense Units (BSDUs) in the sixties or the Civilian Home Defense Force (CHDF) in recent times, serving as local armed groups against those termed as insurgents by the State.

The new group to be created will be named Special Civilian Armed Auxiliary (SPCAA). It will be composed of persons who have finished the Reserved Officers Training Course (ROTC) or retired soldiers “who know how to handle guns and have experience in law enforcement.” The armed civilians will be supervised by the barangay captains but they would be required to report to the police precinct commanders.

The primary targets will be drug lords and drug pushers who may not be addicts themselves but they destroy lives. The post quoted the President-elect as saying during the first press conference after the elections: “Those who destroy the lives of our children must be destroyed. Those who will kill my country will be killed. Simple as that – no middle ground, no apologies, no excuses.”

The second post shared by former high school classmate took me by surprise. It’s about the drug rehab center run by the Davao LGU. I did not know such a facility exists in the city. None of those we interviewed about drug rehab centers in Davao City mentioned this LGU-run center. Probably due to lack of publicity about the center, what became foremost in the minds of people was the punisher’s approach to drug pushers and abusers.

This post, taken from the website Pinoy Trending, talks about a drug rehab program that Mayor Duterte wants replicated throughout the country. Here is the complete post:

"People thought that Ex Davao Mayor and now President Rodrigo Duterte is ruthless to the people who became addicted to illegal drugs, but the truth is, the Punisher is giving a chance to the people who wants to change and escape the addiction that destroyed their life.

“Rodrigo Duterte is offering 2,000 pesos monthly allowance to every drug-addicted citizen of Davao … willing to undergo the drug rehabilitation program of Davao.

“The Ex-Mayor sees that everyone … deserves  a second chance to change and the supporters of the punisher explained that Duterte is ruthless only [to] Drug Lords and Pushers who really destroy the life of many Filipino youth.

 “ The Davao City Treatment and Rehabilitation Center is a residential facility with a 1.2 hectares lot and is 16.7 kilometers away from the … noises of city life. [It is] located in Barangay Bago Oshiro, Tugbok District, Davao City.

“The place offers an ambiance of silence, solemnity and soberness as manifested by its lush surroundings adorned with fruit bearing trees, flowers and other ornamentals.

“To blend with nature, man-made structures such as ponds, fountains, tree house and kiosk are built not as decorative but those that are with therapeutic use. Covered court and sports equipment are also made available as complement to its sports and recreation program.”

The post says the President-elect is planning to implement this project in the whole country, including the National Capital Region.

The third post shared also by my high school classmate gives more details about this facility which grew out of the Rehabilitation Center for Drug Dependents (RCDD), established on May 23, 1985 as a pioneering initiative of the DSWD Regional Office XI  with the support of the Regional Council for Welfare of Children and Youth (RCWCY), the City Government of Davao, and several NGOs.

In more than a decade of program operations, the center has served a significant number of clientele/beneficiaries specifically the male drug and chemical abusers/dependents and non-psychotic cases ages 12-25 years old.

The City Government of Davao and the Department of Social Welfare and Development R.O. XI signed a Memorandum of Agreement on June 11, 2001, which transferred to the City LGU the operation and maintenance of the Rehabilitation Center for Drug Dependents (RDD)).

Pursuant to this MOA, the City Government of Davao  is responsible for  the operations and maintenance of the center. It shall plan, design, implement and evaluate treatment and rehabilitation program for drug dependents in Davao City.

A total amount of Twelve (12) Million Pesos was allocated initially by the City Government “to construct new facilities and renovate existing structures and thus make Davaoenos feel that the local government of Davao is serious in its campaign for a drug-free city in the near future.”

The Davao City rehab center, renamed the Davao City Treatment and Recovery Center for Drug Dependents (DCTRCDD) on October 29, 2009, now boasts of state-of-the art facilities which include among others a chapel, music room and counseling room. It is claimed the facility has become “truly an ideal place for physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual rehabilitation.”

The post adds: “It provides twenty-four (24) hour rehabilitation services which are provided by an interdisciplinary staff.” Its clients include both males and females, minors and adults, drug/substance dependents and non-psychotic cases with court orders who were apprehended and voluntarily submitting themselves for rehabilitation.

The residents are clustered into centers for minors, women and adults. An average of 50, 10 and 40 residents may be accommodated, respectively, at the rehab center or a maximum capacity of one hundred (100) residents at any given time.

As expected, there were problems met during the initial years when the city government assumed responsibility for operations of the drug rehab center:

“At the start of the operation, there were problems as to the implementation since policies, programs and rules and regulations were not so clear to the staff. Personnel were in crisis because of sudden change of work assignments [during] the transition period.

‘When the old management was replaced, there was a gradual change. Clear policies, programs and rules and regulations were properly installed. Consultations, meetings and experimentation have been regularly done. Strategies [and] innovations were employed. Evaluation plays an important role in checking whether the new program strategies [were] introduced. The first two years … proved  to be tough  and challenging  in terms of installing, implementing and strengthening  of its programs , policies and services of rehabilitation.

“ Our attendance in trainings … has enhanced our capabilities, skills, and knowledge in handling drug dependents. Issues, concerns and gaps have been properly addressed thru regular meetings, consultations, right feed backing as well as counseling among peers; spiritual enrichment sessions and recollection have given us proper direction in discharging our different assignments and tasks.

”

It has become a success story and model for other LGUs wanting to set up drug rehab centers:

“Now, the DCTRCDD not only provides  services  that rehabilitate  drug dependents  but also  serves as  the training ground  of the other regions planning  to put up  similar institution like ours and those who are in after care and follow- up services, coping skills  and relapse prevention”, both in the Philippines and abroad.

Let us either visit this Center in Davao City, if project visits are still allowed under the Duterte Administration, or let us invite some resource persons from its management and staff and extract valuable lessons on how LGUs can establish such a vital facility to address this persistent drug menace in our midst. ###

NMP/18 May 2016/5.52 p.m. 

The Politics of Gratitude (Or It's more Fun in the Philippines During Election Time)

For The Bohol Tribune

In This Our Journey

NESTOR MANIEBO PESTELOS

When election time comes around in our country, which is relatively more often than in many other so-called democracies, I cannot help thinking about my mother. From her I learned the primary reason to vote on election time, which is to thank those who have done the family a favor. This to say that the reason not to vote for someone is either the candidate has not done us a favor at all or the person has refused in the past to grant a request for personal favor.

Such was the democratic exercise I knew when I was growing up in a barangay in our home province, Quezon, where elections were in the days of my youth and probably until today, an exercise to thank those who have done us personal favors.

The other reasons cited for voting, such as a person’s fitness for a position, outstanding leadership qualities, commitment to public service, unrelenting devotion to pro-poor development and so on ad nauseam,  seem to me in most cases an exercise in moral camouflage, if not sheer hypocrisy. Or so it seems to me today on the eve of our national elections considered by many as the most acrimonious in our history.

I remember accompanying Inay in the early morning hours, posting with sticky starch that served as glue, on mango trees that used to line both sides of the highway, a poster with a picture of a person surnamed Bueno, who wanted to be Senator. I asked my mother who was this smiling guy in coat and tie on the poster. It turned out she had not met him personally.

She said we owed him a lot because he was helping the family process the pension papers for my Grandfather, a World War II veteran. This was according to the lawyer who directly dealt with this guy Bueno.

I do not think my mother knew about party platforms, a candidate’s commitment or lack of it, to public service. She knew only one reason why we were going through this ordeal of putting up posters; it was to thank the candidate for his efforts to help the family.

I cannot recall if the guy won, probably not, because the surname does not ring a bell now, decades after my Inay and I would surreptitiously walk around in early dawn in our barangay putting up posters for his sake – a gesture of gratitude from a family he was helping get a monthly pension for the heroism of my maternal grandfather.

In later years, I would learn this from my Sociology classes, this sense of gratitude, a prism to view behavioral attitudes and tendencies, is known as “utang na loob” or debt of gratitude. At the level of the voter, I suspect this behavioral trait is the key factor in motivating a person to vote for a specific candidate.

People tend to vote largely based on personal relationships with the candidate or, in most cases, with the person, a group or relatives recommending a particular candidate. All other reasons are secondary.

Indeed the politics of gratitude will be a key factor in determining the outcome of the election. It was so during my mother’s time as it is now during the time of apparent sophistication, with computers and all, in our exercise of the democratic right to vote. In the end, it’s patronage politics that will subvert the democratic process meant supposedly for would-be political leaders to present options for better governance.

It will be good to observe behavior of candidates and voters during election time. From my vantage point, the campaign period which ends this Sunday has presented quite interesting developments not seen in previous election seasons.

The following will require in-depth analysis by political scientists, sociologists and others interested in how democracy works in a context requiring deep-seated structural and probably moral, reforms. I do not remember seeing these in previous political seasons in our country’s history. I lie awake at night thinking about these and their implications:

-The founder of the Communist Party of the Philippines on a video conference (no way  for me to know if this video is fake or not) with a presidential candidate, who had met with an armed group considered as rebels with full media coverage for the release of a policeman who has been held hostage for months.

-A political party, known exponent of decentralization and local autonomy, now chaired by the presidential candidate openly talking about killing criminals without due process, abolishing Congress, declaring a revolutionary government when elected; freeing some prominent prisoners from political dynasties convicted of plunder and other serious crimes;  

Note: This particular candidate’s rise to dominate the opinion polls despite pronouncements that seem to be against traditional and democratic values is itself a sociological phenomenon which needs in-depth analysis for the lessons to be learned about modern society and governance.

Many people believe this overwhelming demonstration of support for him  is due to widespread disillusionment about the system and the perceived ineptness of the Government to control crimes and the illegal drug trade. The popularity of the candidate across all sectors ma be considered a protest vote against the system or the Government and partly a support to the candidate’s intense and uncompromising stand on specific problems affecting the people, such as the drug menace, crimes and peace and order problem;

-A major religious group endorsing a vice presidential candidate from a family known for allegedly stealing billions from public funds and a regime that it established and nurtured characterized by torture, imprisonment and disappearance of hundreds of protesters mostly from among the young generation and despite protests from campus groups, this candidate has been leading in the pre-election surveys;

-A Presidential candidate becoming a shadow of her former brilliant and articulate personality reduced to having memory lapses, stuttering and limping due to poor health, instead of just   retiring to watch the unfolding political scene and dropping pick-up lines, her current preoccupation, now and then to amuse the young and not-so-young or, alternatively, to write memoirs about a colorful political career;

-A candidate, the most experienced among the aspirants, getting peeved but poker-faced rather than worried, when asked regarding allegedly ill-gotten wealth and his refusal to appear in the Senate to explain his side of the story;

-A candidate with relatively limited experience in public governance, supposed to be an Independent candidate, but winning voters for  announcing policies about budgetary allocation to projects all over the country which would require billions of pesos to implement, and more importantly, a political machinery, which she may not have, to back the reforms;

-A candidate with known credentials in public service and no record of corruption but struggling to be heard and listened to due to lack of charisma and flagrant inability to communicate effectively to a mixed audience of elites and the vast majority of the discontented masses.

-The political left being marginalized and coopted by the prevailing system which thrives on patronage by the elites who continue to control the country’s political and economic life through the coercive power of the State and laws which favor and protect their interests.

The “utang na loob” mentality continues to be entrenched as the cultural, emotional and intellectual basis to perpetuate a system dominated by those who dispense favors and privileges.

By next week, the results of the current elections will be known, probably contested but accepted nonetheless because in this country, it’s too expensive both in terms of time and moneyto file electoral protests. It’s the same cycle all over again to perpetuate the same system in favor of the few with most of us caught in petty quarrels and skirmishes to feed the mass media frenzy and thus help preserve in the process, the illusion we call democracy.

Indeed it’s more fun in the Philippines – especially during election time. For this reason and the obvious difficulty of choosing a suitable candidate given the marketing hype and what seems to be outright lying by each camp, I am having second thoughts on casting my vote on Monday.

We will continue to pray however and seek guidance on what to do when we wake up on election day. ###

NMP/06 May 2016/12.07 p.m.