Commission Edited New

In the world of politics, the phrase "pork barrel" is common parlance.
It is a
term that refers to politicians at the national level spending enormous sums of money
in their respective local voting districts in the hopes of persuading people to re-elect
them at the next election. The reasoning behind the practice is based on the
assumption that the money that is allotted to the representative's district will improve
the lives of the local residents, which will in turn secure the constituents' support and
votes. In this sense, support can also take the form of financial contributions to that
politician's upcoming election campaign.
A notorious illustration of pork barrel politics is the "Big Dig" tunnel project
in Boston, which was intended to relocate a 3.5-mile stretch of highway below. The
project was given the catchy nickname "the Big Dig." In 1982, the project was kicked
off by Thomas "Tip" O'Neill Jr., who was serving as Speaker of the House at the time.
He did this by allocating federal monies to the tunnel project. The initial budget of $3
billion was greatly exceeded, and the project was finally finished in 2007 at a cost of
approximately $15 billion, bringing the total to virtually complete.
In the Philippines, our first notion of pork barrel and its purpose was cynical.
Largely shaped by the 2013 pork barrel scam conspired by Janet Lim Napoles and
other lawmakers, Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla.
While ite reputation maybe stained, Pork Barrel was originally intended to serve as a
palliative remedy or "band-aid" to fix some key symptomatic problems caused by
deeper systemic root causes inherent in the overall Philippine "System." It is a
strategic use of politics to further the outcomes of good governance, and provide or
cover up for gaps in the sustainable development of respective communities. A
special privilege given for lawmakers, and their respective provinces or cities, the
pork barrel system is not inherently negative, it is beneficial, however has costs and
compromises. While it takes advantage of the system, pork barrel may so be utilized
for the unjustified interests of politicians, especially with the reluctant presence of
checks and balances regulating them. This is often so why residents of a particular
city or province count on from their local politicians who enter the national arena of
politics.
The institution of the Pork Barrel intends, rightly or wrongly, to fix the
following:
Widespread poverty and perceived need to "assist the poor". The problem of
massive poverty and the mendicant attitude that had been nurtured in the Philippines
has caused politicians to think that it is absolutely necessary for them to hand-out pork
barrel largesse.
The question is, how much of the intended pork goes directly to the people for
its purpose? As political analysts we are also mindful of the systemic effects of pork
barrel, the indivisible emergence of the Padrino or Patronage System that has plagued
society and the achievement of justice. How then that one alternative to the systemic
problems of the Philippines, also leaves the country imprisoned due to one?
Instead of handing out dole-outs, why don't legislators push for ways to create
real jobs in their communities? The Philippines, sad to say, uses a Presidential
System. Presidential Systems feature a separation of powers between legislative and
executive. The Executive may want to do something, but the Legislature may block it.
That clash between the two branches is called GRIDLOCK.
And Gridlock is wasteful and unproductive. Simply removing the "supply" by

abolishing the pork barrel fund will not work, since the demand will continue. Cutting
off supply without finding ways to reduce demand in the first place will mean that
future leaders and politicians will very likely end up reviving the Pork Barrel system.
We must remove all the reasons why People ask for such dole-outs. And we must
eliminate whatever causes the imbalance between the Capital and the Countryside.
Evolving Federalism aims to empower the regions in a gradualist "when you

can" fashion that concentrates firstly on giving the regional authorities the ability to
attract investors into their regions. This is very much tied to Economic Liberalization,
but this time, the regions themselves will be empowered to take the initiative to more
actively "court investors". Simply shifting over to a Parliamentary System
immediately eliminates the gridlock problem, thus eliminating the key "supply-side"
rationale behind the institutionalization of the pork barrel fund. Parliamentary systems
also feature a superior, more transparent, and more accountable means of checks and
balance. Unlike presidential systems which rely on gridlock as a means of having the
executive check on the legislature, Parliamentary Systems have the opposition
Minority checking upon the Majority bloc who runs the Government.
Parliamentary Systems fuse the legislature and executive together and thus do
not have gridlock, then there would be no need for a Pork Barrel fund to entice the
legislature to cooperate with the executive. It's interesting to note that the term "Pork
Barrel" has its origins as an American term and is associated primarily with the
Presidential System. The Pork Barrel fund was meant to "solve" a few problems. But
the Pork Barrel has a lot of totally harmful side-effects. We need to get rid of the
reasons why the pork barrel was thought of as a palliative "quick-fix" in the first
place.
Whether the creation of the Pork Barrel System was motivated or rationalized
for the interests of the few or the many, the costs of such intervention must be lesser
than the benefits perceived. The issue to the various resolutions coming up to abolish
the Pork Barrel System may in the case of the Philippines be more beneficial rather
than detrimental given the deep-seated corruption embedded in the system. I think
that for the Filipinos to reclaim the rights and blessings of democracy, empowerment,
accountability, and transparency must be integrated back again. Our problem, so far,
is not the political system to adapt, but the values and competence that goes with the
people we elect into office. As they say, Public Office is a public trust, our citizenship
does not end at following laws and processes, or by suffrage, it begins right when our
interests for the rule of law, truth, justice, and equity are inadequate. We should get to
the roots of our problems instead of just ignoring them. Band-aid "quick-fixes"
merely attempt to suppress the surface-symptoms but also often end up having serious
side-effects. Let's seek to truly solve the problems of the country by looking at the
bigger picture. Fix the system, all 3 aspects of it.

Commission Edited New

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Commission Edited New

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Commission Edited New

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In the world of politics, the phrase "pork barrel" is common parlance.

And Gridlock is wasteful and unproductive. Simply removing the "supply" by

Evolving Federalism aims to empower the regions in a gradualist "when you

You might also like