Monday, October 30, 2006

2007 Senate Race as a National Referendum on Impeachment

Much credit goes to the organization OneVoice (headed by Christian Monsod and containing the CBCP leadership) for turning the tide against chacha this year. Had they not assembled such a credible group of citizens to say NO to chacha and the Lambino People's initiative, the 8-7 Supreme Court Decision might have had a different Conclusion--though I believe Tony Carpio would've been ponente either way, because he IS the next Chief Justice--(wink!).

But on top of a philosophically conservative opposition to a JDV-GMA-FVR initiative on the Constitution, OneVoice was the first to publicly voice the idea that 2007 can serve as a national referendum on the various thorny issues involving the impeachment of the President that has indeed, paralyzed the nation these past 18 months, ever since Ignacio Bunye held up those two Garci CDRoms for the Media but couldn't get it straight -- which was which.

In the 2007 midterm elections, all local elective positions from Mayor to Governor to Congressman will be contested. Half the Senate or twelve Senators will be elected at-large in national elections. Now, less than SEVEN months from the May, 2007 elections, one may well ask the question:

Can the results of the 2007 Midterm Elections tell us whether or not the Filipino people want President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo impeached?

Such a question can easily be answered it seems, because it only takes one-third of the Members of the Lower House to impeach a sitting President. So, the reasoning goes, the Opposition only needs to win 80 seats and GMA could easily be impeached. But twice already in 2005 and 2006, the Opposition has failed to muster the eighty (80) or so Congressmen to send the President for impeachment trial in the Senate.

Impeaching the President in the Lower House is actually less than half the battle for the Opposition to remove her from office. She must be convicted in the 24-Member Senate in a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Therefore, in the long run it is certain political suicide for the 80 Congressmen who vote for impeachment in the Lower House, IF the chances of gaining conviction in the Senate are NIL anyway.

GMA would likely have been acquitted by the present Senate if a trial were held in 2005 or 2006, given its composition. THAT is the real reason 80 Congressmen could not be assembled to vote for impeachment. They all figured it would be futile and suicide in the end! Many of these guyz may be corrupt local warlords, but they are not stupid.

Perhaps then, the better question to ask is this:

Can the 2007 Elections serve as a national referendum to tell us whether the Filipino People want the President convicted and removed from office?

This question can best be answered by the results of the 2007 Senate race. There two reasons for this assertion: (1) The Senate race is a nationwide election involving all the voters. (2) The voters know that conviction and removal depends on the Senate, where at least 16 Senators out of 24 are needed for conviction.

Now dig this. Take a look at the twelve senators that will be carried over in 2007 as incumbents serving out their last three years:
Manuel Roxas
Ramon Revilla, Jr.
Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.
Maria Ana Consuelo Madrigal
Richard Gordon
Pilar Juliana Cayetano
Miriam Defensor-Santiago
Alfredo Lim
Juan Ponce Enrile
Jinggoy Estrada
Manuel Lapid
Rodolfo Biazon
There are at least 8 incumbents in the above list who would likely vote for conviction if GMA ever darked the Senate's door in a trial in the above list. That means that the 2007 Senate race must be won by the Opposition by the exact proportion required for conviction. If the Opposition wins 8 or more seats in the 2007 elections, there will be a 2/3 majority Opposition in the Senate. There is a wrinkle: Miriam Defensor Santiago's health, but we won't go into that now.

No matter what actually happens in the Lower House races, the mere existence of a 2/3 Opposition Majority in the Senate--16 hanging Senator-Judges-- would increase the likelihood of an impeachment by the the Lower House.

In effect, the Filipino voters have the opportunity primarily in the senate race, to decide the fate of the President, just as One Voice suggested earlier this year.

If they elect 8 or more Opposition Senators in 2007, that would be a clear signal that their answer is YES, impeach, try, and convict President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. But if the Opposition wins 7 or fewer seats that would indicate the People likely do not want a trial at all.

Pulse Asia Surveys July 2006 Ulat ng Bayan
provides a SNAPSHOT of the 2007 Senate Race 10 months before the elections:
Twenty personalities, led by former Senator Loren Legarda, have a statistical chance of winning if the May 2007 senatorial elections were held today. Most of these individuals are affiliated with the political opposition, although given the fluidity of the country’s situation, the political affiliation of these individuals may still change between today and May 2007. Currently, the following individuals end up within the winning circle of 12 senators:
(1) former Senator Loren Legarda (48.6%);
(2) Senator Francis N. Pangilinan (39.0%);
(3) Senator Panfilo M. Lacson (34.9%);
(4) Senator Manuel B. Villar, Jr. (34.2%);
(5) Senator Ralph G. Recto (33.1%);
(6) former Senator Vicente C. Sotto III (31.0%);
(7) Atty. Aquilino Pimentel III (29.9%);
(8) Taguig-Pateros Representative Alan Peter S. Cayetano (29.5%);
(9) former Senator Greogorio B. Honasan (27.7%);
(10) San Juan Mayor JV Ejercito-Estrada (23.8%);
(11) Ilocos Norte Representative Imee R. Marcos (23.1%); and
(12) former Senator John Henry Osmeña (22.7%)
Given the survey’s margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points, the following probable senatorial candidates also have a statistical chance of winning:
(13.) Tarlac Representative Benigno C. Aquino III (21.8%);
(14.) Senator Luisa P. Estrada (21.7%);
(15.) Senator Joker P. Arroyo (21.0%);
(16.) Senator Edgardo J. Angara (20.9%);
(17.) House Minority Floor Leader Francis G. Escudero (20.2%);
(18.) former Senator Francisco S. Tatad (18.9%);
(19.) Presidential Chief of Staff Michael T. Defensor (18.7%); and
(20.) Muntinlupa Representative Rozzano Rufino B. Biazon (18.5%)
The year 2007 is going to be a very exciting election for Philippine Democracy! The last time we held an impeachment trial, Hilario Davide, Angelo Reyes, Gloria Arroyo and Cardinal Sin didn't think we could take the Rule of Law and see the trial through. So they did the coup called Edsa 2.


Now, the People will decide. Not them!

40 comments:

john marzan said...

ito ang mga senador na up for re-elections sa 2007.

joker
lacson
magsaysay
recto
serge osmena
loi estrada
drilon
flavier
angara
pangilinan
villar

sino dito ang malamang na hindi boboto para sa impeachment?

i'm not voting for angara and recto, that is for sure.

sa tingin ko hindi na tatakbo si flavier.

i'm still not sure about sen. noted and manny villar.

the rest like loi, magsaysay, lacson, drilon and serge will probably vote for impeachment.

i may vote for joker even if he's not exactly with the opposition.

And here's the rest of the candidates i'll vote for, to replace the pro-arroyo ones.

1) Chiz Escudero
2) Alan Peter Cayetano
3) Loren Legarda??
4) ??
5) ??

Rizalist said...

sws posted a denial they had released a similar projection i guess it was leaked. but i didnt see that one. did you?

cvj said...

imo, very informative analysis and a useful roadmap to where the opposition should be concentrating its efforts.

manuelbuencamino said...

Djb,

My only reservation to the referndum proposal is CHEATING. The Garci deputies have been promoted to senior and crucial Comelec positions in Armm.

Arroyo will be able to say let's move on.

I think we should try to win the election but not place all our marbles there. Let's not lose sight of the goal to throw her out preferably in the same manner she got in - people power.

Rizalist said...

MB,

Do you really still believe she got in by people power?? 3 days of media-abetted massive demonstrations which erap allowed and didn't suppress. you call that people power?

If Davide had just stayed in bed Mrs. Davide on Saturday, 20 Jan 2001 instead of suddenly swearing her in, the demonstrations of people power 2 would have died down, the trial would've started again. Erap would've been acquitted.

How can it be people power when a simple single factor like Davide sleeping late and it wouldn't have happened at all?

Sure Erap deserved to be impeached AND convicted. But we deserved it too, that he be impeached AND convicted. But it didn't happen. why? people power?

You're almost with me on this MB. Think, Man! I didn't see it for over a whole year after it happened either. But you see, it was no solution.

We are still paying for Davide's shortcut.

If Erap had been properly impeached AND convicted, GMA would've resigned by now in fear of the shame and dishonor.

Causal said...

Do-It-Yourself Impeachment, no joke.
The Citizens' movement!

The day the nation demands impeachment is almost upon us. On Jan 3rd, sacks and sacks of mail will be sent to congress demanding impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635).

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org, part of the movement to impeach the president, has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

STOP WAITING FOR YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO ACT FOR YOU.

You can initiate the impeachment process yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information in the blanks (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. Be a part of history.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

HILLBLOGGER said...

Re: "How can it be people power when a simple single factor like Davide sleeping late and it wouldn't have happened at all?"

I agree with you Dean. Of course, Davide's presence in 2001 was crucial to the whole Gloria farce.

Gloria sent an "invitation" to Davide and to the rest of the SC to her swearing in though. I remember that Davide was "INVITED" and not asked to swear her in in the original letter. If Davide hadn't stepped in, Gloria would still have taken over the rein of government but perhaps on a revolutionary mode a la Cory had Davide refused to swear her in.

It was Gloria and Satur Ocampo people power really with Dinky Soliman conniving and the rest of the Jose Concepcion gang.

So much for people power.

HILLBLOGGER said...

To my mind, the real and only "legit" people power there was in PI was the one staged in 1986.

Rizalist said...

anna,
sooner or later though, PI has to be enabled. I think there are many things the political class around here will never touch in the Constitution. The people have to be able to do it themselves.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Sorry Dean, ooops, was being old fashion there - I wrote PI meaning Philippine Islands (PI)...not People's Initiative.

Why can't the Philippines just adopt good, old fashion national referendum as a process?

Simple and straightforward. Why complicate matters when they can be simplified?

manuelbuencamino said...

DJB,

excuse the bad grammar. I meant "to throw her out through people power" not that she went in through people power.

I prefer people powering her out over the other means of removing her because doing so would have the added benefit of a slap on the face of the Batasan that refused to impeach her.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Tell you what Dean, from among the 20 "senatoriables" you got there, Loren Legarda whom I supported with cash donation when she ran the first time is a no no along with Michael Defensor. As far as I am concerned, those two had better go play with themselves than play politics.

Rizalist said...

Anna,
Take at look at that lead though almost 10 points separate her from Kiko Pangilinan at #2. This is not vacuous popularity as in Erap Estrada is it? Doesn't the people's genuine and sincere support for her count for anything? She's smart and she's young and has learned a lot. What crime has she committed? She was Majority Leader. Passed several important laws. Worse thing about her is her tendency to play footsie with the damn Left. One thing I know about her, she knows she has to keep on learning, keep on improving...

Rizalist said...

MB,
Since the Senate would surely have acquitted her anyway, the real reason behind the Lower House's apparent moral cowardice is realpolitik. It might only have strengthened her to invulnerability to have been impeached and then acquitted. So what was lost? All that work for nothing because a Senate trial would only have led to failure anyway. Now is the real chance to do it the right way. Or else we will just become a banana republic.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Perhaps you're right Dean that there's genuine support for her by the people just like the support by the masses for Erap.

You can say the same thing of what's his name - Defensor, what with his 18 or so % statistical chance of landing a Senate seat. There must be genuine support for him by the people too, wouldn't you say so?

As to crime, I don't believe that Loren has to be judged formally by a tribunal to have committed a crime for me NOT to support her.

Let's just say that to me, she played pure political opportunism when she joined FPJ's bandwagon and I was disappointed in her.

Rizalist said...

Anna,
Can you give me an example of a politician that passes your very high standards? (God and Allah are excluded, k?)

HILLBLOGGER said...

Dean,

I think I detected a very faint hint of sarcasm there but believe you deserve my honest and really, very, very frank and sincere reply.

Most of them are dead already but never mind, since you're asking for examples, let me cite them just the same. On top of my list would have been Lorenzo Tanada. Second would have been Claro Recto and Manuel Quezon. The other one would be Ramon Magsaysay too.

Among the living, I was disappointed in Sen Pimentel sometime in 2001 but he has regained my esteem since. I believe Sen Rodolfo Biazon is doing an excellent job and so is Sen Lacson.

I like the governor of Bulacan; she's got balls and is trying to do well. I would support her anytime against my Mom's first degree cousin, former Gov Pandanganan anytime.

Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with local elected executives so can't cite any on their level and so can only speak of Bulacan.

Does that answer your question?

HILLBLOGGER said...

Btw, Dean, I watched BBC's HARDTALK tonight. Former US SC Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was guest.

I admired her then and I admire her even more today.

Rizalist said...

Anna,
I admit I was being just a lil sarcastic. Forgive me. But we are sculptors, not just chess afficionados or kibitzers. We have to work with the pieces and the material we are given. The way they are arranged on the board, however, is not our choice entirely. The problem with great dead men is of course, that they are dead. As for the living, we must attempt to find FIRST potential for greatness, before we impose our own high standards. If I were a novelist or a poet purely, I could avoid such compromises with reality.

john marzan said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
john marzan said...

i think yung dayaan ngayon sa election ay hindi lang manggagaling sa dagdag bawas, kundi sa pork barrel at gov't funds na Bobolantehin ng gobierno para tulungan gng mga vulnerable na kaalyado nito.

john marzan said...

Djb,

My only reservation to the referndum proposal is CHEATING. The Garci deputies have been promoted to senior and crucial Comelec positions in Armm.

Arroyo will be able to say let's move on.

I think we should try to win the election but not place all our marbles there. Let's not lose sight of the goal to throw her out preferably in the same manner she got in - people power.


I agree. The fact na walang nakulong o naparusahan na COMELEC official sa Gloriagate scandal means that the dagdag bawas machinery is still intact. And while Garcillano is not there anymore, all of his GLORIAGATE deputies are still there, and most of them have been promoted to higher positions -- while Abalos, ComelecAKO et al doing their best to coverup and stonewall for them para hindi sila matanggal.

(and may i say that pushing through with the automated system without first undergoing a thorough housecleaning at the COMELEC is madness.)

Isa pa, they don't need Garci anymore because most Garci's deputies already have had experience doing massive cheating operations in the 2004 elections -- AND GOT AWAY WITH IT.

(just like in iraq, zarqawi may be dead, but the jihadist from europe and other parts of the mideast who went to iraq to fight the "infidels" and "occupiers" have gained tremendous experience from their tour of duty, and many of them have either taken over the operations in iraq, or have returned to their native country a more experienced and dangerous terror operator.

the difference between iraq and our COMELEC though is that at least sa iraq, there is an effort to try to take the terrorists out. sa COMELEC naman, walang naparusahan, walang nakulong. tinanggal lang nila si garci, pero sabi ng mga apologist ng COMELEC at ni arroyo, hindi raw dahil sa dayaan yan.)

If Davide had just stayed in bed Mrs. Davide on Saturday, 20 Jan 2001 instead of suddenly swearing her in, the demonstrations of people power 2 would have died down, the trial would've started again. Erap would've been acquitted.

i'm sorry, dean, pero involved na ang military ni pidal and chavit by that time. they have a "strike force" raw in every part of the country. the demonstrations would not have died down. there's no more "turning back" for them.

How can it be people power when a simple single factor like Davide sleeping late and it wouldn't have happened at all?

Nah. If erap never left malacanang, there would never have been "people power." The Edsa Dos supporters say he resigned, but is it really resignation when somebody puts a gun on your head and tells you to step down? Resignation ba yan o power grab?

in a way, i'm glad erap vacated malacanang. Kasi kapag pumalag siya at ginamit rin niya ang militar para labanin ang militar ni pidal at chavit singson, then there would have been bloodshed. Erap would certainly have been killed or lynched, and arroyo would have taken over blah blah blah...

but knowing what we know now about ARroyo and Pidal, who IMO are worse and more corrupt and ruthless than Erap, and after witnessing bloodshed at edsa and malacanang, where erap was killed off, only to see the people who grabbed power act in an even more abusive and marcosian manner, I think the masa and the people who never supported edsa dos in the first place will be less forgiving to those who put the country through this terrible ordeal. Sasabihin nila, we did all this para lang isaksak sa pwesto si arroyo? and since may patayan na nangyari sa edsa dos, siguro gusto rin nilang gumanti sa mga ito. An eye for an eye? ;)

Sure Erap deserved to be impeached AND convicted. But we deserved it too, that he be impeached AND convicted. But it didn't happen. why? people power?

You're almost with me on this MB. Think, Man! I didn't see it for over a whole year after it happened either. But you see, it was no solution.

We are still paying for Davide's shortcut.


edsa dos would have happened with or without the swearing in (like edsa 1986), and with or without the violence.

why are we putting all the blame on the guy? what about the more significant players at the forefront and behind the scenes?

If Erap had been properly impeached AND convicted, GMA would've resigned by now in fear of the shame and dishonor.

I'm sorry dean, but it's a numbers game. GMA would only resign if there's a gun pointed at her head, like erap.

Since the Senate would surely have acquitted her anyway,

i'm not so sure about that, dean. btw, can you replace enrile with roxas. I believe enrile will vote to acquit. Roxas will vote to convict.

It might only have strengthened her to invulnerability to have been impeached and then acquitted. So what was lost? All that work for nothing because a Senate trial would only have led to failure anyway.

What about erap's impeachment, Dean?

manuelbuencamino said...

what do you think is the nagic number that Arroyo will need to block a senate conviction? (I mean in terms of how many senators will be elected?) I've had many discussions with MLQ about this. Arroyo only has to cheat the election for a minimum number of senators. The opposition would have won the battle but the lost the war to impeach her. Let's keep people power on the front burner and the election as an added bonus.

Rizalist said...

John,
What ABOUT Erap's impeachment?

WHY did the Trial suddenly stop after a simple, legal, regular vote by the Senator-Judges to exclude a worthless piece of evidence that only would've bolstered Erap's claim that the Velarde accounts were not his?

Because of people power!

Does that mean that if and when GMA is impeached and a point comes when she is about to be convicted that HER supporters, which still accounts for 40% of the population, can do a people power and likewise abort the trial for her benefit?

Where is the consistency in this position?

MB says to keep people power on the front burner. What he means is that if GMA had been impeached in 2005 or 2006 and it started to look like we wouldn't like the way the trial is going, it can be pulled out again for our Democracy to once more commit suicide?

I don't think the Edsa Dos demonstrations would've lasted very long at all if Erap for example left for Mindanao or the US. Just like GMA has done. There was nothing fore ordained or even effective about it. If Davide had not done what he did, things would've been just like now.

As it is, the Filipinos were robbed by so called wise men of an important experience: six years under the President they chose, so that they would be so sick of him in the end they would never elect a jerk like him again, yet we would not have the self-disrespect we do today for what we had done in 2001.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Dean,

This is off topic but would appreciate very much your reply to following:

1) What has happened to the anti-terrorism law proposed in the 13th Congress?

2) Have you read the terms and provisions provided for in proposed law?

3) Your comment?

4) What in your opinion, should be added, changed in any of the terms in the bill so it can be palatable to those who oppose it?

Thanks.

Rizalist said...

Hillblogger,

Check out Global Voices Online (Harvard Berkman Center) coverage of my recent post on terrorism bill.

Also use the Google Search box on my left hand column for "terrorism" to find many recent postings.

Haven't read the final, final version, but I think this bill was 90% of what it is now way back in 2004.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Thanks, Dean.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Dean,

I copied and am pasting here some of the provisions contained in the proposed anti-terrorism law; my initial comment is that the proposed section 4 is a bit too superfluous... What do you think? (I am comparing the bill to the anti-terrorism law existing in France - part of a "homework" I was asked to do.)


SECTION 1. Short Title. – This Act shall henceforth be known as the “Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006.”

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is declared a policy of the State to protect life, liberty, and property from acts of terrorism, to condemn terrorism as inimical and dangerous to the national security of the country and to the welfare of the people, and to make terrorism and conspiracy to commit terrorism crimes against the Filipino people, against humanity, and against the law of nations.

SEC. 3. Terrorism. – Any person who, acting in any of the manner described in Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, and Paragraph 3 of Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code, uses assassination, kidnapping, hijacking of land-sea-or-air transportation, bombing, biological or chemical agent, nuclear device, the paralyzation of the water supply system, the paralyzation of the electric power or communication systems of the country, or the paralyzation of any other strategic and vital infrastructure of the nation either to advance, propagate, and promote his religious or political belief or to sow and create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear, anxiety and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to a given demand shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua or death, at the discretion of the court.

SEC. 4. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism. – Persons who conspire to commit the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
There is a conspiracy to commit the crime of terrorism when two or more persons come to an agreement to use assassination, kidnapping, hijacking of land-sea-or-air transportation, bombing, biological or chemical agent, nuclear device, the paralyzation of the water supply system, the paralyzation of the electric power or communication systems of the country, or the paralyzation of any other strategic and vital infrastructure of the nation either to advance, propagate, and promote his religious or political belief or to sow and create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear, anxiety, and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to a given demand.

Rizalist said...

My comments in the Global Voices posting were two:(1) there should be a FISA like Special Court to handle all the terrorism related cases prosecuted under this law. and (2) You can't just suddenly be labelled a "terrorist" just because you are prosecuted under this law, if there were a definite LIST of terrorists and terrorist organizations that become reviewed periodically, with the cognizance and approval of the Special Court. In other words, I want it clear that an integral and purposeful part of the law is the LABELLING of specific individuals and groups as terrorists. ONLY those on the list are considered terrorists.

So the point of the law is to EMPOWER the authorities to do ANY and ALL things necessary to secure the nation and the people against terrorist attacks. But it also creates a special enemy status which ought formally to be in a list. Only those on the list are considered enemies of the State. Ideally, it is INDIVIDUALS that should be listed, indicating only the organizations and affiliations each person actually has to the extent it is known. To be labelled a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ought to take a lot, including the special court's approval.

The application of any portion of the law should be with the special court's permission and cognizance since all prosecutions will automatically be in its jurisdiction.

Rizalist said...

MB,
I hope you agree with my Principle of Impeachment Realpolitik: Impeachment is uselss unless there is CLOSE to 2/3 Majority in the Senate likely to vote for conviction, or 16 senators.

As I see it a 6-6 tie in the Senate means the Filipino people do not want an impeachment and trial. Of course an outright Palace victory in the Senate race also means the same thing. 7-5 for the opposition gives them 15 or 16 seats, but I think 8-4 is the minimum Opposition victory that will almost guarantee conviction.

GMA needs to win at least six senate seats. If she doesnt, her ass is grass.

Karl M. Garcia said...

How will the impeachment,reach the senate,if I may ask?

Rizalist said...

Karl,

By counting noses at the Senate, it should have been obvious to everyone that an impeachment by the House in 2005 and 2006 would have led straight to acquittal in the Senate trial.

But I think many people didn't care about this because they were actually counting on a repeat of Edsa Dos, in which a trial occurs, but as soon as an adverse vote is taken by the senator-judges, whammo prosecutors walk out on their sworn duty and join the crowd at the Edsa Shrine demos and people power.

It didn't happen this time because even though the Lower House Members are mainly moral cowards, they are not blind. They can count noses. And they knew conviction was highly unlikely anyway, and people power an iffy possibility. Thus, why should they stick their neck out? For the moral satisfaction of bloggers? Hardly.

It was unreasonable for us to think they should or could ignore the Damocles Sword of Failure in the Senate and just offer themselves as sacrificial lambs. They are, after all, mainly moral cowards as I said.

Now to your question, how will the impeachment reach the Senate.

My answer is this. We must remove the Damocles Sword of Failure that is the reason for their cowardice! We must have a hanging Senate.

Next to moral cowardice you see, the greatest emotional trait of such politicians is AMBITION.

Remove the reason for their cowardice and ambition takes over!

Once they see that the Senate is willing and able to convict, the mere possibility of it, truly nonexistent thus far, will become a corrosive acid on the Palace's hold on them. All of a sudden they have options. All of a sudden, the winner is not so certain.

In the service of their ambition of course, such politicians employ the traits of the segurista. In politics this is the strategy of "going with the winner."

Eh, ngayon pa lang the Senate already looks like a winner, having demolished the Palace in FIVE major rulings (CPR, EO464, 1017, pcgg, and no p.i.)

Realize that even if 80 seats are not won outright in the May elections, 80 votes to impeach could still be obtained a few months into the new Congress.

Bernardo F. Ronquillo said...

The 2007 Elections as a referendum on whether Gloria should be impeached or not? I have to beg your pardon, Dean, but I don't think so. That's too much of a baggage to carry when a simple person like me go to the precinct to vote. I will be voting for my local officials and nationally for my senators and I simply won't have time to think if my vote will impeach Gloria or not. That is thinking the parliamentary way and not the Presidential way which we fortunately are.

Please Dean, I cannot believe that pulse survey. Atty. Pimentel III at 29.9 percent over Chiz Escudero's 20.2? Unbelievable. Who's he, what has he done to gain national attention? And Mike Defensor at 18? Impossible.

Rizalist said...

Strange things happen in a voting booth (or cardboard box as the case may be). Names fly by in a blur. But people choose, as you said, often without thinking very much. Yet most of them do so honestly and freely. And most know what each name stands for to them. I believe that the wisdom of democracy is a statistical effect, not the direct product of cerebral action. People know who are for and against GMA. That is enough to produce the effect I've described.

john marzan said...

MB says to keep people power on the front burner. What he means is that if GMA had been impeached in 2005 or 2006 and it started to look like we wouldn't like the way the trial is going, it can be pulled out again for our Democracy to once more commit suicide?

i don't mind kung hindi ma-convict si arroyo. not getting convicted doesn't mean she's not guilty. at least malalaman na natin kung sino yung mga hudas sa senado ano? hindi na pwedeng mag fence sitting si mr. palengke.

and about the chances of people power happening kung obvious na lutong makaw ang trial, it could happen or it might not. hindi ko masyadong pino-problema ang people power na yan. but at least malalaman ng mga tao kung sino talaga ang mga tarantado sa senado, ano? kung halatang guilty si arroyo and some of the senators vote to acquit her. di alam na natin kung sino ang hindi iboboto sa 2007.

and about democracy "committing suicide", so you're against people power too? eh hindi ba parang umaasa ka na magtagumpay ang people power ni cory at danilo lim, querubin sa makati noong 2006. read your old posts, djb. tapos ngayon ayaw mo na?

I don't think the Edsa Dos demonstrations would've lasted very long at all if Erap for example left for Mindanao or the US. Just like GMA has done. There was nothing fore ordained or even effective about it. If Davide had not done what he did, things would've been just like now.

if erap left for the US o mindanao, di natulad siya kay thaksin o kay marcos. lmao. isa pa, flight means guilt. kaya nga nani perez tried to negotiate with erap to leave the country for the US or Australia. if erap took the bait, di parang inamin na niyang guilty siya.

Rizalist said...

Hi John,
If Cory and Querubin had succeeded last February though, it's not ME that would be calling it People Power, it's the folks that called it that after the last coup d'etat. Me, I might enjoy the results of another coup like that, this time on GMA, but I would call a spade a spade. I would call it a revolution or a regime change but I wouldn't call it "constitutional throughout" and a "people power uprising."

john marzan said...

How will the impeachment,reach the senate,if I may ask?

good question, karl.

By counting noses at the Senate, it should have been obvious to everyone that an impeachment by the House in 2005 and 2006 would have led straight to acquittal in the Senate trial.

But I think many people didn't care about this because they were actually counting on a repeat of Edsa Dos, in which a trial occurs, but as soon as an adverse vote is taken by the senator-judges, whammo prosecutors walk out on their sworn duty and join the crowd at the Edsa Shrine demos and people power.

It didn't happen this time because even though the Lower House Members are mainly moral cowards, they are not blind. They can count noses. And they knew conviction was highly unlikely anyway, and people power an iffy possibility. Thus, why should they stick their neck out? For the moral satisfaction of bloggers? Hardly.


you got it wrong, sir. the lower house members are less worried about the consequences of siding with GMA because they are locally elected. kaya nga they can ignore the sentiments of the majority of filipinos because they only get elected by their local constituents.

but not the senators. they're voted nationally, you see. so they are more aware of the national sentiments of the public, and adjust their views accordingly. and they have, to a certain extent.

kaya nga ina-atake sila ng malacnang eh. kaya nga isang malaking tinik ang senado sa leeg ni arroyo eh. kaya nga gustong i-abolish ng malacanang at house ang senado.

besides, it's much more challenging and satisfying to take out the assholes and loyalists in House like Pichay, Nograles, Villafuerte, Lagman, Datumanong, Jaraula, Macarambon, Markoleta, Cagas, Puentebella, Libanan, Iggy and Mikey Arroyo.

It was unreasonable for us to think they should or could ignore the Damocles Sword of Failure in the Senate and just offer themselves as sacrificial lambs. They are, after all, mainly moral cowards as I said.

Now to your question, how will the impeachment reach the Senate.

My answer is this. We must remove the Damocles Sword of Failure that is the reason for their cowardice! We must have a hanging Senate.


i think we should do both: 1) get 80 seats in the House, and get 16 seats in the Senate.

I believe winning big in the senate is tough but doable. Winning 80 seats in the House is even tougher, especially since lamang na lamang sa pork barrel ang admin candidates over the opposition at mga challengers.

Once they see that the Senate is willing and able to convict, the mere possibility of it, truly nonexistent thus far, will become a corrosive acid on the Palace's hold on them. All of a sudden they have options. All of a sudden, the winner is not so certain.

In the service of their ambition of course, such politicians employ the traits of the segurista. In politics this is the strategy of "going with the winner."


but what we won the senate bigtime but the House administration-oppositon numbers were not changed by the recent election, and they still chose to go along with Arroyo instead?

Rizalist said...

John,
I throw your question back to you. How will impeachment reach the Senate?

I say impeachment CANNOT reach the Senate if there is no hope of conviction there. The House races can be affected by the Senate race too, if there is a widespread perception even b4 the campaign starts that the Senate will become opposition. This could embolden those contesting House seats and give them ammunition to best their admin rivals.

I guess I'm just saying its the Senate race that is a very impt key to the House vote.

What's your "critical path item" to the 80 votes?

john marzan said...

Hi John,
If Cory and Querubin had succeeded last February though, it's not ME that would be calling it People Power, it's the folks that called it that after the last coup d'etat. Me, I might enjoy the results of another coup like that, this time on GMA, but I would call a spade a spade.


thanks for clarifying, dean. so you'd be happy if another successful edsa dos type of "people power" happened to GMA rin pala, even if it means democracy "committing suicide."

I would call it a revolution or a regime change but I wouldn't call it "constitutional throughout" and a "people power uprising."

the difference between edsa dos and arroyo's situation is that erap's a legitimately elected president, while arroyo stole the presidency twice.

yeah, kapag na overthrow si arroyo via "people power" or a coup, syempre hindi constitutional yan. but i don't mind. thaksin got thrown out by the military, and most thais (even the king) seems to support the move. erap was thrown out by arroyo and the CBCP. hindi rin constitutional yan diba?

yes, if we "edsa dossed" arroyo, hindi constitutional yan. pero there was nothing constitutional about the way Arroyo got her presidency either. Just ask Garci at yung general na hindi marunong sa pagpapataas ng boto ni maam.

And if arroyo diverted all the philhealth cards, all the bolante funds, all the road users tax, and all of the pork barrel funds legally and illegally to help her allies in the House, what are you gonna do about it? what if COMELEC's dagdag bawas made a difference again in several districts/areas where arroyo's allies were vulnerable? what are you gonna do? complain to the DOJ or ombudsman? lol.

Me, I might enjoy the results of another coup like that

you might??? sa mga nabasa ko dito, mukhang ipinagdadasal mo pa na sana'y magtagumpay ang overthrow ni arroyo via people power or coup.

(nothing wrong with that, btw ;) )

john marzan said...

I throw your question back to you. How will impeachment reach the Senate?

I say impeachment CANNOT reach the Senate if there is no hope of conviction there.


I strongly disagree. as long as you elect 80 opposition House members willing to impeach arroyo, aakyat ang impeachment complaint sa senado.

pero kung hawak ng opposition ang senado, pero wala pa ring pagbabago sa House administration-opposition membership sa Kongreso, then there is NO CHANCE that the impeachment complaint will be submitted to the senate for trial.

the fact na so many of your regular readers are questioning your theory re this is already a sign.

The House races can be affected by the Senate race too, if there is a widespread perception even b4 the campaign starts that the Senate will become opposition. This could embolden those contesting House seats and give them ammunition to best their admin rivals.

I guess I'm just saying its the Senate race that is a very impt key to the House vote.


if you put it this way, then mas okey yan. pero parehong importante ang dalawa. 16 seats sa senate. 80 seats sa house. yan lang nga, mas mahirap makakuha ng 80 seats sa house dahil local ang elections at babaha ang pork barrel at kung ano ano pang mga pondo sa mga administration controlled areas.

What's your "critical path item" to the 80 votes?

What's a "critical path item"?