The wake of every Congressional election in the post-Marcos era has seen turncoatism on a massive scale. The aftermath of the 2016 election saw the emergence, almost immediately after the May 9 electoral event, of Congressional majorities supportive of the incoming administration. In the House of Representatives, the post-election outcome was not just a majority but a supermajority – 259 out of 289 – of the newly elected Lower House members.
The Lower House members of the 17th Congress have justified their immediate switch to President Rodrigo Duterte’s party in cooperation-versus-opposition terms. For the good of the nation, legislators should cooperate fully with, and even switch to, the administration party, say the coat-turning 17th Congress Senators and Representatives. Congressional opposition is the nemesis of national progress, they say.
This rationalization is unacceptable. The mass defection to PDP Laban, the administration party, of men and women elected under the banners of the other major parties – Liberal Party, NPC, UNA, G-Puso and Lakas NUCD – cannot be rationally explained.
The business of opposition parties is to oppose, not to join or to coalesce But there is such a thing as constructive opposition, and congressmen elected as Liberals, NPC, UNA, etc. can remain members of the opposition and still be patriotic. Constructive Congressional opposition, like responsible mining, is not an oxymoron.
For the Philippine economy to move forward in a sustainable manner, policymaking must be of high quality. The making of sound and sustainable policies can take place only within the context of free, constructive and discerning discussion of the critical economic and social issues of the day. Almost by definition, a state of affairs in which the up-to-proclamation oppositionist Representatives rush to join the winning Presidential candidate’s party—to form a “supermajority”—is not conducive to such discussion.
The accent must be on the word ‘constructive’. The nation’s interest demands cooperation between the political parties. The voters elected members of Congress to work for the good of the nation, not to hold back its progress. The minorities in the Senate and House of Representatives must agree with the majority when they can, and they must disagree with the majority when the situation demands it. But disagreement must always be expressed in a constructive fashion, not on knee-jerk, partisan manner. Political parties must agree to disagree, not be disagreeable, in the performance of their policymaking function.
The 17th Congress members who have abandoned their election-campaign affiliations and joined the administration party have insisted that they can remain oppositionist even if they have become parts of the administration party’s supermajority. Is this likely to happen?
I don’t think so. Ample experience has taught us that once a Senator or Representative has transferred his affiliation from an opposition party to the administration party, he is totally lost to the opposition; after the switch he has voted with, and has supported the positions of, his new party. On the basis of that historical record, the members of the 17th Congress Lower House supermajority can be expected to go all the way, voting-wise, with the Duterte administration.
That’s too bad for the crafting of legislation on economic and social issues. Good policymaking is the result of debate, argumentation, philosophical challenge – and, yes, opposition. It is not made by the silence of a large band of pliant, yes-saying legislators.
E-mail: rudyromero777@yahoo.com
