TO a person, the presidential candidates this year are tripping over themselves to pronounce their support for the 4Ps, the government’s P60-billion dole program that gives poor families a monthly stipend for keeping their children in school. That none of them have questioned the basic premise of the program—taking money from hardworking taxpayers and giving it away to unproductive members of society who do not have to earn it—is a measure of how much they are pandering to the poor in the hopes of winning their votes.
The claims by the administration that the program is not being politicized is about as tall a tale that anyone can construct.
The ruling Liberal Party, in fact, has used the 4Ps as a bludgeon against those running against the administration’s standard bearer, Manuel Roxas II, suggesting during campaign sorties that the poor should not vote for the opposing candidates who will kill off the program.
Early this year, Vice President Jejomar Binay denied rumors that he would abolish the 4Ps if he is elected, and has promised to increase its coverage to senior citizens.
At about the same time, a spokesman for Senator Grace Poe denied a Liberal Party claim that the senator had done nothing to support the program when its budget was being deliberated in the Senate.
“Senator Poe is a staunch advocate of the 4Ps program,” the spokesman said. “She has stated on record that if given the chance to serve as president, she will make sure to expand and enhance the 4Ps program and see to it that system losses are plugged.”
Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, too, said he would continue the program, and promised to add a sack of rice to the monthly stipend.
Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago focused on operational shortcomings of the program and said she would work to plug the leaks and get local governments involved—statements that clearly indicate that if she were elected president, she too would continue the government doles.
The Aquino administration pitches the 4Ps as a poverty-alleviation program but the law of unintended consequences tells us that the poor will remain poor to stay on the dole (one must by definition be unemployed to qualify for the monthly stipends) and that they will come to see the payments as their entitlement—what is due them, even if they have not worked a single hour for the money.
The random interview at campaign rallies already exposes this reality. One woman says the 4Ps really helps her with the bills—and helpfully suggests that the dole be written into the law.
4Ps stands for Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, which roughly translates to a bridge for poor Filipino families to cross over to something better.
But throwing money at a problem never solved anything—and it will not fix poverty. The idea of easy money degrades the value of that money and diminishes the worth of an honest day’s work.
Unless someone addresses this basic flaw in the 4Ps, it might just come to mean Pandering to the Poor is a Prescription for Peril.
