Retail politics
Retail politics
Updated 01:20am (Mla time) Nov 17, 2004
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the November 17, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
RECENT administration overtures to Sen. Edgardo Angara indicates a government attempting wholesale unity in retail style. Angara himself supports the wholesale view by issuing statements such as the one saying he "was not carrying the minority ... the invitation was to the LDP party." This was in response to complaints by other oppositionists that he's kept them out of the loop by not referring the administration offer to them.
If the administration wants the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP), and not just Angara, in its tent, can this still be called a wholesale effort at unity? Angara says President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is interested in his party, and not just him. Political developments seem to indicate that Angara may actually be in a position to bring his party (or what's left of it) with him. But a confluence of administration intent and LDP opportunism does not indicate a broader national unification effort. It only means an LDP-Lakas-Liberal Party coalition.
It is wrong to confuse the courting of Angara with some sort of political evolution for the country. Malacañang, with its pro-parliamentary instincts, certainly wants to promote this as the first signs of future governance by inter-party coalition. But it should be pointed out that only Angara was approached; there has been no news of any other LDP stalwarts being approached, and Angara has shown no inclination to even make a show of consulting his partymates. Thus, the Palace overtures to Angara were in the tried and true personalistic tradition of Philippine politics, and nothing new.
Malacañang seems to think it needs Angara, who, politically speaking, it makes pragmatic sense to have on the administration side. However, wanting Angara does not give the administration an excuse to claim it as a victory for unity. This is retail politics.
The Palace wants Angara, and all signs indicate that it will get him. Not the least because what the Palace wants, Angara wants, too. But we repeat that it would be wrong to give it a greater significance than it deserves. It is clear that the Palace moves involve Angara alone and no larger cause. It certainly should not be cloaked as a means for national unity.
For the truth is that Angara is not a unifier. Former President Joseph Estrada avoided resignation upon his advice, and it was Angara's diary that led to a judicial construction that armed the opposition with a claim to continued legitimacy. He divided the opposition in the May elections by endorsing one of the most unqualified presidential candidates in our history. Since the election, he has seemed less interested in opposition harmony and more in his continued importance in the system. That he has managed to keep himself important is a testimony to his cleverness and strategic sense.
In the end, in getting what it wants, the Palace will gain a useful operative, while Angara will get a new lease on political life. The administration majority in the Senate will be stronger, but with the reduction in their number, each senator will be that much more difficult to manage. The cause of national unity will be badly served, because Angara's defection will only convince the remaining members of the opposition that he was a traitor to their cause always.
Angara's willingness to jump ship is also testimony to a long-standing bad habit among senators, which is to turn their back on a national mandate in order to achieve personal political gain. The people of the Philippines elected our senators for a fixed term and for certain purposes. For a senator to relinquish membership in an independent branch in order to play ball with a President is to turn one's back on a solemn duty.
Updated 01:20am (Mla time) Nov 17, 2004
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the November 17, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
RECENT administration overtures to Sen. Edgardo Angara indicates a government attempting wholesale unity in retail style. Angara himself supports the wholesale view by issuing statements such as the one saying he "was not carrying the minority ... the invitation was to the LDP party." This was in response to complaints by other oppositionists that he's kept them out of the loop by not referring the administration offer to them.
If the administration wants the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP), and not just Angara, in its tent, can this still be called a wholesale effort at unity? Angara says President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is interested in his party, and not just him. Political developments seem to indicate that Angara may actually be in a position to bring his party (or what's left of it) with him. But a confluence of administration intent and LDP opportunism does not indicate a broader national unification effort. It only means an LDP-Lakas-Liberal Party coalition.
It is wrong to confuse the courting of Angara with some sort of political evolution for the country. Malacañang, with its pro-parliamentary instincts, certainly wants to promote this as the first signs of future governance by inter-party coalition. But it should be pointed out that only Angara was approached; there has been no news of any other LDP stalwarts being approached, and Angara has shown no inclination to even make a show of consulting his partymates. Thus, the Palace overtures to Angara were in the tried and true personalistic tradition of Philippine politics, and nothing new.
Malacañang seems to think it needs Angara, who, politically speaking, it makes pragmatic sense to have on the administration side. However, wanting Angara does not give the administration an excuse to claim it as a victory for unity. This is retail politics.
The Palace wants Angara, and all signs indicate that it will get him. Not the least because what the Palace wants, Angara wants, too. But we repeat that it would be wrong to give it a greater significance than it deserves. It is clear that the Palace moves involve Angara alone and no larger cause. It certainly should not be cloaked as a means for national unity.
For the truth is that Angara is not a unifier. Former President Joseph Estrada avoided resignation upon his advice, and it was Angara's diary that led to a judicial construction that armed the opposition with a claim to continued legitimacy. He divided the opposition in the May elections by endorsing one of the most unqualified presidential candidates in our history. Since the election, he has seemed less interested in opposition harmony and more in his continued importance in the system. That he has managed to keep himself important is a testimony to his cleverness and strategic sense.
In the end, in getting what it wants, the Palace will gain a useful operative, while Angara will get a new lease on political life. The administration majority in the Senate will be stronger, but with the reduction in their number, each senator will be that much more difficult to manage. The cause of national unity will be badly served, because Angara's defection will only convince the remaining members of the opposition that he was a traitor to their cause always.
Angara's willingness to jump ship is also testimony to a long-standing bad habit among senators, which is to turn their back on a national mandate in order to achieve personal political gain. The people of the Philippines elected our senators for a fixed term and for certain purposes. For a senator to relinquish membership in an independent branch in order to play ball with a President is to turn one's back on a solemn duty.
posted by Dante at 3:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home