In a pamphlet bearing the question “Now That You Are a Senator: An Introduction to Organizing the Work of a Senator of the Republic of the Philippines,” a former Senator and health secretary, the late Juan Flavier, summarized for neophyte Senators the roles of legislators in four “main functions,” to wit: lawmaking, public advocacy, constituency building, and government oversight.

This means that a Philippine national lawmaker (a Senator or a Representative in Congress) has to blend and balance several political concerns.

First, he/she has to be able to identify issues that require legislative attention and, if need be, make a new law or amend and update an existing one to be responsive to the identified social concern. This “first” function of issue determination is most crucial and, to my mind, betrays a particular politician’s wisdom.

Clearly, the legislator is an advocate. Advocacy means influencing individuals to change their behavior, attitudes, and decisions, and groups to shape or reshape their group decisions or policies. Public advocacy entails standing and speaking for a particular set of interests in behalf of a public or publics, To advocate is to fight for something.

Third, the lawmaker has to do constituency building which means getting others to support and own legislative proposals that the legislator espoused. This translates to mobilizing a public to get laws enforced and supported since laws and lawmaking do not happen in a vacuum. Without people’s support laws can be very useless.

Then there is government oversight which pertains to the authority of legislators to conduct inquiries or investigations regarding the performance of the executive. Congress, in other words, has to make sure that laws and policies are enforced and that resulting programs and projects must be implemented. What’s the point, after all, of making decisions—laws are but decisions for the community—if decisions will not be followed trough by action?

These are very serious concerns and we expect our most wise of leaders to rise up to the challenging art or science of crafting responsive and relevant pieces of legislation.

But real life brings us many lemons (or calamansi, if you will) along the way. To illustrate, instead of focusing today on laws that will launch this nation towards a post-pandemic “better normal,” here comes the three stooges (Millenials, please google the reference). A trio of legislators are leading the most heroic advocacy in Congress of pushing for a formal renaming of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport to be the Paliparang Pandaigdig ng Pilipinas!

Wow.

To put things in perspective, let’s stop for a while and paint this image in our minds. In the midst of a pandemic, with tens of thousands of our people getting sick or dying, and many, many more losing jobs and livelihood, with even our young people getting mortally depressed over the state of our national learning system under quarantine and lockdowns, here comes the news of an utterly brilliant proposition to beat all other mind-blowing motions—to change the name of NAIA. As the young would tweet it, #BOOM.

Am I being unduly judgmental of those proposing this Act? Let’s take this then from another perspective. As of February of 2019, it was proudly bannered in national media that the current administration has been more legislatively productive compared to the previous administration.

While PNoy’s term came out with merely 28 laws signed by the President in its first two years, the Duterte Presidency has already signed 133 new pieces of legislation in its first two.

President Duterte is noted to have signed Republic Act No. 10963 or the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Act; RA 10931 that promotes universal access to quality tertiary education by providing free tuition in state universities and colleges; and, RA 11036 that establishes a national mental health policy for enhancing delivery of integrated mental health services, as well as promoting and protecting rights of persons utilizing psychiatric, neurologic and psychosocial health services. Then there is also the national feeding program under RA 11037 which mandates the distribution of free lunch to undernourished children in public daycare, kindergarten, and elementary schools to combat hunger and undernutrition among Filipino children. Quite notable, indeed.

Laws do not come cheap. The Senate had a budget for legislative work alone of 1.96 billion pesos in 2017, while the House of Representatives had 6.88 billion pesos for its legislative and related operations.

For 2018, the Senators had 2.03 billlion pesos in total and the Representatives were given 6.44 billlion in all to do work labeled as “Crafting of significant legislation.”

Philippine Congress' Budget for Legislative Work [Billions, Pesos]

Senate: 2017 - 1.96, 2018 - 2.03

House: 2017 - 6.88, 2018 - 6.44

Total: 2017 - 8.84, 2018 - 8.47

Grand Total: 17.31

What do these numbers tell us?

In two years under President Duterte, Congress spent a total of 4.9 billion to craft 133 Acts of Congress. Simple math tells us that each Republic Act is thus worth about 130 million pesos.

I can see the point of investing 130 million pesos on our children’s education, or mental health, but to satisfy the political whims of a few stooges to rename streets, parks, or airports—not to mention waste precious legislative schedules while people are dying and going hungry around us? Unconscionable!

A hundred thirty million could already give 130 modernized jeepneys to PUJ drivers who have lost their jobs due to this pandemic and the ill-designed policy of this government on mass transport. A hundred thirty million can already feed over 216 thousand urban poor families for two days. A hundred thirty million can already give 8,500 public school students free laptops.

What is the legislative wisdom being served here? What social problem is being prioritized under the pandemic with this proposal? What constituency are we satisfying aside from that of historical revisionists? The proponents of this law are basically neophyte national legislators. The good Senator-Doctor Flavier would be turning in his grave if this proposal is passed.

I say no to this proposal. So should you. What we need to do is face this pandemic with the unyielding tenacity of a parent rushing her sick child to a hospital. Anything else now would be unscrupulous and abominable politicking.