A vote for performance
MUCH
has already been said about how the results of the last elections surprised many. The old political saints from various cathedrals have fallen from their pedestals, and new faces emerge around the archipelago, rejecting old political elites in local governments and legislative districts, and their proxies in the partylist groups.
This only indicates that contrary to the sourgraping few, most voters demand more change, and real performance. They desire leaders who can make tough choices instead of politicians that use empty pleasure to fool them.
This is not surprising when you consider that most of these voters who rejected the old narratives and politicos, the so-called Class D, represent 75% of the vote. They got the benefit of important reforms in the last three years, from 2016-2018.
The first batch of reforms in this period saw free state education, universal health care, improved infrastructure particularly the commencement of mass transit projects and long awaited PUV modernization, the Bangsamoro Basic Law, tax relief under the TRAIN Law.
Even the new rice tarrification law and free irrigation law promise benefits in the form of boosted food supply. Add to these the palpable changes in the form of the toughness on crime, the 5-year drivers license, a 911 system, and 10-year passport renewal intervals that are appreciated by many.
The results of this initial three years are clear with numbers that have a positive effect on this class – lower crime rates, lower unemployment, and lower poverty and self-rated poverty in 2018.
Apart from this, the regions are starting to grow in step with national GDP. A review of the 2018 Gross Regional Domestic Product Growth rates show a slight improvement in the regions share of GDP vs. the National Capital Region.
These reforms and the initial results have been achieved in the first half of the Duterte administration and have not been lost on most voters, and certainly outweighed much of what the opposition claims to the contrary.
In a deeper sense, this reflects what some analysts call an administration that is less sensitive to elite gripes, and more to the feelings and welfare of a greater number.
Truthfully, the governments prior to 2016 were always shifting policies that tended to please the pressure centers of the elites, which include elements from the military with persistent threats of coups and other misadventures, certain vocal church and business leaders who seem to have an opinion beyond their expertise.
A look at all the numerous and confusing exemptions on both our tax system and business incentives and you will hear their voices.
The opposition coalition represented a big part of this old narrative. The voters saw that beyond the old imagery and noisy antigovernment slogans lay the specter of past administrations that failed them. They feared that electing these candidates endorsed by the elites they question meant a return to the old system that kept them, and their interests excluded from national discussion.
They are tired of the usual politicking and demanded performance and continued reform they have seen. They are now more vigilant to ensure that reforms continue.
This confidence in performance, coupled with the non-identification with elite politics makes the majority identify with the government, particularly the President. Opinion polls in the last few weeks affirm that.
Moving forward, delivering on further necessary reforms and infrastructure will have various benefits. New measures will also be needed. from greater local economic empowerment, there are new tougher laws against terrorism and unfair labor contractualization, and the necessary reduction in corporate income taxes that can empower small and medium enterprises to boost entrepreneurship. The implementation of current reforms also needs to be monitored.
The voters demand performance. These, among others , will result include a stable government and economy, and continued popular support that ensures this stability.
For reactions: