Take what is offered to you, and vote your candidate of choice

RICHARD K. Morgan, a science fiction and fantasy writer, in his Altered Carbon (Takeshi Kovacs series) book wrote, “Take what is offered and that must sometimes be enough.”

In the Netflix series version of the same book, Quellcrist Falconer in several instances commanded Takeshi Kovacs, “you take what is offered” even if it is coming from his enemies.

I believe the same thing can be said to our electorate, particularly this election season — take what is offered to you.

What is vote buying?

Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code lists the variants of election offenses, including vote buying. It is described as “[a]ny person who gives, offers or promises money or anything of value, gives or promises any office or employment, franchise or grant, public or private, or makes or offers to make an expenditure, directly or indirectly, or cause an expenditure to be made to any person, association, corporation, entity, or community in order to induce anyone or the public in general to vote for or against any candidate or withhold his vote in the election.” At the other end is vote selling, which is also a prohibited act.

Take note that vote buying does not entail giving cash or money only. It also pertains to “anything of value” like merchandise. Making a “promise” to give something in return for voting a candidate is also considered vote buying, so if, for example, a candidate promises to give free housing to those who would vote for him, then that is vote buying.

Voters would be deemed guilty of vote selling if they performed the act requested of them by the vote buyer. However, if the voter voted another candidate who is not part of the buy-sell deal, then there is no vote selling at all.

Accordingly, election offenders, if found guilty, shall be punished with imprisonment of not less than one year but not more than six years and shall not be subject to probation.

Encouraging vote buying?

Vice President Leni Robredo, in her online dialogue with kasambahays (househelps), said, “Magiging honest ako sa inyo ha. Kasi, nung nag-run ako for congressman, grabe ‘yung bilihan ng boto sa amin. Alam mo mali siya. Mali ‘yung pagbibili ng boto. Pero ‘yung sinasabi ko sa tao, tanggapin ninyo. Parati kong sinasabi tanggapin n’yo kasi galing din naman ‘yan sa atin. ‘Yung pinambili ng boto pera din ‘’yon ng taong bayan. Pero kung tatanggapin mo, ang iboboto mo kung sino ang nasa konsensya mo. Huwag kang boboto dahil pakiramdam mo may utang na loob kasi tinanggap mo. ‘Yung sa akin, tanggapin ang pera pero iboto sa konsensya.”

Former senator Bongbong Marcos Jr., in a video posted on Twitter uttered, “Basta kahit ano pa ang gawin ninyo, kung ano ang inyong talagang pagpili sa ating mga kandidato, ‘yun ang ilagay ninyo sa balota. At ah… huwag na ninyong masyadong… huwag na ninyong pansinin ‘yung mga vote buying na ‘yan. Kunin ninyo ang pera kung sakali, pero huwag kayong boboto sa sinasabi nila. Iboto ninyo ‘yung gusto ninyo.“

Other candidates, like Manila Mayor Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso, have always sung the same tune — accept the money from the vote buyer, but vote according to your own desire.

These candidates are not encouraging vote buying. Their statements reflect that they want to end vote buying by punishing the vote buyers with no vote conversions on election day.

For those who think that they are election law experts, file the appropriate election offense complaints (encouraging vote buying?) against these candidates, and I will be watching from a distance.

Erratum

Thank you to Mr. Edgardo O. Castro, acting vice chairman of the Department of Foreign Affairs-Overseas Absentee Voting Secretariat (DFA-OVS) for sending me an email on an even date to correct the supposedly wrong figure that I cited in this column on October 23. He informed me that “the overseas voter turnout in the 2016 NLE was 432,706” and “for the 2022 NLE, their [sic] will be 1.5M registered overseas voters.” My bad for roughly estimating that “only 137,000 votes came from OFWs in 2016.”

Final quote

Let me end this week’s commentary with a kickass quote from the same Altered Carbon author.

“The personal, as everyone’s so f**king fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, take it personally. Get angry. The machinery of justice will not serve you here — it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide from under it with a wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it personal. Do as much damage as you can. Get your message across. That way, you stand a better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerous. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous marks the difference —- the only difference in their eyes — between players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it’s just business, it’s politics, it’s the way of the world, it’s a tough life and that it’s nothing personal. Well, f**k them. Make it personal.”

My unsolicited advice to all: Be players. Don’t be the little people.

Please continue sending your comments to allinsight.manilatimes@gmail.com. Visit our page at www.facebook.com/All.Insight.Manila.Times. Messages can also be sent to Viber account (0915)4201085.