Immaterial
Our political party system has been weak to begin with. Over the past five years, they became immensely weaker.
The period of dictatorship, with its fake elections, torpedoed the once stable two-party system. The 1987 Constitution, prescribing a “multi- party system” superimposed on a presidential form of government, prevented the resurrection of stable party competition.
There were structural reasons as well for the disappearance of the old two-party system.
From the end of the war to 1972, the party system reflected the alliances of provincial political lords and landed barons. Since our local politics always tended to be bi-factional, the two-party system comfortably accommodated local rivalries.
Before the onset of dictatorship, our economy was largely agricultural. The landed elite wielded economic power, and hence political power. Those who owned the haciendas had both the cash and the indentured rural poor to mobilize votes during elections.
Electoral contests then were financed largely by the provincial landed elite. This is why our political history books described the two-party system as a reflection of the rivalry between the “sugar bloc” and the “tobacco bloc.”
Through the interregnum of dictatorship, the economic landscape changed dramatically. Rural poverty produced a powerful “push” factor for massive urbanization. While the importance of our traditional plantation economies declined, new urban elites emerged.
Urbanization, of course, took away the “command votes” of the plantation-based elite. That merely magnified their economic decline.
In the old arrangement, where election campaigns were financed by the landed regional brokers, the national parties performed the role of talent scouts for the political gladiators on the national stage. They actively recruited those who topped the bar (the likes of Jovito Salonga and Jose Diokno) to field as national candidates.
In the new arrangement, the mass of voters concentrated in the cities. These voters are not beholden to landlords. Without any ideological delineation among the contending parties, they chose candidates elected at-large on the basis of name-recall and popularity. This is why, in the post-Edsa Revolution elections, movie stars and athletes and media personalities invaded the electoral sphere in force.
Since voters did not choose their candidates on the basis of party affiliation or adherence to some program of government, the political parties became increasingly immaterial.
It did not help that the pattern of electoral financing changed dramatically. Campaign contributions now come mainly from large urban business interests, not from plantation owners. The funding flows directly to the presidential candidates who in turn support the campaigns of local candidates.
Party politics now centered on the presidential aspirant. This is why all our nominal parties are really the shells of previous presidential campaigns.
After every election, politicians routinely change party affiliation and congregate around the winning presidential candidate. It is the elected president who controlled the pork barrel and disbursed project money from vast discretionary funds. This was only thinly disguised by calling the chronic opportunism of the political aristocracy “coalitions.”
Worsened
Benigno Aquino III worsened the trend. He relied principally on buying political support. This is why the pork barrel grew several-fold, supplemented by the “disbursement acceleration program” (DAP) funds. This is why he continues to be denounced from the streets as the “Pork Barrel King.”
Even as both the explicit pork barrel and the DAP were declared unconstitutional, the money was still paid out for political support from the engorged slush funds controlled by the Chief Executive. Our politics became even more transactional. Alliances are defined by outright bribery. The Corona impeachment episode (driven by DAP funds) elevated this to its most obscene extent.
The decrepit state of our party politics is only exceeded by the gross deterioration of our rail services under the Aquino administration. Positioning for next year’s presidential contest demonstrates the abyss into which our political party system has fallen.
The LP is behaving ignominiously. It has not even bothered to convene an internal nomination process for its standard bearer. The party is content waiting for the President to make choices for the party.
The so-called “ruling party” has not evolved a program of government. It projects no vision of the future. It now resembles a gang of politicians waiting for the President’s marching orders — a party with no mind of its own.
Survey frontrunner Grace Poe does not as much as give a nod to the party system. Relying entirely on personal popularity, she now threatens to win the highest elective office as an “independent.”
That prospect becomes thinkable only because the majority of voters is expected to cast what electoral technicians call “market votes.” Such votes are independently cast — although entirely on the basis of shallow impressions of the candidate.
A campaign anchored entirely on popularity is, no doubt, feasible. But it is also vulnerable. A major screwup on the part of the candidate can dramatically alter the voter preference profile.
Citizenship issues hound Poe, notwithstanding her popularity ratings. Some of those issues might require a court ruling while the campaign is in full swing.
For his part, Vice-President Jejomar Binay appears to be the only candidate seriously doing party building. Last month, he launched UNA as a political party. It will be the mechanism for tapping the bi-factional dynamic in local politics to build a base for his presidential campaign — and for his presidency if that happens.
As first-mover, his strategy is clearly to have the forthcoming campaign evolve around an administration-opposition divide. That will be to his advantage because he has basically taken control of the opposition franchise.
It has been a privilege writing for the STAR all these years, a paper one could truly trust. Happy anniversary!