Vote-buying or Voter-calamity-fund?

By Ermin Garcia Jr.

THE Comelec was swamped with reports of vote-buying in the country. The situation in Pangasinan was certainly no different.

As thousands will attest, they who were programmed to receive both cash and grocery goodies, local candidates here must have spent millions to carry out their vote-buying schemes, a far cry from the vote-buying schemes in 2013 and earlier.

With technology (aided perhaps by stolen data from Comelec files), the distribution appeared more systematic compared to the usual pakurong tradition that required some intelligence networking of sort.

In 2013, targeted voters were visited in their homes where cash and goodies were delivered. All in exchange for a tacit promise and assurance that their family members will vote for the candidates whose names are listed in a sample ballot attached to the goodies and envelope.

In 2016, a more systematic approach aided by technology was introduced and tried by a political camp. The methodology was completely changed. This time, targeted voters were identified through a database that provided not only the name of the voter but also his/her home address and precinct number. It gave the impression that nothing will escape the candidate’s eyes.

There was no more semblance of a cloak and dagger operation like everyone was accustomed to in the past. Targeted voters were made to claim their cash and goodies in designated areas on specific dates, armed with pre-numbered printed stubs. 

The pre-determined recipients of the stubs were made to line up to collect the promised cash and noodles like they were claiming calamity funds from the government. Lost was the element of secrecy that used to accompany the pakurong system.  Everything was in the open. If one lined up with a stub, it presupposes that the voter that received the goods had compromised his vote.  But that didn’t seem to bother the stub recipients.  They claimed cash and goodies from all quarters.

As expected, the whole process engineered by one political camp shocked communities in Pangasinan. That was in 2013.

*                *                *                *                *

END OF PAKURONG. Last week, one can no longer differentiate what was strictly vote-buying or “voter-calamity program” of candidates.

Voters in many barangays were seen lining up in “stub redemption areas” of opposing candidates. Through it all, it has come to a point where voters who redeemed their stubs collected as much as P5k-P10k from both opposing camps.

Proof of the indiscriminate distribution of vote-buying stubs by opposing camps was the full house status of all fastfood chain outlets in towns and cities on May 14-15. Voters splurged after voting on May 13!! 

Woe is the candidate who lost. The system allowed the candidate to make the distribution of millions accountable but it failed to ensure accountability of votes.

Woe is the voters in the community. The winner will likely try every means to recover costs of vote-buying from budgets allocated for health, sanitation, sports, garbage collection, road and school projects.

The only thing certain? – The days of the traditional effective pakurong have ended.

*                *                *                *                *

LESSONS LEARNED. AS one can glean from our stories this week, this year’s election has seen a lot of upsets and reversal of political fortunes for a number of politicians.

For sure, a lot of lessons could be learned from this year’s elections.  From our outsiders-looking-in perspective, here are some lessons from their observations:

1. Loyalty votes enjoyed by incumbents are no longer transferable to children, spouses.
2. There are no benefits to opposing camps if they employ the same vote-buying scheme. (Consider returning to the old effective pakurong)
3. Reject the “stub-redemption” scheme. It is not only incriminating but doesn’t guarantee to candidate anything except to know how much was distributed and who received them.  
4. Sample ballots are a waste of paper and cash.
5. Under the automated system, it’s futile to demand for manual count.
6. “Watchers” have different tasks under the automated system. “Watchers” must watch voting proceedings from start to finish, particularly if vote-counting-machines (VCM) are prone to malfunctioning and ballots have to be stored for encoding in replacement VCM.  So watchers must be qualified and trained to understand the automated system.  (Watchers are no longer needed to watch canvassing proceedings).
7. To show good faith in the community, be the first to remove and dismantle your own posters, streamers and tarps. The act of volunteerism as a sincere gesture for public service will long be remembered even by jaded believers among voters.
8. Voters are becoming more astute and better informed because of social media. Don’t rely on personality imaging alone.
9. Conduct your own scientific voter’s preference survey. Don’t trust ward leaders’ surveys.
10. Be wary of volunteers not known to ward leaders.

*                *                *                *                *

PERFORMANCE VS. VISION. In Dagupan City, it’s a matter of time before political loyalties begin to switch from Mayor Belen Fernandez to Mayor-elect Brian Lim. 

Fortunately for Mayor Belen, her record of transparency and accountability is beyond reproach. The usual political payback policies that will go into effect will only affect the rank and file. Consequently, their loyalty to the new administration will constantly be tested.

And as far as Mayor Belen is concerned, her disappointment will likely last a month but she can look forward to deep restful sleep in the months and years ahead because nothing and nobody can undo the completed infrastructure under her stewardship.

It will be Mayor Brian who will have to deal with the unprecedented levels of achievements that his predecessor accomplished.  Any continued attempt to discredit her will only show weakness on his part.

On the other hand, Mr. Lim will have one big advantage that Mayor Belen did not have. There are millions in resources available to him that he can tap to implement his own vision of development for the city. There are breakthroughs that will allow him to further improve on the status quo left behind by Mayor Belen.

Also, Mr. Lim will likely not have an obstructionist pestering him from within the city council. The newly-elected councilors, particularly, those in Mayor Belen’s team are level-headed. Mayor Belen had to deal with Mr. Lim’s loyalist in Councilor Red Erfe-Mejia who attempted to stonewall each and every ordinance or resolution endorsed by Mayor Belen.  (For that, Red should be amply rewarded)   

My only fear in the city council will be an attempt to install a new version of Judas 9 that wreaked havoc in the city under the stewardship of his father, the late Mayor BSL.

Be that as it may, the PUNCH will extend to Mr. Lim’s administration the support and the benefit of the doubt deserving of a new vision for good governance.

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments