“Candidates simply show their confusion about the issues.”
The presidential debate is truly lamentable. It seems that candidates do not know or are confused about the issues. This can be gleaned at how they analyze issues which indicate that either they do not understand or just picked them up thinking it will help elect them than in educating our people about the purpose of our democracy.
This is sad because our system of freewheeling democracy involves discussion of issues. Often, many equate democracy as extension of their freedom but not to measure their ability to analyze as aspiring political leader. As host, political debates have become a sort of tradition, and people unwittingly calling it a “wrangle”. He who can talk much louder, has the ability to rudely interrupt, to inject topic considered as out-of-line, or one who has made it his forte to insult his opponents is considered a champion.
Since debates are hosted by people who are politically inclined, it is most likely that the questions asked by the host, acting as moderator, are often designed to embarrass or humiliate one candidate. The louder the applause from the audience is treated as affirmation to carry on the debates more so if the moderator managed to pin down his rival. On the whole, a candidate who can give his wishy-washy response without the audience distinguishing whether he or she is the smartest or the dumbest of the candidates is treated as a hero.
Those who refuse to participate in what some say as a free-for-all wrangle is branded as a coward, insinuating the candidate is hiding something he could not possibly answer. Thus, the gullible audience are made to judge and prosecute all rolled into one.
People who are knowledgeable of the important issues often get tired of what the candidates are talking about. The debate easily gets boring especially if one is given by his/her heathen analysis of the issue. Either he or she is seen as an ignoramus pretending to be knowledgeable or worse, a demagogue riding on public passion. After all, it is not democracy that is important, but the number of people who will vote irrespective on how he assesses the issues presented to him.
For instance, one presidential candidate gave a one-liner observation of what is going on in Ukraine. Her one-line jab at Russia for allegedly committing aggression was intended to appease her alien political brokers although it is clear she has little understanding why it erupted into a full-blown conflict. Her statement was a payment for their support for her candidacy.
Likewise, nobody talks much about the “green party” that is so popular in Germany. The party is concerned about our environment.
Unfortunately, nobody talks about this issue, especially now where there is a sharp rise in the cost of fuel energy. All that the candidate rants are the sharp rise in the price of fuel, yet continues to applaud the US for imposing a worldwide ban on the sale of Russian oil. It never came to the mind of our candidates that banning the importation of Russian fuel could engender retaliation.
While the US could easily pass on the price of fuel to local distributors, our candidates never think of the possibility that the US could even profit while jacking up their export of oil from this country. Right now, the US is negotiating with Venezuela, Iran, and Qatar to obtain oil at discounted prices. US importation of oil and natural gas from these countries is intended to stabilize the price of oil. This means the US could forgo their oil embargo and re-open the pipeline to buyers if that would serve their interest.
As stated, the US is negotiating now with Iran, Venezuela, and Qatar. From the grapevine, the US is seeking a 25 to 30 percent discount from these countries they once considered as “rogue states”. What is deplorable is the possibility of the US reselling their oil imports at 15 to 10 percent discount to us.
To recall, Cory Aquino mothballed the BNPP after faithfully paying Westinghouse for the full amount in 2012. No candidate today dared to open his mouth that the Plant today is an empty shell. All the machinery and equipment to operate a nuclear plant have long been removed and resold by the contractor. This explains why the reopening of the BNPP is considered costly because all were disposed of after a pacto de retro sale with us getting nothing.
In our haste to replace our diesel-fired generation plants, the advocates of the Clean Air Act had all of them replaced with cleaner natural gas that fueled generators to keep our environment clean. We were also forced to make use of the wind and solar energy just to meet the increasing demand for clean energy. We were fortunate that China was able to introduce their much-reduced cost windmills and improved the efficiency of its solar panels.
Their introduction of wind power and solar energy proved to be timely to our quest to industrialize. The country was able to import windmills made in China instead of those costly ones made in Europe. The same can be said of those solar panels. Unfortunately, one distributor of solar energy was able to monopolize the business so that nobody can use the system without the permission from the franchisor.
Despite our attempt to get oil, nobody from the candidates admitted that our current misery is the result of the decision to stop the mining and production of coal, hypocritically thinking that coal is inefficient and blamed as the cause of environmental pollution. Today, we are importing coal from Indonesia. Most of our industries, including the power generation plants have all been replaced by the costly natural gas extracted in Malampaya which is about to be depleted by 2025.
Even a candidate claiming to represent his own class has no idea on how he could go about exhuming our people from poverty. He has no idea that water is needed to irrigate the farmland, and next to that is the supply of fertilizer. Many of these projects have long been built and implemented by the Marcos administration, yet they continue to deny all his achievements. Candidates today are caught in their own delusion.
First, they revised the original land reform program of Marcos. They reduced the hectarage only to find out that the farmland would not suffice to economically sustain every farmer and his family. The concept of land distribution is based on his ability to pay the land, and on the reasonable amount of harvest to help alleviate his livelihood. The Cory Aquino administration revised the formula to erase the past. This caused a financial burden to many. Farmers were not able to pay the monthly amortization and instead abandoned their farm lots for subdivision purposes.
They even privatized the irrigation system to allegedly allow the government to recover production cost. This was followed by the privatization of the country’s only fertilizer plant. The country suffered a slump in rice production, and fly-by-night agricultural experts contend that farmers should be taught with new approaches that could lead to higher crop yield. But since our famers measure their income in terms of production, many of them stick to the old practice of measuring their income per harvest.
Our technocrats failed to measure the cost of production per hectare plus the cost per bag of fertilizer and cost of irrigation, which would result in a net production loss to many.
Debate should focus on how we could help alleviate the economic livelihood of our people, instead of reminiscing about the things which the past administration has long accomplished. We should move forward to suggesting new ideas. Criticizing the past only reveals that candidates have no platform of government to present if elected. They cannot move forward novel ideas because what is in their minds is how to exact revenge.
