Teflon and double standards

If we go by recent opinion surveys, President Aquino must be wearing an armor-plated vest that cloaks him with permanent impermeability from criticisms on his performance.

Social Weather Stations reported that its survey of September found that the President’s net satisfaction rating plummeted by 15 points to +49 from  +64 in June, but  it cushioned  the rating by saying it was still  “good,” according to its classification ranging from “excellent” (+70)  to “execrable” (-70).

Another pollster, Pulse Asia, was more sycophantic; its survey, also for September, found that the majority  (63 percent) of Filipinos approve of the “response of President Aquino to the issue of the alleged anomalous use of the Priority Development Assistance Fund,” a manifestation of the administration’s  anticorruption reforms and initiatives.

According to Pulse Asia, the survey shows majority support for the President’s call to “search for the truth” and to hold accountable “those who are responsible,” particularly his pledge to prosecute persons involved in the  misuse of the notorious pork barrel known as the PDAF. The September survey gave the President a 79-percent approval rating, six percent higher than the 73 percent in June. Mr. Aquino’s spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said the survey was “a reflection of the unwavering confidence that the Filipino people have in President Aquino and his reform agenda,” adding that “confidence has remained strong despite the attempts of those who oppose the President’s good governance and anticorruption agenda to sow distrust and confusion.” Attempts to pull Mr. Aquino down will not prosper, especially those who had misused and abused public funds, he also said.

It  should be noted that Pulse Asia focused on the issue of the PDAF, ignoring the fact that public outrage has shifted to the DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Program), the mechanism invented by the administration to grab control of the bulk of political-patronage resources financed by the national budget and sourced from  taxpayer money. Its focus on the misuse of the PDAF played into the hands of the administration, whose efforts had been to blur the issue of its duplicity on the public demand for the total abolition of the pork barrel, especially the President’s own.

From whatever perspectives the surveys examined the pork barrel issue, P-Noy has come out with flying colors and unscathed. From the survey results, it appears that P-Noy is infallible and is incapable of doing anything wrong. If the surveys accurately reflect public opinion on the performance of the Aquino presidency, then we are headed for trouble. Most of the media—whether print or TV and radio—are saturated with reports and commentaries mostly full of praise, uncritical of the administration’s performance after four years in office, drowning out contrary views from a few. It’s time to pause and consider whether this condition—where the public is not demanding that the government raise the bar of its performance on issues other than the criminal prosecution of those involved in the P10-billion pork barrel scam allegedly masterminded by Janet Lim-Napoles—is pushing the nation to become a nation of sheep.

The surveys have allowed the administration to believe that its priorities are right and to be complacent of its continuing popularity despite the glaring shortfalls of its obsession with the single issue of criminal prosecution of persons charged with plunder in its anticorruption campaign. For example, interpreting the Pulse Asia survey, Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma gave it this spin: “Despite efforts at misdirection, our people clearly discern President Aquino’s determination to institute needed reform measures  to ensure that public funds are properly used in the delivery of essential infrastructure and services.”

In response to the 15-point plunge of his satisfaction rating in the SWS survey, the President said the slump was not due to anything he had done but to the toxic effect of public sentiment against corruption in the  previous administration. He told reporters that it was  public outrage over the pork barrel scam that had dragged down his rating. “What was discovered  from 2007 to 2009? ” he asked reporters. “Who were in office in Malacañang? Not us. So it seemed that we have been dragged into [this scandal] because we’re all part of government, perhaps.”

He noted that the government had already filed cases against those who misused their pork barrel entitlements and had enough witnesses to support the  cases. But the cases highlighted the point that cases are selected and target political enemies of the administration. With the blame game in full flight, many are asking: How far back will the administration go in the past to show that its anticorruption crusade is delivering results? How many more cases will be filed by the Department of Justice and how many more will be charged to demonstrate how clean and incorruptible is the  “daang matuwid” administration?

How about alleviation of poverty, generation of jobs to give incomes to the poor, and resolving the deficit in infrastructure investments needed to boost economic growth? Sending crooks to jail is not the only function of governance. Surely the nation cannot wait for the benefits from economic projects until the crooks are sent to jail—or until Mr. Aquino is beatified for sainthood.