Senate to survive pork barrel scandal

We write in reaction to Stephen Monsanto’s letter which proposed that given the number of lawmakers named in the pork barrel scam, the “country would be better off with a Congress put to rest for a while” (Opinion, 5/26/14).

Offhand, we acknowledge the people’s outrage over the scam. This is what Senate President Franklin Drilon said about it: “The pork barrel controversy and the public outrage that came with it serve as a cleansing process, not only of Congress, but of our entire political system. I am certain that when the guilty are expelled and imprisoned and the innocent, cleared, Congress as an institution will be stronger than before. We will uncover the truth behind this controversy, regardless of the political affiliation of those involved.”

The misuse of pork barrel funds was committed by individuals; never has it been alleged as an act of Congress. Given this, we must punish individuals and not the institution. As Drilon put it, “History tells us that politicians come and go, but our political institutions stay. This is why we have political stability. Our democracy, our political institutions, will survive this pork barrel scandal.”

To insinuate that Congress should be abolished is oversimplifying the problem. To say that Congress is guilty merely because the names of most of its members are in the so-called “Napolist” shows a lack of appreciation (of) our democratic processes.

Our democratic framework provides us with a potent weapon against corruption—we can always vote those who we think misused public funds out of office. In contrast, demagogic calls to bring down our means of representation and our democratic institutions will lead us only to a greater nightmare of anarchic disorder.

It cannot be denied that reforms to cleanse the government of corruption are underway. In the Senate, this is reflected in the abolition of the pork barrel fund, the institution of more transparent measures in the annual budgetary process, and the current legislative efforts to add more teeth to our antigraft and corruption policies.

To say then that “we have enough laws to tide us over another hundred years” to justify the elimination of Congress from our state is an irresponsible and contemptuous approach to our democratic system. We are certain Monsanto realizes that Congress is one of the three independent branches of government that provide for a system of check and balance in our democratic and republican state.

We advise Monsanto to look at the actual applications of his suggestion. History and recent developments teach us that removing a country’s parliamentary component invites totalitarian disasters. Take the Philippine Congress’ abolition which led to 20 dark years of nightmarish authoritarian rule. The recent declaration of military rule in Thailand and Egypt has shown us where nations go when they belittle political institutions and submit to the temptations of strong-arm tactics and mob rule.

—SAMMY SANTOS,

print media director,

Senate of the Philippines