St. Valentine’s Day has come and gone, but the courtship continues. I refer to that between the candidates and voters in the coming local elections. Let us then examine the roses and violets. These are the platforms on offer.
Platforms are like orphans. They are declarations of “principles and policies” adopted by candidates for public office. Here are examples of the content of platforms: “Jobs for the jobless.” “A better economy.” “A pristine environment.” “Affordable health care.” “Peace and order.”
What do these examples have in common? If asked, I’d say that they mean nothing at all, other than to indicate what the candidates think the voters want.
Democracy involves a classic (somewhat sad) story that never ends, with background music suggesting that “you can’t always have what you want.”
Studies have, however, shown that, by and large, parties and officials who win elections adhere to their platforms.
This does not mean that voters choose primarily on the basis of platforms. Our history suggests that elections hinge also on the personal attractiveness of candidates or on ‘extraneous’ forces such as vote-buying, disinformation, cheating in the vote counts, etc.
Still we persist, and I asked the two rival factions in the upcoming City elections what they offer the voters. I asked them to spell out their platforms. I also discuss below a three-part ‘platform’ suggested by my fellow columnist, Golda Benjamin, here at the MetroPost.
The incumbent faction, called Lupad Dumaguete, plays on the acronym LUPAD. It stands for Livable and cultured community; Urban revitalization inclusive of all barangays; Professionalism in government service & good governance; Abundance of food, clothing, adequate shelter for every family; and Devotion to God & Dedication to country and the community.
The above summary is, of course, a bit abstract. The Lupad group has pointed to the progress achieved in urban development (new bridges, wider roads, more than 300 CCTV cameras, etc.).
On the environment, the incumbents cite the closure of the open dumpsite, and its replacement with a facility to convert garbage to construction materials.
They also claim to have provided more open spaces with the Pantawan 2 reclamation and shoreline protection.
They consider tourism as an economic driver in their local economic development activities.
As to public health and disaster preparedness, they claim to “have attained and surpassed [CoViD] herd immunity” and are “building now the beginning of a future city hospital.”
In education, the City government has expanded its scholarship programs, and is set to complete multi-storey school buildings.
The Lupad group also says that “Talk is cheap,” and that, as representatives of the incumbent City administration, their “track record speaks for itself. The comparison is simple: performance vs. mere promise. We’ve already done or begun what they said they would.”
The reference to “they” is meant to apply to the opposition group.
The opposition, called Kasaligan, offers a supposedly alternative vision, as challengers often do. The group offers a “five-point development agenda” – which is focused on “health care, housing, livelihood and employment opportunities, environment, and peace and order.” The devil is in the details.
In health care, the group promises home delivery of free medicines (through a smartphone app). They promise a modern public City hospital (to augment the services of the public provincial hospital). They also promise free education for medical students who will serve local barangays.
On housing, they promise mass housing projects (“not less than 100 houses per year”).
On the local economy, they will focus on the “ease of doing business,” a reference to how the City currently processes permits and collects business taxes, which they view as cumbersome.
They also cite the need for inter-LGU cooperation on agriculture (“We sell, you produce” projects). They promise a “modern satellite public market”.
On the environment, the Kasaligan group has registered its objection to the 174-hectare reclamation project, which the group sees as a failure in local governance (more on this issue below); they promise instead to revitalize the marine protected areas, and to rehabilitate the Banica River.
On peace and order, they emphasize projects involving ‘neighborhood watch,’ and barangay-level crime prevention and emergency response.
Are there major differences in the platforms of these two groups? I suggest that there are none for the most part, although certain differences remain.
For example, I pressed the Lupad group on the issue of island reclamation. Here is their response:
“LGU Dumaguete will have to abide by the existing laws, as well as the policies of the next national administration. The plan for a smart city is still in the early stages, and the City has not given the award yet to any company. There will still be a long, tedious process, and the appropriate government agencies may or may not approve it.
A plan, whether everyone agrees with it or not, is better than no plan at all. And as the saying goes, the most important quality of any plan is the flexibility to change.
Lupad is in favor of rational development that offers more benefits than disadvantages for our generation and the next, with due regard to the conservation of our physical environment pursuant to prevailing laws.”
It seems that the Lupad group still supports reclamation, albeit not necessarily the aborted 174-hectare proposal linked to a Chinese corporation.
The Kasaligan group, on the other hand, unequivocally opposes the ‘174’ smart city project because of the environmental harm they foresee.
They also fault the incumbent administration with failing to provide the public the timely information needed for due consideration.
What is left unsaid also matters. In advertising campaigns, promoters tend to downplay the weaknesses of the products they sell. Thus, it pays to ask about issues that are barely or not even mentioned.
For example, neither group seems to have addressed the problem of vehicular traffic congestion in the City streets. Also, neither group talks about public libraries.
Importantly, the Lupad group now downplays the divisiveness of the reclamation issue (as can be seen in their response to a specific question on the project).
The Kasaligan group, on the other hand, says little about their role as “outsiders looking in,” which is understandable.
This suggests that the coming elections will be a proxy fight between the politically-connected and those who are not.
If a voter likes the incumbents, he will vote with the idea that the City will “fly high” (the meaning of lupad).
If a voter sides with the opposition, he is implicitly asking for more “trustworthiness” (the meaning of Kasaligan).
Certain issues should perhaps also be highlighted. Golda Benjamin in her column on “The City deserves better leaders” (MetroPost, Feb. 20-26, 2022) identified three: 1) inadequate consultations between City officials and residents; 2) a need to upgrade the City’s use of information technology, such as for the business permit system; and 3) non-transparency when the City officials privatized the water system and put forth the 174-hectare reclamation proposal.
Atty. Benjamin also noted ongoing problems with garbage collection.
Do platforms matter? They do, but perhaps not simply as records of achievement or promises. Dig deep and we find that platforms don’t say much about the mindset of candidates, though they can reveal some of the issues that matter to voters.
In a rational world, candidates will not over-promise. This may be because they are honest enough, and understand the difficulties of governing.
Alternatively, over-promising by a devious candidate is counter-productive; an enlightened voter understands that things that look too good are not likely to be true.
The voter is then left “hanging.” He must choose, knowing that platforms do not tell the whole story, and will likely rely also on other criteria. Perhaps something like ‘gut feel’ also applies.
We cannot read minds but we must discern who has the better ‘heart’. It’s a courtship thing. Roses or violets?
Personally, I prefer pink carnations.
______________________________________________________
Author’s email: [email protected]; Twitter: @ORoncesvalles
