Why not limit session time of Congress?

Why not limit session time of Congress?

Updated 06:43am (Mla time) Oct 13, 2004
By Neal Cruz
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the October 13, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


I HAVE only one objection to lawyer Romulo Makalintal's proposal to abolish Congress and save P67 billion. His proposal is not to have any elections for all congressmen and for half of the 24-member Senate when their terms expire in 2007. The other 12 senators, whose terms won't expire until 2010, will stay on to enact the laws that are necessary and repeal those that are not needed anymore. Then we will have a unicameral legislature. That will save the nation P67 billion which we sorely need to balance the budget and pay our debts, he said.

Makalintal was one of the two guests at last Monday's Kapihan sa Manila media forum; the other was Interior and Local Government Secretary Angelo Reyes.

I have earlier also proposed the abolition of Congress but my principal objection to Makalintal's version is that among the 12 senators who would be left behind to do the mopping up are Lito Lapid, Bong Revilla and Jinggoy Estrada, plus five neophytes: Jamby Madrigal, Pia Cayetano, Dick Gordon, Alfredo Lim and Mar Roxas. There would be only four veterans left: Aquilino Pimentel Jr., Juan Ponce Enrile, Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Rodolfo Biazon. What is happening to us?

My original proposal was to abolish the whole Congress, period, and save even more money. The most peaceful time we had was after President Ferdinand Marcos abolished Congress. Things became “magulo” [chaotic] again, and graft ridden, when the Batasang Pambansa [National Legislature] was established. (Note that the Batasan was a unicameral legislature, with which Makalintal and certain congressmen want to replace our Congress.) Without a legislature, the government would be a dictatorship, some say. But with the Batasan, the government was still a dictatorship, and the legislature only added to the taxpayers' burden.

Anyway we have too many laws already so that many of them are not being enforced. These laws are so many that law enforcers, judges and justices, lawyers and even the legislators themselves can't remember them all. That is why court cases take years and years to finish, and fiscals and courts often make mistakes, resulting in miscarriages of justice. Even the Supreme Court sometimes contradicts itself because of too many contradictory laws.

And if the members of the legal profession can't remember them all, how can we expect ordinary citizens to remember and obey them all? That is why there are many law violators; they don't realize they are violating laws. Ergo, too many laws make too many criminals. Our lives were much simpler, more peaceful and orderly when we had very few laws promulgated by the village chieftains.

With fewer laws, we would need fewer courts, judges and justices, fiscals, clerks of court, stenographers, interpreters and lawyers and save even more money.

This is not a joke. Many countries have no legislatures for much of the year. They are called to sessions only when the proposed laws to be enacted have been gathered for discussions. As soon as they are passed, the legislature adjourns.

Needless to say, the legislators are paid only when they are in session. Which is only fair, 'di ba? So, a lot of taxpayers' money is saved, and legislators don't make a career and a family business of politics.

The Philippine system is very wasteful. Congress holds sessions for most of the year, during which the legislators, members of their staff, drivers, advisers and consultants are paid salaries, not to mention the bills for light, water, telephone, gasoline, snacks, office supplies and a thousand and one other things. In fact, they are paid even when they don't attend sessions, or they are in recess, or traveling abroad (which is often), with the taxpayers paying for their travel and representational expenses. Include the notorious multibillion-peso pork barrel, a big chunk of which goes into private pockets, and you will see why the government is going bankrupt.

Since Filipino politicians want to copy legislatures of other countries anyway (after copying the American presidential-bicameral system, they now want to copy the parliamentary, unicameral system), why don't we copy that system wherein the legislature holds sessions only when needed and the chief executive calls them? When Congress holds sessions the whole year, it does mostly nothing but investigate, investigate and investigate every little thing that would give its members publicity and end up finding nothing. Or they file innocuous and useless bills such as changing the names of streets and schools.

We don't have to abolish the Senate. If one of the houses of Congress has to be abolished, I think it should be the House of Representatives. With limited session time, we would save enough money even with a bicameral Congress. And movie actors like Bong Revilla can go back to acting when Congress is not in session.

* * *

Former Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) chief of staff and former defense secretary Angelo Reyes had no inkling of the AFP scandals that exploded recently, he told the Kapihan sa Manila last Monday. For which reason he has not yet formed any opinion as to whether former AFP comptroller Carlos F. Garcia should be tried in a civilian court or face a military court martial. Reyes is now the secretary of interior and local government and fortunately above the AFP scandals -- as of the moment.

* * *

TODAY'S JOKE: Senator Lito Lapid: Ano ba ang ibig sabihin ng Bank Secrecy Law?

Senator Bong Revilla: Ibig sabihin n'yon ang mga deposito sa bangko ay sekreto.

Senator Jinggoy Estrada: "Di totoo 'yon. Bakit ang Jose Velarde deposit sa bangko ng erpat ko, nabisto?

Senator Lapid: Bakit hindi mabibisto eh ang dami ng mga tellers sa bangko.