Sabado, Pebrero 25, 2017

Luzonians oppose Cha-Cha in first congressional consultation


By Mortz C. Ortigoza

DAGUPAN CITY -  Out of more than a hundred crowd invited by Congress, only five wanted charter change through a Constituent Assembly in the first public consultation of congressmen to revise the 1987 Constitution.
REALITY CHECK. Author, a radio commentator too, does some rabble rousing explanation about the pros and cons of charter change  before members of the "Committee on Constitutional Amendments" of the House of Representatives.

When the Committee on Constitutional Amendment’s Chairman Roger Mercado asked the more than a hundred attendees, at a hotel here, who came from the 31 villages of this City led by their barangay chairmen, mayor, councilors, and public and private officials from here and the towns and other cities of the mammoth Pangasinan province if they favor Constituent Assembly (CA) or Constitutional Convention (CC) to craft the 1987 Constitution, only five raised their right hands on the CA and more than 10 raised their hand on the CC.
The opinion of some spectators was either the attendees did not understand the bodies that have been given a constitutional power to hammer the highest law or they did not want federalism as the “silver bullet” to end the malaise of this country if based on the pronouncement of Representative Mercado and others.
A Constituent Assembly, according to Wikipidia, is composed of all members of the bicameral Philippine Congress (Senate and the House of Representatives). It is convened by Congress to propose amendments to the 1987 constitution. Under Article XVII of the Constitution of the Philippines, amendments pass upon a vote of three fourths of all members of Congress, but it is not clear if the Congress should vote as a single body or as separate houses.

Congressman Mercado said here that C.A would be convened where Senate and House of Representatives vote as one for the three-fourth. His pronouncement made some experts here skeptical if the charter change bid would pass the scrutiny of the Supreme Court whose members were pet peeved of President Rodrigo Duterte – the main proponent of the constitutional change.
A constitutional convention, Wikipidia said, is a gathering for the purpose of writing a new constitution or revising an existing constitution. Members of a constitutional convention are often elected by popular vote. The resulting constitutional frame of government is often subjected to a popular vote via referendum before it enters into force.  
College of Law Dean and lawyer Manuel Manuel of Lyceum Northwestern University told Northern Watch his students had a position paper opposing the amendment or revision of the Constitution.
Veloso said the C.A is the practical vehicle than C.C because C.A could save ten billion pesos of the public funds in the deliberation, debate, and amendment or revision by its members of the fundamental law.
Iyong pipiliin niyo na mga commissioners sa C.C tinalo na ng mga congressmen ninyo sila sa last elections,” the former Court of Appeals Justice explained.
A former professor of political science and radio commentator probably influenced the voting mood of the attendees when he passionately argued that Congress should focus on amending the xenophobic 60-40 percentage business equity that favor Filipino businessmen at the expense of foreign investors instead of zeroing on federalism that has nothing to do with the penury of the Filipinos.
Our problems are jobs for our people and the solution is break that 60-40 percent economic provision in the Constitution and make it 100 percent to attract more foreign businessmen to put jobs in the country,” he told the Committee on Constitutional Amendments headed by Mercado, and composed of Representatives Vicente Veloso, Virgilio Lacson, and Edward Maceda who were joined at the panel table by Pangasinan Congressmen Christopher de Venecia and Rosemarie “Baby” Arenas.
The Committee has 35 members.
He elaborated that 100 percent foreign ownership made Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore a haven of foreign investors while their neighbor Philippines lurked at the economic bottom in drawing investors.
“According to the World Bank in 2015 foreign direct investors poured almost U.S $6 billion to the Philippines; $ 9,003, 516, 296 to Thailand; $10, 962, 721,673 to Malaysia; $11,800,000,000 to Vietnam; $20, 054, 270,304 to Indonesia; and $65,262,633,426 to Singapore,” he stressed.
He cited he was opposed to federalism because poor regions and provinces like Maguindanao, Basilan, Samar, Leyte, Kalinga Apayao for examples would suffer more economic devastation.

“Taxes given to the provinces through the internal revenue allotments (IRA) are taken from the Bureau of Internal Revenue’s Value Added Tax, Capital Gain Tax, Corporate Tax, Donor Tax, Percentage Tax, Documentary Tax, except thumbtack. How will these provinces or regions pay to their public school teachers, policemen, and other workers who used to be under the national government since they could not collect many taxes unlike the emoluments given to them by the national government?” he posed.
          VIDEO: Bakit Pangit ang Federalismo, bakit Maganda ang 100% Free Economic Equity? 
 Maganda ang 100% Free Economic Equity sa Foreigners, pero Pangit ang Federalism sa mga Mahihirap na provinces, regions sa Pinas pag ni adopt natin sila sa New Constitution.

1 komento:

  1. Red Viñales magchange na tayo move to federalism
    Like · Reply · 37 mins
    Michael Wittmann
    Michael Wittmann that can be easily solved like in the US states which need economic assistance receive Federal funding\

    TumugonBurahin