When he was asked why he wants to run for president, El Shaddai leader Bro. Mike Velarde said he wanted to solve this country’s problems. When I heard that I realized that all our aspirants are basically using that same line as the reason why they want to become president.
To solve our country’s problems. Talaga lang ah.
When our politicians say this line you can bet that they want us to think that they are our hope for salvation and that not getting them elected will be our loss. I have no doubt that is the subliminal message they want us to absorb.
I’ll pretend there’s some truth to this. I’ll suspend my disbelief and accept the possibility that these politicians really do have the answers.
Now, I’m wondering if they really do have the answers and they really care about our country’s welfare why haven’t we heard about their ideas?
That’s one of the problems inherent in our current system. Anyone can just come out and present themselves as a presidential candidate (remember Eddie Gil) and just about anyone with enough media mileage and financial resources can get themselves elected. Sure, those of us who are smart enough to demand for more than just soundbytes and cheap gimmickry from our candidates can do so till our candidates give in. The problem with this though is that it’s all optional. It’s still all up to the candidates to give us substance.
Obviously, something has to be done about this. Our candidates should be required to give us something to work on in our search for our next leader. To me the obvious solution is to adjust the qualifications for president. Aside from the already established qualifications, prior experience in an administrative position in government should also be required of all candidates for president. This way the presidential aspirant will have some sort of public service track record, which voters can use as a gauge of his or her worthiness for the top post.
I think we should also have a law or policy requiring anyone who wants to run for any public office position to start demonstrating their ability “to solve our country’s problems” at least two years before an election year. Of course that same law or policy should also create the environment that would allow these aspiring public officials to do their thing.
Here’s an imaginary scenario to make this all clear.
It’s 2005. Mr. Pagasa wants to run for congressman in 2010. His reason: he wants to solve our country’s problems. Aware of the abovementioned policy, he drafts a number of proposals that he claims can solve Metro Manila’s traffic problem. He submits his proposals to his congressman and/or the MMDA. He submits the same to media for publication.
Also aware of the policy (which should mandate media participation in this whole set-up), media outlets come out with reports or advisories informing the public of Mr. Pagasa’s ideas.
What was achieved in this imaginary scenario? First off, Mr. Pagasa was given a chance to establish his worth as a possible candidate in a future election. He came up with a possible solution to a problem. If it’s any good, the congressman and/or the government agency to whom he gave his proposal should then take the necessary action to make it official. The congressman should have it tackled for possible legislation. The MMDA should implement it. The media mileage given to Mr. Pagasa and his proposal should ensure that credit is given where credit is due. It should also give the public the opportunity to see for themselves if Mr. Pagasa could be the next big thing in Philippine Politics.
Of course, if the proposal turns out to be worthless then nothing happens and Mr. Pagasa simply fails to establish himself as a worthy future candidate. But, at least he tried.
I must admit I’m a little concerned this suggestion of mine might be seen as ‘weird.’ Well, at least I tried to help. But, no. I have no political ambitions whatsoever.
You know lpgd, you’re on to something. Ideally the system rewards positive contributions with the right to run for higher office. It won’t just be bragging rights; it’s currency to buy the ticket into greater responsibility. We’re still very far from becoming a society that picks leaders for what they already are and what they have given of themselves (note that I didn’t say “and what they have accomplished”), not for what people HOPE these candidates could be.
[Reply]
lpgd Reply:
August 24th, 2009 at 3:18 am
you got me thinking with this line “note that I didn’t say “and what they have accomplished” and i realized that while accomplishments can be a good gauge of a candidate’s worth it shouldn’t be treated as the ultimate factor. a candidate may have already accomplished a great deal but that is no assurance he/she will always do the right thing. i think it really boils down to screening a combination of factors such as character, track record, accomplishments, platform and others i’m not aware of right now.
[Reply]