House lawmakers thumb down peer's proposal for term extension

Two senior House leaders reiterated on Wednesday that political provisions would not be pursued in their relentless push for a Charter change (Cha-cha).

Majority Leader Manuel Jose Dalipe and Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez, chairperson of the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments, were both quick to shoot down Ilocos Norte Rep. Angelo Marcos Barba’s Resolution of Both Houses 8, seeking to extend the terms of office for members of the House of Representatives from the current three years to five years.

Dalipe said the House leadership will “stick” to its initial proposal of lifting only certain restrictive economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution, including those on foreign ownership in public utilities, educational facilities, and the advertising industry, covered under Articles 12, 14, and 16, respectively.

“We are sticking with that advocacy because that is what we think will be good for the country and that is what we believe the people will accept,” the Zamboanga lawmaker averred.

Rodriguez is also keen that Barba’s proposal will fail to flourish in the lower chamber as it contradicts the collective position of Speaker Martin Romualdez and the supermajority bloc. 

“I think the House leadership will not favor this proposal. The Speaker has repeatedly declared that the push for Charter reform at this time is confined to amending the Constitution’s restrictive economic provisions,” Rodriguez said.

RBH 8, filed on Monday, aims to allow House members to serve two consecutive terms, or a total of 10 years in office, than the current nine years for every congressman reelected twice. 

In his resolution, Barba pointed out that the nine-year period for House members is “not enough” to fully serve their respective constituents and that their legislative agenda is “most of the time left unenacted due to various priorities.”

Dalipe, on the other hand, said that Barba’s proposal might not be given due consideration, considering that the “House is inclined to confine itself to economic Charter reforms.”

He also cited a recent survey by big data research firm Tangere showing six in 10 Filipinos support only the proposed economic reforms, believing these would generate more job and income opportunities for Filipinos and faster economic growth for the country as a whole.

“While there is broad acceptance for these reform proposals, a proposed constitutional amendment that is political in nature, on the other hand, will surely divide our people. They will suspect self-interest as the motivation behind such proposal,” he said.

The House of Representatives had already passed the March Resolution of Both Houses 7, aiming to ease foreign restrictions on Articles 12, 14, and 16 of the 37-year-old CharterCharter.

Their counterparts in the Senate, however, have been giving the cold shoulder in their own Resolution of Both Houses 7—the counterpart of the House-approved measure. 

Senate President Francis "Chiz" Escudero had also previously said that those legislation that "divide the public," including RBH 6, will not be accorded due priority.

Attempts to revamp the CharterCharter have failed in past Congresses due to suspicions that the move was a veiled bid by politicians to perpetuate themselves in power by extending their terms.

Several experts also believe that economic growth could be attained without tinkering with the Constitution if the government concentrates on enforcing current laws and combating corruption.

Proponents in the House, however, allay fears that amending specific provisions will be coupled with political interest, insisting that the objective is merely to relax the restrictive economic restrictions on entering foreign capital and investments in the country.