House leaders on Wednesday expressed optimism that the contentious Ayuda Para sa Kapos sa Kita Program (AKAP) will pass the scrutiny of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. amid reports that he may veto some line items in the 2025 national budget following public backlash.

Marcos is expected to sign into law the P6.352 trillion budget proposal for fiscal year 2025 on Friday, 20 December. However, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin announced Wednesday that the signing “will not push through” to give the President more time to review certain items and provisions that may potentially be vetoed.

The projected delay follows calls for a meticulous review of the budget, especially amid concerns over questionable funding cuts, including the P12 billion reduction in the Department of Education (DepEd) budget and the absence of subsidies for the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation, while allocating P26 billion for AKAP.

Despite criticisms, Bataan Rep. Geraldine Roman, Ako Bicol Rep. Jil Bongalon, and Tingog Rep. Jude Acidre remain hopeful that AKAP will not be among the items vetoed.

“I personally believe that the President will not veto that. Because the feedback from us district congressmen is that it really helps a lot [our constituents in need of assistance],” Roman told reporters.

While the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) already runs existing programs like the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), Roman pointed out that these programs do not cover all Filipinos in need of monetary aid, particularly those in the near-poor sector.

“[There are] people we want to prevent from sliding down in our economic scale [and] they are the beneficiaries of AKAP... Hopefully, there [will be] higher pay and there [will be] more jobs and economic progress as a whole. But in the meantime, what are we going to do? Watch? We have to do something about it and AKAP I think is the answer,” Roman explained.

Echoing Roman’s sentiments, Bongalon, vice chair of the House committee on appropriations and a member of the bicameral panel that finalized the budget proposal, said AKAP is instrumental in providing direct and immediate assistance, not only during inflation but also in times of typhoons and calamities.

"I also do not believe that the funds for the AKAP program will be vetoed by our President. This is one of the programs that addressed the problem of our countrymen… We cannot always rely on relief goods provided by our government agencies and other private organizations. So the AKAP program mainly addresses several issues of our country,” he said.

For Acidre, the fact that AKAP hurdled the bicam panel underscores its perceived benefits to the public, particularly the disadvantaged.

“We will respect the President whatever the decision will be in the end. But personally, I hope that the program will be judged based on its merits. We know what the individual benefits of AKAP are. But I'm also [focus] on the macroeconomic effects of AKAP,” Acidre told the media.

The House-initiated AKAP, under the DSWD, was designed to assist the “near poor,” including minimum wage employees earning P21,000 and below per month who are vulnerable to economic shocks such as job loss or runaway inflation that could easily push them back into poverty.

The program has been controversial after Senator Imee Marcos, sponsor of the DSWD’s budget, claimed that this year’s funding for the initiative, amounting to P26.7 billion, was “alien" and "magical" to her and was only inserted by the House for political motives.

Recently, she disclosed that she will urge her brother, President Marcos, to scrutinize every line item of the 2025 budget, noting that some funds are allocated for projects not aligned with his administration’s priorities.

The bicam appropriated P26 billion for AKAP, despite it being defunded by the Senate in its version of the 2025 General Appropriations Bill (GAB). Of the amount, P21 billion will be allocated to members of the House, while P5 billion will go to senators.

Senator Marcos, who vowed to contest AKAP, has maintained that government funds should prioritize long-term development and self-reliance rather than creating another “ayuda" or cash assistance program.