Dear Editor, 

The latest Social Weather Stations (SWS) survey showing President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s trust rating slipping into negative territory reflects a failure of leadership that can no longer be explained away as political “noise” or temporary dissatisfaction.

It is noticeable that only the DAILY TRIBUNE, among the country’s major dailies, gave prominence to the story. What gives? Have other media firms been co-opted by Malacañang?

Trust declines when citizens see a disconnect between promises and outcomes. In this case, the connection between the President and the corruption scandals hounding his administration is direct and unavoidable.

President Marcos entered office with a clear pledge: To rebuild the Marcos name and distance his presidency from the abuses and excesses of the martial law period.

That pledge carried moral weight because it acknowledged history and promised reform. Yet today, his administration is increasingly associated with allegations of corruption involving billions of pesos in public funds, particularly in infrastructure and flood control projects.

Corruption at this scale does not flourish without weak oversight and permissive leadership — BBM’s. Cabinet members and agency heads ultimately answer to the President.

When accountability is selective or delayed, responsibility flows upward. The public understands this, which is why trust has eroded despite repeated assurances that investigations are ongoing.

The economic consequences of this credibility crisis are becoming evident. Business confidence weakens when governance appears unstable or compromised. Investors hesitate, projects slow down and companies reassess hiring plans.

Many Filipinos are already feeling the effects through job losses, stagnant wages, and rising uncertainty. For households living paycheck to paycheck, trust ratings are not abstract numbers. They translate into daily anxiety about employment and prices.

The administration’s recent decision to approve staggered salary increases for military and uniformed personnel has further complicated the picture. While these workers deserve fair compensation, the timing raises legitimate questions.

Implemented amid corruption scandals and declining public trust, the move risks being interpreted as a political calculation rather than a policy grounded solely in economic planning. Even the perception of using public funds to secure institutional loyalty damages credibility.

President Marcos cannot distance himself from these outcomes. He is not a passive observer of his administration’s failures. He sets its tone, approves its priorities and tolerates or corrects its behavior. The survey results reflect a growing belief that he has chosen accommodation over accountability.

As 2025 draws to a close, the country faces serious questions about governance, economic stability and public trust in 2026. Something has to give.

Yours truly,

Gerard Alcantara

Kakawate Street

Barangay West Bicutan