Wrecked Senate

Wrecked Senate | Daily Tribune

And also because conservatively, “credentialism confuses titles for wisdom and professions for truth,” says ex-presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda as he lambasted Senate newbie Marcoleta’s cheap condescending credentialism potshot at 10-year chamber veteran Sen. Risa Hontiveros.

In fact, Marcoleta’s gratuitous catcall of Hontiveros led to the unprecedented Tuesday walkout of the 11 minority senators, effectively paralyzing the business of the Senate and exposing a lame duck majority held hostage by a lack of quorum.

The minority walked out after the tyrannical majority’s suspicious attempt to railroad Marcoleta’s motion to amend the Senate rule, in the guise of “technological advancement,” on allowing remote participation and, worse, voting.

The minority suspected the motion was for the benefit of fugitive Sen. Bato dela Rosa and other majority senators possibly facing non-bailable criminal cases.

Anyway, that “master of the rules” Sen. Tito Sotto adroitly brought up the matter of a quorum when he pushed for adjournment after the walkout, which the hopelessly rules-challenged Marcoleta couldn’t block.

In case you’re wondering why Sotto stayed behind after the tactical walkout — which left only 12 senators, including himself, in the plenary hall — in the unbendable mathematics of the Senate’s quorum rule, the 12+1 equation must be strictly adhered to at all times for any major Senate business to prosper.

Outsmarted by Sotto, the majority had no choice but to adjourn, effectively postponing the vote on Marcoleta’s motion.

In the end, as Lacierda pointed out, “the irony was impossible to miss. Senator Marcoleta was defeated by Senator Sotto who is not a lawyer but knew the rules better.”

And in Sotto’s gloves-off shoutout to Marcoleta: “’Akala ko ba magaling [ka] sa rules (I thought you knew the rules).” Better yet, in Sen. Ping Lacson’s “it’s the rules, stupid!”

In the wake of the Senate’s shaky quorum, excitable speculators are wondering if the majority would have the gumption to compel the minority to attend tomorrow’s session.

Constitutionally, the majority can do that. Article VI, Section 18 says “...and may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide.”

But it remains unclear if the majority senators are ballsy enough or if the compelling procedures and penalties are in place. What is sure, however, is that even if the Senate proceeds with penalizing absentees, it would require a two-thirds vote. Can the majority muster 16 votes?

Quorum issues aren’t the only unparalleled political crisis facing the beleaguered Senate, however. On the broader political front, there’s also the fact the Senate is on the cusp of the Veep’s impeachment trial.

“The country is sleepwalking into an unchartered political crisis that no existing law or rule of procedure or the Constitution anticipated,” worries political science professor Miriam Coronel Ferrer.

Ferrer’s concern comes from her valid observation.

“How will the Senate, debased by the chaos of the past two weeks, function given that nine or 10 of the 24 senators are due to be arrested based on ICC-issued warrants and on plunder charges, or will be under criminal investigation for nefarious family business activities, for coddling fugitive fellow senators, or some other crimes, and may likewise be arrested?”