A dysfunctional Senate (2)

A dysfunctional Senate (2) | Daily Tribune

But here? There exists no authentic federal-local jurisdictional divide. Local government units operate firmly under the umbrella of national policy, beholden to Malacañang’s directives and congressional appropriations. Nor is there any meaningful equitable representation mechanism to safeguard smaller provinces or temper demographic imbalances.

Senators, elected nationally in at-large contests, become glittering celebrities and dynastic standard-bearers rather than deliberative statesmen attuned to provincial nuances. The result is a chamber that amplifies personality cults and national name recognition while duplicating the House’s efforts, delaying urgent measures, and inflating the cost of governance.

Consider our 1987 Constitution — born from the ashes of dictatorship and designed to disperse power — already vests sweeping executive authority in the President, who commands a vast bureaucracy, influences appointments through the Commission on Appointments and shapes policy across a unitary state. The House of Representatives, with its district-based members embedded in local realities, provides the essential popular check, granular representation, and direct accountability to constituents.

What unique value then does the Senate add beyond redundant debate and procedural bottlenecks? In practice, it often serves as an ornate speed bump — magnifying gridlock precisely when agility is paramount. The current impasse, where even confirming appointments or passing disaster aid becomes an ordeal, underscores this redundancy with painful clarity.

In our resource-constrained archipelago, perpetually battling poverty, inequality and climate vulnerability, such duplication is not a luxury but a luxury we can ill afford. A unicameral body would compress the legislative timeline from proposal to enactment, enhance transparency by concentrating accountability on a single chamber and force representatives to prioritize substance over spectacle.

Imagine avoiding the fiscal hemorrhage of maintaining two chambers. Gone will be the Senate’s generous allocations for salaries, staff, offices, foreign travel and operational luxuries –- all rechanneled to health infrastructure, education, and resilient disaster preparedness.

This constitutional housekeeping is long overdue. When the Upper House cannot reorganize itself without descending into farce, when walkouts and counterclaims supplant lawmaking, it unwittingly authors the strongest brief for its own obsolescence. We need a streamlined legislative branch that can balance deliberation with decisiveness. Let this current dysfunction serve as the catalyst for structural constitutional revision worthy of our people’s aspirations.

We Filipinos have demonstrated remarkable fortitude through colonial rule, martial law, multiple revolutions and natural disasters. We deserve a governance architecture that mirrors that resilience: agile in responding to crises, responsive to the genuine needs of the citizenry and lean in its institutional footprint.

It is high time to retire the redundant, expensive ornament that is the Senate and construct a legislative branch truly fit for the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. The curtain on this protracted and costly drama has been up far too long. Let it fall, so that a more efficient and accountable democracy may rise in its place.