Former Senate President Franklin Drilon is pushing for a two-year national budget, saying Congress needs more time to scrutinize trillions of pesos in government spending and guard the appropriations process against political insertions.

Drilon made the proposal as Congress began deliberations on the P7.2-trillion 2027 National Expenditure Program, arguing that lawmakers are being asked to examine the spending requirements of every government agency within just four or five months.

“There may be a reason and rationale for having a budget for two years. In other words, you enact the General Appropriations Act, with a validity of two years,” Drilon said in an interview with DAILY TRIBUNE’s Straight Talk.

Under his proposal, Congress would enact a General Appropriations Act valid for two years instead of repeating the full appropriations process every year.

More time for scrutiny

For Drilon, the case for a two-year budget begins with the sheer scale of the work Congress is expected to complete each year.

“You have barely four or five months of debating on a, I don’t know how many trillion pesos budget today,” he said.

The task is not simply to approve a single spending figure. Congress must examine the proposed budgets of departments and agencies, question their priorities and determine whether billions of pesos are being allocated for programs that deliver results.

“It is a very time-consuming process because you have to look at all the agencies of government,” Drilon said.

The Department of Budget and Management (DBM) submitted the proposed P7.2-trillion 2027 budget to Congress this month, opening legislative scrutiny of the government’s spending priorities for next year. The House of Representatives has set a 53-day timetable for deliberations and approval.

A two-year appropriations law, Drilon said, would give lawmakers more room to conduct that scrutiny without having to repeat the entire process from the beginning every year.

Tighter congressional calendar

The pressure becomes more apparent when the budget process collides with other major responsibilities of Congress.

This year, senators are simultaneously serving as judges in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte while carrying out their legislative duties, including the examination of the national budget.

“Wala na po kayong magagawa ibang trabaho. You can hardly find time for the legislative work the moment you have an impeachment trial,” he said.

Drilon has firsthand experience with the demands of impeachment proceedings. He served as a senator-judge in the impeachment trials of former President Joseph Estrada and former Chief Justice Renato Corona.

The overlap illustrates the vulnerability of an annual budget system, where delays in one major congressional undertaking can quickly put pressure on another.

And when the clock is already running, Drilon said, the quality of budget scrutiny can become a concern.

Election-year insertions

That concern takes on added weight because the 2027 budget will be implemented during an election year.

Drilon warned that the political stakes could make spending allocations particularly vulnerable to pressure from lawmakers seeking projects or funds for their constituencies.

“We will certainly scrutinize that closely. There’s a lot that can be inserted there. We call them ‘insertions’ — items that can be inserted for politicians. I’m sure there are already many hidden provisions in there,” he said.

The DBM has backed livestreaming bicameral conference committee proceedings, where House and Senate versions of the budget are reconciled, as a transparency measure.

But for Drilon, greater transparency does not eliminate the pressure created by the annual deadline. The more fundamental question is whether lawmakers have enough time to examine the spending plan before they must approve it.

Cost of running late

That question becomes more urgent as the year-end deadline approaches.

Drilon said Congress could face the possibility of a reenacted budget if lawmakers fail to approve the 2027 appropriations law on time.

“The reality of a reenacted budget is something that is within the realm of political possibilities at this stage because of the circumstances,” he said.

A reenacted budget would keep the government operating under the previous year’s appropriations while limiting the authorization of new spending in the normal manner.

For Drilon, the consequences would not stop at the halls of Congress.

“If there are no government spending, so the economy will not grow,” he said.

He also warned that a reenacted budget could alter the balance of power between Congress and the executive because lawmakers would lose much of their leverage over newly authorized spending.

“Certainly, the executive becomes a very strong executive when there is a reenacted budget,” Drilon said.