Fil-Ams’ stake in floods and corruption
Fil-Ams therefore have every reason to demand accountability for how public money is spent back home.
Text size
Fil-Ams therefore have every reason to demand accountability for how public money is spent back home.
From California, the floods back home do not feel distant.
Filipino-Americans watch the same heartbreaking images: families wading through filthy water, homes submerged, vehicles stranded, and workers unable to earn their daily living.
They also ask the same troubling question: Where did the billions of pesos intended for flood control go?
Fil-Ams remain deeply invested in the Philippines — not only emotionally but economically.
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas figures show that overseas Filipinos sent home $39.6 billion in personal remittances in 2025. Of the $35.6 billion coursed through banks, about $14.15 billion was recorded as originating from the United States.
Those dollars paid for food, education, housing, healthcare and small businesses. Behind every dollar is a story of sacrifice: long working hours, separation from family, and the hope of giving loved ones a better future.
Fil-Ams therefore have every reason to demand accountability for how public money is spent back home.
For this column, I sought the perspectives of two Southern California Filipino-American leaders whom I met in Long Beach recently and who remain closely connected with developments in the homeland.
Eddie C. Ferrer is a Long Beach businessman, president of E.C. Ferrer Customs Broker Inc., a veteran Baguio City broadcaster and past president of the Pangasinan Brotherhood Association USA.
Dan E. Niño is president of the Philippine Global Media Group (PGMG), a veteran syndicated Filipino-American columnist who writes for several community publications and a former president of the Filipino-American Press Club of Los Angeles.
Their views reflect a wider diaspora concern: remittances are contributions to national survival and development — not a blank check for corruption, incompetence and official neglect.
Fil-Am contributions also go far beyond remittances. They support schools, churches, civic organizations, and disaster-relief efforts. Many invest in property and businesses or return home carrying their professional expertise and valuable international networks.
They want those contributions matched by honest and competent governance.
Each heavy downpour in the Philippines brings back painfully familiar scenes. Yet we continue to call these calamities natural disasters.
Rain and typhoons are natural. But the magnitude of the destruction need not be.
When drainage systems fail, waterways remain clogged, pumping stations prove inadequate, and billions supposedly spent on flood mitigation fail to protect communities, disaster acquires a decidedly man-made dimension.
For Ferrer and Niño, transparency must be the starting point.
The public deserves to know where flood control projects were constructed, who built them, how much they cost, and whether they actually reduced flooding.
Their prescriptions are straightforward.
First, every project should have publicly accessible information identifying its contractor, cost, timetable, engineering specifications, and intended impact.
Second, independent technical and financial audits must determine whether drainage systems, pumping stations, dikes and river improvements actually function as promised — and whether projects were properly built, overpriced, abandoned, or duplicated.
Third, officials and contractors found responsible for ghost and substandard projects, inflated costs, or misuse of public funds must face prosecution, disqualification where legally warranted, and the recovery of unlawfully obtained funds.
But accountability cannot stop with small contractors and low-level government employees.
If the evidence points higher — to senior officials, legislators, political leaders, or influential business figures — investigators must follow it without fear or favor.
This is where the controversy becomes a defining test for the Marcos administration.
