Marcos regime imploding

The Marcos administration is self-destructing because of the backlash against its maneuvers to affect overall socioeconomic health, a think tank explained in a study.

The Center for People Empowerment in Governance Inc. (CenPEG) outlined the administration’s tactics thus far and how they contribute to the economic downturn.

It drew a parallel. As the moves become more desperate, the economy worsens, making the effort to consolidate its power futile as public outrage grows, culminating in the brazen use of government resources and institutions to pursue a survival agenda.

The political, fiscal, economic and geopolitical events of September 2026 demonstrated an administration actively working to control its political future, according to the CenPEG study, “The Marcos Dilemma: Political Survival and Strategic Dependence.”

Among the steps taken to shape the political situation and attain a stronger grip on power were pushing the barangay elections to late 2028, securing a major foothold in Muslim Mindanao, channeling the budget into flexible local grants, and pursuing the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte.

According to CenPEG, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has built a powerful machinery that rests, however, on an increasingly fragile foundation.

“Soaring national debt of P19.61 trillion, a depreciating peso, rising unemployment, and steep drops in public trust expose a fundamental vulnerability,” CenPEG warned.

Focusing resources on partisan aims has caused hardship. As transport strikes, anti-corruption rallies, and citizen petitions gain momentum, the administration faces a growing challenge.

CenPEG cautioned the President that political consolidation cannot replace actual economic relief for ordinary citizens.

Without addressing core socioeconomic pressures, the administration’s effort to lock in the President’s successor in 2028 “risks worsening public instability across the country.”

CenPEG referenced September 2026 as a significant moment in Philippine politics when domestic maneuvering, fiscal decisions, and international strategic partnerships converged.

The developments pointed to efforts to strengthen the administration’s political position ahead of the 2028 national elections. This also resulted in deeper integration into US-aligned military and commercial frameworks through initiatives such as the Luzon Economic Corridor.

With the 2028 polls fast approaching, the administration’s efforts to preserve local political alliances and challenge the Duterte camp have unfolded. The backdrop to the offensive is the intensifying disputes over corruption, public resources, and the distribution of political power.

The cost of the administration’s intensified efforts to consolidate power through blatant manipulation is public confidence, which has eroded for President Marcos.

His survey numbers have stopped falling but have not recovered. New polls this week show his ratings holding near their lows after a steep second-quarter decline.

His ratings have been plunging into negative territory in several independent surveys.

Focusing his energy on the pathetic campaign to restore his falling ratings widened the gap between his political positioning and citizens’ immediate needs.

“The central question is whether the administration can sustain its influence ahead of 2028 or whether economic hardship and growing public discontent will undermine its political ambitions,” the report said.

To ensure that the senator-judges vote to convict Vice President Sara Duterte, the administration has applied targeted regulatory and legal scrutiny to influential political families holding swing votes.

Complaints about their business dealings put pressure on a handful of senator-judges, leading some to switch to the majority camp.

High-profile anti-corruption moves against former Marcos allies have suffered from a lack of credibility with the public.

Malacañang presented the arrest of former speaker Martin Romualdez over the alleged P7.4-billion flood control kickback scheme as proof that “no one is untouchable,” but public opinion surveys showed that citizens viewed these actions as political theater.

The perception is that the supposed call for accountability, rather than genuine reforms, is a tool for forcing political figures into line rather than recovering stolen public funds.

The trade-off in the vicious feud between political combatants is the health of the economy. Guess who is winning? Those in power or the public welfare?