Cha-cha again?

In spite of the Cha-cha proponents’ insistence that a congressman’s three-year term is too short for meaningful work, the matter of the pork barrel always gets in the way.

Recent tales of attempts to change the present constitution tell us it is nothing but a cat and mouse story. Invariably, the tales tell us the House of Representatives is the mouse, and the cat is the Senate.

Invariably, too, in the natural scheme of things, the bigger cat gets the tinier mouse. By its very nature, the cat sometimes toys with its food and sometimes it quickly gorges on its food.

It is with the latter, the gorging, which aptly describes the House’s most recent project to amend the 1987 Constitution once the Senate got around to feast.

Reviving a dormant bid to tinker with the Charter in the past two weeks, the House had high hopes it would get its way this time around. High hopes became dead hopes.

Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, exercising diplomatic inter-parliamentary niceties, dearly wanted toying with the House. “We have nothing to do with that. We have nothing to do with it because it is not a priority in the Senate. It’s not in any of the committees,” he told reporters.

At the other end of the room, beefy minority leader Sen. Franklin Drilon was decidedly harsh. He promptly proclaimed “Cha-cha is dead!”

The House, of course, knew beforehand they would have immense difficulties with senators. But it seems they were not as prepared — the immediate Senate broadside left them with nothing but to wax optimistically the Senate “will see the light.”

The optimism presages their Cha-cha (Charter change) project was a goner. If anything, the Senate’s rejection turned the House into a paralytic, paralyzed like the mythological ass caught between contradicting desires to undermine its rival and to avoid precipitating the collapse of its desires once roundly rejected by the Senate.

We should not, however, deny the mouse did have some sort of fleeting happiness when it sprang the Cha-cha surprise during the holidays.

In between extended bouts of political boredom and assiduous fawning of the Executive during budget negotiations, the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments managed to spring their Cha-cha surprise during what many described was some sort of secret conclave of like-minded adherents.

The House Cha-cha coterie declared a Cha-cha project with four definable goals. Those four goals of the yet unnumbered congressional resolution are:

· The extension of the terms of the congressmen and local government officials from the current three years to five years;

· The regional election of senators at three from each of the nine proposed regions and the fixing of senatorial terms at five years from the present six years;

· The tandem election of the president and the vice president;

· The adding of the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” to the economic provisions in the Constitution.”

Of the four goals, the one on the tandem election of the president and the vice president is probably the most benign, even if it smacks of shameless fawning of Mr. Duterte, who has troubles with Vice President Leni Robredo.

However, before anything more about the proposals, we must first deal with the mundane matter the House seems largely populated by sclerotic politicians, politicians who had not learned the ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

When the congressmen made their Cha-cha move not only was there clear sclerosis in failing to accurately read the Senate’s mood, they also even made a more grievous political sin — the lack of timing.

The House may have thought they have succeeded avoiding controversy when they secretly slipped in the providential measure during the holidays, when many are preoccupied with fat bonuses and the mad holiday rush. But they forgot foul January.

According to Cha-cha proponents they will call for a constituent assembly to tackle the proposals when Congress resumes sessions after a month-long Christmas recess, on 20 January.

So, it seems proponents did not seriously consider the foulness of January, where depleted wallets and debts force bad-tempered grumbles that any talk of controversial political maneuvers, particularly if it serves the self-serving interests of a few, arouses public anger.

Self-serving politics in Congress is immediately arousing anger as the House has not conclusively debunked claims congressmen have weaned themselves from further wallowing in the hated pork barrel.

In spite of the Cha-cha proponents’ insistence that a congressman’s three-year term is too short for meaningful work, the matter of the pork barrel always gets in the way. Imagine what the public would say about the pork barrel when congressmen get to serve a total 15 years?

Even if we allow congressmen to have the barest minimum of strictly utilitarian intelligence, strictly limited to immediate functions which are to make laws, the “too short” argument is asphyxiating. It is the reasoning of the asphyxiated who are so asphyxiated that they don’t even realize their asphyxiation, since three years are long enough to craft good laws.

But then we fear many congressmen see Congress not as a lawmaking institution but as more like a business enterprise. A view which does make three years too short for wheeling and dealing with pork barrel funds.

In addition, the insertion of the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” in at least seven economic provisions that limit foreign equity in land, exploitation of natural resources, public utilities, mass media, advertising, and education is a troubling proposal, again having to do with money.

The proposal is clothed grandly with the excuse that “there is an urgent need to lift such restrictions to attract new business and investments that would generate jobs and income for our people.” But something is deceptively hidden.

One deception is that when laws are being crafted favoring foreign interests there will always be lobbying from big multinational business. And big business lobbying always involves money — lots of it.

What we now have then is that congressmen not only get to dip their hands into the pork barrel but also into lobby money. I’m pretty sure none of us will clap and approve with that eventuality.