The poor man’s vote

ON DISTANT SHORE
by Val G. Abelgas

For decades, Filipino politicians have courted the poor in their campaigns, and with good reason, of course, the poor having the most number of votes and being the most gullible among the nation’s voting groups. Most of those who associated themselves with the poor or who claimed to champion their cause have won election to important posts in both the House and the Senate and to the presidency.

It is ironic that while the poor have been responsible for the election of nearly all of these politicians, their economic situation has worsened through the years. In fact, their numbers have grown through the years that they elected alleged “champions of the poor” who promised to uplift them from their poverty.

And because their number keeps growing, and because their votes have become even more significant, more candidates are now claiming to be the poor man’s candidate, with one presidential candidate in the coming May elections claiming to have come from their ranks, being the “poor boy from Tondo.”

Of course, that line had been used successfully before when Rep. Diosdado Macapagal of the first district of Pampanga ran for vice president under the Liberal Party in 1957. Using the line “the poor boy from Lubao,” Macapagal easily defeated Jose Laurel Jr. although the Liberals’ standard bearer, former Speaker Jose Yulo lost to President Carlos P. Garcia of the Nacionalista Party.

Macapagal could not be faulted for using the monicker “the poor boy from Lubao” for he was indeed born to a poor family and, in fact, had to stop his law studies at the Philippine Law School to star in zarzuelas with boyhood friend and later brother-in-law Rogelio de la Rosa and raise enough money to continue his law studies at the University of Santo Tomas, eventually graduating as summa cum laude and topping the 1936 bar examinations.

And to his credit, Macapagal championed the cause of the poor as a congressman, authoring such pro-poor legislation as Land Reform Law, Rural Health Law, Minimum Wage Law, and the Barrio Industrialization Law, among others. He was unable to pursue many of his programs as president because of strong opposition from the Nacionalista-controlled Congress.

Before him, Ramon Magsaysay was elected president in 1953 by the masses on the strength of his being a former mechanic who rose to become one of the most popular government officials of his time. He defeated the scandal-ridden reelectionist President Elpidio Quirino and went on to become one of the most popular Philippine presidents ever. He was well loved by the masses because he championed their rights and opened the gates of Malacanang to them. But much of his attention was diverted to fighting the communists and following the dictates of the United States.

Although they were truly from the poor and really championed the poor man’s cause, Magsaysay and Macapagal inadvertently set the tone for other politicians to use the poor for political gain.

Actor Joseph Estrada was the most successful of these politicians, having won by landslide all the electoral contests he joined on the strength of his appeal as the “champion of the masses.” Although he was inarguably a scion of a wealthy clan, the toughness and simple ways he showed in his roles as protector of the oppressed in scores of films gained not just acceptance from the masses, but their unprecedented adulation as well.

He became so popular that the poor accepted even his weaknesses as their own weaknesses, and his vulnerability and his failures as their own. When he was ousted in a second People Power Revolt that turned out later to be a conspiratorial plot hatched by then Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and some generals, his followers launched their own EDSA revolt and marched to Malacanang in what this writer called “a poor man’s rebellion.”

And yet, Estrada did not lift a finger to uplift the poor from poverty. Instead, he tolerated jueteng that robbed money from the poor. Instead, he displayed a callous disregard for the poor by building mansions for his mistresses while the people he claim to champion lived in abject poverty. Instead, he allowed corrupt cronies and colleagues to rob the people blind.

When Arroyo took over, she promised to combat poverty and corruption. After all, she had topped the senatorial elections and won the vice presidency by landslides on the strength of her support from the masses. But her economic programs were only meant to promote the interests of the wealthy businessmen, and she placed even heavier burdens on the shoulders of the poor with her onerous taxation policies. Instead of protecting the rights of the poor people she had promised to uplift, she allowed the wealthy and the powerful to abuse them and trample on their rights. As a result, the poor became poorer and the not-so-poor became poor, too.

And now comes Sen. Manny Villar, the Nacionalista Party bet who proclaims himself as the “poor boy from Tondo” as if being previously poor (if indeed he was one) was enough reason for the poor to support him. In each one of the multi-million-peso worth of commercials that he runs nearly every hour of the day on radio, television and newspapers, Villar claims that being a poor boy who rose to become one of the wealthiest Filipinos because of “honest and hard work,” he understands the needs of the poor and would, therefore, gear his efforts towards uplifting the masses.

Is the message reaching the poor? Of course, it does. Wowowee Willie Revillame makes sure it does. Dolphy makes sure it does. “Eat Bulaga’s” wacky trio make sure it does, and scores more of entertainers make sure it does. The multi-million peso ads make sure it does.

Will the message bring in the masses’ votes? Not necessarily. In the first few days of the campaign, the message seemed to have caught the attention of the poor as the surveys showed him catching up fast on LP bet Sen. Noynoy Aquino.

But as more and more credible journalists, columnists and opinion writers began exposing the numerous anomalies that could have helped Villar attain the billions that he has amassed while a member of the House and the Senate, Villar’s numbers started to go down again. And as writers and bloggers tore to pieces the myth that he was a poor boy from Tondo, the poor that seemed so gullible at first started drifting away from him, some going to the side of Aquino and many deciding to go back to the waiting arms of their idol Estrada.

Thus, the latest SWS survey showed Villar losing six percentage points and Aquino gaining one percentage point. Significantly, Estrada gained four points.

Aquino gained 15 percentage points in the ABC class with Villar losing 16 points among these upper and upper middle classes. Villar lost seven points in Class D (lower middle classes) and Aquino held his ground. In Class E (lower classes), Villar lost 3 points and Aquino gained one point. Although newspaper reports did not mention how much Estrada gained in the economic classes, it can be surmised that he got much of his gain among the D and E classes.

Villar is apparently hoping to win the support of the poor masses as evidenced by the direction of his political ads, which target the poor. Unfortunately, the poor cannot relate with him in the same way they relate to Estrada. He is too clean looking, too prim and proper. Besides, as Bagumbayan presidential bet Sen. Dick Gordon said, Villar does not have much to show in his record as a lawmaker that he had been promoting the welfare of the poor. Aside from housing laws that would evidently benefit his real estate businesses, Villar has nothing to prove he has the poor in his heart.

With the advent of text messaging, the internet and television, to which a big part of the masses now have access, hopefully the Filipino masses have become more discerning in voting for the candidates who have their interests at heart. Not just candidates claiming to be one of them.

(valabelgas@aol.com)