Manila Bulletin - Friday, November 6
SO far RP is about the only democratic state in the world that regulates popular election with the gravity and strictness of the Penal Code. Election rules provide disqualification, prison term, fine and all kinds of administrative sanctions.
More deserving of sanctions
But to this day millions of voters can't recall if sanctions were ever imposed on dozens of winning/losing candidates for brazenly violating election laws. The more deserving of prison terms are candidates who habitually engaged in vote-buying since May 1987, first election of the members of Congress under the Cory Constitution.
Evil scheme
And the more dangerous Comelec officials/supervisors were the alleged promoters of an evil scheme called dagdag-bawas. One of them left the country, on an immigrant visa, and was seen lately shopping near the Rockefeller Center, Fifth Ave., Manhattan.
But the most popular of the lot is still here writing his memoir about himself and the election he supervised (and could have happily polluted) to "near perfection" as ordered. It's hard to make a list of his "sins, violations, favors and rewards" resulting from election law violations.
More election experts
Before the start of campaign on February 9, candidates for president, vice president and senators badly need assistance from lawyers knowledgeable in all election laws.
But at least five café analysts also swear that the "experts" can aid candidates in coolly violating or avoiding all the unneeded and unnecessary rules.
The great difference?
For example, what's the difference between active campaigning and promoting a candidacy started in 2008 at huge expense of more than P100 million on TV, radio and print ads? The same would-be candidate must have spent an initial P100 million for purposes like: 1) travels nationwide with a staff of five to be met at destinations by more people supported by him 2) and making of banners and tarpaulin signs with pictures and messages sent to any point in RP that shows signs of fiestas, graduation, cockpit derbies, etc.
New tax
Lately, BIR imposed a five-percent tax on all election expenses. Tax experts have no plans on how to collect taxes from donors known only as "friends of so-and-so," with no specific hint to identify the "donors." If they cannot be identified can beneficiaries - would-be candidates - be forced to pay the new tax imposed only in 2009?
Again this is one policy question candidates' lawyers may refer to the Supreme Court for a more intelligent guidance.
One or two election officials' view on the subject may not satisfy both BIR and the candidates.
He is not shameless
This week, a top BIR official said "he could not collect the tax quota for the national budget and he's ashamed he failed." He was referring to old taxes, not the recent five-percent imposed on all election expenses.
Café analysts estimate a total election cost of P10 billion to P15 billion up to May 10 for 17,888 elective positions - president down to town councilors - excluding the seats for party-list.
The above can easily net P500 million to P750 million before election day. Can BIR fully collect this amount within 2010 to 2012? If it fails can it feel shame?
Who's shameful
Let's ask ourselves why the resigned BIR official felt the shame of his failure to collect taxes from the same old taxpayers. The probable cause: Failure to collect or taxpayers tend to delay/avoid payment and lack the willingness to pay.
This is too early to hazard a guess for the failure or success of the new election tax imposed this week to generate income to support a P1.5 trillion plus budget.
Last say
When a new Congress is convened after June 30 any tax measure that made campaign more difficult for the new Senate/House members may be subject to review and outright rejection. It takes less than 10 words to scratch out any new tax on campaign expenses.
In many ways politicians have the first and last say on this and other subjects. (Comments are welcome at roming@pefianco.com)
SO far RP is about the only democratic state in the world that regulates popular election with the gravity and strictness of the Penal Code. Election rules provide disqualification, prison term, fine and all kinds of administrative sanctions.
More deserving of sanctions
But to this day millions of voters can't recall if sanctions were ever imposed on dozens of winning/losing candidates for brazenly violating election laws. The more deserving of prison terms are candidates who habitually engaged in vote-buying since May 1987, first election of the members of Congress under the Cory Constitution.
Evil scheme
And the more dangerous Comelec officials/supervisors were the alleged promoters of an evil scheme called dagdag-bawas. One of them left the country, on an immigrant visa, and was seen lately shopping near the Rockefeller Center, Fifth Ave., Manhattan.
But the most popular of the lot is still here writing his memoir about himself and the election he supervised (and could have happily polluted) to "near perfection" as ordered. It's hard to make a list of his "sins, violations, favors and rewards" resulting from election law violations.
More election experts
Before the start of campaign on February 9, candidates for president, vice president and senators badly need assistance from lawyers knowledgeable in all election laws.
But at least five café analysts also swear that the "experts" can aid candidates in coolly violating or avoiding all the unneeded and unnecessary rules.
The great difference?
For example, what's the difference between active campaigning and promoting a candidacy started in 2008 at huge expense of more than P100 million on TV, radio and print ads? The same would-be candidate must have spent an initial P100 million for purposes like: 1) travels nationwide with a staff of five to be met at destinations by more people supported by him 2) and making of banners and tarpaulin signs with pictures and messages sent to any point in RP that shows signs of fiestas, graduation, cockpit derbies, etc.
New tax
Lately, BIR imposed a five-percent tax on all election expenses. Tax experts have no plans on how to collect taxes from donors known only as "friends of so-and-so," with no specific hint to identify the "donors." If they cannot be identified can beneficiaries - would-be candidates - be forced to pay the new tax imposed only in 2009?
Again this is one policy question candidates' lawyers may refer to the Supreme Court for a more intelligent guidance.
One or two election officials' view on the subject may not satisfy both BIR and the candidates.
He is not shameless
This week, a top BIR official said "he could not collect the tax quota for the national budget and he's ashamed he failed." He was referring to old taxes, not the recent five-percent imposed on all election expenses.
Café analysts estimate a total election cost of P10 billion to P15 billion up to May 10 for 17,888 elective positions - president down to town councilors - excluding the seats for party-list.
The above can easily net P500 million to P750 million before election day. Can BIR fully collect this amount within 2010 to 2012? If it fails can it feel shame?
Who's shameful
Let's ask ourselves why the resigned BIR official felt the shame of his failure to collect taxes from the same old taxpayers. The probable cause: Failure to collect or taxpayers tend to delay/avoid payment and lack the willingness to pay.
This is too early to hazard a guess for the failure or success of the new election tax imposed this week to generate income to support a P1.5 trillion plus budget.
Last say
When a new Congress is convened after June 30 any tax measure that made campaign more difficult for the new Senate/House members may be subject to review and outright rejection. It takes less than 10 words to scratch out any new tax on campaign expenses.
In many ways politicians have the first and last say on this and other subjects. (Comments are welcome at roming@pefianco.com)