PINOY POLITICS 101: ON POLITICAL DYNASTIES Part III

PINOY POLITICS 101: Third of Five Modular Lessons

Present Day Practice of Political Dynasties in the Philippines

       John Andrew S. Bautista, OP

According to Philippine Political historian Bobby M. Tuazon,[1] nearly 50 percent of the country’s current political dynasties owe their ascendancy to post-Marcos era (1986-present) including the Ampatuans of the infamous Maguindanao massacre. In the entry of political appointees which began under the time President Corazon C. Aquino, it is understood that more new families were allowed to establish their respective dynasties in the political arena. The prevalence of political families in various public posts has become commonplace in the Philippine government today.

The end of Marcos dictatorship has seen the reestablishment of institutions of democratic governance. A number of old “landowning” elite political dynasties[2] weakened their hold, while new political players emerged. Democratization and decentralization of political power that was previously held by Marcos’ allies and cronies have contributed to the emergence of these new political players. Economic expansion have paved the way for non-elite political players with middle-class professional and entrepreneurial backgrounds, to penetrate the political arena. These new political players were active in the anti-Marcos struggle and served in the Aquino administration before embarking on a political career. These new faces and political players that abruptly burst into the scene include the Estradas, the Villars, the Cayetanos, the Angaras, the Arroyos, the Rectos, the Remullas and the Singsons to name a few. [3]

To sum up, the framework and the overall picture of the Philippine Political Dynasties today is comprised of politicians that can be classified as dynasties of ‘old’ and of ‘new’, those who were the prominent and established ‘elite dynasties’ that has stood through time from the post-colonization era and the latter being the Post-Marcos (Post-Edsa) new breed of Politicians who are middle-class players that gained prominence on the fall of the Marcos regime.

 Political Dynasties in the Philippines by the Numbers and Statistics

           

According to the study of CenPEG (Center for People Empowerment in Governance) which was conducted in 2011[4], it was found out that 94% of the provinces in the Philippines (73 out of total 80) have political dynasties. To be exact, accordingly there are 178 dominant political dynasties today (excluding those in local areas); of these 100 or 56% are old elites and 78 or 44% are new elites emerging from Edsa I People Power Revolution in 1986 and the 1987 post-Marcos era elections.

Also, according to a study of the Asian Institute of Management[5], at the opening of the 15^th Congress of the Republic of the Philippines (July 26, 2010 to June 6, 2013), data shows that 68% of the members of the Congress (lower house and senate) belong to Political Dynasties. Moreover, it was also shown that the elected officials in the 15^th congress have relatives who have been members of the 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th congresses, or local officials who were elected in 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2010. The same study also points out that these politicians belonging from a political dynasty possess higher net worth and win elections by larger margins of victory compared to those who are not members of a political clan or family.

In the last 2010 presidential elections wherein our country’s current President Benigno Simeon “Noynoy” C. Aquino III was elected, the same study of the Asian Institute of Management shows that during which the automated election system was used nationwide for the first time—the number of political dynasties both at the national and local levels continue to grow. The same study shows that political dynasties are also prominent in the Philippines' political parties as they make up 76% of the Lakas-Kampi Party, 56% of the Liberal Party (LP), 74% of the Nationalist People's Coalition (NPC), and 81% of the Nacionalista Party (NP). [6]

These dynasties that either belong or not in these political parties have been thriving with memberships increasing through dynastic succession and expansion of power. In the 15th Congress for instance, this ‘dynastic succession and expansion’ included local and national positions, covering legislative districts, provinces, and regions, and even penetrating the party-list system in the House of Representatives. According to Mon Casiple, a political analyst, said that “Politicians that come from political families have already become household names as they dominate today’s politics.”[7]

Evidently, in the results of the 2010 national elections, the top 3 presidential candidates all come and belong from political families. President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino won with 15,208,678 votes followed by fellow traditional politicians Joseph “Erap” Estrada and Manny Villar. The top 2 vice-presidential candidates also come from political families with Jejomar Binay having won the vice-presidential race followed closely by Manuel “Mar” Roxas.

 On the other hand, in the senatorial race of 2010 national elections, 8 of the senatorial winning candidates namely, Ramon “Bong” Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada, Juan Ponce Enrile, Pia Cayetano, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., Ralph Recto, Sergio “Serge” Osmeña III, and Teofisto “TG” Guingona, all too, come from political families.[8]

Furthermore, in the more recent 2013 National Mid-Term Senatorial Elections, again it was apparent that politicians from political clans prove to be the preferential choice for our country’s voters. 8 of the 12 winning senatorial candidates namely, Francis “Chiz” Escudero, Alan Peter Cayetano, Nancy Binay, Sonny Angara, Benigno “Bam” Aquino IV, Koko Pimentel, Cynthia Villar and JV Ejercito all belong from a particular clan or family who had served as politicians years, decades and generations before them.[9]

The study of Mendoza, Ronald, et. al in Political Dynasties and Poverty: Evidence from the Philippines[10] in 2013 classifies political dynasties in the country into two types, namely, the thin dynasties and the fat dynasties. On this study and research, it is was depicted how political families have learned the advantage of having multiple family members in several elective positions at the same time. This process of dynastic family succession within the political arena could be seen between the presence of this

 thin and fat dynasties. 

 A “thin” dynasty is a political clan that only has two members – like a father and son – swapping certain positions, as when a mayor-father, at the end of his maximum three terms, lets his son, who may also have reached his three-year term either as vice mayor, councilor, provincial governor or vice governor, running for each other’s position. In this type of dynasty, only one government position is being manipulated by the members of the political clan.

On the other hand, in a fat dynasty, the members of the political clan are in power and/or are running for different government positions at the same time. Furthermore, Fat dynasties have several members holding elective positions that can either be in a local or in the national level. In short, these are politicians from a political clan who make their presence felt in the entire political arena.  

Mendoza, in the aforementioned study that looked into reigning political clans with a tight control of elective positions in local governments nationwide, stated that “These political dynasties continue to monopolize political power in many local governments like provinces, municipalities and cities nationwide, as classified in current reigning political clans as “fat” or “thin” dynasties.”[11]

---

[1] Bobby, M. Tuazon, Six Centuries of Political Dynasties: Why the Philippines will Forever be Ruled by Political Clans? Center for People Empowerment in Governance, (2012).

[2] In the book Landlords and Capitalists: Class, Family and State in Philippine Manufacturing, political scientist Temario Rivera revealed that about 87 families controlled the top 120 manufacturing companies from 1964 to 1986. Sixteen of these families—about 20 percent—were involved in local politics. Majority of them were members of the ‘landowning elite’ that emerged during the 19th century, these include prominent names such as the Aranetas, the Cojuangcos, the Jacintos, the Madrigals, and the Yulos.  Thus, these so-called “landowning elites” were not just mere landowners and businessmen, at that period because of their power and position in the society, they had the opportunity to make a strong presence in the political scene by also being elected as politicians. For the longest time, Rivera explicitly pointed out that the social and class structure of the Philippines in this period sustained a landowning system that perpetually concentrated economic and political power to a core of landed families. Cf. Temario C. Rivera, Landlords and Capitalists: Class, Family and State in Philippine Manufacturing (Diliman QC: University of the Philippines Press, 1994) 45-46, 52, 66-67.

[3] Julio C. Teehankee, Emerging Dynasties in the Post-Marcos House of Representatives, Philippine Political Science Journal, Vol. 22 No.45 (2012): 55, 57.

[4] Bobby, M. Tuazon, Six Centuries of Political Dynasties: Why the Philippines will Forever be Ruled by Political Clans? Center for People Empowerment in Governance, (2012), 4.

[5] Ronald Mendoza, et. al., Inequality in democracy: Insights from an empirical analysis of Political Dynasties in the 15th Philippine Congress, Research Paper, Asian Institute of Management, (2012).

[6] Ibid., 14.

[7] Romeo Pefianco, “Term Limit and Political Dynasties,” Manila Bulletin Online, August 20, 2014, http://www.mb.com.ph/term-limit-and-political-dynasties/.html (accessed November 10, 2014).

[8] Ronald Mendoza, et.al., Inequality in democracy: Insights from an empirical analysis of Political Dynasties in the 15th Philippine Congress, Research Paper, Asian Institute of Management, (2012). 26,28.

[9] Steven Hood, “Families, Not Political Parties Still Reign in the Philippines” In Asia Weekly, May 22, 2013, http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2013/05/22/families-not-political-parties-still-reign-in-the-philippines/.html (accessed November 11, 2014).

[10] Ronald Mendoza, et.al., Political Dynasties and Poverty: Evidence from the Philippines, Research Paper, Asian Institute of Management, (2013).

[11] Ibid., 19.