Pila
may imo nadawat? This is normal conversati you can hear
anywhere. Rich or poor, professional or not… everybody is talking about the
money they received from the politicians who ran for the local elections.
Article 22, Section 261 of the Omnibus Election
Code considers vote buying and vote selling as election offenses.
Vote-buying seems thoroughly undemocratic. Moral
arguments aside, vote-buying certainly shouldn’t happen when there is no way to
enforce the transaction. Yet, vote-buying happens – and quite frequently in all
parts of the country. This puzzling feature of many elections, particularly how
it affects electoral behavior, is something we need to understand better.
The act of handing-in money for the votes has a
positive effect on participation. People went out of their house even the
elderly and those with disabilities to cast their votes. The discomfort is all
taken the political leaders might see them NOT casting votes when in fact they
received money from them.
However, it would obviously be a step too far
to say that this factor implies vote-buying should be encouraged.
Normative evaluations of vote buying vary based
on individuals' understanding of the transaction itself and abstract societal
costs associated with the practice.
When society normalize the practice, what
becomes of the law?
After the national and local elections, Tandag
City estimated a cash movement of around 500,000,000 in the commercial and
services sector. People are flocking to the different stores until ten in the
evening. One can read between the lines where did the money come from.
What will happen to governance
and can we expect better services from those who gave money? And what happens to
our value system?
No comments:
Post a Comment