Arroyo
Moreover, the results of the surveys are a barometer of public perceptions about the Arroyo administration and the President herself. That the opposition candidates for the Senate as well as in the elections for the House and local government seats are leading in the PES may suggest undercurrents of opinion – or is actually a “protest vote” – against the present administration. In this context, the recent survey findings mirror previous public surveys that rated the performance of Arroyo as the lowest among sitting presidents since Marcos. Indeed, the May 2004 fraudulent elections are still fresh in the minds of many Filipinos today and the clamor for her removal remains strong among them. It is not surprising, therefore, that the likes of former Chief of Staff Michael Defensor, who has been closely identified with Mrs. Arroyo and who is otherwise known nationally, may not even make it in the Senate race. Yet, again, all these are conjectural and a mere political reading of the statistical results.
This is the reason why the current surveys are a far cry from what should be a more comprehensible way of determining the whys and wherefores of the voting preferences based on quantifiable results.* Is Loren Legarda, for instance, the respondents’ top choice because of name recall, personality or winnability? Or, was she chosen by 60 percent of the respondents, according to the recent surveys, because of her known record of leadership and performance?
Studies commissioned by the Ateneo University in recent years try to answer the demand for explaining and putting substance into current surveys that are limited to measuring voting preferences. The Ateneo studies showed that voters particularly the youth respond to a host of issues and look for certain qualities in their choice of leaders such as “sincerity,” being pro-people and being able to “deliver on promises.” The surveys also suggested that politicians would be better off refraining from conducting their campaign on personalities and start talking about real issues. They also revealed public perceptions that no group, except for two traditional political parties and the progressive Bayan Muna, can qualify as a real political party in terms of articulating visions and clear electoral platform.
———————-
* Pulse Asia tried to remedy this by conducting a survey on April 3-5 to measure the trust ratings of the senatorial candidates.
Since surveys are a public service and do influence public behavior in the long run, it is about time that future studies are designed to allow the voters to think and speak up their minds in consonance with the level of voters’ political maturity and awareness that has remained untapped. Surveys can be done where respondents are allowed to choose their leaders based not on name recall or image, but on issues and election platforms. Then we can see who really deserves to be voted into office. Then, we can start talking about democratizing the elections. Of course, this is just a beginning in the grueling efforts to reform the country’s flawed and much-discredited electoral system.
Policy Study, Publication and Advocacy (PSPA)
Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)
TeleFax 9299526; Mobile Phone 0915-6418055
Email: cenpeg.info@gmail.com
website: www.cenpeg.org
