Electoral reforms

(Today’s column)

What if we can hold the 2010 elections without printing ballots, without fear that ballot boxes would be stolen and switched and without worrying about “dagdag-bawas”? No, I am not talking about the kind of computerized voting that the Commission on Elections has in mind. Think hanging chad in the 2000 battle between Bush and Gore and we have to admit that’s not the way to go. I am talking about voting via text messaging or SMS.

Last Saturday, two of my closest girl friends from the UP College of Law, Ida May La’O and Lisa Araneta came over for dinner. The dinner stretched on and it was almost sunrise when they left. We talked about the Web, common friends and, inevitably, politics. That was how the idea about voting via SMS was born. Let me assure you that there was no alcohol that night, no marijuana, no drugs. There was just nicotine, coffee, tea, beef stroganoff and pumpkin walnut cake, a genuine desire to understand why this country is in this rut and an even more ardent desire to come up with solutions.

So we were talking politics and Ida was saying how the national government had simply become superfluous and why presidential campaigns had become a joke. She said there ought to be a law that bans (I think criminalizes would be more appropriate) candidates from singing and dancing during campaign sorties. She said political ads on TV should not be allowed. Lisa and I couldn’t disagree—we thought she was correct. In fact, I even added that political ads on radio should be banned too.

Lisa took the discussion a step farther. She said we shouldn’t be voting for candidates but for plans. A plan is put forward and registered as a political platform and voters choose from among the registered plans. That was the point when we started talking about how silly elections have become with candidates competing on a very personal level and visions be damned. And they came up with proposals.

It was Ida who first thought about voting via SMS. When a voter registers, he is given a Comelec-issued SIM card good for a specified number of SMS. Lisa wanted voters to have an opportunity to really screen the candidates over an extended period of time. American Idol style. Televised programs where the candidates will talk and discuss and, each week, one or more will get eliminated as people vote via SMS. That’s why each SIM card is only good for a specified number of SMS. The number will depend on the number of elimination rounds plus one to choose between the last two remaining contenders.

But what if there are more than a hundred candidates? That’ll stretch the campaign period to several months if only one candidate can be eliminated every week. My proposal was that the elimination be on a quota basis. For instance, for the first week, any candidate who fails to get more than 50,000 votes is automatically eliminated. That way, it is almost certain that after a few weeks, the number of candidates will be down to a few.

Ida did not think that an American Idol format would get the candidates to talk and discuss issues extensively. She figured a Pinoy Big Brother format was a better idea. Sequester the candidates in one house for the duration of the campaign (I suggested that the program be broadcast 24/7 via the government TV and radio networks) and put them in a position where they have nothing to do but talk. No scripts totally. No contrived drama. The candidates’ handlers and ghostwriters will not have any access to them so they’ll be forced to talk about what they know, show how much they know and prove that they really have a grasp of the job they are applying for. Just as with the Lisa’s American Idol format proposal, candidates get eliminated weekly through SMS voting.

Thinking out of the box and casting Jurassic ideas aside—why not, really? Filipinos are addicted to SMS and reality TV and even the humblest household has at least one cell phone. All that spells maximum participation. Candidates do not have to spend money campaigning and they will all be on equal footing as against a situation where the candidate with the most money to spend gets more exposure. We don’t have to deal with stupid Photoshopped posters dirtying just about every bridge, pole, tree and wall in the country (think how many trees we can save in a paperless political election).

Moreover, there will be no watchers and teachers to be paid during ballot counting and the winners can be declared within minutes after voting period is closed because every vote via SMS goes into a central computer that automatically tabulates the votes. No election violence, less opportunity for media to engage in trending, mis-reporting and playing favorites since the public is privy to every aspect of the campaign that is live on the air 24/7, and no hanging chad either.

But there are loopholes and I played the devil’s advocate to try to plug them in. I pointed out that computers can be hacked and one central computer tallying all the votes just makes it easier to cheat. Instead of bribing so many barangay officials, instead of paying off and/or terrorizing towns and villages, a candidate need only bribe the dozen or so people who has control over the computer system. On the other hand, the fact that there is only one way to cheat simplifies the process of electoral protest. There can only be one ground for electoral protest—that the computer system has been compromised.

Second, I told my friends that their proposals did not eliminate opportunities for vote buying because the candidates’ families, friends and supporters would not be sequestered along with them. They are free to go door-to-door and subvert every voter’s will with payoffs. It is simply too naive to presume that every voter will be discerning enough to take the money and still vote for the candidate of his choice. In our culture, the men and women with a reputation for giving the largest cash gifts are the most popular choices for ninong and ninang in weddings and christenings. In a country deeply steeped in the padrino system, there is that danger that the common man will still decide based on who offers the highest amount of bribe money with the hope that should the candidate win, the same generosity will be displayed in the future.

Today, as an afterthought, I am thinking about the original proposal that Smart and Globe telecoms be obliged to render public service by providing all election-related services including the GSM system for receiving and tabulating votes. Well, that might amount to deprivation of property without due process so, in the alternative, if both telecoms fail to muster enough patriotic spirit and refuse to render public service, they can always outbid each other for the government contract to provide all GSM-related services for the elections.