Posted by: shubicpda | August 19, 2006
Eleazar N. De Leon II BPS-IR 3-2
Posted in Constitutional Amendments
Recent Comments
 | Forstinjt5 on Eleazar N. De Leon II BPS-IR… |
 | Flierbiff on Eleazar N. De Leon II BPS-IR… |
 | jonnel on Welcome |
 | EnlarryPalo on Eleazar N. De Leon II BPS-IR… |
 | xbolabol on Eleazar N. De Leon II BPS-IR… |
Flickr Photos
|
Why abolish the Senate?
This august chamber has always been a bastion of democracy, during the dark times of the dictatorship, it was the members of the Senate who fought and serve as beacon of light for our people.
The Senate is a training ground for leaders who would assume greater responsibility. Most of our Presidents are Senators, the chamber serves as their practicum for greater responsibility for the nation.
The Senate’s concern is different to that of the parochial house of representatives, they act as the conscience of the Nation. Their concern is not local like that of the congressman, they give a national perspective on the laws passed by Congress.
Lastly, it serves as counter-balance to the legislative process. Their existence serves as a second mill thereby making the bill passed by the legislature fine tune4d.
And again I ask why, WHY SHOULD THE SENATE BE ABOLISHED?
josef san jose
By: shubicpda on August 29, 2006
at 4:20 am
abolish the Senate?
my friend, i think your resolution is too general in its nature…you regard the Senate and its Senators as incompetent and a waste of money, time and effort..mind you, passing a resolution must be germane to its nature, it must bear the name in which the resolution is being passed, i mean, you are passing the resolution to a body composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives..do you want to outrage the Senators?? and one thing i want you to know may friend is that,the Senate is a protagonist of our history especially the time of Senator Salonga, a liberal..being the Senate President at that time, Sen. Salonga and his dear colleague had come into a decision to trash the agreement between the US and the Philipines concerning military bases of the Americans in the Phlipines, and they succeed..and i think you now already the story behind it…
By: bernardo guillermo 4-2 on August 30, 2006
at 1:40 am
i agree to both comments given by mr. san jose and mr. guillermo. in addition, i think you are too pessimistic and you did not saw the other side of the coin shall i say. don’t just look on the negative side…. open your mind, only then you will be enlightened by the great things that the Philippine Senate had contributed to the Philippines and will continue to contribute to the people.
“silly question and/or suggestion”—why not propose the abolishment of the house of representatives?? HOR is much expensive than senate……
By: james ryan 4-2 on August 30, 2006
at 11:31 am
Compared to other proposals, yours is presented clearly and properly. .But before my congratulations, I have here some comments and clarifications which might be helpful in the consideration of your proposal – that is if you find all of these constructively!
• In your set-up – your reasons from one to five can be summarized in just one sentence – that your proposal is more practical than the present bicameral system. When we are talking of practicability, we are talking of how much time and resources we can save in accomplishing certain objectives.
• Your proposal seems to care more on how much do we spend our time and resources than on how well do we spend it. Given the status quo, even if the unicameral system consumes less tedious, less expensive, and more practical, it is more susceptible to abuse. The party in power has all the power to speed up the process of legislation all the times at the expense of the interest of the people. If there is an absence of thoroughly scrutinizing a bill, the danger that it might fabricate a negative effect in the future is very possible to happen.
• “The Senate has proven its incompetence because majority of the members cuts only according on their interest and political affiliation especially on Impeachment trial.”– relatively, this argument depends in the situation at hand, therefore, this is always not true. For example, Erap was not impeached because majority of the senators during his time was his ally. Now, if the articles of impeachment will reach the confines of the senate, Gloria will likely be impeached (classify the leaning of the senators and you’ll be surely amazed by the numbers!!!) .
• The prohibitive cost of Senatorial election makes it possible for only wealthy individuals to make it to the Senate, therefore providing representation for rich people. – if your complaining that the senate caters only those who are considerably wealthy, then, abolishing it does not suffice for the right solution. Instead, the mode of representation should be replaced. In consonance with this, we should therefore not abolish the senate but make its representation regional rather than national.
. . . . sana po makatulong itong mga isunulat ko dito para sa pagpapabuti ng iyong adhikain. . .
Enjoy po kayo sa subic….
By: azhe on August 31, 2006
at 5:42 pm
Pahabol po bossing. . .
. . . . even if the unicameral system consumes less tedious . . . this one is obviously incorrect…it should be even if the unicameral system IS LESS TEDIOUS. . .
. . .haaayy, pag gusto mo nga naman matulog na, kaso hindi pa pwede kc lampas na nga sa deadlyn tapos dehins mo pa gagawin. . . he he… .
By: azhe on August 31, 2006
at 5:49 pm
I just want to make this short, cause i think you have had enough.
Your resolution is leaving the whole chamber dilapidated… i may say so!
By: bhern perez on September 1, 2006
at 1:11 am
well i think and i admit you resolution is well presented..
but i dont think that we should abolish the senate,coz i do believe tha to maintain the check and balance of or government will be useless if we dont have a bicameral system.. it would be better if you would present a way on a unicameral system how checka nd balance will work..
By: to mr. eleazar(di ko ma gets spelling sorry) on September 1, 2006
at 6:38 am
well i think and i admit you resolution is well presented..
but i dont think that we should abolish the senate,coz i do believe tha to maintain the check and balance of or government will be useless if we dont have a bicameral system.. it would be better if you would present a way on a unicameral system how checka nd balance will work..
bpag 3-1 ghynette esplana
By: to mr eleazar on September 1, 2006
at 6:39 am
” WHEREAS, maintaining the present set-up only produces duplication of efforts in passing a bill, which takes 2 years in average.”
Mr. DeLeon
Are you therefore saying that we should pass bills in a hurry?
You see, the wisdom behind a bi-cameral readings and approval is bills is to prevent the promulgation of bad laws. How is this? When, for instance, the Lower House, had approve bills that is inimical to the country, it is subject for the review of the Senate, and therefore, it is dually reviewd. Is it not better that laws be properly and thourghly scrutinized and debated, before promulgated, fort, laws are promulgated to curtail the right of the individaul to life, liberty and property? And this, being so, deserves and must be subjected to the due process of law, though slow it maybe,it serves as a caution agaisnt bad laws, ill-fully structured laws, and hasty (that is, without proper understanding) passage of laws…?
Please answer.
By: Lawrence P. Villamar on September 1, 2006
at 11:12 am
the purpose
By: don jerome halal on September 1, 2006
at 1:07 pm
the purpose of a bicameral set-up is to have check and balance. since congress is a large group and they must be monitored regarding their duties and responsibilities.
If the senate will be abolished, there will be so many laws that will directly be passed to the executive department since the membership of the congress is too large and if there will be no senate, there will be no body that will limit the bills. Unlike in a bicameral set-up, the bills passed will be limited only to those with great relevance.
By: don jerome halal on September 1, 2006
at 1:28 pm
to mr. halal,
this is not your proposal therefore i need not comment on you but i was intrigued by your statement/comment……
are you sure that the purpose of a bicameral set-up is to have checks and balance???? of what??? dont they, the senate and the HOR, have the same function which is to make laws??? senate can and will review the bills from the HOR not check then balance??? hindi naman kasi magkalaban/magkaiba ang senate and HOR eh sa katanuyan magkakampi sila sa paggawa ng magagandang batas, pero sa kasalukuyang 13th congress hindi.hehehe!
if my memory serves me right, i hope so, the principle of checks and balance happens within the three branches of the government meaning the legislative branch will be checked by the executive and the judiciary, the executive branch will be checed by (alam nyo na kung sino hindi ko na lang itatype mahaba eh.) peace to all!!!
By: codename:SHAIDER on September 2, 2006
at 1:33 pm
again, it’s very cliche’ to tell that having a bicameral system is expensive.. aren’t you aware that the senate plays a imporatnt role in our legislative department? i want you to consider the bebefits and not only on the cost..
By: Amilie Joy J. Micaller on September 3, 2006
at 1:56 pm
again, it’s very cliche’ to tell that having a bicameral system is expensive.. aren’t you aware that the senate plays an imporatnt role in our legislative department? i want you to consider the bebefits and not only on the cost..
By: Amilie Joy J. Micaller on September 3, 2006
at 1:58 pm
why do you think we should abolish the senate? if we abolish that body we would be changing the constitution as well. I believe the role of the senate is important than what is seems to be. Like the passing of the bills,it should not be solely determine by one body. It should be studied and approved by two different bodies. A unicameral system is not the solution to the corrupt body you are trying to say.Thank you
By: Marianne Grace Felix on September 5, 2006
at 2:47 pm
To Mr. De Leon,
Your resolution states that it has no assurance of better considered and better deliberated law if we maintain a bicameral system of legislative body, therefor it is necessary to abolish senate. Well, considering the present situation of the senate, some of its members are really “incompetent” to perform the job of a senator. But let us not disregard the expertise and capabilities of the other senators…
Yes, I agree to what Azhe’s comment regarding the practicability of your resolution, but are we ready if unicameral system will be implemented? Can the people expect that there will be better laws passed? Will it diminish the issue regarding corruption?
By: megolias tacio jr on September 7, 2006
at 8:09 am
Whoa!!! Really??? Abolish Senate… hahahaha!!! you think they (the senate) would love the proposal of yours???
Anyways, Lapses are not the only factor to be considered in measuring the ability, capability, (and the likes) of one thing., surely, you do not want to be judge this way eh? you see, you should also look at the other side, which is the good side of the coin, and see, that it is far more worth commending… AM I MAKING SENSE??? Nyawk!
But anyways, i really think this is one good product of a human mind… hehehe… Cheer up baby!
By: antonette tud comia BPS 3-2 on September 7, 2006
at 10:13 am
ely! cheer up daw from 2nichi…
waaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!
nweis, bill pla ppkialaman q… sori
elyboi, get ur point why abolishing the senate
however, i really cannot accept the fact that you only noticed the
lapses of the senate, how about our huge HOR???
i think its better if you proposes another mechanism in adopting a unicameral legislature rather than abolishing the senate… =)
By: chrisane on September 9, 2006
at 9:35 am
abolish the senate?
then waht is your alternative?
and how will you assure to us that this was the proper solution to the existing problem?
By: Jovelyn Tobiano on September 9, 2006
at 10:35 am
mr.de leon c”,)
well,i think that your resolution is hard to make..abolition of the senate is hard to do so..well,what is your counter proposal if the senate will be abolished?…mr.dont you know that the senate have a big job in our government?,and now ur saying that the senate should be abolish..mr.ok kah lang?… c”,)
By: jhazz 3-1 on September 9, 2006
at 1:13 pm
To Mr. De Leon
Examining your resolution, I find my self asking myself, “Is Senate that bad?”
Brother, there is indeed always two sides of the coin, and Senate as an organization is not a perfect organization.
If you listen to Maam Empemano about the critique of the media to the Senate, she mentioned that she wonders how these Senators allow such attacks to their office while, according to her, these Senators are busy doing their job. Sabi pa nya, kung sya daw sa mga senador, tatawagan daw nya yung mga kumukutya sa Senado upang ibigay ang kanilang panig.
With the testimony of a person who work in the Senate, i may say that the office is doing their job, while we just dont appreciate their work.
Still, i would choose to have law which takes time to be passed rather than a law immediately passed for it is prone in becoming a trial and error.
—————————————————————
“Ang payapang pampang ay para lamang sa mga pangahas na sasalunga sa alimpuyo ng mga alon sa panahon ng unos”
-Isang bilanggong pulitikal
By: Gerald Corton BPS 3-2 on September 9, 2006
at 2:27 pm
One more thing, (dont worry ely, i have enough on my comment to your resolution, its not for you)
To Mr./Ms./Mrs. Azhe
I just wanna make clarification on what you’ve mentioned that “Erap was not impeached because majority of the senators during his time was his ally”
Impeached lang din ba ang tawag if the Senate will approve the complaint? kasi di ba, to impeach means to accuse, so kung impeached lang din po ang term sa judgment na irerender ng Senate, therefore accused pa lang yung subject of impeachment by the house? Ganun po kasi pagkakaintindi ko sa sentence nyo.
Saka, kung susundin ko yung sa sentence mo, dapat palang sabihin “Erap was impeached only by the House not by the Senate”
Ewan ko, di ko sure, pero i think there’s a proper term in pertaining to the final judgment of the Senate.
Un lang. Tnx
By: Gerald Corton BPS 3-2 on September 9, 2006
at 3:21 pm
nice one eleaz,,,,,,,,,
why should we abolish the senate?
senate lng b ang ngpupursue or ng pprioritize ng interests ng mayayaman,,,,e pati house of rep din db? e mas madami un…….224 lng ang senate 240( correct me if im wrong) ang house of rep….
the purpose of senate is for better formulation of laws right so why abolish it?//////although d nmn nito ngggwa ng 100% ang duty nito pero imposibleng wla itong nggwa>…
practicability? mas mlaki b ang gastos ng senate kesa sa house?/
thanks and godbless
By: jonnel on September 10, 2006
at 2:01 pm
nice one eleaz,,,,,,,,,
why should we abolish the senate?
senate lng b ang ngpupursue or ng pprioritize ng interests ng mayayaman,,,,e pati house of rep din db? e mas madami un…….24 lng ang senate 240( correct me if im wrong) ang house of rep….
the purpose of senate is for better formulation of laws right so why abolish it?//////although d nmn nito ngggwa ng 100% ang duty nito pero imposibleng wla itong nggwa>…
practicability? mas mlaki b ang gastos ng senate kesa sa house?/
thanks and godbless
By: jonnel on September 10, 2006
at 2:01 pm
i do respect yor proposal. because of the fact that bicameral set-up is too expensive . but dont you think of a cause that our country might face if we use unicameral set-up? i guess we all know that the purpose of the senators it to maintain check and balance.
By: k.aren n. on September 12, 2006
at 2:25 am
ELI jojo,,,
the senators perform their function nationally unlike the congressmen who perform their function by district or locally in their constituency…..
By: ms. Mallari on September 12, 2006
at 11:51 am
it is better to have senators because they maintain check and balances…un lang po..peace..
By: Ruth Elaine D.C. Jacinto on September 13, 2006
at 8:37 am
A unicameral assembly may be less costly but it is important to have two houses of congress to maintain checks and balances because if we’ll let the representatives of districts to have the sole legislative power, they may abuse their power by agreeing to create laws that will serve their own interest.. It’s better to save Filipinos from abusive politicians that to save 2.3 billion pesos..
By: ma. cristina rafol on September 13, 2006
at 9:50 am
elyboi,
tanong ku lang pu kuya,dont you think mas mahirap maextract ang iniisip ng mga magiging members ng unicameral na sinasabi mo with regards to their personalaffairs concerning such issues like Impeachment???
ngiti naman jan..
Novs_isda
By: Jhonna Nova J. sebuc on September 13, 2006
at 10:04 am
To the Honorable Eleazar De Leon
I really commend you my friend for this very brave proposal. well in my humble opinion, I really do not want to abolish the Senate. Especially in this times when the administration seems uncontrollable in implementing its unmanly dispositions the Senate is the only stalwart fighting bastard instituion that could prevent such actions. And by the way I think you did well well in your last defense. And even this bill seems unfavorable to me but would be beneficial for the whole Philippine society, I wish you goodluck that your resolution be passed considering your good intentions.
By: Rodolf Gadingan on September 13, 2006
at 1:06 pm
sana lng nagrereply ka sa mga comment sau…
i think u’ve had enuf so i’m going to make this short and simple…
if you’re going to abolish the senate, who will represent the national interest?
as i can see, ginagawa din yun ng HOR pero hindi yun ung point e.. Not all congressmen/women, represent the natl interest.. ung may gus2 lng! There is a need for someone to burden such responsibility and the Senate does it.
By: Rachel BPAG 3-1 on September 14, 2006
at 3:18 am
elly,
why should we abolish senate??? ang dami mong iaabolish eh ung senate pa,isipin m lng kpg nangyari yan ano pa lalo ang mngyayari sa ating bnsa cno nga nmn ang mgrerepresent ng national interest????and d b di nmn lhat ng member nyan isa lng ang intensyon mrmi sa knla gsto mktulong sa bnsa di mo lng nppnsin.gud luck
By: rojohn on September 14, 2006
at 4:33 am
to eli
parang charter change na din yan di ba , sa parliamentary form of government maabolish din ang senate. so y propose a reso na included din sa cha-cha
By: PATRICK on September 14, 2006
at 4:33 am
hi ely…..
what a nice bill!…i agree with you it will be more practical if we adopt the unicameral legislature…..and the process of making laws will not be as complicated as before……and it will less expensive….the budget allocated for that legislative body will be used to other services by the government….
have you already defend your bill? its really a good proposal!!goodluck to your defense!!
thank u!!!
By: Kristine marie Santillan on September 14, 2006
at 10:58 am
Mr. DeLEon
Well ur proposal is very interesting. Abolishing the Senate? but your proposal is lacking substance……….I mean hindi mu masyado naiexplain ng maayos ung reso mu!!!!!! written man or nung actual defense mu…….. but its good………..
By: jess on September 14, 2006
at 11:22 am
h m m m? juz wondering . .being a senator is not a crime at all . .ayt? . .well,you have an impressive work . .pro nver think na cla lng ang nagpapahirap stin . .if your going to abolish senate . .ofcourse there will be consequences . .r u aware of those consequences? and are you willing to face them all?i know you have a good intention . .pero sa situation ntn ngaun . .prang malabo po . .there are lot of things that we should prioritize . .pro i commend you for that . .impressive huh?
By: may-z on September 14, 2006
at 3:15 pm
helo!naks ka2iba when some other would want a con con and other amendments e2 unicam ung gs2………enwei mrmi rn nmn ung binanggit n advntages ng uni cam pero andmi rn kcng disadvantages like wlng other body pra macheck ang governing body and ung house of reps kc db serves as the training ground for future leaders kaya mbuti rn n mgkaroon ng house of reps pra ung mga mgiging future senators and other high ranking officials mgkaroon ng place to learn for future services in the govt pero un nga lng mas mura nga cguro ang maintenanz ng uni cam……….gndng morning!
By: sheryl BPAG on September 15, 2006
at 1:27 am
There are more concerns about this form of government that you didn’t mention, There are lots of threats to the Human Rights in an Unicameral legislature.
By: Jacquelyn Y. Morales BPS IR III-2 on September 15, 2006
at 11:57 am
maganda ang idea mo about unicameral, kaso magagawa ba niya lahat ng work ng i-aabolish mong senate?
By: Angela Alcantara on September 15, 2006
at 12:03 pm
do you think that it is the senate where the future president of our country can train his/her leadership?
By: krystyn on September 15, 2006
at 1:14 pm
to mr. de leon,
are youn a supporter of cha-cha?if we abolish bicameral it will destroy the sytem of check in balance.
By: reynaldo falcutila jr. on September 16, 2006
at 1:02 am
To All !!!
Thank you very much for your comments!!!!
Sorry , it took me so long to reply,, hehe im busy.
Why do I want to abolish Senate ? actually I have heard enough comments to all of you. Wala na ata akong bala para sa inyong lahat……
By: ely on September 16, 2006
at 12:48 pm
Wjy do I wnt to abolish the house of SENATE?
First is Having a bicamreal set-up will save us billions of pesos.
For one chamber like the senate to operate , It will cost the phillipine treasury Aproximately 2 billion pesos .Should the house of senate be abolished, this sum of money can ba re-allocated to social services of the government, Health and medical alloccation, education, and many other projects.
By: ely on September 16, 2006
at 12:54 pm
I do really want to abolish the senate …..
But I want to redirect some of its function to the remaining house . Im abolishing the Senate but not necessarily its functions.
There must be members on the house of rep. to deal with NATIONAL MATTERS AND INTEREST.
By: ely on September 16, 2006
at 1:00 pm
Another one is that it will save time on passsing a bill.
Even though a law has passed the two branches already, it does not necessarily mean that it is already perFect since all laws has loopholes in it .
By: ely on September 16, 2006
at 1:04 pm
Hey!
Give me link for downloading XRumer 5 warez!
Thank you…
Very-very much.
I’m so need this program for advertise my website!!! This software is the best thing for online promo and mass posting, you know…
And, dont send me XRumer 2.9 and XRumer 3.0 – that versions are too old!
P.S. Google cant help me((((
By: XRumerMonstroZ on March 12, 2009
at 9:54 pm
Guys I ve heard that Inet Bizness booming right now! With all the Newspapers and Radio chanel bancrupt advertisement shifted online! Are you making cash of this web now!
By: suerouffpep on April 12, 2009
at 10:41 pm
The topic is quite trendy in the net right now. What do you pay attention to when choosing what to write ?
By: Vince Delmonte on April 14, 2009
at 8:53 pm
mp3 mp3 clawfinger love.mp3 turn around.mp3 /collective soul
By: bruinuamb on May 7, 2009
at 2:33 pm
I was justified reading a query on how to convey your down comforter all puffy again and scarcely all the answers said that you can relate fool someone some tennis balls in the dryer to amount to that happen. how to horse around doubles tennisSo how does that chef-d’oeuvre exactly? Why does this happen? Can you bring into play something else pretty than tennis balls? Gratefulness you!
how to play tabs on the guitar
By: nulleyBex on May 19, 2009
at 6:33 am
Не долго думал да ладно молвил(:
By: xbolabol on May 19, 2009
at 1:18 pm
buy virginia slims ultra phosphorescence cigarettes
cheap doral cigarette tawdry doral cigarette|trashy doral cigarettes
cut-price doral cigarettes two-bit doral cigarettes
cheaply gpc cigarette cheap gpc cigarettes
economical gpc cigarettes budget-priced gpc cigarettes
discount pall mall cigarettes
By: EnlarryPalo on May 25, 2009
at 4:11 pm
He put his eye to the hole. He just managed to spy some people sitting in deckchairs chanting, before a finger came out of nowhere and poked him in the eye. As he staggered back, the people started chanting, “Fourteen, fourteen, fourteen…”
By: Flierbiff on July 11, 2009
at 12:53 am
Obection hi boy
Obection hi boy
By: Forstinjt5 on August 17, 2009
at 10:37 am