Formerly known as the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDA), the pork barrel is government spending for projects aimed at benefiting legislators' constituents. However, it is also an opportunity for corruption, making it a form of institutionalized corruption. Senators and Congressmen receive millions of Pesos as an automatic appropriation in the General Appropriations Act, with no proposed projects required. They often keep the funds instead of using them for the intended purposes.
This pork barrel system relies heavily on the integrity and actions of the lawmakers. While not all Senators and Congressmen are guilty, allowing corruption to happen is as much a crime as committing it oneself. The pork barrel scam has exposed corruption and led taxpayers to demand accountability from the government.
Therefore, thanks to the eye-opening actions of individuals in
...volved in corruption, many now believe that abolishing the pork barrel system completely is a better option than merely reforming it. Initially, I opposed abolishing the system and favored reforming it since it seemed like an effective way to accomplish tasks.
Moreover, it is believed that the pork barrel may never be discontinued and will merely be renamed, although its essence remains the same. I previously believed that the issue lied in the implementation and accountability of the pork barrel. I thought that stricter monitoring, control, and evaluation of these funds would suffice in reducing corruption. However, after reading various articles, my perspective shifted. In the previous system, project planning did not necessarily precede the allocation of pork barrel funds to lawmakers; it could occur afterwards or not at all. In contrast, under the new system, lawmakers propose projects that can benefit their constituents. If
approved, these projects are listed as line items in the national budget. The approved line-item projects are then included in the implementing agency's budget. This alone was enough to change my stance on abolishing the pork barrel. I now believe that this approach is more efficient and centralized compared to solely relying on lawmakers' discretion. Additionally, eliminating the pork barrel would discourage individuals from entering Philippine politics. When considering it, traditional politicians are primarily motivated by the availability of pork barrel funds. Why would they choose politics when higher remuneration exists elsewhere? This would consequently attract politicians who genuinely prioritize improving the Philippines, despite lower salaries.In my opinion, the absence of pork barrel leads to a decrease or even elimination of motivation to seek political office, apart from the intention to improve and serve the Filipino people.
- Federal government essays
- Armed Forces essays
- Confederate States Of America essays
- Federal Government Of The United States essays
- Fourteenth Amendment To The United States Constitution essays
- Governance essays
- Parliament essays
- Politics essays
- Jurisdiction essays
- Bureaucracy essays
- Separation Of Powers essays
- Congress essays
- President essays
- United States Congress essays
- Non-Commissioned Officer essays
- Appeal essays
- Revenge essays
- Corporate Governance essays
- Public Service essays
- Income Tax essays
- Supply essays
- Red Cross essays
- Democracy essays
- State essays
- Liberty essays
- Absolutism essays
- Reform essays
- Republic essays
- John Marshall essays
- Bourgeoisie essays
- Developed Country essays
- Elections essays
- International Relations essays
- Left-Wing Politics essays
- Monarchy essays
- Political Corruption essays
- Political Party essays
- Political Science essays
- Sovereign State essays
- United Nations essays
- World Trade Organization essays
- Contras essays
- Dictatorship essays
- Foreign policy essays
- Monarch essays
- Corruption essays
- Foreign essays
- Democratic Party essays
- European Union essays
- President Of The United States essays
