The document discusses the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam in the Philippines involving the misuse of PDAF funds by members of Congress. It provides background on the PDAF, estimates that 10 billion pesos was defrauded from the government, and outlines calls for reform and abolition of the pork barrel system. The reaction argues that politicians who were meant to help Filipinos instead stole from them through bogus NGOs. While some involved have faced charges, real change requires reforming the system to remove legislators' discretion and influence over projects.

1. Laguna State Polytechnic University
Sta. Cruz Main Campus
Priority Development Assistance Fund
scam
(PDAF)
Reaction Paper
 Submitted By:
Pasahol, Ericson A.
EE-2A
 Submitted To:
Sir Alexander Cabalza

2. Introduction
The Priority Development Assistance Fund scam, also called the PDAF scam or the
pork barrel scam, is a political scandal involving the alleged misuse by several members
of the Congress of the Philippines of their Priority Development Assistance Fund
(PDAF, popularly called "pork barrel"), a lump-sum discretionary fund granted to each
member of Congress for spending on priority development projects of the Philippine
government, mostly on the local level. The scam was first exposed in the Philippine
Daily Inquirer on July 12, 2013, with the six-part exposé of the Inquirer on the scam
pointing to businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles as the scam's mastermind after Benhur
K. Luy, her second cousin and former personal assistant, was rescued by agents of the
National Bureau of Investigation on March 22, 2013, four months after he was detained
by Napoles at her unit at the Pacific Plaza Towers in Fort Bonifacio. Initially centering on
Napoles' involvement in the 2004 Fertilizer Fund scam, the government investigation on
Luy's testimony has since expanded to cover Napoles' involvement in a wider scam
involving the misuse of PDAF funds from 2003 to 2013.
It is estimated that the Philippine government was defrauded of some ₱10 billion in the
course of the scam, having been diverted to Napoles, participating members of
Congress and other government officials. Aside from the PDAF and the fertilizer fund
maintained by the Department of Agriculture, around ₱900 million in royalties earned
from the Malampaya gas field were also lost to the scam. The scam has provoked
public outrage, with calls being made on the Internet for popular protests to demand the
abolition of the PDAF, and the order for Napoles' arrest sparking serious discussion
online. Although the history of pork barrel-like discretionary funds in the Philippines
dates back to 1922, during the American colonial period, the PDAF in its current form
was only established during the administration of Corazon Aquino with the creation of
the Countryside Development Fund (CDF) in 1990. With ₱2.3 billion in initial funding,
the CDF was designed to allow legislators to fund small-scale infrastructure or
community projects which fell outside the scope of the national infrastructure program,
which was often restricted to large infrastructure items. The CDF was later renamed the
PDAF in 2000, during the administration of Joseph Estrada.
Since 2008, every member of the House of Representatives usually receives an annual
PDAF allocation of ₱70 million, while every senator receives an annual allocation of
₱200 million. The President also benefits from a PDAF-like allocation, the President's
Social Fund (PSF), worth around ₱1 billion. Contrary to public belief, however, PDAF
allocations are not actually released to members of Congress. Rather, disbursements
under the PDAF are coursed via implementing agencies of the Philippine government,
and are limited to "soft" and "hard" projects: the former largely referring to non-
infrastructure projects.

3. Reaction
A citizen vulnerable from the power and gain of these officials. Most likely, he would
wonder what a pork barrel is. Consequently, a Pork Barrel is a fund given to
Government officials that has sole purpose; “To Help the Filipinos.” Nevertheless this
fund also came from the Filipino taxes, so Juan Dela Cruz has all the right to claim this.
Sadly, it is as if Philippines has seized all the bad luck in the world, this officials,
Napoles among them has directed this money to bogus Non-Government Associations
(NGO), maybe in the form of donations or projects. Yes, you read it right, Napoles is just
one of the others, according to the Commission on Audit (COA) investigation, many
government officials has done this cruel act among Filipinos, considering they live
lavishly while more than half of the country is striving to live and survive. Aside from the
infamous Napoles, Ramon Revilla Jr., Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and many
others topped the list of having bogus NGOs.
Filipinos might be furious at this time knowing that the name of this Officials were
revealed and Napoles is imprisoned now, but another piece of misfortune Filipinos has
no guarantee that the Officials would pay the price. I know I sound negative, but truth
hurts we all know that. They would go out of the country, bribe the people in charge,
hospital arrest, house arrest and many tarnished tactics for their comfort that they had
maintained throughout their life. Just look at Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo,
just look at her. The whole nation knows her story, but where she is now? A
Congresswoman.
Philippines rot inside. People that we expect to help the society are the ones who stab
us at the back. They are masked in a very good image, helpful, angel-like impression
during campaign period but look at them. I happen to read in Facebook a picture
statement from Lani Mercado, a congresswoman, wife of Ramon Revilla Jr., said. “Ok
lang walang pork barrel fund, basta wag lang manghihingi sa amin ang mga tao.” How
painful was that?”
We must know how to choose our leader. To love our country despite what’s
happening, let us uplift the Philippines and let this be our strength to push through the
dangerous way of justice and progress.

4. Conclusion
There are just too many poor people all around the Philippines asking for assistance.
The politicians long ago who thought of institutionalizing the Pork Barrel did so because
they felt that a certain discretionary “special assistance fund” would give legislators the
necessary funding they feel they need in order to spearhead projects that could “assist”
the needy people in areas they represent in order to gain goodwill and justify the reason
for their elected positions’ existence. Apparently, far too many Filipino leaders didn’t
think that legislators are supposed to concentrate on legislation – i.e.: passing new
relevant laws and/or repealing obsolete ones, or that representing their constituents’
interests in the legislature was what they signed up for.
It seems more like their idea was that all elected positions are somehow “executive” and
are supposed to have projects (both soft projects such as scholarships as well as
“infrastructure projects”) that would create visibility for them even if the elected positions
they ran for are purely within the legislative branch. Hadn’t they heard of “Meet the
People” or “Townhall” Sessions that happen where representatives regularly meet with
the people they represent in their own districts for Q&A’s and thus gain the necessary
input they need for privilege speeches and for discussions and debate in the
legislature? (Then again, “Meet the People” or “Townhall” Sessions are how things work
in a Parliamentary System)
The problem of massive poverty and the mendicant attitude that had been nurtured in
the Philippines has caused politicians to think that it is absolutely necessary for them to
dole largesse out to the people in their districts in order to placate the poor and their
demands/requests for assistance. This is a “pull factor” in the sense that it is oftentimes
many ordinary people who directly or indirectly beg for the Pork Barrel fund to continue
on. Without the Pork Barrel fund, they feel they’ll be helpless.
Well, instead of handing out dole-outs, why don’t legislators push for ways to create
real jobs in their communities? (More on the details of how to do that later in this article)
After all, if jobs were plentiful, then people wouldn’t be asking for dole-outs in the first
place. If people weren’t asking for dole-outs because they had jobs, then politicians
wouldn’t need to hand-out pork barrel largesse which are funds they get from taxpayers.
But because there aren’t that many jobs, so many Filipinos are poor and always asking
for money and assistance, the pork barrel fund serves as an institutionalized means for
politicians to elicit a debt of gratitude from among the people who benefit from their
largesse.

5. Recommendation
I believe the President means well and is motivated by the public good in overhauling
the pork barrel system. I also think that the proposed reforms, as elaborated by
Secretary Butch Abad, would make the process more rational and transparent.
However, as I always emphasize to my law students, citing my mentor Prof. W. Michael
Reisman of Yale Law School, there is a big difference between “black-letter law” (the
official policies, rules and regulations) and the “operational code” (how things really
work). The CDF and PDAF would actually pass scrutiny if one only looked at the former
but fail when we examine their implementation. Even before this recent scam exploded,
so many safeguards were already in place, including the Procurement Act or R.A. 9184
and many COA issuances, yet the operators still managed to circumvent them with
impunity.
I have proposed a three pronged control-entitlement test for the abolition of the pork
barrel or for its authentic reform if it cannot be totally eliminated. Citizens should ask
three questions: How is the project to be decided? Is it solely the legislator’s discretion?
Is there an entitlement to the fund? In other words, does the legislator believe that s/he
has control of the fund? Does the legislator have a say on who implements the project
and how it is implemented? That is, can s/he influence who the agency/ implementer
/contractor will be? A yes answer to these questions means there is no iron wall
between the executive and legislative branches of government and that patronage
politics lives on. The bottom line is to totally remove the legislator’s discretion in the use
of funds and how the project will be implemented, including making endorsements of
contractors/suppliers. Project determination shall be undertaken as a collective action of
stakeholders, including the legislator himself.
The control-entitlement test will help but it will not ensure a corruption-free budgeting
system. Citizen vigilance is critical and must continue. Convictions must be obtained
against those who have manipulated the system and gained from their corrupt acts.
Above all, as I have said again and again, we must have a Freedom of Information Act
so that we are not dependent on the next whistleblower to catch wrongdoing