Voters, taxpayers and a polycrisis

By Michael Henry Yusingco, LL.M

A ‘sea of trash’ emerged after the intense rainfall. And Cabinet officials actually debated whether to call this a ‘crisis’ or not. Just like Smokey Mountain back in my day, the garbage dump is a visual reminder of our failure to address intergenerational problems. We are likely to be constantly in polycrisis mode as interconnected economic, environmental, political, social and technological challenges converge on the Philippines. Only voters and taxpayers can get us out of this purgatory. Though they must first open their eyes to the monster they created.

The fundamental flaw in the government’s approach to flood control is that it appears to be largely disconnected from a coherent, long-term scientific strategy. Government action often comes after devastating floods, public outrage and widespread disruption. Projects are announced, budgets are allocated and new infrastructure is promised. But the deeper question is rarely confronted: are we designing flood-control systems for the conditions we face today, much less for the conditions we will face in the future?

The answer, unfortunately, appears to be no.

Too much of our planning seems trapped in the past. The measures being implemented today often appear to have been designed for yesterday’s scale of flooding. We continue to build, repair and expand infrastructure without sufficiently asking whether it can withstand the rainfall, storm surges and urban conditions projected for the coming decades. That is the problem with reactive governance: it solves the last disaster rather than preparing for the next one. This requires political leadership capable of thinking beyond the next election.

Unfortunately, this is where voters and taxpayers repeatedly fail. Many elected officials operate within short electoral cycles. Their incentives are obvious: deliver projects that can be inaugurated, photographed and claimed as political accomplishments before the next campaign. Long-term planning is less attractive because its benefits may only become visible years or decades later, perhaps under another administration.

But flooding is an intergenerational problem. Decisions made today will determine whether future communities are protected or condemned to live with worsening inundation. A government that plans only for the next three or six years is fundamentally incapable of addressing a problem that will unfold over generations.

Still, it would be too easy to blame politicians alone. Voters and taxpayers must also accept part of the responsibility.

We cannot demand intelligent, long-term solutions while continuing to elect people who are incapable of providing them. We cannot complain about failing infrastructure while repeatedly sending clowns and plunderers to Malacañang and Congress. Democracy does not guarantee good government. It gives citizens the power to choose their representatives. When we exercise that power carelessly, we should not be surprised when government produces careless policies.

Intergenerational problems require problem-solvers. They require legislators who understand that governance is more than distributing projects or securing funds for their districts. Congress must be capable of crafting laws that integrate scientific evidence into public policy, reform outdated planning systems and establish institutions that can pursue long-term strategies beyond electoral cycles.

The necessary reforms will not always be easy or popular. They may require restrictions on irresponsible development, changes in land use, the relocation of vulnerable communities and greater public investment. These costs and difficulties must be honestly confronted and fairly shared.

But that is precisely what responsible political leadership requires: the ability to tell the public that there are no painless solutions and the competence to design reforms that protect both present and future generations. And so, we badly need voters and taxpayers who understand that the quality of government ultimately depends on the quality of the people we choose to govern us.