Clarifying what Leni meant by "keep the money"

his is not the first time I’ve heard the line (and I use my own name so I don’t offend any candidate) “Ang pera sa bulsa, si Joel sa balota!”

In all Philippine elections I’ve witnessed in my lifetime, votebuying always played a role in swinging the results in favor of moneyed candidates. So it’s not surprising that in this early runup to the May 2022 elections, this most intractable of all election crimes is again animating the nationwide debate between moralists and pragmatists.

The pragmatists—practical-minded people with no qualms about speaking out of both corners of the mouth—recite their signature mantra that taking the money and voting one’s conscience regardless is the no-brainer solution to this dilemma.

This, of course, prompts the moralists to ask what kind of conscience would anyone who takes the money possibly have?

As if we didn’t already have enough issues to divide us as a nation, these hissing spats on whether “to bid or not to bid” for votes on sale is even dividing people belonging to the same camp.

Independent presidentiable Leni Robredo put some supporters on gimbal lock when she said in an interview that anyone offered money by votebuyers shouldn’t struggle with accepting it guilt-free—keeping in mind where the money likely came from: stolen from the public coffers.

But what if the wealthy candidate is running for office for the first time? That candidate would certainly “reimburse” himself of the cost of votebuying if elected. So taking his money in advance actually provides him the impetus to steal once in office.

It didn’t sound like the Leni I knew so I reviewed the videoclip and saw the subtle context many—myself included—missed. She was recounting her own experience when she ran against the well-oiled campaign machinery of the Villafuerte political dynasty in CamSur, back in the day. Stripped of all the hypotheticals, the situation becomes more focused. Stricken by conscience some supporters unburdened to her that they had accepted vote money—fait accompli—before she had gotten to them in the campaign. Therefore would she accept their support even if they were morally unclean? So she helped them exorcise the false pangs of conscience by telling them if they voted their conscience and breached the votebuying contract they would precisely be undoing their involvement in votebuying in the first place.

If you still missed the subtle nuance of a difference there, let me restate it. She didn’t tell anyone to take any money TOMORROW, she was just telling them what to do and how to feel if they had ALREADY taken the money YESTERDAY--as a balm for their conscience having found remorse a day too late.

Somehow, I don’t struggle too much agreeing with that, especially since she had come out strongly denouncing votebuying in other interviews that followed. Sadly though, logical acrobatics like that won’t be enough to appease the Pharisees among the ranks of Leni supporters. I know some peers in the legal profession really squirmed hard in their seats listening to it.

I have a much easier way of dealing with it, and it has nothing to do with moral polemics. It’s all about understanding that there is no—in fact there can never be—a one-size-fits-all message to cater to a wide support base, especially one as diverse as hers.

She was talking to the dirt-poor, to many of whom a hundred pesos is equivalent to a few scrappy meals. But even the poor are entited to dignity. The central strategy of votebuying is not to get the poor to sell their votes, it’s to get them to devalue their own dignity. Once you succeed in making someone feel worthless, you can buy their vote even cheaper.

Leni understands the idea of “have not” comprehensively, and extends the hand of vindication to those who had been convinced they had sold their soul for a bowl of porridge.

Leni knows “lugaw”—they deride her for it. But the poor see hope, and some measure of redemption in her message: you took their money, they took your dignity, but don’t you believe they took your soul. Clearly you could still discern right from wrong, which means your heart and soul are intact. Now just let your mind follow your heart, and you’ll be fine on election day.

It’s a totally ineffective message to anyone who has never missed a meal.