Lacson supports marcos' budget oversight, hontiveros warns of constitutional limits
The Department of Budget and Management earlier said the President intends to monitor the entire budget process to ensure alignment with government priorities.
Lacson welcomed the move, saying it could strengthen discipline in Congress—as long as Marcos does not interfere in bicameral conference committee discussions.
'It will send a clear and very strong signal to the members of Congress not to make a mockery of our role in the budget process… and that we should not treat the national budget as individual prerogatives,' Lacson said in a statement.
However, Hontiveros raised constitutional concerns over the president's involvement, stressing the limited role of the executive in the budget process.
'The power of the purse is wielded by Congress and Congress alone,' she said during a media forum.
'Walang papel ang presidente bilang observer sa bicam sa Konstitusyon. 'Pag pinilit 'yan baka magkaroon pa sila ng problema, baka kasuhan sila.'The debate comes amid legal challenges to the P6.3-trillion 2025 national budget, currently pending before the Supreme Court. Critics have flagged blank allocations and the zero subsidy for PhilHealth as signs of potential abuse.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
6 hours ago
- Gulf Today
How California draws congressional districts
Seema Mehta, Tribune News Service The potential redrawing of California's congressional district lines could upend the balance of power in Washington, DC, in next year's midterm congressional election. The unusual and unexpected redistricting may take place in coming months because of sparring among President Donald Trump, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Redrawing these maps — known as redistricting — is an esoteric practice that many voters tune out, but one that has an outsized impact on political power and policy in the United States. Here is a breakdown about why a process that typically occurs once every decade is currently receiving so much attention — and the potential ramifications. What is redistricting? There are 435 members of the US House of Representatives, each of whom is supposed to represent roughly the same number of constituents. Every decade, after the US Census counts the population across the nation, the allocation of congressional representatives for each state can change. For example, after the 2020 census, California's share of congressional districts was reduced by one for the first time in state history. After the decennial census, states redraw district lines for congressional and legislative districts based on population shifts, protections for minority voters required by the federal Voting Rights Act and other factors. For much of the nation's history, such maps were created by state legislators and moneyed interests in smoke-filled backrooms. Many districts were grossly gerrymandered — contorted — to benefit political parties and incumbents, such as California's infamous "Ribbon of Shame," a congressional district that stretched in a reed-thin line 200 miles along the California coast from Oxnard to the Monterey County line. But in recent decades, political-reform organizations and some elected officials, notably former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, called for independent drawing of district lines. In 2010, the state's voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure requiring California congressional maps to be drawn by a bipartisan commission, which it did in 2011 and 2021. Why are we talking about this? President Trump recently urged Texas lawmakers to redraw its congressional districts to increase the number of GOP members of the House in next year's midterm election. Congress is closely divided, and the party that does not control the White House traditionally loses seats in the body two years after the presidential election. Trump has been able to enact his agenda — from deporting undocumented immigrants to extending tax breaks that largely benefit the wealthy to closing some Planned Parenthood clinics — because the GOP controls the White House, the Senate and the House. But if Democrats flip Congress, Trump's agenda will likely be stymied and he faces the prospect of being a lame duck during his last two years in office. What is Texas doing? Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called his state's Legislature into special session last week to discuss the disastrous floods that killed more than 130 people as well as redistricting before the 2026 election. Trump and his administration urged Abbott to redraw his state's congressional lines with the hope of picking up five seats. Abbott has said that his decision to include redistricting in the special session was prompted by a court decision last year that said the state no longer has to draw "coalition districts" that are made up of multiple minority communities. New district lines would give Texans greater opportunity to vote for politicians who best represent them, the governor said in interviews. Democrats in the Lone Star state's Legislature met with Newsom in Sacramento on Friday to discuss the ramifications of mid-decade redistricting and accused Trump of trying to rig next year's midterm election to hold onto power. Republicans "play by a different set of rules and we could sit back and act as if we have some moral authority and watch this 249-, 250-year-old experiment be washed away," Newsom said of the nation's history. "We are not going to allow that to happen." Democratic lawmakers in Texas have previously fled the state to not allow the Legislature to have a quorum, such as in 2021 during a battle over voting rights. But with the deadly flooding, this is an unlikely prospect this year. Why is California in the mix? The Golden State's congressional districts are drawn by an independent commission focused on logical geography, shared interests, representation for minority communities and other facets. If the state reverts to partisan map drawing, redistricting experts on both sides of the aisle agree that several GOP incumbents in the 52-member delegation would be vulnerable, either because of more Democratic voters being placed in their districts, or being forced into face-offs with fellow Republican members of Congress. There are currently nine Republican members of the delegation, a number that could shrink to three or four, according to political statisticians. Strange bedfellows These dizzying developments have created agreement among rivals while dividing former allies. Sara Sadhwani, a member of the 2021 redistricting commission and longtime supporter of independent map drawing, said she supports Democratic efforts to change California's congressional districts before the midterm election. "I stand by the work of the commission of course. We drew fair and competitive maps that fully abided by federal laws around the Voting Rights Act to ensure communities of colour have an equal opportunity at the ballot box," said Sadhwani, a politics professor at Pomona College. "That being said, especially when it comes to Congress, most certainly California playing fair puts Democrats at a disadvantage nationally." She said the best policy would be for all 50 states to embrace independent redistricting. But in the meantime, she supports Democratic efforts in California to temporarily redraw the districts given the stakes. "I think it's patriotic to fight against what appears to be our democracy falling into what appears to be authoritarian rule," Sadhwani said. Charles Munger Jr., the son of a late billionaire who was Warren Buffet's right-hand man, spent more than $12 million to support the ballot measure that created the independent redistricting commission and is invested in making sure that it is not weakened. "He's very much committed to making sure the commission is preserved," said someone close to Munger who requested anonymity to speak candidly. Munger believes "this is ultimately political quicksand and a redistricting war at the end of day is a loss to American voters." Munger, who was the state GOP's biggest donor at one point, is actively involved in the California fight and is researching other efforts to fight gerrymandering nationwide, this person said. The state Democratic and Republican parties, which rarely agree on anything, agreed in 2010 when they opposed the ballot measure. Now, Democrats, who would likely gain seats if the districts are redrawn by state lawmakers, support a mid-decade redistricting, while the state GOP, which would likely lose seats, says the state should continue having lines drawn by the independent commission once every decade. "It's a shame that Governor Newsom and the radical Left in Sacramento are willing to spend $200 million on a statewide special election, while running a deficit of $20 billion, in order to silence the opposition in our state," the GOP congressional delegation said in a statement on Friday. "As a Delegation we will fight any attempt to disenfranchise California voters by whatever means necessary to ensure the will of the people continues to be reflected in redistricting and in our elections." What happens next? If Democrats in California move forward with their proposal, which is dependent on what Texas lawmakers do during their special legislative session that began last week, they have two options: • State lawmakers could vote to put the measure before voters in a special election that would likely be held in November — a costly prospect. The last statewide special election — the unsuccessful effort to recall Newsom in 2021 — cost more than $200 million, according to the secretary of state's office. • The Legislature could also vote to redraw the maps, but this option would likely be more vulnerable to legal challenge. Either scenario is expected to be voted on as an urgency item, which requires a 2/3 vote but would insulate the action from being the subject of a referendum later put in front of voters that would delay enactment. The Legislature is out of session until mid-August.
Web Release
10 hours ago
- Web Release
World FZO Brings its 12th World Congress to Panama in 2026
The World Free Zones Organization announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with the government of Panama to host the 12th annual World FZO's World Congress in the country's capital, Panama City, in July 2026. The MoU was signed by His Excellency Dr. Mohammed AlZarooni, Chairman of the World FZO, and His Excellency Julio Molto', Minister of Commerce and Industries at the Government of the Republic of Panama, in the presence of senior officials from both sides. The announcement was made during an official visit led by Dr. AlZarooni to Panama City, where he met with His Excellency José Raúl Molino Quintero, President of the Republic of Panama. On the sidelines of the visit, the delegation toured key sites in Panama, including the Colón Free Trade Zone, PANAPARK Free Zone, and the Panama Canal. Under the MoU, both parties will collaborate to deliver a high-caliber edition of the World FZO World Congress, that convenes decision-makers, freezone leaders, and investors from more than 100 countries, in addition to attracting major economic institutions from around the world. The event is expected to strengthen Panama's global standing as a hub for trade and logistics and enhance its visibility on the international investment map. H.E. Dr. AlZarooni, said: 'World FZO is committed to forging strategic partnerships that enhance the role of freezones as drivers of global growth, based on the importance of developing platforms for international dialogue and cooperation to keep up with the major shifts taking place in the global economy. Our cooperation with the government of Panama represents a key milestone in our efforts to outreach to Latin American markets and strengthen cooperation with governments and economic institutions in this vital region.' HE Julio Molto', said: 'Hosting the Congress represents a strategic step that highlights Panama's position as a global investment gateway and opens new prospects for regional cooperation, technology, and investment. We are committed to providing all necessary elements to ensure the success of this crucial event, in cooperation with the Organization. We value our partnership with World FZO and look forward to leveraging its extensive experience in the development and administration of freezones internationally, which will enhance the competitiveness of Panama's business environment and open our economy to global markets.' This announcement comes as preparations continue for the 11th World FZO Congress, set to take place in Hainan province, China, from 10–12 October 2025, held with the Hainan International Economic Development Bureau. The back-to-back hosting of the Congress in both China and then Panama reflects the growing momentum of the World FZO on the international stage. .The World FZO World Congress is the world's premier gathering of freezone leaders, government officials, investors, and trade experts. It gathers more than 1,500 delegates from over 100 countries, bringing together a select group of decision-makers, and high-level representatives from global industry, trade, and investment sectors.
Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
Risking a country's commitment to equal education access
Linnea Saxton, Tribune News Service While volunteering this spring at a middle school in Washington, DC, I watched a science teacher chat with her newest student, who had recently arrived from Paris. The teacher began explaining the guidelines of an upcoming assignment, employing hand gestures and a few well-intentioned Spanish words. The student, appreciative though a bit bewildered, listened intently as her teacher endeavoured to communicate across their language barrier. The right to equal education access, regardless of native language or any factor of identity, has been a core tenet of American values since the Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, though study after study shows that true education equality has yet to be realised. President Donald Trump's Executive Order 14224, 'Designating English as the Official Language of the United States,' stands in direct contradiction to these values. Besides declaring English the nation's official language, Trump's order revokes President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 13166, 'Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).' Clinton's order, deriving its authority from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, defined linguistic partiality as discrimination on the basis of national origin and directed federal agencies to 'implement a system by which LEP persons can meaningfully access' necessary services. Since signing the order on March 1, the Trump administration has begun withholding federal funds supporting emergent bilingual students. Ileana Najarro, writing for Education Week, explains that revoking Clinton's order removes the requirement for federally funded schools to support emergent bilingual students in accessing school resources. That means schools may terminate their interpretation and translation services. By eliminating these protections, the Trump administration has jeopardised the country's commitment to equal education access. Efforts to remove protections for bilingual speakers are as old as the country itself. Officials at residential schools punished Indigenous children for speaking their native languages. In a 1919 letter, President Roosevelt wrote, 'We have room for but one language here,' criticizing the country's evolution into what he called 'a polyglot boarding-house.' In 2023, more than a century later, then-senator JD Vance introduced a bill to designate a federal official language and require English proficiency for naturalisation. English-language fluency is vital for students to succeed in US schools and workplaces. Fighting to provide equal opportunities for emergent bilingual students should therefore remain a national imperative. As Pooja Reddy Nakamura, a senior researcher for the American Institute of Research, concluded, 'Throwing children off the linguistic deep end and trying to immerse them in English before they learn their own language invites literacy failure in both English and their own languages.' Native language literacy is not merely a stepping stone to English literacy; a student's resulting bilingualism offers them crucial advantages. The Center for Applied Linguistics describes multilinguals as possessing 'both a personal and societal asset' that 'strengthen(s) our position' in diplomatic relations and the global economy. Moreover, supporting multilingualism brings communities together. Every time a family's efforts to support their children are snubbed because they lack English fluency, or an emergent bilingual student is deemed unintelligent, a wedge drives deeper into the communities around our public schools. Native language valuation is not only academically and economically beneficial; it is an act of community building and an affirmation of our nation's egalitarian ideals. For these reasons, state departments of education and school districts must protect students' and families' rights to translation services and language-learning support. To be sure, policymakers fighting for equal education access have finite political capital, and schools have limited funds to allocate to these endeavors. Supporting emergent bilingual students is one goal of innumerable necessary fights, but it must be considered just as urgent as other contemporary civil rights issues. On that spring day at the middle school, I later approached the student and struck up a conversation in French, my words laced with a thick American accent but welcoming all the same. Her face lit up, and though we only exchanged a few sentences, I think our interaction left us both feeling a little more tethered to the school's community, bound together by language.
