The irrelevance of the Senate

Here we are in the middle of the tragic aftermath of two killer typhoons devastating our countryside and what is the Senate interested in? Changing its leadership.

- BOO CHANCO

Senate President Tito Sotto admitted that he has heard reports that some of his colleagues are plotting to replace him with Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano. That is not surprising because Sen. Alan Peter had always been an egotistical power-hungry politician.

Indeed, Sen. Alan Peter and Sen. Chiz Escudero are about the worst of current national politicians. With their education, they are expected to know better compared to Senators Bato and Robin. They are dreadfully ambitious and have no national interest.

Both want to be president and that’s the trajectory of their never-ending quest to gain political leverage. Escudero even threw out Sen. Grace Poe, Senate finance committee chair, from the “small” bicameral conference committee.

The public is starting to wonder if we still need a Senate. A recent survey by OCTA Research showed the Senate’s trust rating fell from 57 percent to 49 percent; performance rating dropped from 53 percent to 47 percent. My gut feel tells me the drop should be even more.

Gone is the Senate of old, the one I covered as a young reporter. We had learned statesmen who no doubt had national interest at heart. We learn a lot just listening to their debates. They provided the national perspective to legislation to balance the parochial view of the congressmen.

They were ambitious too. We had a joke among the Senate reporters that described the Senate as being composed of 23 people who think they should be President and one who thought he should be the Pope, with reference to Kit Tatad.