Promises! Promises! on Election Time

By: Joe Mauricio

 

Election time is a season of promises, in the U.S., Philippines, anywhere in the world. Politicians running for public offices make promises to entice voters to vote for them to win the election. These promises are instrumental in getting candidates to be elected– with a false hope of better life for the voters.

After all, campaigning for the highest office in the land is essentially a marketing process, in which candidates present themselves as products, differentiate themselves from other products, and make proposals on how they will perform if elected. This is why campaign promises are such an important part of the election process, especially if they revolve around issues that create emotional interest.

While campaign promises can be enticing, talk is cheap; even candidates with the best intentions can have difficulty making them happen. Let’s take a look at some of the most common economic campaign promises that candidates make, and evaluate what it takes to make these promises a reality.

Campaign promises may change slightly from election to election, but they are almost always related to changing current issues that are in the minds of voters. Some may be ideological in nature, like implementing governmental fiscal responsibilities or proposing precise cuts for tax rates per person. However they are proposed, they are promises that are credible, and those are shots in the dark.

Tax cuts…you don’t see the candidates proposing to raise taxes during the campaign–usually it’s quite the opposite. In America, the president does have significant powers, in conjunction with Congress, to use fiscal policy, whereas monetary policy is controlled by the Federal Reserve Board. In other words, the President does have the power to directly influence tax rates. But while a campaign promise to cut taxes sounds like the candidate can just press a few buttons and lower taxes, it’s a little more complicated than that, for it requires legislation. Campaign promises to cut taxes are quite appealing, but are rarely proposed without the offsetting legislation that will enable the cuts.

Promises of job creation are quite popular for the campaigning candidates, especially if the current economic environment is weak and unemployment is an issue. A promise to create jobs can be both reasonable and unreasonable. To be reasonable, the promise should include how the candidate proposes to achieve results and falls into fiscal policy arena. Jobs can be created by direct government intervention and spending.

It is interesting to see how history tends to repeat itself and how short-term our memories can be. With good intentions, presidential candidates stage their platforms with campaign promises designed to sway voters’ opinions and get elected. Some of the promises are ideological in nature and difficult to quantify, while others are more direct and accountable.

In an ideal world, each campaign promises could be presented with complete story, but the political process doesn’t seem to promote that concept. Campaign promises can create controversies, evoke emotions, and can tilt an election toward the candidate that either has the best promise or one who markets the idea the best.

It would be ideal for all presidential candidates to just tell the voters that they will have to raise taxes and cut spending to make ends meet, but unfortunately, what candidates promise and what they are able to deliver can be different things, particularly when candidates are met with unforeseen political or economic hurdles once in office.

Because of the politicians’ greed before and after the elections in the Philippines’ political arena, millions of Filipino families cannot have decent livelihood, or enjoy adequate meals. The elected officials are prospering, while bleeding the national coffers intended for the nation building.

This is the prize for giving the electorate of the Philippines an economic false hope of a better life.