|
Founded in 1986
Founding Publisher/Editor:
Lito A. Gajilan
Columnists:
Atty. Michael J. Gurfinkel
Joseph G. Lariosa
Gani P. Tolentino
Ted L. Reyes
Atty. Reuben S. Seguritan
Photographers:
Butch Gata
Sheryl Garcia
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not reflect the opinion of the paper nor that of the publisher
|
|
For the past 20 years, The Filipino Express has provided the Filipino American community the best news, arts and entertainment coverage from around the United States and the Philippines.
|
|
This website includes selected articles from this week's edition of the Filipino Express. Not all the stories published in the printed version appear on this site.
|
|
|
|
To tell us what you think about Filipino Express Online or to comment on the stories published here, E-mail us at Filexpress@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IT was expected. On June 7, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo claimed that the overwhelming victory of the administration coalition in the House of Representatives and in the local government level was “a continuing mandate of reform, unity, more work and less politics. We all have a mandate to look forward and leave behind the contentious past.”
But the administration candidates’ victory for House seats was only half of the picture. At the Senate, opposition candidates trounced Arroyo-backed aspirants. Administration bets limped home with only two Senate seats to show. A closer look would reveal that the two administration slate winners were actually former oppositionists who were just guest candidates of Arroyo’s party.
So how does Mrs. Arroyo view her candidates’ dismal showing at the polls?
Sure, her administration party won majority of the seats at the House. But it was nothing to crow about. History of the Philippine House of Representatives tell us that not once -- not ever, and not in 25 elections over 100 years -- has a ruling majority ever lost the House.
Even when presidents lost the presidency, their parties retained control of the House -- until, almost instantly, the members of the majority that lost the presidency took their oath of affiliation with the parties of the new presidents.
So it was that even when President Elpidio Quirino, a Liberal, lost the presidency, his party mates retained the House until they suddenly became Nacionalistas to match the affiliation of the new President, Ramon Magsaysay.
So it was that when President Carlos P. Garcia, a Nacionalista, lost the presidency, his party retained the House until its members became newly minted Liberals under President Diosdado Macapagal.
And so it was that Macapagal’s Liberal majority survived him in the House until his party mates became Nacionalistas after the election of President Ferdinand Marcos.
And so on: Ramon Mitra’s LDP party kept the House until the LDP members defected to become Lakas under President Fidel V. Ramos, and the Lakas party members that controlled the House despite the election of President Joseph Estrada became instant adherents of LAMMP, and then changed their stripes.
The question. though, begs to be answered. How does Mrs. Arroyo, or any other political observers for that matter, explain the people’s overwhelming preference for senatorial candidates who lined themselved up against Mrs. Arroyo?
Perhaps even a five-year old may come up with a smart answer. The people want change. The vote against anybody identified with Arroyo is a mandate for change. And the President should heed the call.
The people expect no less.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editor’s Note: REUBEN S. SEGURITAN has been practicing law for over 30 years. For further information, you may call him at 212 695 5281 or log on to his website at www.seguritan.com
WITH the long delay in the processing of family-based and 3rd preference employment-based visas, a viable option for investors who want to immigrate to the U.S. fast is the EB-5 category.
Under this category, the investor can invest $500,000 and he and his family may obtain their conditional green cards in less than a year. The money must have been obtained through lawful means such as gift, loan, investment, sale of property or inheritance.
The EB-5 category was created in 1990 for those who could invest $1 million (or $500,000 under certain circumstances) in a new commercial enterprise that create at least 10 full-time jobs. A total of 10,000 visas are allotted annually.
Initially, only a few availed of the benefit because of the restrictive requirements. In 1993, a pilot program was established which allowed more flexibility in complying with the requirements. This attracted more applicants.
The pilot program designated “regional centers” that could participate in the immigrant investor visa program. These regional centers are allotted 5,000 of the 10,000 EB-5 visas available. This program expires on September 30, 2008.
The regional centers currently approved by the USCIS to participate in the program are located in Pennsylvania, California, South Dakota, Washington, Louisiana, Vermont, Texas, Wisconsin, Iowa and Alabama.
“Regional centers” can satisfy the job creation requirement by counting not only the direct jobs created in New Buswang, Aklan, as an example of excellence in forest management. Pangangan Island school principal Felix Ytac and students planted 54 hectares that protected their 4.5 kilometer causeway to Calape, Bohol.
Bani fisherfolk in Pangasinan parlayed a P522,000 loan to replant their last hectare of mangrove into 42 hectares of protected area that won a P1-million award. And the King of Thailand honored Eugenio Paden of Banacon Island, Bohol, for creating a 600-hectare forest that tamped down planting costs to US$66 to 78 per hectare.
Government and international projects came on stream, starting in the 1970s. For some projects, planting costs spiraled “from $100/hectares to over $500/hectares. In a number of these, half of the budgets were chewed up by “indirect costs”: administration, supervision, etc.
World Bank’s project in Central Visayas granted valuable stewardship certificates. “But survival rates were low – 17% to 19% covering around 491 hectare in Cebu-Bohol.” Costs in Japan’s rehabilitation of 11,175 hectares of mangroves, ranged from: P6,759/hectares in Palawan to P15,484/hectares in Zamboanga del Sur.
A major international project claimed it achieved survival rates between 20 percent and 98%. “But these were either in rounded-off numbers or a single figure for the whole municipality,” reminiscent of Maguindanao and Lanao election returns. But “(they) look like guesswork,” Primavera and Esteban noted. There was no information on age of stand or how survival was computed.”
Haphazard evaluation is abetted further by lack of monitoring. Barrel-bottom survival rates… “can be traced mainly to inappropriate species and sites,” Seafdec scientists said. Government and NGOs, for example, prefer Rhizophora species, which are easy to collect and plant. “But this is planting by convenience, not by ecology.” Flawed training allows this malpractice to persist. And this species is planted in exposed seaward zones, instead of where they grow naturally: areas now crammed with controversial fishponds.
Pond ownership is complex and thorny but should not stomp down nature. “Mangroves should be planted where they used to be. And that is fishponds, not on seagrass beds and tidal flats where they never existed.” Ignoring ecology courts high-mortality rates, as seen in Calauag and Tayabas Bays in Quezon and in Agusan del Norte.
“Lack of funds” is the usual dodge offered for failure. But “funding is of secondary importance” in re-greening mangroves, Primavera and Esteban assert. More critical are suitable sites, better training, correct species, community commitment, and grant of tenure.
“Legal protection of mangroves is not wanting” either. But political backbone is. RA 7161, for example, bans cutting of mangroves, while RA 8550 and PDs 705 and 953 mandate a greenbelt. “But implementation is weak, hampered by lack of political will to enforce said laws. “Spider webs and laws catch the flies but let the rats escape,” the old axiom says.
Ecologically sensitive but titled ponds should revert to the public domain, the scientists suggest. Government barely tapped Global Environment Facility’s buyback schemes. Idle lands should have permits scrubbed so the forestry bureau can replant them.
Like political dynasties, “single families own hundreds of hectares of pond areas,” the study notes. “(But) 20 hectares, even less, is the most a pond operator can realistically manage by himself.” (Thai shrimp farms, in contrast, average 2 hectares or less.) Many ponds are abandoned or yield poorly. “By reducing farm sizes, Filipino aquaculturists can increase pond yields.” But then, whatever you feed greed is never enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHICAGO, Illinois – The departure of some Filipino senators from office, among them Sen. Ramón Magsaysay, Jr., would have been more colorful and enriching to international legal jurisprudence if Senator Magsaysay made a different call.
I don’t know if it was personal for Senator Magsaysay to appear before Chicago Immigration Judge George P. Kastivalis in the Bolante case. Otherwise, he could have sent a representative at the hearing of the immigration case of former Philippine Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-Joc” I. Bolante.
I surmise, the dictates of protocol might have weighed heavily against Senator Magsaysay’s appearance before a lowly quasi-judicial body. But it would not have hurt if the Senator asked the District Counsel for Homeland Security, who requested his appearance if he could send a representative in his stead.
Because if his representative were allowed to appear on his behalf, his representative would have been able to get information about the Bolante case.
As a result, the case has been one of the most concealed cases involving a public official.
It’s very hard to cover a case when all possible sources of information are not media friendly.
The case is still pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals in Falls Church, Virginia, which could take it nine months to resolve his appeal for political asylum.
Speedier Resolution
However, because he is in detention, Mr. Bolante could request for a speedier resolution of his case.
Some immigration practicing lawyers, like Manny Aguja, give Mr. Bolante a slim chance of getting a political asylum, just like Judge Kastivalis, who denies nine out of 10 such applications on the average.
Only Bolante’s lawyers are making a killing on this losing case.
Citing threats on his life, Mr. Bolante filed for political asylum last Nov. 9 to avoid political persecution in the Philippines. He filed the asylum, even without waiting for the resolution of the deportation case against him.
In contesting his deportation, Bolante said he never broke any immigration rules contrary to allegations by immigration agents who stopped him at the Los Angeles International Airport last July.
B-1, B-2 VISA
According to the court records of the Bolante case, the United States Embassy in the Philippines revoked his “B-1/B-2” (tourist/business) visa when Bolante did not respond to its two letters, inviting him to the embassy so his visa can be revoked. Because he was a no show at the embassy, the US Embassy was prevented from stamping “Revoked” in his passport as he left the Philippines.
Later, the US government lawyers from the Homeland Security added grounds to oppose any extension of his stay in the United States, saying that because of his connection with people living in the United States, like his relatives, he is now suspected of immigrating in the United States, instead of just visiting or doing business in the US.
During the hearing of his case, Mr. Bolante told the court that all the allegations against him by the Philippine Senate Committee on the fertilizer scam are “politically motivated.” He snubbed the Senate committee.
The Senate wanted Mr. Bolante to shed light on the disappearance of the 728-million pesos (US$ 15-M) fertilizer fund, which reportedly bankrolled Mrs. Arroyo’s presidential election in 2004.
At any rate, the Mag-saysay Senate committee has proven that its representation, including the Senate’s subpoena power, is recognized by the international community, including the United States.
(lariosa_jos@sbcglobal.net)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HIGH-PROFILE disasters, like Solar One’s oil spill blackening Guimaras’ coastline, shoved lowly mangroves into headlines. But the more lethal threat to this threatened resource rarely makes primetime news because it is silent, namely: barrel-bottom survival rates of replanted trees.
In Magallanes, Agusan del Norte, 53.8 hectares were replanted at a cost of P2.28 million. But trees survived in only one hectare, Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (Seafdec) scientists report. Floods swept the rest away. Isn’t this stumbling backward into the future?
“Hundreds of millions of dollars (went) to rehabilitate thousands of hectares over the last two decades,” Seafdec’s Jurgenne Primavera and J.M.A. Esteban said in a De La Salle University conference. “(But) long-term survival rates of mangroves – the main and only meaningful index of success – hover at 10% to 20%.”
In 1900, mangroves blanketed 450,000 hectares. In areas around Manila Bay, these rich wetland forests extended 20 kilometers inland. Today, only a third remain – and are still shrinking. They’ve been cut, asphalted or farmed. Aquaculture ponds now sprawl over 232,000 hectares.
To mitigate ecological damage, scientists cobbled a safety benchmark: for every hectare razed for a bangus pond, keep four hectares of mangroves untouched.
We’ve turned a blind eye to that indicator by pruning down to half a hectare of remaining mangroves for one of pond. “None so blind, as those who refuse to see,” the old proverb says.
There’ve been striking exceptions. Through self-help, with little government help, communities in Bohol, Pangasinan and Aklan raised lush mangrove stands. Survival rates topped 97%, jobs were created and international accolades reaped.
UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization cited mangrove reforestation by NGOs in New Buswang, Aklan, as an example of excellence in forest management. Pangangan Island school principal Felix Ytac and students planted 54 hectares that protected their 4.5 kilometer causeway to Calape, Bohol.
Bani fisherfolk in Pangasinan parlayed a P522,000 loan to replant their last hectare of mangrove into 42 hectares of protected area that won a P1-million award. And the King of Thailand honored Eugenio Paden of Banacon Island, Bohol, for creating a 600-hectare forest that tamped down planting costs to US$66 to 78 per hectare.
Government and international projects came on stream, starting in the 1970s. For some projects, planting costs spiraled “from $100/hectares to over $500/hectares. In a number of these, half of the budgets were chewed up by “indirect costs”: administration, supervision, etc.
World Bank’s project in Central Visayas granted valuable stewardship certificates. “But survival rates were low – 17% to 19% covering around 491 hectare in Cebu-Bohol.” Costs in Japan’s rehabilitation of 11,175 hectares of mangroves, ranged from: P6,759/hectares in Palawan to P15,484/hectares in Zamboanga del Sur.
A major international project claimed it achieved survival rates between 20 percent and 98%. “But these were either in rounded-off numbers or a single figure for the whole municipality,” reminiscent of Maguindanao and Lanao election returns. But “(they) look like guesswork,” Primavera and Esteban noted. There was no information on age of stand or how survival was computed.”
Haphazard evaluation is abetted further by lack of monitoring. Barrel-bottom survival rates… “can be traced mainly to inappropriate species and sites,” Seafdec scientists said. Government and NGOs, for example, prefer Rhizophora species, which are easy to collect and plant. “But this is planting by convenience, not by ecology.” Flawed training allows this malpractice to persist. And this species is planted in exposed seaward zones, instead of where they grow naturally: areas now crammed with controversial fishponds.
Pond ownership is complex and thorny but should not stomp down nature. “Mangroves should be planted where they used to be. And that is fishponds, not on seagrass beds and tidal flats where they never existed.” Ignoring ecology courts high-mortality rates, as seen in Calauag and Tayabas Bays in Quezon and in Agusan del Norte.
“Lack of funds” is the usual dodge offered for failure. But “funding is of secondary importance” in re-greening mangroves, Primavera and Esteban assert. More critical are suitable sites, better training, correct species, community commitment, and grant of tenure.
“Legal protection of mangroves is not wanting” either. But political backbone is. RA 7161, for example, bans cutting of mangroves, while RA 8550 and PDs 705 and 953 mandate a greenbelt. “But implementation is weak, hampered by lack of political will to enforce said laws. “Spider webs and laws catch the flies but let the rats escape,” the old axiom says.
Ecologically sensitive but titled ponds should revert to the public domain, the scientists suggest. Government barely tapped Global Environment Facility’s buyback schemes. Idle lands should have permits scrubbed so the forestry bureau can replant them.
Like political dynasties, “single families own hundreds of hectares of pond areas,” the study notes. “(But) 20 hectares, even less, is the most a pond operator can realistically manage by himself.” (Thai shrimp farms, in contrast, average 2 hectares or less.) Many ponds are abandoned or yield poorly. “By reducing farm sizes, Filipino aquaculturists can increase pond yields.” But then, whatever you feed greed is never enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oakwood Seed Germinates To Trillanes
|
|
|
|
HE Oakwood mutineers planted a seed. The name Oakwood is an apt symbolic name of the patriotic movement that was born and which the May 2007 elections in the Philippines gave life to. And like sturdy oak tree, it will gain size and strength and push aside the weeds of corruption that Lt. Antonio Trillanes and his followers seek to destroy so it could freely shoot up into the blue skies in a blaze of glory for the country.
After being disgraced by a failure of intelligence, Esperon et al who protect Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, took a pause from their lives of lazy luxury. They are going about interviewing the rank and file of the soldiery to find out what their beef was, which inspired them to convince the people to catapult the unlikely Trillanes into the winning magic 12 in the senatorial race. But too late the hero. Too late to shut the barn after the cow has fled.
The generals had nary a hint of the Trillanes phenomenon. He was hardly mentioned in the several public surveys that predicted winners in the last elections. Although no doubt the military rank and filers as well as the straight officers were busy campaigning for the lowly lieutenant Trillanes and guarding his ballots.
Even the corrupt Comelec must have overlooked Trillanes. Or else, there must still be many conscience-stricken straight Comelec officials and employees who deliberately turned their heads the other way and defied their head Abalos, by allowing Trillanes to zoom past them into the winning column.
The chain of events was incredibly simple. From his jail cell, Trillanes announced to media he had only one platform. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo cheated her way into the presidency and she was corrupt, and he will devote all his waking moments to the goal of ending her term. That’s all. And donations came from unlikely supporters. And the votes which nobody expected piled up.
The military surveys attributed many reasons why Trillanes won. Trillanes possesses some competence at governance. There is an evident desire to change the military establishment. It was a sign of defiance of the military top brass. Trillanes represents the reform movement in the military. His win stood for approval of extra-constitutional means to change the administration, such as a coup.
But why go into this convoluted way of analyzing the problems. Just look at Trillanes’ simple campaign line. The people does not like GMA and wants to change her. That’s it.
What do you think GMA and her generals will do to the survey results? They will likely throw them into the trash can. From here on, expect them to devise ways to stop Trillanes from assuming his position as Senator. Or failing that, make it difficult for Trillanes to perform his people-given job.
But they must remember a few things. With modern electronics, Trillanes can perform many things from inside his jail cell. That is, if GMA will overlook the fact that somehow being elected as a Senator of the Republic, takes precedence over many legal obstacles his highly paid legal team may be able to put up. Yes, a big court battle could be in the offing.
We hope GMA and her followers will remember one thing: It is unwise to piss on the military rank and file. They hold the guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Gurfinkel has been an attorney for over 26 years, and is an active member of the State Bar of California and New York, as well as the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Immigration Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. He has always excelled in school:
Valedictorian in High School; Cum Laude at UCLA; and Law Degree Honors and academic scholar at Loyola Law School, which is one of the top law schools in California.
WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com
Four offices to serve you:
LOS ANGELES:
219 North Brand Boulevard, Glendale, California 91203
Telephone: (818) 543-5800
SAN FRANCISCO:
966 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94103 Telephone: (415) 538-7800
NEW YORK:
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2101, New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 808-0300
PHILIPPINES:
Heart Tower, Unit 701, 108 Valero Street, Salcedo Village, Makati, Philippines 1227
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
