Marcos-Duterte feud spurs surprise gains by ‘third force' in Philippine vote
Two liberal Philippine politicians have emerged as key players after a surprisingly strong performance in Senate elections, gaining support from a bloc of voters dissatisfied with rancor between President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and his deputy Sara Duterte.
After trailing in surveys and losing in previous elections, Bam Aquino and Francis Pangilinan are unexpectedly returning to the Senate following Monday's midterm elections. Aquino, the relative of two former presidents, won the second-most votes of candidates competing for 12 Senate seats and led the count in the vote-rich metropolitan Manila, according to GMA News. Pangilinan came in fifth.
"They sneaked in, showed they still have a strong base that they have been able to maintain the constituency that supported the anti-Marcos, anti-Duterte vote in 2022," Bob Herrera-Lim, managing director of risk consultancy Teneo, told Bloomberg Television on Tuesday.
While Marcos and Duterte teamed up to win the 2022 elections, their alliance has dramatically collapsed. The vice president remains furious that Marcos handed over her father, ex-President Rodrigo Duterte, to the International Criminal Court to face charges over alleged crimes against humanity. Sara Duterte herself was impeached by Marcos allies over the alleged misuse of funds and a threat to assassinate Marcos, which she denies.
While the midterms boosted the Dutertes, some voters appeared turned off by the two feuding leaders. That helped Aquino and Pangilinan, who avoided the Duterte-Marcos row and focused on livelihood issues such as food, education and jobs.
Progressive political group Akbayan, which includes Marcos-Duterte critic, Senator Risa Hontiveros, was the surprise leader in the party-list elections for the House of Representatives. A party-list led by former Senator Leila de Lima, who was detained during Duterte's term, is also poised for a seat in Congress. Opposition figure and former Vice President Leni Robredo won as mayor in her bailiwick.
Aquino and Pangilinan may have also won the support of younger voters, according to Francisco Magno, director of the De La Salle University Institute of Governance in Manila. Some 60% of voters are composed of millennials and Gen Zs.
The Marcos and Duterte camps both have to contend with the stronger-than-expected performance by liberals and progressives in the midterms, especially as the families seek to stay in power through the 2028 presidential elections, Teneo's Herrera-Lim said.
"They now have to start thinking about the middle vote," he said. "You have a third force, and it's not going to be just Marcos versus Duterte going forward."
-------
-With assistance from Cecilia Yap and Cliff Venzon.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Florida lawmakers must take local land-use change limit off legislative agenda
In the last scheduled days of their tumultuous 2025 session, Florida legislators passed Senate Bill 180 'to bolster hurricane relief and recovery and enhance response efforts in Florida,' according to a Senate press release trumpeting the legislation. But among some healthy policy prescriptions, SB 180 includes a poison pill conspicuously missing from that press release: a provision that would prevent any local government in Florida from adopting any amendment that could be deemed more 'restrictive or burdensome' to its comprehensive plan — its blueprint for orderly and sustainable growth — along with its land development regulations (LDRs) and procedures. This is a sweeping, undefined provision that could rule out any changes to local growth guidelines in Florida unless developers agree and sponsor the change. And under the bill, this provision would apply retroactively from Aug. 1, 2024, through Oct. 1, 2027. Which means that if SB 180 becomes law without any amendments, much if not most local land-use planning in Florida will be suspended for three years. When state lawmakers passed Florida's Community Planning Act in 2011, their justification for eliminating the state's land planning oversight agency, the Department of Community Affairs, was that they wanted to empower local leaders to make planning decisions. But with SB 180, they have severely curtailed that power. Ironically for a bill that purports to promote emergency planning and disaster recovery, this provision could prevent local governments from making the kinds of changes to their comp plans and LDRs that would make their communities more resilient to future storms. A comp plan change that would steer future development away from storm-vulnerable areas, for example, would be considered more restrictive and burdensome. Ditto, updated regulations on stormwater management to prevent flooding. Even periodic, state-required updates to comprehensive plans could be called into question. Protest Florida state parks: USA Today Network-Florida Opinion campaign to preserve and protect our state parks These scenarios are not hypothetical. In 2023, the Legislature passed SB 250, a law with a similar though narrower three-year ban on more restrictive or burdensome changes to comp plans and LDRs for 11 counties that had been in the path of Hurricane Ian. This month, Manatee County commissioners were told by the state Department of Commerce that they would be violating that 2023 law if they voted to restore the county's strong wetland protections in its comprehensive plan. As reported by the Bradenton Herald, an incredulous Commissioner Bob McCann said, 'SB 250 was for hurricane disaster relief. How can you say getting rid of wetlands … has anything to do with disaster relief?' It is hard to imagine any reasonable limit on growth and development through a comp plan amendment or LDR change that would not be considered restrictive or burdensome unless a developer proposed it. And if developers object to limits, the bill creates grounds for them to sue. Communities at that point are given two choices under the bill: either withdraw their amendment to a plan or regulation, or go to court, and risk paying the legal costs of the developer who sued them. We'll give legislators the benefit of the doubt, and assume they didn't realize the deeply damaging impact of this provision when they voted for the bill. After all, the final version is 48 pages, with nearly 1,400 lines of text. And it was amended no less than 10 times between its introduction and final passage, likely making its details a mystery to many of the members who voted to approve it. This is but one example of the deeply flawed process that repeatedly leads to laws laced with unintended consequences. Legislative budget battle: Florida lawmakers paralyzed over tax breaks they can't afford to give Legislative leaders are currently deadlocked over tax cuts and other budget-related issues. SB 180 passed with only one negative vote each in the Senate and House. Though the session has been extended, the agenda is currently limited to budget-related items and the Senate president's Rural Renaissance bill. But with a two-thirds majority in both houses, the presiding officers could expand the agenda to address the existential threat to local land-use planning in Florida, while preserving the good elements in SB 180. We urge them to do so, not only for the fate of local land-use planning in Florida, but for the millions of Floridians who deserve a meaningful say in the future of their communities. Paul Owens is the president of 1000 Friends of Florida, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to planning for fiscally and environmentally sustainable communities. This opinion piece was distributed by The Invading Sea website. This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Florida set to disrupt orderly, sustainable local growth | Opinion
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The lack of housing in New Hampshire is hurting families. Are state senators listening?
Housing is in short supply throughout New Hampshire. (Photo by Dana Wormald/New Hampshire Bulletin) In the most recent UNH Granite State Poll, New Hampshire residents said housing is their top concern. More than three times as many people cited housing compared to the next most important issue, taxes. Yes, we are experiencing a statewide crisis of housing affordability. This crisis constrains economic growth and community vitality. Yet the New Hampshire Senate is poised to vote on a state budget that turns its back on housing, cutting funding for important programs that help our cities and towns meet their housing challenges and missing opportunities to help developers build housing that Granite Staters can afford. The Housing Champions program was created by the Legislature in 2023 with a $5 million appropriation to provide grants to cities and towns to help them voluntarily change their zoning ordinances to be more 'housing friendly.' Communities that made these changes were recognized as 'Housing Champions' and are eligible for additional funding, such as grants for infrastructure improvements. So far, 18 communities have achieved this distinction, and others are poised to follow. Despite this celebrated success, the Senate has proposed zeroing out this program. This shortsighted decision takes away the principal incentive ('carrots, not sticks') for our cities and towns to make important zoning changes. Earlier this year, the Senate passed Senate Bill 81 (then tabled it to add it to the budget) increasing the annual allocation to the state's affordable housing trust fund from $5 million to $10 million and making an additional appropriation of $25 million to the trust fund. The annual increase acknowledges the rising cost of building homes — the same money just doesn't go as far as it once did. The additional one-time appropriation acknowledges the housing deficit we're in — we need to build many thousands more homes just to meet current demand and help our economy grow. Even with good zoning, the developments that house our workforce require significant financial resources. Witness the several developments that have stalled recently in Concord because of higher costs. Senators gave themselves the opportunity to add SB 81 to the budget and then ignored it. Finally, the Senate has proposed reducing funding to the Housing Appeals Board, an innovative approach to addressing appeals of local planning and zoning decisions. The Legislature created the fast-track of the Housing Appeals Board in 2020 recognizing the delays that housing developments faced when local decisions were appealed to court. Time is money, and delays add to development costs. The Housing Appeals Board has been nationally recognized as a light-touch, small-government approach, and it has shown to be an effective and efficient means of hearing appeals. In the midst of a housing crisis, it is nonsensical to pull back on a proven way to speed up final decisions on development proposals. Our current lack of sufficient housing is a drag on economic growth and is hurting New Hampshire's families. It's time for the Senate to put its money — our money — where its mouth is: fund these vital housing programs and help move the Granite State out of its current housing crisis and toward a better, brighter future.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
With business tax projections down, lawmakers look to raising fees
In a difficult budget year, lawmakers are looking at increasing several fees to help fill in the gap. (Getty Images) For years, Republican lawmakers have applied a guarantee to each budget they have passed: 'no new taxes and fees.' This year they're reconsidering the second part. In a year defined by lower projected business tax revenues, the budget passed by the House in April includes increases to a number of registration charges and levies in the state, from driver's licenses to tractors. Legislative leaders say the fees are a pragmatic way forward to address expected shortfalls in business taxes in the next two years — and to apply them to those who use the services. 'In the past, we've kind of overlooked fees,' said Rep. Ken Weyler, a Kingston Republican, speaking to the House on April 10. '… What does it cost to register a car? Not so much. When was the last time it went up? We can't find any history beyond 25 years.' But others, including Democrats, say they're unnecessary. 'I didn't run on a platform of increasing fees,' said Rep. Matt Wilhelm, of Manchester, speaking in April ahead of the House passing the budget. 'If I remember correctly from the flyers that I received in the mail … my friends on the other side of the aisle didn't campaign on a platform of raising fees either.' The question is now in the hands of the Senate, where the Finance Committee is set to wrap up a final proposal for the budget in time for the whole chamber to vote on Thursday, and where senators have already put in place more optimistic revenue projections. Here's a guide to what costs might go up. The House has included an increase to the fee to obtain a new driver's license: from $10 to $20. The application fee for a new motor vehicle registration would rise from $25 to $35. The yearly cost for vanity license plates would also increase, from $40 to $60. A number of the fee increases would affect professional drivers, specifically. Large commercial trucks would all see annual registration fees increase. Those trucks between 8,000 and 73,280 pounds — which include most large commercial trucks when empty — would see a 50% increase in annual fees, from $0.96 per hundred pounds to $1.44 per hundred pounds. Registration fees for smaller trucks and vehicles would also increase, depending on the weight class. The House budget also includes specific registration fee increases for agricultural vehicles, from $6 to $11; for tractors, from $1.80 to $12; for cement mixers, from $6 to $11; and for saw rigs and log splitters, from $6 to $11. A number of costs for developers, businesses, and landowners might increase. Under the House budget, the cost for an elevator inspection would rise from $50 to $75. And developers seeking to develop subdivisions would have to pay $450 for the application fee and an additional $450 to install sewage systems; those fees are currently $300 and $290, respectively. For those building structures on shorelines, the application fee would increase from $400 to $600, as well as $6 per square foot of dock area; currently that amount is $4 per square foot. A number of agricultural companies could see fees increase under the House budget. The annual fee for pesticide dealers would increase from $20 to $60, and they would have to pay a new annual fee of $160 for each pesticide they are registering. Fertilizer producers and dealers would see similar increases — from a $50 annual fee to a $100 annual fee, while commercial feed producers would pay $120 for each product they register with the state, up from $75. The state charges would go up for maple products, too: Those producers would face a new fee of 'not less than' $33. For those looking to fish in New Hampshire, the cost will increase slightly. While presently, out-of-state registrants must pay $15 for a one-day permit and New Hampshire residents must pay $10, they must also pay $1 toward the fisheries habitat fee. That fee would increase to $5. And dam registration fees would double, ranging from $800 to $3,000, depending on the hazard potential of the dam. That's part of a push to better fund long-needed repairs. Weyler said the voluntary nature of fees makes them more fair to taxpayers. 'If you don't want to do this, you don't pay the fee,' he said. 'You don't want to use that, you don't pay the fee. So we went up with the fees, and it brought us about 5% more revenue, and it should be fairly painless, because if you don't want it, you don't, you don't get it, you don't pay the fee. But to Wilhelm, raising the fees is an unnecessary corrective to the budget. 'We wouldn't need to raise these fees … if we halted the expansion of education freedom accounts to ultra wealthy Granite Staters who don't need taxpayer dollars to subsidize their choice to send their kids to a private school,' he said, referring to efforts in the Legislature to extend the school voucher-like program to all income levels. Some industry representatives have strongly criticized the fees. Jasen Stock, the executive director of the New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association, spoke against the increased costs for truck owners. 'To increase truck registration fees by as much as 50 to 60% in one fell swoop is a very big pill to swallow, particularly given the economic impacts that our industry has seen with respect to the markets, tariffs and so forth,' Stock said at the Senate hearing. He asked that the fees be increased more gradually if necessary. But Rob Johnson, policy director at the New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation, said his group is not so concerned about the potential new fees. Even when some have doubled or quadrupled, they still do not rank highly on the list of pressing expenses for farmers, Johnson said. More pressing, he argued, is the need to restore a proposed $50 million cut to the university system, which Johnson worries could hurt the University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension, which supports farms. 'It has an effect (on farmers), but it's minimal,' Johnson said of the state fees. 'And overall, generally, we would rather pay it as a user fee, as opposed to an increase on the property-tax payer.' But Bob Scully, the official spokesman for government affairs for the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, spoke against the fees for trucks and large vehicles, and said lawmakers were effectively passing a tax by another name. 'There seems to be some discussions that fees are fine and taxes aren't. If you're the individual, the money's coming out of your pocketbook. It's the same thing.'
