Senators file priority bills in 20th Congress
According to the Senate's bills and index section, Senator Loren Legarda was the first to file her 10 priority bills, topped by the One Tablet, One Student Act.
Her other bills are as follows:
Pangkabuhayan Act
Unpaid Care Workers Equity and Empowerment Act
Magna Carta of Waste Workers
Living Wage Act
Monthly Maintenance Medication Support Act for Senior Citizens
Women and Children Protection Units Act
Low Carbon Economy Act
Complementarity in Education Act
Blue Economy Act
Next to file was Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero, who included in his top ten bills is the act mandating government officials and employees to execute and submit a written permission to examine, inquire, or look into all their deposits and investments, thereby waiving the Bank Secrecy Law.
Escudero also listed in his priority measures the act lowering the compulsory retirement age of teachers and non-teaching school personnel of the Department of Education (DepEd) from 65 to 60 years old.
His other priority bills are:
An act prohibiting any form of interference by national government agencies with the use of the national tax allotment and locally-generated revenues of local government units;
To further strengthen local autonomy through a more rationalized system of decentralization;
An act promoting business competitiveness by providing temporary tax relief to single proprietorships, cooperatives, partnerships or corporations classified as micro, small and medium enterprises
An act promoting business growth and recovery by reducing the cost of business compliance for micro, small and medium enterprises;
An act providing an increase and an automatic adjustment mechanism in the Personnel Economic Relief Allowance (PERA) granted to government employees;
An act reinstituting mandatory credit allocation for micro, small and medium enterprises, imposing fines and penalties for noncompliance, and for other purposes;
An act providing for the redevelopment of condominiums;
An act establishing a tripartite council to address the problems of unemployment, underemployment, job-skills mismatch and technology-induced job displacement.
Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada came next, pushing for the promotion of safer communities and future-proof essential public services.
Among his 20 legislative proposals is a measure that would guarantee a monthly stipend for all Filipino seniors—P1,000 for indigents, and P500 for non-indigents, to be increased after five years. He also sought for a measure granting senior citizens a 20% discount on travel tax.
Estrada also filed the Disaster Food Bank and Stockpile Act, Department of Disaster Resilience Act, and the Rainwater Harvesting Facility Act, among others.
Meanwhile, included in Senator Robin Padilla's 10 priority bills was an act expanding the grounds for dissolution of marriage, instituting divorce and setting the procedures thereof, providing protections to the parties to the marriage and its common children.
He also filed measures seeking the medicalization of cannabis; the establishment of Muslim prayer rooms in all public offices and establishments; a P150 minimum wage increase for employees and workers in the private sector; and the prohibition of political dynasties.
Senator Joel Villanueva, on the other hand, highlighted in his priority bills the Security of Tenure and End of Endo Act, which seeks to put a stop to the end-of-contract and labor-only contracting schemes.
He also filed a bill on anti-online gambling which aims to ban all forms of online gambling in the country, among others.
Topping the list of Senator Erwin Tulfo's priority measures was a resolution urging the Senate to review the Rice Tariffication Law, restoring the regulatory powers of National Food Authority.
The first-termer senator also filed his version of the National Land Use Act which seeks to create a rational, holistic, and sustainable land use and physical planning mechanism.
As a former secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the younger Tulfo also proposed a bill that seeks to simplify the documentary requirements for accessing government financial assistance or ayuda.
Senator Bong Go also filed his top 10 bills in the 20th Congress which included magna carta for barangays, across-the-board wage hike, establishment of Department of Disaster Resilience, and provision of expanded tertiary education subsidy.
Returning senator Vicente 'Tito' Sotto III also filed 10 landmark bills aimed at strengthening government accountability, social welfare, public safety, and institutional reform.
Among these were the People's Freedom of Information Act of 2025, Anti-False Content and Fake News Act, 14th Month Pay Law, Maternal Surname for Legitimate Children Act, and Rightsizing the National Government Act.
For his part, Senator Bam Aquino filed 10 education-related measures, including proposals to bridge the education-to-employment gap and strengthen the implementation of the Tertiary Education Subsidy (TES) under the Free College Law.
Aquino will also push for the School-to-Employment Program (STEP) Act which seeks to establish job placement offices in all public senior high schools, state universities and colleges, and local universities and colleges.
He also filed the E-Textbook Para sa Lahat Act, which intends to improve access to textbooks for teachers and learners by requiring all DepEd-approved textbooks for basic education to be made available in digital format, free of charge, through official platforms or other authorized channels. —RF, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
9 hours ago
- GMA Network
OCTA poll: 80% of Filipinos want VP Sara to face impeachment trial
Majority of Filipinos believe that Vice President Sara Duterte should face an impeachment trial to answer the charges against her, results of a survey conducted by OCTA Research showed. The July 2025 Tugon ng Masa (TNM) Survey, released on Sunday, showed that 80% of respondents answered in the affirmative when asked if they thought Duterte should face trial. There were 14% who disagreed, while the remaining 7% were undecided or refused to answer. Majority support for the trial was seen across all regions: 87% in the National Capital Region, 77% in balance Luzon, 92% in the Visayas, and 69% in Mindanao. This was also the case across socio-economic classes: 80% for Classes A, B, C, and D, and 78% for Class E. For those who agreed that Duterte should face the impeachment trial, the most commonly cited reason, with 59% of respondents, was that she should address the charges, clear her name, and prove herself worthy of her position. Other reasons include a belief in the charges with 21%, and the view that facing trial is necessary for her to remain eligible to run in the 2028 elections with 16%. Among those who opposed a trial, 44% said the issue is a political conflict between the camps of Duterte and President Ferdinand 'Bongbong' Marcos Jr., whom she ran alongside with in the 2022 national elections. Other cited a belief in her integrity and disbelief in the allegations with 33%, while 19% said she should focus instead on serving the nation. The survey fieldwork was conducted using face-to-face interviews from July 12 to July 17, 2025, a week before the Supreme Court released its decision declaring that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional. SC spokesperson Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. The survey polled 1,200 male and female respondents aged 18 and above. It has a margin of error of ±3 % at a 95% confidence level. Subnational estimates carry a ±6% margin of error for Metro Manila, Balance Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Out of the respondents, 97% said they have heard, read, or watched anything about the impeachment complaint, while 2% said they were unaware. The recent SC decision is in relation to the petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others, seeking to declare the Articles of Impeachment against her null and void Lawyer and Constitutional law expert Domingo 'Egon' Cayosa on Saturday said the Senate may still opt to proceed with the trial, as it may assert its 'exclusive power' with regard to impeachment matters. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
12 hours ago
- GMA Network
Senate impeachment court to vote on whether to proceed with VP Sara trial
The Senate impeachment court is set to vote whether to proceed with the deliberations after receiving the Supreme Court's ruling on the Articles of Impeachment filed against Vice President Sara Duterte, its spokesperson said Sunday. According to Senate Impeachment Court spokesperson Regie Tongol, the body received the email transmittal of the SC decision on Friday evening, July 25, 2025, and will vote on it moving forward. 'Yes, as part of the usual deliberative process of any collegial body based on Senate rules,' he said in a Viber message to reporters over the weekend. This comes as the SC ruled unanimously to declare that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional and violate the right to due process. SC spokesperson Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. The decision is in relation to the petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others, seeking to declare the Artiles of Impeachment against her null and void Following the announcement of the decision, Tongol said the Senate Impeachment Court is 'duty-bound' to respect the finality of rulings issued by High Court. 'The Senate, sitting as an Impeachment Court, has always acted in deference to the Constitution and the rule of law. As a co-equal branch of government, we are duty-bound to respect the finality of rulings issued by the High Court,' he said then. Senators have since aired contrasting opinions on the decision, with some saying the Senate can still choose to proceed with the trial. Lawyer and Constitutional law expert Domingo 'Egon' Cayosa on Saturday said the Senate may still opt to proceed with the trial, as it may assert its 'exclusive power' with regard to impeachment matters. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
2 days ago
- GMA Network
Proceed with VP Sara trial despite SC decision? Senators weigh in
Several senators on Saturday expressed their views on whether or not to proceed with the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte following the Supreme Court's decision declaring the Articles of Impeachment against her as unconstitutional. In a message to reporters, Senator Juan Miguel "Migz" Zubiri warned that the Senate may be held in contempt should it proceed with the trial. "We may be courting a contempt order from the Supreme Court and a possible constitutional crisis, not to mention a dangerous precedent, should we proceed with the impeachment trial in defiance of a unanimous en banc ruling of the High Court," Zubiri said. "Ignoring the SC decision is tantamount to eroding the very principle of 'judicial review' established in Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139 (1936), and in turn, endangers the delicate system of checks and balances that is foundational to our democracy. Whether we agree with the decision or not, the Supreme Court remains as the final arbiter of constitutional issues—lest we destabilize the very framework of government," Zubiri said. "Respect and honor the Supreme Court of the Republic. PERIOD," Zubiri added. Interviewed on Saturday morning, Senator Risa Hontiveros noted that more than a few of her colleagues in the Senate were dismayed with the Supreme Court ruling. Asked if there was still a chance for the impeachment trial to proceed this year, Hontiveros said, "Laging may pag-asa (There's always hope)." "Well, abangan natin. Nababalitaan ko may mga nagco-consider mag-file ng motion for reconsideration. May mga wise na mga column at sulat na inilalabas, payo, kung paano puwede pa ring sa diwa ng pagrespeto sa Korte Suprema, pero puwede pa ring salbahin yung proseso ng impeachment," Hontiveros said. (Well, let's see. I hear that there are those who are considering to file a motion for reconsideration. Wise columns and letters, advice, have come out, on respecting the Supreme Court while saving the impeachment process.) The high tribunal ruled unanimously, deeming that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte is barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. Moreover, magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process. The Supreme Court also said the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings. Upcoming discussion Senator Erwin Tulfo, for his part, said that while he respects the high court's decision, the Constitution gives the upper chamber the sole authority to try and decide on all impeachment cases. "I respect the ruling of the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the constitutional limits that guide the impeachment process. Nonetheless, the Constitution is clear: the Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment," Tulfo said. "If given the opportunity, I am prepared to discharge our solemn duty and allow the evidence to speak for itself… I will act with my fellow Senators in upholding our constitutional mandate with integrity and fairness," Tulfo said. Tulfo said senators will have a discussion on Monday, July 28, if the chamber will oblige with or ignore the SC's ruling. Call to proceed Following the announcement of the SC decision on Friday afternoon, Senator Bam Aquino had maintained that the impeachment trial should proceed as he called on fellow senators to immediately hold a caucus to discuss the decision, which he said "ignored" the Senate's constitutional duty. However, Senator Ping Lacson, in a post on X, said the Senate must respect and comply with the SC's ruling, "notwithstanding the contrary opinions of several legal observers, particularly on the Court's interpretation of Art XI Section 3, paragraph (4) - that the filing of a verified complaint by at least 1/3 of all the members of the House of Representatives shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed." Interviewed on Super Radyo dzBB on Saturday, constitutional law expert Atty. Domingo "Egon" Cayosa said the Senate may opt to proceed with Duterte's trial despite the SC's decision should the legislature assert its "exclusive power" with regard to impeachment matters. Article XI Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that: "In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed." Constitutional duty Senator Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan, likewise, said that should the Senate proceed with the trial, a constitutional crisis may still be avoided. "I believe a way out of this impasse can be found in the opinion of former Justice [Adolf] Azcuna on the doctrine of operative facts wherein a Motion for Reconsideration is filed by the House of Representatives citing the operative facts doctrine as basis." "The Supreme Court may then reconsider its ruling and if so, the Constitutional duty for the Senate to forthwith proceed with trial can be observed and respected. In doing so, several provisions of the Constitution namely the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, the HoR (House of Represenatives) power to initiate impeachment complaints and Senate's power to try and decide Impeachment cases are harmonised and all three are given validity and legal effect as it ought to. It is a well established rule in constitutional construction that one provision of the Constitution should not be allowed to defeat another (Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary)," Pangilinan said. To recall, when the Senate impeachment court first convened on June 10, Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa made a motion in the Senate plenary seeking that the verified impeachment complaint against Duterte be dismissed. Senator Alan Peter Cayetano later that day moved to amend Dela Rosa's motion to instead have the Articles of Impeachment returned to the House of Representatives without dismissing or terminating the case. The House of Representatives impeached Duterte on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint. The Vice President was accused of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes. Duterte, meanwhile, entered a "not guilty" plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a "scrap of paper." — VDV, GMA Integrated News
