Friday, December 12, 2008

HB 1 or SB 101?

E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

HB 1 or SB 101?
Sunday, 08 26, 2007

If I were to counsel Iloilo Rep. Ferjenel Biron of the Nacionalista Party (NP) on how to characterize his legislative initiatives which have counterparts filed by other legislators, I would tell him to simply describe his bills as “better,” or “comprehensive.” I would caution him, if he considers other legislators’ bills as “half-done,” or “inadequate,” to use those very words, and never resort to the vernacular. You see, words in the vernacular can have meanings that cut both ways, depending on who says it or who hears of it.

Biron, author of House Bill (HB) 1, used the word bakla in describing Senate Bill (SB) 101, introduced by Sen. Mar Roxas II, on the same subject: the Cheaper Medicines Bill.

Now, that word is a double entendre. On the one hand, it could refer to one who is gay, whether the closet type or an out-and-out screaming you-know-what. On the other, it is simply a descriptive argot that has gained popular usage to mean “not having the necessary components.”

And this is where I get totally perplexed: Why has the word royally raised the hackles of many in the Liberal Party (LP)?

A feud is a-brewing, as one daily screamed carrying a newsfeed from the LP, to which Roxas belongs. The newsfeed, quoting a party member, reads: “Liberal Party congressmen yesterday warned Rep. Ferjenel Biron against dealing low blows to Sen. Mar Roxas’ version of the Cheaper Medicines Bill. We have talked to Congressman Biron and asked him to stop using the word bakla on Senator Roxas’ version of the Cheaper Medicines Bill. If he doesn’t stop, we will be forced to go down to his level and retaliate.”

A low blow, indeed, if you ask me. You see, the word could be misconstrued as a pejorative applying to either the author of the bill or the provisions of the bill. Biron had better watch his language; otherwise, the LP “would go down to his level and retaliate.” Start quaking, Ferj!

Election 2010 is three years away yet, but the LP and the NP are already skirmishing, choosing Congress as the flash point. Roxas is the LP’s presidential bet in 2010; Villar, the NP’s. That should explain the feud between these parties, this time over the Cheaper Medicines Bill which has been certified urgent for approval.

The way I see it, Biron is playing the role of surrogate fighter for Villar, taking Roxas head-on. (Villar himself filed SB 90, similar to Biron’s, but for the meantime, he is letting Biron do the fighting). Just imagine, if Roxas’ version of the bill is enacted into law, he would have bragging rights to the title of “Mr. Murang Gamot” in addition to “Mr. Palengke!” — and the people’s votes, of course. And where would that leave Villar?

Political stratagems aside, why is Roxas’ version bakla while Biron’s version is tunay or, in English, straight?

SB 101 is bakla not because medicines taken under the bill will cause one to stray from his God-given gender, but because Roxas’ bill is too “soft,” i.e., it does not bring enough pressure to bear on multinational companies engaged in the pharmaceuticals industry.

HB 1 is tunay not because it will render one who takes the medicines under this bill into a straight person, but because Biron’s bill says what it sets out to legislate: Out with the multinational companies or, at best, allow the parallel importation of patented medicines so more poor people could benefit from cheap drugs.

Biron envisions a market, 75 percent of which is presently controlled by a cartel, to open up wide, allowing the sale of locally manufactured generic and off-patent medicines, which are cheaper in comparison to imported ones. Biron rues the fact that imported, branded drugs are now being sold at prohibitive prices, when they could be actually sold for much less.

The LP should not threaten Biron to shut up, lest the “goods” on Biron will be made public. Why, is HB 1 also bakla, undeserving of being enacted into law? To my knowledge, Biron is determined in having the bill passed, against those equally determined to thwart it.

Former Rep. Rolex Suplico, now vice-governor of Iloilo, recalls that he filed such bill during his first term in the House of Representatives. He refiled it during his second term, together with Biron. He and Biron again filed it in his third and last term, and almost came close to having it enacted into law, reaching as far as the conference committee stage. But the huge lobby fund to fight the bill carried the day. So we are now back to the ring, with Biron in one corner, ironically against Roxas, who should be a sparring partner in the first place. Meanwhile, the lobbyists are gleefully watching from the ringside.

Legislation, they say, is the art of the compromise. HB 1 and SB 101 can be reconciled. After all, they have the same objective — to make medicines affordable to Mang Pandoy.

But, wait. Compromises could be carried too far, even up to that ugly point which guarantees the non-enactment of the bill into law, to accommodate those who have the motives and the wherewithal to fervently wish its demise.

It looks like Biron has the “goods” on those who are opposed to the Cheaper Medicines Bill, that’s why he is using tough language. He promised me the details will come out in this space — 2.5 billion reasons, low blows and all — next time.

A word of advice to Biron, who is a medical doctor: The practice of medicine requires you to keep to yourself your diagnosis of your patients. Just like lawyers, who must keep their client’s revelations in confidence. Better yet, sit down with Roxas on the bills, arrive at a compromise version and push it through the legislative mill.


For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph

No comments: