Our Senate exists to provide three things. The first is to bring a national perspective to solving the country’s problems, because senators are elected by the whole nation and not by a small part of it. This is vital for a country with a traditionally parochial political class. The second is a consequence of the first: being the only people to share a national mandate with the president and vice president, senators, because of their work, are in a training ground for the presidency. The third is actually the foundation of the first two: to achieve national awareness and prominence, and thus earn a national mandate, ideally requires more than mere celebrity or money, and it requires a track record of responsible leadership.
That this last part is less and less likely the case is another story—of the collapse of both political parties and the mass media. But for now, it remains true that the Senate remains a durable proving ground for the presidency where leaders are trained.
In his book “Certain Trumpets: The Call of Leaders,” Gary Wills says, a leader is someone who can move people to act on and pursue the goals the leader and followers share.
But here, we are often conflicted over what we seek: do we want a leader or a manager for president?
What is the difference? Leaders are transformational; they inspire people to do things differently. Managers, on the other hand, are transactional, fostering deals to get things done. Leaders will sell, managers tell; leaders exchange excitement for work, managers exchange money for work. A president leads; the Cabinet exists to manage. Put another way, the manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people; the manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust. The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.
By these standards, it’s clear who has demonstrated leadership in the Senate.
It wasn’t the former Senate president; one fundamental reason for President Marcos calling Congress to a special session is precisely the manner in which Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano’s foolishness derailed the legislative calendar. The first test of the Senate, then, today, is if it can both muster a quorum and finally settle the question of its leadership. The past couple of weeks have seen Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian acting as Senate president, and Senators Erwin Tulfo and Raffy Tulfo, for their part, have been the most effective in calling out the Cayetano clique.
It seems to me, though, that all eyes will also be on Sen. Risa Hontiveros, because of how uniquely situated she is in this leadership-defining moment for the Senate. Coalitions come and go, but she is unique in both her consistency and ability. To begin with, she has twice been elected to the Senate, which is proof of her being able to obtain a national mandate—and keep it.
Second, she has, through her decades of political work, managed to do the right thing: she did not ally herself with former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, and she stood up to former President Rodrigo Duterte, even when it was unpopular to do so.
Third, she has mastered the work of the Senate, both in fostering coalitions to get individual bills passed into law and in using the oversight function of lawmaking to conduct investigations that gathered evidence in the face of sustained opposition: consider her unearthing documents and testimony on Pharmally, and the immigration “pastillas” scheme. Those she went up against in her fact-finding were powerful indeed: the Philippine offshore gaming operators (Pogos) and Apollo Quiboloy, to name just two.
And she’s done all this by being a voice of reason, of sobriety, and empathy. She has done her homework, and she stands her ground in the face of petty-minded bullies like Sen. Rodante Marcoleta.
History often presents moments when leadership is not merely desired, but required. In a period marked by uncertainty and a seeming vacuum of leadership within the opposition, Hontiveros rose to meet that challenge, answering the call of the times with courage, steadfastness, and purpose.
In a nutshell, by 2028 her record would have shown: competence—proven by legislation; integrity—proven by consistency; compassion—proven by advocacy for the vulnerable; institutionalism—proven by reliance on democratic processes; courage—proven by standing alone when required. Steadfastness—proven by her pursuing and confronting powerful interests: Alice Guo, Pogo syndicates, Quiboloy, Pharmally-linked actors, and entrenched corruption networks. Fearlessness—proven by her willingness to challenge Marcoleta, Rodrigo Duterte, and Vice President Sara Duterte despite their influence, popularity, rank, or credentials.
Recent events have not changed who she is; they have simply reminded us of what has long been there, a leader willing to confront powerful interests, defend democratic institutions, and fight for the public good regardless of political cost.
Perhaps the country does not need to search endlessly or wait for someone to lead. Perhaps we simply need to recognize the leader who has been there all along, quietly and steadfastly fighting for us.
—————-
Email: mlquezon3@gmail.com; Twitter: @mlq3