Monday, June 15, 2009


Someone on twitter sent me a website that had all the proposed changes for the constitution. Nice site. Clean. Easy to maneuver. But nevertheless, I'm a little ADD so I had a bit of a problem wading through it at first. I was soon glad to realize that the parts that were to be changed were written in bold letters with a corresponding breakdown beside it. Excellent idea to keep a dolt like me in line.

And after going through it, I realized that I'm OK with it. I still am ambiguous about the method of how these changes will be done but I am actually going to say I am OK with the idea of changing the constitution PERIOD. I mean, yeah. I am cool with the idea of federalism. I'm cool with the idea of getting rid of senate. I'm cool with foreigners having a more ownership in their investments in the country ARTICLE 16. SECTION 12. Yipes. Did I just write that out loud? And truth be told, I had a hard time finding the part which explictly or implicitly said that GMA will stay beyond 2010. But then again, I'm a layman and an idiot so it could have totally flown over my head. Please don't hesitate to correct me if you think otherwise. 

Even when I hit a part that freaked me out - the part where "All members of Senate/Congress shall, upon assumption of office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests/notify of a potential conflict of interest. that may arise..." ARTICLE 6. SECTION 12 had been DELETED. DELETED!  What the f..?

I looked around and found a part that kinda eased my fears: ARTICLE 6, SECTION 10. "Records and books of accounts of the Parliament shall be open to the public in accordance with the law...which shall publish annually the itemized expenditures for each member."

But as I said, again, what do I know? Why don't you all log onto the site, read up on it, and , just like me, come up with an opinion of your own. And my opinion now is: Let the changes proceed.*

Log on here to 

*But of course, NO to GMA term extension.