Stark relationship: Poverty persists where dynastic power endures

How entrenched political families in Congress continue to block reforms, leaving millions in poverty

Section 26, Article II of the 1987 Constitution explicitly mandates the state to prohibit political dynasties “as may be defined by law.” But nearly four decades later, that law has yet to be enacted.

What exists — clearly and consistently — is a Congress dominated by families whose political survival depends on the absence of such a law.

Since the 1986 Edsa Revolution, lawmakers have regularly filed bills prohibiting political dynasties, but none have passed. The reason, according to a political science professor at the University of the Philippines Diliman, is structural.

Maria Ela Atienza told INQUIRER.net that the lawmakers tasked with prohibiting political dynasties overwhelmingly belong to them. “It is in their interest to prevent the passage of an enabling law,” she said.

READ: Banning dynasties in the Philippines 

As the system is shaped to protect these families, she said, the cost is borne by millions of people in some of the poorest regions of the Philippines.

Recent months have seen a renewed openness from political elites, coinciding with public anger over revelations of systemic corruption, particularly in flood mitigation projects. But Atienza cautioned that the call against political dynasties is being framed as part of a broader good governance narrative — and rhetoric should never be mistaken for reform.

She said recent bills filed by House Speaker Faustino Dy III and Ilocos Rep. Ferdinand Alexander Marcos, both members of political dynasties, are significantly watered down compared with those introduced by opposition lawmakers.

Lip service

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s call for Congress to prioritize a law prohibiting political dynasties is not an assurance of action, said Dennis Coronacion, a political science professor at the University of Santo Tomas.

READ: Marcos to Congress: Prioritize anti-dynasty bill, 3 other measures

“There’s a big difference between urging the legislators to prioritize a bill and certifying it as urgent,” he told INQUIRER.net, explaining that in the first case, the president only encourages, and lawmakers may still refuse to cooperate.

READ: The will to pass an anti-dynasty law

He said certifying a bill as urgent allows it to bypass parts of the legislative process, improving its chances of passage.

Coronacion believes Congress is unlikely to pass such a law because it is against lawmakers’ interests. He said no dynasty would support a bill that would regulate their political existence and could potentially make them extinct.

Atienza noted that since the president and his allies are paying lip service to the idea of passing an enabling law, this could be the best time for anti-dynasty lawmakers to seize the opportunity.

“[They should] aggressively push for this much-needed reform,” she told INQUIRER.net, particularly with the apparent openness of political elites to the idea.

Disadvantage to the poor

The consequences of dynastic dominance are not abstract. They are measurable and disproportionately affect the poor, as the absence of a law allows members of the same families to hold office simultaneously.

RELATED STORY: Poverty: It’s not just about the money

Data from the Philippine Statistics Authority and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism show that the 10 regions with the highest poverty rates are largely governed by political dynasties.

All provinces in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao — which registered the highest poverty incidence in 2021 at 37.2 percent — are led by political families.

In Caraga Region (33.2 percent), Zamboanga Peninsula (30.1 percent), Bicol Region (29.3 percent), and Eastern Visayas (28.9 percent), most, if not all provinces, are also governed by dynasties.

The correlation is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence. While poverty has multiple causes, regions with concentrated political power often suffer from weak accountability and limited competition.

READ: Gov’t poverty metrics: You’re not poor if you spend P21 per meal

Atienza said political dynasties not only prevent equal opportunities and competitive elections, but also block democratic reforms and act to protect their own interests when they monopolize public office.

READ: When those who feed the nation are the poorest: Farmers, fisherfolk in deepest poverty pit

In such systems, public office becomes a birthright. Accountability, transparency, and scrutiny weaken. Wrongdoing is covered up through networks of loyalty and nepotism, preventing substantive democracy from taking root.

Easier to postpone barangay elections

For decades, the House of Representatives has presented itself as a hesitant but willing arena for political change, particularly on the constitutional ban on dynasties, which legal experts say requires an enabling law.

The ban is laid out in Section 26, Article II of the 1987 Constitution, which provides for “equal access to opportunities for public service” and a prohibition on “political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

However, a review of legislative records across 13 Congresses shows that lawmakers have consistently shown more urgency in postponing barangay elections than in dismantling entrenched family power.

An analysis by Dr. Alicor Panao, INQUIRER Metrics data scientist, shows that from the 8th Congress in 1987 to the present, 161 bills have been filed to postpone barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) elections.

Only 68 bills addressing political dynasties were filed in the same period—a disparity that is striking not just in number, but also in intent. Panao said the imbalance is not accidental.

READ: Another petition to enact Anti-Political Dynasty law filed

He noted that barangay and SK elections are considered the most basic and accessible form of democratic participation — local, low-cost, and ideally less dominated by national elites.

Yet these elections have been repeatedly suspended through legislation, especially in the 18th and 19th Congresses, which alone produced 85 postponement bills. In contrast, anti-dynasty proposals rarely progress beyond filing.

READ: A nation of dynasts

Even in the 20th Congress, and despite prodding from the executive branch — such as Malacañang’s Dec. 9 statement — anti-dynasty bills remain pending in committees.

Atienza described the present moment as a rare opening, driven by public anger, corruption probes, and growing awareness of how political dynasties and networks enable large-scale abuses.

She noted that more Filipinos are demanding transparency, accountability, and jail time for corrupt officials. Many are beginning to recognize how dynastic politics shield powerful figures from consequences.

RELATED STORY: Marcos vs dynasties? Palace explains what changed

“If the president wants to stay in power until the end of his term and leave a legacy, he needs to show that he can walk the talk and make powerful people accountable,” Atienza said. “He may be pressured to really push the anti-dynasty law.”