House lawmaker asks DBM for help in pinpointing source of 2025 GAA insertions
More House lawmakers are questioning the insertions that emerged in the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA) as they called for the release of documentations of meetings and reports that will supposedly reveal where the insertions were made.
Manila Rep. Rolando Valeriano on Thursday urged the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to release the Full Variance Report comparing the House version of the 2025 budget to the one approved by President Marcos.
“Once the DBM releases those documents, we can clearly see where the changes were made. Right now, the House is being blamed left and right for the insertions, as if we were the ones who made them,” Valeriano said.
He added that the DBM committed to submit the control bill, the final version of the budget, and the list of For Later Release (FLR) projects.
The FLR list, Valeriano said, would help identify items not included in the National Expenditure Program (NEP) that Malacañang submitted to Congress and disprove claims of House involvement in the insertions.
Presidential veto
The P6.326-trillion 2025 GAA (Republic Act No. 12116) was signed into law on Dec. 30, 2024 after Mr. Marcos vetoed more than P194 billion in unprogrammed appropriations, including public works projects, deemed to be inconsistent with his administration’s priorities.
When the 20th Congress convened on July 28, the President unleashed a withering criticism of lawmakers in his State of the Nation Address and urged them to have a little shame (‘Mahiya naman kayo’) in handling taxpayers’ monies.
Should this practice continue, he vowed to veto the 2026 budget even if it means reenacting the 2025 GAA.
Amid public suspicion that the insertions came from the lower chamber, House lawmakers became defensive about their proposed public works projects, particularly since the President has gone on field inspections to check the status of multibillion-peso flood control projects.
Valeriano insisted that the general appropriations bill the House passed for the President’s signature did include the priorities outlined in the NEP.
He said the House version of the GAA allotted the most funds to the Department of Education and also earmarked funds for the Philippine Health Insurance Corp (PhilHealth).
“But along the way, when the measure went through the Senate, the bicameral meetings, and finally became law, the version that came out was already different,” Valeriano told reporters.
He was referring to public criticism of the sudden inclusion of P26 billion in the Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita program and the removal of the PhilHealth subsidy.
Antipolo Rep. Ronaldo Puno also backed Valeriano’s claim that the House did not remove PhilHealth’s subsidy.
