Why we must choose country over party

The proposed P7.2-trillion national budget for 2027 has passed the House of Representatives on third and final reading and now proceeds to the Senate for further deliberations. These public funds are meant to build classrooms, strengthen health care, improve public services, protect vulnerable communities, and prepare our nation for disasters.

Yet, whenever questions about corruption, questionable allocations, and the misuse of public funds arise, a fundamental issue resurfaces: How do we hold our government accountable when we, the people it serves, cannot even stand together?

We are deeply divided by colors, political parties, personalities, and entrenched beliefs. Too often, we defend a politician not because we have objectively examined the facts, but because we have already decided which side we belong to. When someone from our preferred political camp is criticized, we rush to defend them. When the same accusations are directed at the opposing side, we are quick to demand accountability. We have become so accustomed to defending our choices that we forget to question the very people we elected—and somewhere in all that partisan noise, true accountability gets lost.

There is nothing wrong with having political beliefs. Democracy depends on a diversity of opinion, competing ideas, and the freedom to disagree. The problem begins when loyalty to a political color supersedes our loyalty to the country. Corruption should never be acceptable simply because the accused belongs to our preferred party, nor should good policies be rejected simply because they originate from politicians we dislike.

Public money has no political color. The medicines that indigent patients desperately need are not political favors. Classrooms are not rewards for voting for the winning candidate, and public services should never depend on party affiliation.

As a public health physician, I see public spending as far more than numbers in a budget document. Every peso represents an opportunity to protect a life, prevent an illness, or bring essential services closer to someone who needs them. When public funds are misused, the consequences extend beyond government offices. Corruption is not an abstract political debate; it carries a real human cost, paid mostly by those with the least power to demand answers.

We have become remarkably good at expressing outrage. We share posts, argue in comment sections, create trending hashtags, and call out public officials. For a few days, an issue dominates our timelines until another controversy emerges, and the public moves on. Social media can expose wrongdoing and amplify the voices of ordinary citizens, but visibility alone does not guarantee systemic change.

Anger must lead somewhere meaningful. It must lead to examining budget allocations, asking how projects were selected, and demanding clear explanations from those entrusted with public funds. It must lead to supporting independent journalism, strengthening investigative institutions, and insisting on transparent procurement.

Most importantly, it must lead to the ballot box, where we evaluate candidates by their integrity, competence, and record of public service rather than their promises or political lineage. When evidence of wrongdoing emerges, we must demand impartial investigation and due process, regardless of who is implicated. The goal is not to trend for a day; it is to make accountability impossible to ignore.

Unity does not mean agreeing on every issue or abandoning our principles. It means recognizing that certain standards should never be compromised. We should all agree that public money must be accounted for, government contracts must be transparent, and public officials must answer for their decisions. No politician is above the law, and no political party deserves unconditional loyalty.

Perhaps the most meaningful form of patriotism today is the willingness to criticize the people we voted for when they fall short, while acknowledging good work even from those we did not support. That is not betrayal—that is responsible citizenship.

Being pro-Philippines does not mean blindly supporting the government. It means caring enough about the country to question those who govern it. As the proposed national budget undergoes further scrutiny, citizens still have a critical role to play. Corruption thrives not only when public officials abuse their power, but also when citizens are too divided to hold them accountable.

Before we are supporters of any politician, we are citizens of the Philippines. Our nation deserves more than our posts, arguments, and temporary outrage. It deserves our vigilance, courage, and collective voice.

—————

Raymond Martin Ajero Corpus, MD, MPM-HG, is a Bicolano public health physician and former doctor to the barrios (Batch 38) who served in the island communities of Ticao, Masbate, from 2021 to 2024. He is currently a medical officer IV at the Department of Health–Bicol Center for Health Development.