1. Whether or not political dynasties should be abolished a. It will go against the democratic and republican form of government b.

Political dynasties are not evil per se. it is simply the product of the nature of a local community c. Equal access to opportunities by depriving people just because d. Compelling state interest e. Will of the electorate even in administrative cases f. There is more pressure to do good when you are in a political dynasties to live to the established reputation g. Deprive people just because of their family name h. Indirect and direct injury. It is not the end all and be all solution. There are other means that are democratic. i. Is it necessary? j. Political dynasties that are better quality k. Computerized elections

94% dynastic regions, revera policy center 70% belong to dynasties 10 million are wealthier poorer provinces with dynastic families article 2 sec 2 and 1. Republican and democratic state it deters qualified individuals violated daw ang Sovereignty resides on the people. It requires a constitutional amendment if we increase qualification Ambiguous, what is a political dynasty? Sec 26, use the intent of the constitution. It is made not illegal per se but prohibits circumvention PAMATONG VS COMELEC Not necessary for political access. He can still field other people such as their agents. Even familial ties do not hold water look at villafuerte. ELECTORAL reform to curve abuse of power And voters education it is the real responsibility of the state IT IS already in the constitution!!! Duh BENEFITS

Political development If you remove, then the electorate are FORCED to know more candidates

The spirit of the provision is to focus electoral reform such as cap on expenses, political advertisement, removal of posters, endorsements. Forms of prohibiton It is not in the interest of congress

2. House Bill seeking life time income tax exemption in grounds of honor and recognition he has given to this country 3. fight against climate change with the Kyoto protocol, the legally binding climate accord that requires industrialized countries to make quantified carbon emission cuts. The Kyoto Protocol which was supposed to end last year was extended as a product of UN Climate Change talks in Doha. Are its TARGETS STILL RELEVANT? OR OS IT TIME TO amend it?

Deadline by Monday

TAX
Vicky Pro Pacman exception Bete Anti Pacman

Bangsamoro
Manuta - pro constitutionality Bance anti constitutionality