Monday, June 20, 2011

DA agrees meeting violations occurred but refuses to prosecute, lambasts those who filed complaint

Public bodies must identify the nature of the claim or investigation on the agenda for an executive session under the Open Meeting Act's attorney-client privilege exemption, the district attorney for the Oklahoma Panhandle recently told a hospital board.

The agenda also must identify by name or position the employee to be discussed under the personnel exemption, said James M. Boring, district attorney for Cimarron, Texas, Beaver and Harper counties.

An agenda must also identify the "potential action [to be] taken as a result of the executive session," said Boring in a June 10 letter to three doctors who filed an Open Meeting Act complaint against the board.

Boring said these required pieces of information were left off a May 24 meeting agenda for the Board of Control overseeing the Memorial Hospital of Texas County in Guymon.

Violating the Open Meeting Act is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in the county jail and a fine of up to $500. (OKLA. STAT. tit. 25, § 314)

But Boring said he won't prosecute because these omissions weren't "a willful violation of the OMA by the BOC that would support or justify criminal prosecution."

Boring blamed the violations on the "extremely short notice and time period" that the hospital's CEO had to "prepare, post and file a revised agenda in order for the BOC to be able to address" the issue that required an executive session. (Read The Oklahoman article for an explanation of the conflict over a doctor's suspension.)

"It is also worthy of noting that this complaint is the only complaint ever received by this office against the BOC of MHTC with respect to the OMA," Boring said.

However, May 24 wasn't the first time the board's agenda omitted some or all of the information that Boring said is required to conduct an executive session.

Eleven of the board's previous 15 agendas since Nov. 24, 2009, lacked the necessary information for its closed-door sessions. (Read the agendas for Jan. 25, 2011; Dec. 20, 2010; Sept. 28, 2010; Aug. 24, 2010; May 25, 2010; April 27, 2010; March 30, 2010; Feb. 23, 2010; Feb. 2, 2010; Dec. 22, 2009; and Nov. 24, 2009.)

So, a lack of time doesn't seem to have been the cause of the violations.

Perhaps the lack of complaints is because the public attending the meetings didn't know the law.

That's not an excuse for the board. As Boring pointed out, the hospital's CEO is not responsible for the Open Meeting Act violations even though he puts together the agenda.

"He is not a member of the BOC," said Boring. "The provisions of the OMA impose obligations upon the board of a public body."

The board members are Chairman Wayne Manning, Vice Chairman Dallas Mayer, Secretary/Treasurer Jim Webster, John Nye, John Board, Mary Beth Ebersole and Kelly McMurry.

Why don't they know the law? Boring's conclusions and the law he relied upon regarding what the statute requires are decades old. The Act states, "If a public body proposes to conduct an executive session, the agenda shall:

Contain sufficient information for the public to ascertain that an executive session will be proposed;
Identify the items of business and purposes of the executive session; and
State specifically the provision of Section 307 of this title authorizing the executive session." (OKLA. STAT. tit. 25, § 311(B)(2)(a-c))

A 1997 attorney general opinion says agenda items for an executive session under the personnel exemption must include either the employee's name or job title if it "is so unique as to allow adequate identification." (1997 OK AG 61, ¶ 5)

The reasoning in that opinion and the statute's language also make clear that a specific item of business must be listed under the exemption for attorney-client privilege.

Boring agreed, saying,

It is my opinion that the agenda item to consider an executive session must identify either the position or the individual who is the subject of the discussion or the nature of the investigation or claim to be discussed in the agenda that would apprise the public of the matters to be addressed in the executive session.

So what is required for a violation to be prosecuted?

Boring explained that his "office is not authorized to file criminal actions against anyone on its own initiative."

"My office files criminal actions based upon the receipt of an 'affidavit of arrest' or an 'affidavit for issuance of an arrest warrant' from a law enforcement officer," he said.

Boring said his office may "receive and gather information relating to allegations of criminal activity, especially when such activity relates to actions taken by public bodies."

"Subject to obtaining relevant facts that may indicate criminal action has occurred, this office may then submit the information to the appropriate law enforcement agency for formal investigation," he said.

Boring said it's "not unusual" for his office "to receive complaints relating to violations of the OMA." His office then attempts to obtain all the pertinent information and determines if the Open Meeting Act has been violated, he said.

"If we find a violation, we must then consider if such a violation could be deemed a 'willful violation' of the OMA before referral is made to law enforcement," Boring said.

He noted that in 1984, the state Supreme Court said that for the purposes of the Open Meeting Act:

Willfulness does not require a showing of bad faith, malice, or wantonness, but rather, encompasses conscious, purposeful violations of the law or blatant or deliberate disregard of the law by those who know, or should know the requirements of the Act. (Rogers v. Excise Bd. of Greer County, 1984 OK 95,¶ 14)

He also noted that in the same opinion, the court said, "Notice of meetings of public bodies which are deceptively vague and likely to mislead constitute a willful violation." (Id.)

Boring said that in reading the board's May 24 agenda, "It is not possible to say that it would be comprehensible to a person of ordinary intelligence what matters were proposed to be discussed in the executive session and what action, if any, was contemplated to be taken on the matters to be discussed in the executive session.

"The duty to specify on the agenda plainly and directly in language comprehensible to a person of ordinary intelligence the purpose of the executive session proposed ... was not satisfied," Boring said. "The notice provided to the public in ... the revised agenda fails to satisfy the requirements of minimum notice of the contemplated action that would be taken following the executive session."

So why isn't Boring forwarding the violations to a law enforcement agency for formal investigation and then prosecution? He explained:

It does not appear to me that there is any basis whatsoever to assert, much less establish and prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal prosecution, that the BOC had any intention of acting in bad faith or with malice or wantonness to circumvent the provisions of the OMA.

There is absolutely nothing in the record that would indicate that any of the obvious hostility between the medical staff and the CEO, and perhaps any feelings the CEO might have toward members of the medical staff, were, should, or could be imputed to the individual members of the BOC.

Further, I can not conclude and certainly do not feel the facts would support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the actions of the BOC were taken in conscious, purposeful, blatant, or deliberate disregard of the OMA.

In addition, I do not believe or find any facts that would legitimately support a proposition that there was any intention on the part of the BOC to be deceptively vague or to mislead the public about the nature of the matters to be addressed in the executive session.

I conclude and find there was not a willful violation of the OMA by the BOC that would support or justify criminal prosecution of the BOC of MHTC.

What a steaming pile of buffalo chips.

Boring said the OMA puts the obligation on the public body, but then he excused them for being ignorant of a law that's nearly 35 years old. He's doing exactly what our Court of Civil Appeals in 1981 warned against:

If willful is narrowly interpreted, if actions taken in violation of the Act could not be set aside unless done in bad faith, maliciously, obstinately, with a premeditated evil design and intent to do wrong, then the public would be left helpless to enforce the Act most of the time and public bodies could go merrily along, in good faith, ignoring the Act.

Instead of prosecuting the Open Meeting Act violations, Boring lambasted the three doctors who filed the complaint with his office, saying:

It is the policy of this office that, to the extent possible, we will avoid being drawn into political disagreements associated with municipal and county entities, including the functioning of various boards established under municipal or county authority. This office is not willing to permit the power of the office through a threat of criminal prosecution to be used as the arbiter of such disagreements.

The complaint received by this office is laden with indications of it being instigated as the result of an internal or political disagreement or dispute between certain members of the medical staff and the CEO of MHTC.

Boring said he is relatively sure that if the board had upheld the doctor's suspension by the three doctors, they would not have filed the complaint. He doesn't explain why that should affect his decision on whether the board willfully violated the Open Meeting Act. But Boring did add:

This matter has consumed almost four full days of my time in order to sort through and determine the actual facts as well as doing the necessary legal research and drafting of this response. These four days represent four additional days of time that other criminal matters and county business requiring my attention have been placed on hold. That means victims are waiting, defendants are waiting, judges are waiting, attorneys are waiting, and county officers are waiting while I have been dealing with this complaint.

That's all he did for those four days? So much for multi-tasking. And if it's "not unusual" for Boring's office to receive Open Meeting Act complaints, shouldn't he already know the law? This is another example of why the public should be able to go to someone at the state level who specializes in open government law.

In the meantime, Boring has provided some insight into the difficulty of getting district attorneys to treat this form of public corruption seriously.

P.S. The board's agendas also routinely list items of business under "New Business." Boring should explain to the board that the Open Meeting Act defines "new business" as "any matter not known about or which could not have been reasonably foreseen prior to the time of posting." Nothing should be listed on the agenda under "new business." (OKLA. STAT. tit. 25, § 311(A)(9))

Joey Senat, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
OSU School of Media & Strategic Communications

From where I am, miles away in geographical distance and political viewpoint from Manila media, I am appalled by the pettiness and hypocrisy of some news columnists and commentators viciously attacking PNoy for buying a used sports car with his own money.

They denounce him for "insensitivity to the poor and the hungry," an accusation which can be made against anyone who enjoys the most modest of luxuries in our present Philippine society.

In actuality, PNoy's lifestyle is closer to that of the average middle class Filipino. He dresses simply, does not entertain lavishly, is a bachelor with no extravagant wife, spoiled children, numerous in laws. Compared to all past Presidents from Aguinaldo to Gloria Arroyo, PNoy's personal expenses are measurably lower not to mention the fact that all such expenses come from his own pocket.

So why the shrill carping and caviling among self appointed media critics who themselves are leaders in conspicuous consumption?

I, as well the majority of fair, objective, open-minded Filipinos am at a loss for an answer.From where I am, miles away in geographical distance and political viewpoint from Manila media

For the 175th Anniversary of the founding of the Ateneo de Manila, my father, among other alumni, was asked to write about his particular Ateneo hero. What follows is the article he submitted:

I am writing this to satisfy myself that at least I am speaking for a worthy Atenean who in my personal evaluation was a major contributor to the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship. He was an authentic hero of what we now know as the EDSA revolution.

So very few remember him now, especially Filipinos of the present generation who in a recent poll cited Ferdinand Marcos as second to Cory Aquino as the most beloved president of the Philippines. Hence it is appropriate to present Renato E. Tanada as one of the Unknown Soldiers of Philippine history, forgotten patriots who sacrificed their lives for us to live in freedom.

No one in my generation, the men and women who fought the dictatorship could question the courage, valor, dedication and love of country of Nats Tanada.

Jovito Salonga, Nap Rama, Jake Almeda Lopez, Lorenzo Tanada Jr. Ed Olaguer, among the few I can remember still living, with whom he worked and fought and struggled against the dictatorship will testify to this fact.

Ninoy Aquino himself was well aware of Nats's heroism.

My memory has faded with the years but there is one episode I remember well.

Marcos was at the peak of his absolute power. He wanted to celebrate and display the peace and stability of the Philippines in the manner of North Korea. He invited the international diplomatic corps to Imelda's convention center. But the travesty was shattered by an explosion in the midst of his invited guests.

The dictator was livid with rage. Who had the gall to embarrass him? A full military alert was sounded and its vast intelligence network uncovered the master mind: Renato E. Tanada. An immediate shoot-to-kill order was issued.

Some nights later, a man with a heavy mustache, hair held down by thick pomade came to see me. It was Nats Tanada in disguise. I did not recognize him because the man in disguise was in no way like the Nats Tanada I had known for decades.

I knew, respected and admired him for his inner strength. Deeply principled, he never ran away from a just fight. But more than a committed man of action he was a brilliant lawyer with a wide ranging interest in the Humanities and Arts.

And there he was that night in my living room, looking like Charlie Chaplin with a glint in his eyes I had never seen before. It was a flicker of fear. For the first time, Nats was afraid. But as he explained he was afraid not for himself but for his eldest daughter Karen, a well known anti Marcos activist herself.

He had been told through the grapevine by an Imelda Blue Lady that he must surrender or face the consequences. "Surrender, apologize and make amends to Marcos or be captured, tortured, killed and your daughter abused in detention by the military."

Nats did not surrender. He went into hiding with Karen, constantly pursued by the dictator's men but but he eluded them until the people power victory at EDSA.

But personally for Nats, EDSA was a Pyrrhic victory. His long struggle against the dictatorship had taken its toll. Physically, he was a broken man. He died a few months later.

In hindsight I can say that most of the EDSA freedom fighters have been recognized and rewarded. Not so for Nats Tanada.

This is why I write about his heroism with the hope that perhaps, Nats's Alma Mater might honor his memory in a manner both fitting and enduring.

Or else just to say that there was a Renato Tanada, an Atenean.

Andres S. Bautista . ADMU : H.S. '48; Litt.B '54; LLB '55

For months I left my blog page dormant, until the gunfire of August 23d woke me up and I received this e-mail.

The Filipino today

By Alex Lacson

After the August 23 hostage drama, there is just too much negativity about and against the Filipino.

“It is difficult to be a Filipino these days”, says a friend who works in Hongkong. “Nakakahiya tayo”, “Only in the Philippines” were some of the comments lawyer Trixie Cruz-Angeles received in her Facebook. There is this email supposedly written by a Dutch married to a Filipina, with 2 kids, making a litany of the supposed stupidity or idiocy of Filipinos in general. There was also this statement by Fermi Wong, founder of Unison HongKong, where she said – “Filipino maids have a very low status in our city”. Then there is this article from a certain Daniel Wagner of Huffington Post, wherein he said he sees nothing good in our country’s future.

Clearly, the hostage crisis has spawned another crisis – a crisis of faith in the Filipino, one that exists in the minds of a significant number of Filipinos and some quarters in the world.

It is important for us Filipinos to take stock of ourselves as a people – of who we truly are as a people. It is important that we remind ourselves who the Filipino really is, before our young children believe all this negativity that they hear and read about the Filipino.

We have to protect and defend the Filipino in each one of us.

The August 23 hostage fiasco is now part of us as Filipinos, it being part now of our country’s and world’s history. But that is not all that there is to the Filipino. Yes, we accept it as a failure on our part, a disappointment to HongKong, China and to the whole world.

But there is so much more about the Filipino.

In 1945, at the end of World War II, Hitler and his Nazi had killed more than 6 million Jews in Europe. But in 1939, when the Jews and their families were fleeing Europe at a time when several countries refused to open their doors to them, our Philippines did the highly risky and the unlikely –thru President Manuel L Quezon, we opened our country’s doors and our nation’s heart to the fleeing and persecuted Jews. Eventually, some 1,200 Jews and their families made it to Manila. Last 21 June 2010, or 70 years later, the first ever monument honoring Quezon and the Filipino nation for this “open door policy” was inaugurated on Israeli soil, at the 65-hectare Holocaust Memorial Park in Rishon LeZion, Israel.

The Filipino heart is one of history’s biggest, one of the world’s rare jewels, and one of humanity’s greatest treasures.

In 2007, Baldomero M. Olivera, a Filipino, was chosen and awarded as the Scientist for the Year 2007 by Harvard University Foundation, for his work in neurotoxins which is produced by venomous cone snails commonly found in the tropical waters of Philippines. Olivera is a distinguished professor of biology at University of Utah, USA. The Scientist for the Year 2007 award was given to him in recognition to his outstanding contribution to science, particularly to molecular biology and groundbreaking work with conotoxins. The research conducted by Olivera’s group became the basis for the production of commercial drug called Prialt (generic name – Ziconotide), which is considered more effective than morphine and does not result in addiction.
The Filipino mind is one of the world’s best, one of humanity’s great assets.

The Filipino is capable of greatness, of making great sacrifices for the greater good of the least of our people. Josette Biyo is an example of this. Biyo has masteral and doctoral degress from one of the top universities in the Philippines – the De La Salle University (Taft, Manila) – where she used to teach rich college students and was paid well for it. But Dr Biyo left all that and all the glamour of Manila, and chose to teach in a far-away public school in a rural area in the province, receiving the salary of less than US$ 300 a month. When asked why she did that, she replied “but who will teach our children?” In recognition of the rarity of her kind, the world-famous Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the United States honoured Dr Biyo a very rare honor – by naming a small and new-discovered planet in our galaxy as “Biyo”.

The Filipino is one of humanity’s best examples on the greatness of human spirit!

Efren Penaflorida was born to a father who worked as a tricycle driver and a mother who worked as laundrywoman. Through sheer determination and the help of other people, Penaflorida finished college. In 1997, Penaflorida and his friends formed a group that made pushcarts (kariton) and loaded them with books, pens, crayons, blackboard, clothes, jugs of water, and a Philippine flag. Then he and his group would go to the public cemetery, market and garbage dump sites in Cavite City – to teach street children with reading, math, basic literacy skills and values, to save them from illegal drugs and prevent them from joining gangs. Penaflorida and his group have been doing this for more than a decade. Last year, Penaflorida was chosen and awarded as CNN Hero for 2009.

Efren Penaflorida is one of the great human beings alive today. And he is a Filipino!

Nestor Suplico is yet another example of the Filipino’s nobility of spirit. Suplico was a taxi driver In New York. On 17 July 2004, Suplico drove 43 miles from New York City to Connecticut, USA to return the US$80,000 worth of jewelry (rare black pearls) to his passenger who forgot it at the back seat of his taxi. When his passenger offered to give him a reward, Suplico even refused the reward. He just asked to be reimbursed for his taxi fuel for his travel to Connecticut. At the time, Suplico was just earning $80 a day as a taxi driver. What do you call that? That’s honesty in its purest sense. That is decency most sublime. And it occurred in New York, the Big Apple City, where all kinds of snakes and sinners abound, and a place where – according to American novelist Sydney Sheldon – angels no longer descend. No wonder all New York newspapers called him “New York’s Most Honest Taxi Driver”. The New York City Government also held a ceremony to officially acknowledge his noble deed. The Philippine Senate passed a Resolution for giving honors to the Filipino people and our country.

In Singapore, Filipina Marites Perez-Galam, 33, a mother of four, found a wallet in a public toilet near the restaurant where she works as the head waitress found a wallet containing 16,000 Singaporean dollars (US $11,000). Maritess immediately handed the wallet to the restaurant manager of Imperial Herbal restaurant where she worked located in Vivo City Mall. The manager in turn reported the lost money to the mall’s management. It took the Indonesian woman less than two hours to claim her lost wallet intended for her son’s ear surgery that she and her husband saved for the medical treatment. Maritess refused the reward offered by the grateful owner and said it was the right thing to do.

The Filipina, in features and physical beauty, is one of the world’s most beautiful creatures! Look at this list – Gemma Cruz became the first Filipina to win Miss International in 1964; Gloria Diaz won as Miss Universe in 1969; Aurora Pijuan won Miss International in 1970; Margie Moran won Miss Universe in 1973; Evangeline Pascual was 1st runner up in Miss World 1974; Melanie Marquez was Miss International in 1979; Ruffa Gutierrez was 2nd runner up in Miss World 1993; Charlene Gonzalez was Miss Universe finalist in 1994; Mirriam Quiambao was Miss Universe 1st runner up in 1999; and last week, Venus Raj was 4th runner up in Miss Universe pageant.

I can cite more great Filipinos like Ramon Magsaysay, Ninoy Aquino, Leah Salonga, Manny Pacquaio, Paeng Nepomuceno, Tony Meloto, Joey Velasco, Juan Luna and Jose Rizal. For truly, there are many more great Filipinos who define who we are as a people and as a nation – each one of them is part of each one of us, for they are Filipinos like us, for they are part of our history as a people.

What we see and hear of the Filipino today is not all that there is about the Filipino. I believe that the Filipino is higher and greater than all these that we see and hear about the Filipino. God has a beautiful story for us as a people. And the story that we see today is but a fleeting portion of that beautiful story that is yet to fully unfold before the eyes of our world.

So let’s rise as one people. Let’s pick up the pieces. Let’s ask for understanding and forgiveness for our failure. Let us also ask for space and time to correct our mistakes, so we can improve our system.

To all of you my fellow Filipinos, let’s keep on building the Filipino great and respectable in the eyes of our world – one story, two stories, three stories at a time – by your story, by my story, by your child’s story, by your story of excellence at work, by another Filipino’s honesty in dealing with others, by another Pinoy’s example of extreme sacrifice, by the faith in God we Filipinos are known for.

Every Filipino, wherever he or she maybe in the world today, is part of the solution. Each one of us is part of the answer. Every one of us is part of the hope we seek for our country. The Filipino will not become a world-class citizen unless we are able to build a world-class homeland in our Philippines.

We are a beautiful people. Let no one in the world take that beauty away from you. Let no one in the world take away that beauty away from any of your children! We just have to learn – very soon – to build a beautiful country for ourselves, with an honest and competent government in our midst.

Mga kababayan, after reading this, I ask you to do two things.

First, defend and protect the Filipino whenever you can, especially among your children. Fight all this negativity about the Filipino that is circulating in many parts of the world. Let us not allow this single incident define who the Filipino is, and who we are as a people. And second, demand for good leadership and good government from our leaders. Question both their actions and inaction; expose the follies of their policies and decisions. The only way we can perfect our system is by engaging it. The only way we can solve our problem, is by facing it, head on.

We are all builders of the beauty and greatness of the Filipino. We are the architects of our nation’s success.

To all the people of HK and China, especially the relatives of the victims, my family and I deeply mourn with the loss of your loved ones. Every life is precious. My family and I humbly ask for your understanding and forgiveness.

Alex Lacson wrote an article titled The Filipino Today. It is a well meaning, carefully researched piece but it is flawed on many levels.

1. He says we must accept the Luneta incident " as part of us Filipinos.. a failure on our part, a disappointment to the whole world.." It is not so.

The Luneta incident was a result of the ineptitude and insensitivity of the police force and officials of the present administration. I and more than ninety million Filipinos here and abroad had nothing to do with it. We refuse to be identified with the dullness of mind and spirit of a handful of policemen and politicians.

2. He says we must protect and defend the Filipino and hence he makes no explicit condemnation of the character of the hostage taker, the conduct of the negotiators, the blind, unthinking carelessness of the government authorities with human life. But there is nothing Filipino in violence and irrational recklessness.

3. Instead he implies that the persons responsible for the death of the hostages may not be judged too harshly because after all there are heroes like Jose Rizal, celebrities like Ruffa Gutierrez, athletes like Manny Pacquiao and singers like Lea Salonga.

This is absurdly irrelevant. The nobility of Dr. Rizal, the looks of Ms Gutierrez, the strength of Mr. Paquiao and the talent of Ms Salonga belong to them alone.

4. If Alex Lacson claims kinship to Rizal, and a connection to Gutierrez, Pacquiao and Salonga, then he must admit complicity to the cupidity and cruelty of the Marcos dictatorship, the cases of corruption in the Aquino, Ramos, Estrada, and Macapagal regimes, the lawlessness of the NPA, the malevolence of the Abu Sayaf. I am not prepared to do that.

5. The point is this: Filipinos should not be burdened by collective guilt anymore than they can justifiably claim credit for individual endeavor and achievement. Each of us must account for himself and receive praise or blame as he deserves. Misconduct and merit are non transferable. Neither can truly be shared. In a social context the doctrine of Original Sin does not apply and Redemption by association is not possible.

I must say I agree with the writer and I apologize to my friend Alex Lacson who perhaps, if he had enough time, would have taken a more nuanced position.

So it seems ludicrous to me that members of the administration who are actually culpable for the mishandling of the hostage crisis should announce to media that "they would not abandon the President."

One of them said, "I am willing to take a bullet for him."

Needless to say none of them has admitted any blunder or negligence on their part.

My question is: Why would anyone need to defend or shield the president ? He is not to blame. It is he who at an enormous personal sacrifice is assuming responsibility for the incompetence of his men. He is helping those who are supposed to help him. And this is where I agree with the writer. The President's generosity, his willingness to protect his people can only go so far. The President's men must show individual capability, resourcefulness, drive and intelligence to meet the challenges which the Aquino administration will surely meet in the days to come.

Much is expected from the President and he has the mind, heart and spirit to live up to the people's expectations.

But those around him should not only avoid being part of a problem but devise their own solution to a bad situation of their own making.

There is no need to take a bullet for the President. No one is shooting at him. He is blameless. But it may be time for some of the President's men to bite the bullet, acknowledge the fault that is theirs alone and face the inevitable consequences.

The Philippine election is over. I have returned to Guymon, Oklahoma where I have spent much of the last twenty years of my life. I left in winter--in my heart, many more seasons ago--to join the campaign of Noynoy Aquino to transform the future of our country.

It has been an intense, bruising, bewildering hundred-twenty days, marked by hours of confusion, stress, frustration, and also by special moments of excitement, passion, kinship, hope and inexplicable joy.

I did not lack energy or enthusiasm. I immersed myself completely in the campaign, fully involved in town meetings, debates, media engagements. I spoke, attacked, parried, promoted, persuaded, and in the end, I placed 35th in the senate race.

What did I accomplish?

Looking back now, in the placid Oklahoma spring, I have a simple answer: I helped.

True to my code as a physician and my values as a Filipino, I answered the call of Noynoy Aquino as he reached out, and Filipinos at home and abroad responded, and now we have a new President Aquino.
This was not an exercise in nostalgia. It was a collective expression of hope.

Hope shared by millions that government corruption would be stanched, as indeed it will be; that new men in office would try harder, as indeed they will; that the burden of Filipino families would be lighter, and life, somehow, would be better, as indeed it will.

It is why I am happy and gratified, without a Senate seat, but with the knowledge that I have been of help, if only in a small personal way, to President Noynoy, and in the final analysis, to the Filipino people whom he will serve honestly and well.

A few words of sincere gratitude to all the men and women of goodwill ( many more than I had expected) who gave the campaign material and moral support. In behalf of Noynoy Aquino and in my own behalf, let me say, thank you. Maraming, maraming salamat. All of us can say together, with one voice, in this proud moment of history: I helped.

Yet the struggle is not over. The work is not done. Actually it begins now and will continue with every passing day. President Noynoy will continue to need us, each one of us ("Kayo ang Aking Lakas"). Let us be unselfish in our assistance, unstinting in our cooperation and unwavering in our dedication to help him recover and restore the hope of a nation which seemed to have been irretrievably lost.