To some, the Vice President can be characterized as not only combative but unwelcoming of either scrutiny or debate. Public discourse is less about debate, and more about shouting contrarian voices down, even when operating from a position of strength, which she arguably was in terms of Congress acting on her budget. Not the parliamentary clumsiness of the President's son—who 'moved to terminate' the Vice President's budget (instead of moving to terminate debate: a substantial difference; technically one could argue the enthusiastic support for the Sandro Marcos motion effectively abolished the entire VP budget) nor the 'aha!' moment of the opposition (when it noticed the VP's intelligence funds were an augmentation, when there hadn't been a similar provision the year before, hence how could something nonexistent be added to?) could faze the executive department: the executive secretary (who knows a thing or two about allocations, having written the Supreme Court decision that narrowed the discretion available to the executive to do so) declared everything kosher after Congress fell over itself to exempt the VP from scrutiny.

https://opinion.inquirer.net/166271/get-thanks-for-giving-nothing

#inquirer