The numbers game in a democracy

Numbers are an inevitable part of our lives as human beings, sometimes even creating undue pressure on our daily lives as we chase these numbers for our own survival. For example, we need to have enough money to feed our families and prepare for eventual health crises within the family and even for the future of our children.

But numbers are even more imposing in a representative democracy.

Our officials get elected through the ballots we cast, and these are counted after an election. These officials are supposed to represent not their personal interests but the interests of those who voted for them to be in office. They are supposed to be accountable for everything they do in their privileged positions.

Article continues after this advertisement

In any democratic state, those who get the highest number of votes are declared winners.

FEATURED STORIES

OPINION

OPINION

OPINION

A French aristocrat, Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859), wrote extensively on democracy, its essence, but also on its inevitable drawback, warning readers of democracy’s tendency to lead toward a “tyranny of the majority.”

In 1831, Tocqueville visited the United States of America, then a very young democratic state, to study its political and penal systems, and published his observations and analysis in a two-volume work, “Democracy in America.”

In this seminal work, Tocqueville noted that Americans valued equality (that was then), and concluded that democracy can be the “ultimate equalizer of social conditions.”

Article continues after this advertisement

However, he also noted that while democracies stress equality and individual freedom, they also pose the possibility of a tyranny of numbers—of the majority imposing their public opinions and crushing minority rights and dissenting opinions from a few. Those who have the “numbers”—the democratic majority—can use social pressure and conformity to quash dissenting views and minority concerns.

Tocqueville’s early warning on the “tyranny of the majority” has played out in Philippine politics for quite some time, and in fact has been the cause of major upheavals in its contemporary institutions like the House of Representatives and the Senate.

On July 23, 2018, then Rep. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo became the new speaker of the House of Representatives with the support of 184 fellow representatives. She wrested it from then Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez after a leadership row that delayed the delivery of then President Rodrigo Duterte’s State of the Nation Address for that year. Talks behind this change insinuated the influential role of then Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte in installing Macapagal Arroyo as the first woman Speaker.

Article continues after this advertisement

We have seen four quite dramatic changes in the leadership of the Senate within the current Congress, which started with the replacement of Sen. Jose Miguel Zubiri by Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero in May 2024. More than a year later, in September 2025, Sen. Vicente “Tito” Sotto III replaced Escudero, and in May 2026, Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano replaced Sotto after a dramatic chain of events involving the sudden appearance of fugitive Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa in the Senate. In all these changes, the numbers game was the determinant as Dela Rosa appeared to complete the “majority number” of senators to install Cayetano.

But once again, some more movement in the Senate majority and minority memberships changed the equation after the alleged shooting incident in the Senate. This created a new “majority” with two former majority senators shifting allegiance to a new majority.

This new majority elected Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian as the new Senate president.

Gatchalian heads the Senate as it is conducting the impeachment trial of VP Sara.

Last week started the series of hearings for VP Sara’s impeachment trial. Once again, numbers are mentioned by the Vice President’s defense lawyers to quash the impeachment case against her. One of these arguments noted that a vote of 31 million Filipinos means popular approval of VP Sara, thus, the impeachment case should be dismissed.

But the more important issue that is now being incessantly debated in the impeachment trial is the number needed to impeach VP Sara. The Constitution says that two-thirds of the number of senators, which is 24, is needed for VP Sara to be impeached.

This translates to 16 of the 24 senators. But with the absence of three senators—one a fugitive (Dela Rosa), and two others incarcerated—Jinggoy Estrada for plunder and Rodante Marcoleta for violating electoral laws and misdeclaring his statement of assets and liabilities, the total number of ”working senators” is now 21. This means that a vote of 14 senators in favor of impeachment can hold. But what if the Senate impeachment court presiding judge—Escudero—sticks to the rigid interpretation of 16 as the required two-thirds vote of the 24 senators?

Abangan.

—————-

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Comments to [email protected]