Elected President

Its's been 2 months since my last post. On 27 Aug Singaporeans will head for polling stations for the 2nd time in 2011. This time to elect our President.

There has been much talk and debate about who we should vote for. Many are asking for us to vote for an independent candidate. One who can provide a check and balance on the government. Some are asking for someone who has the ability to make the right decision when the call comes for the President to exercise his custodial powers. Others are looking for someone with the stature to represent our country in the international arena.

It is mostly a battle of words to me. Some candidates come up with a strong stand and back down a bit when challenged, especially where their words can bring about consequences outside the campaign. We are voting for a President and not a politician after all. Until the government decides to initiate any change, the constitution is what it is today. Why waste effort and resources debating issues that are currently outside the current powers of the presidential office according to the current constitution?

I prefer someone who can do his best for the country given the existing circumstances to someone who talks about change beyond his powers. This is not the mark of a weak person to recognize limitations beyond his control. It takes intelligence to recognize where one's capability can be put to best use with the most positive results. Track records count, despite the fact that many may claim otherwise.

The incumbent has been in office for 12 years and was never elected by the people. However, that did not stop him from garnering the support and love of the general public by his actions. His act of championing worthwhile causes which benefit many Singaporeans did not go unrecognized. Was he a radical President who endlessly challenged the government? We do not know beyond what is in records available to the public. So far nothing has shown that he has challenged the government substantially.

If the 4 Presidential candidates felt very strongly about the ability of the President to provide check and balance on the government, why didn't they stand for election during the last Presidential term? We have had the same government for 46 years. It is the times that had changed. During good times, nobody thinks about such matters. Why? Everyone is busy making money and are happy. Bread and butter issues are not on the table when we have caviar and champagne. Did the income gap exist prior to 2011? Of course it did. Were there always people who needed help? Of course there were. Did the capacity of the President change over the last 12 years? No.

Then why didn't any of the 4 candidates do something about it then instead of now?

Some are riding wave of dissidence among the public against the government. The President has less say in policies than the opposition Members of Parliament. It's a reality that we must accept. If the President were to overstep his authority as outlined in the Constitution, wouldn't he stand the risk of being prosecuted by Public Prosecutor in the District Attorney's office? I wouldn't know because I'm a commoner with no legal knowledge.

All I know is that although my vote is secret, I can share my vote with you. I will be voting for a Tan.