Chapter 1

PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Matured Filipino voter? This has been one of the arguable stories of the

previous midterm elections. Indeed, a maturing democracy is good for development.

But how much of these assumptions are actually true especially when we consider the

growing number of informal settlers in the urban area and their reified efficacy in the

outcome of our elections and democracy. By which this study ought to analyze as this

sector of the society plays a significant role upon the outcome of the Senatorial

election.

Every citizen of a country has been endowed with rights and privileges which

are protected by their respective constitution. A man has three basic rights: right to life,

liberty and property. These rights should be stated in one state constitution. In order for

a citizen to exercise his right to liberty, the government is compelled to give their

people the privilege to choose the public officials who will administer the country; this

right is basically known as the right to vote or right to exercise one’s suffrage.

In our archipelago, we claimed to have a democratic government. We have a

republican form of democracy wherein people choose their leaders and representatives

via election process. Democracy goes yet a step further than this. Shively (2008)

claimed that “in a democracy, it is hoped not only that people will obey the laws and be

enthusiastic citizens but that they will also be at the same time critical citizens.”

Nevertheless, there are certain characteristics that a democratic citizen must at least

1
acquire in order to make democracy truly effective. And among these are active

participation which could connote voting regularly and a high level of interest and

information which similarly suppose that people’s knowledge about the candidates they

are choosing.

In Philippine setting, the 1987 Constitution also protects the Filipino citizen’s

right to vote. It’s stated in Article V, Section 1: “Suffrage may be exercised by all

citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen

years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year, and in

the place wherein they propose to vote, for at least six months immediately preceding

the election. No literacy, property, or other substantive requirement shall be imposed

on the exercise of suffrage.” Every citizen of the Philippines who was able to pass such

qualifications and was able to be registered as a voter can exercise this right.

According to COMELEC (Commission on Election), as of now there are approximately

52 million of registered voters from all parts of the Philippines which came from

different sectors but the most people who comprised these population are people from

poor class, which in a similar vein wherein the informal settlers belongs to.

In our country, the people who came from rural areas have this notion that there

are bigger and lot of opportunities here in Metro Manila. Due to this notion, people from

provinces tend to migrate in Metro Manila which causes the bloating population in the

city; in the end some of these people tend to become informal settlers. Makati, as a

part of Metro Manila and known to be the business capital, has also been inflated with

informal settlers.

2
 Informal settlers are still citizens of our country; they are also entitled to exercise

their right to vote just like the formal settlers. In our study the formal settlers are defined

as De Leon (2008) stated that they are seen as private individuals who own private

lands in this study; these are the voters of Barangay Valenzuela who own the parcel of

land in which they built their houses. While the informal settlers as the National Census

Office has defined Informal Settlers as “households occupying a lot rent-free without

the consent of the owner”. These are residential areas where a group of housing units

have been constructed on land to which the occupants have no legal claim, or which

they occupy illegally.

In this study, these are the voters of Barangay Valenzuela residing in a place

which they lack of ownership to the land parcel on which they built their houses as well

as living in the areas that are not viable to live in according to the city government.

These two settlers came from different class; the former is known to come from the low

class which is sometimes being deprived of some things in life, like a better quality of

education and the latter who came from middle or upper class, (see appendix C social

status and income tables pp.93-96) which arethe more privileged ones as to compare

to those living in an informal settlement. These two classes differ in their type of

behaviour and preferences in life but they have a common similarity, they prioritize the

things that they needed the most. Their classes affect the factors which result to their

behaviour; such behaviour of the informal and legal settlers can also be observed on

how the way they vote or choose their leaders.

Florin (n.d.) said that the voters’ educational background is one of the factors

that affect their voting behavior and preference. He added that the people with higher

3
education have a higher sense of civic duty, and stronger allegiance to the political

system. Education gives various political resources needed by the voters in order to

make informed choices. In relation to the voting turnout education is a determinant

factor for policy preferences and partisan choice. Similarly, in terms of socioeconomic

status Pelero (2008) stated that in the context of Philippine elections communities with

lower incomes are more likely to vote because they are more susceptible to political

operators and electoral fraud mechanisms especially vote buying and because unlike

those with higher incomes who may engage the political process through personal

connections or civic involvement, voting remains the major way low-income people can

be involved in the political process.

This study focuses to determine the differences of the voting preferencesof the

Formal settlers and Informal settlers of [Link], Makati City for the local itself

is among our country’s most urbanized local and the barangay in itself despite of its

comparatively better off local economy was still plaque with informal settlers.

Furthermore, this study will analyze the factors that affect the voting preferences of

these two kinds of settlers like the candidates characteristics that lead them to vote

their chosen senators on the last 2013 elections. Given the hard data that the two

types of settlers differed in their social class and profile as a modifying variable to

classify them. Did the residents have responsibly exercise their right to vote? Have

they placed their vote for the right candidates and have given the seats in the

government to the most competent individuals? The researchers chose to study the

voting preferences of the residents of [Link], Makati City because of its large

number of population, the heterogeneity of its population that consists of the formal

4
settlers and informal settlers, the location of the city and lastly to find out the

preferences of the people that resides in the most prestige “Business Capital of the

Philippines.”

5
Theoretical Framework

The Central place theory of Christaller (1933) concluded that people gather

together in cities to share goods and ideas and that they exist for purely economic

reasons. The researchers thought that this is of the reasons why many people

originally from the rural area tend to migrate to the cities of the metro that is one of the

growing causes of informal settlement. Robert Andersen and Anthony Heath (2000) in

their study entitled “Social Cleavages, Attitude and Voting Patterns” used the

Sociological approach to voting theory by which it states that group identities affect

attitudes and interest which in turn affect how people vote. And that they vote for

parties that best reflects the interest of their group. Thus, by implication in any given

society the effects of group membership should be the same on attitude as they are on

vote. In relation to our study the researchers presumes that the two different class of

formal settlers and informal settlers significantly different in their voting behavior given

their difference on the Index of political predisposition of: socio economic status and

area of residence.

Following the Sociological approach to voting theory, in the findings of

Lazarsfeld et al. (1944) showed that majority of the voters voted according to their

original political predisposition. Similarly, it is said that the association between

electoral behavior and the social groups to which they belonged was so strong that it

was possible to explain the electoral choices using factors such as socio-economic

status, religion and area of residence. In our country, Article 5 section 1 of the 1987

Constitution stipulates that “no literacy, property, or other substantive requirement

shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage”. Sison (2013) stated that “the informal

6
settler’s right to vote in the election seems to be the very reason behind the chronic

squatter problem in this country because politicians themselves largely depend on

squatters’ vote to win elections.” which is consistent with the rational choice theory Hay

(2002) wherein the individual actors involved such as the voters and the candidates are

engaged in maximizing their material self-interest. They behave rationally, maximizing

personal utility net cost while giving little or no consideration to the consequences for

others of their behavior. Garrett Hardin (1968) ‘Tragedy of the commons’, concluded

that the long-term effects for the environment are all too obvious, by which individual

rationality translates into collective irrationality. This supports the notion of relationship

between the dynamics of the informal settler’s electorate and the policymakers that

indeed results to the degradation of our environment and democracy in terms of its

ideal sense.

I’ll give you a tax cut for your vote and healthcare for everyone for your vote.

Everything is a transaction with the citizen in a transactional democracy. Hence, using

the concepts of transactional politics,a study conducted by Amoranto, Chun,

&Deolalikar (2010) entitled “Who are the Middle Class and What Values do They

Hold?” Evidences from the World Values Survey claimed that “The middle class is on

average more politically active than the lower or upper classes. This is consistent with

the story that the middle class is important in its demand for better goods and services

and keeping governments accountable.” According to theNational Statistical

Coordination Board (NSCB) the middle class or the middle income earners can be

classifiedas the class earning an average of P36, 934 per month. According to

Thompson and Hickey (2005) the middle class are can be classified as those whom

7
arehighly-educated, professionals and semi-professionals. (See appendix C for the

table of social class)Thus, this goes to show that a rising middle class like those living

in a formal settlement that pay real estate taxes and income taxes were deemed to be

the more ideal class of electorate compared to those in the upper and lowest strata of

the society.

On the other hand, a study entitled “Local Dynamics in Informal settlement

Development” by BaktiSetiawan (1998) showed that the success of particular

kampung(Informal settlement) communities in developing their settlements depends on

the ability of kampung people to develop informal-reciprocal relations with external

agencies. The nature of policy formulation and implementation in relation to kampung

problems is characterized by a fluid and reciprocal series of interrelations among many

individuals and agencies, within and outside government. Patron-client relations exist

between government officials and kampung people, and these relationships

significantly determine the level of government support to each kampung.

This study concluded that the Indonesian government needs to treat housing and

kampung issues as part of a broader social welfare policy and should create more

transparent and fairer mechanisms to guarantee equal opportunities for access to

urban resources and decision making processes. Hence, just like here in the

Philippines, such relations continue to exist, particularly because of the persistence of

imbalances in control over resources and power between the government and the

informal settler communities that result to transactional democracy between the

electorate and the candidates buying to win votes. Thus, it was deemed that the socio-

8
economic status through the difference in home settlement (formal or informal) a factor

to consider regarding the voting behaviour of individuals.

Another factor to consider is the clientelistic nature of our election process. John

Duncan Powell (1970) defined the key features of patron-client relationship. “First, the

patron-client tie develops between two parties’ unequal in status, wealth and influence.

Second, the formation and maintenance of the relationship depends on reciprocity in

the exchange of goods and services. Third, the development and maintenance of a

patron-client relationship rest heavily on face to face contact between two parties.”

Because of its unequal nature, the patron-client relationship is inherently

unstable but in the context of traditional village life, the fairly simple network of mutual

relationships is well known and fully understood. This tendency to instability increases

rapidly in the context of urban immigrants, whose desire for jobs makes them

vulnerable to recruitment into a much more complex network where any sense of

reciprocal obligation is easily lost.

On the other hand, Thompson (2010) states that populism is another form of

elitist democracy and that in our country the populist candidates like Estrada and Poe

did not rely on organized labor for support, but on the large informal sector of the poor

and marginalized rural area. Similarly, he defined populism as the process wherein

candidates involves direct media-carried appeals by leaders in the form of promises to

help the common tao (people) at the expense of the elite. This distinguishedit from

clientelism which involves indirect ties between national leaders and voters via local

leaders who develop dyadic ties with their voter clients. Albeit, populism and

9
clientelismoverlaps because of the small number of middle class and large number of

underclass, not just in terms of income, but in terms of health care and other basic

services. Much of the lower class is involved in what is today termed “informal sector”.

That is consistent with our study regarding the voting preferences of these informal

settlers and their influence to our electoral process.

No matter how democratic the electoral procedures may be, national

legislatures and political executives rarely, if ever, mirror the class make-up of their

electorates. Nevertheless, since in our country leaders usually lack strong ideological

conviction, seeing the will of the common people as being a determining factor and

vice versa for the voters. As Canovan(1981) said that, “The key to their success is the

way in which they identify issues that call forth the maximum response from their

constituency.”

According to Maor (1997), “in every electoral process there are two main actors:

the voters and the candidates”. These two actors have different aims why they

participate in election. Most of the theories about voting and party competition which

share the broad rational-choice rubric recognized two types of actors: (i) parties, which

consist of unified leaders who only aimed to win the office through elections; (ii)

electors, who wish to advance their political and economic ends”. In order to garner the

votes of the electors, leaders follow the voter’s interests.

In the Philippines, we have a multi-party system which allows several political

parties to participate during elections. Given such rights, many political parties with

different ideologies emerge in our country during elections. The numerous numbers of

10
allowed parties to participate in election created a sphere of competition. As Maor

(1997), explained “Down’s spatial model of electoral competition seen the parties or

candidates behaving analogously to firms, and voters in much as the same way as

consumers”. In which parties tend to create policies aligned with the interests of the

people, other parties’ fear of losing the elections, try to formulate policies similar with

the other parties to attract voters. Through this act, political ideologies of the parties are

being ignored. Voters also possessing their own interests follow the rationality

principle- electors tend to vote for the alternative closest to the most preferred one.

The attitude of the voters in choosing leaders was based on their rational

thinking. Meaning, electors tend to place a candidate in a government position

depending on the policies that they promise to formulate which they think that will

benefit them the [Link] behavior theory posits that humans have perfect

knowledge and always make economically rational decisions. Consumers are assumed

to have complete information on the availability of goods and services in the landscape

and, in seeking to minimize transport time and cost, always to visit the nearest center

supplying the goods [Link] relation to this, most of the Filipinos tend to vote for a

candidate because they knew that they will gain something out of it. Thus, voters, upon

knowing the program of a certain candidate, conceive that it is beneficial to them.

Thus, by using the above mentioned theories, it clearly help the researchers

build the main purpose of the study: which isto determine and compare whether the

socio-economic status through difference in home settlement (informal and formal)

would have a significant effect and relationship upon the voting preferences of the

selected formal settlers and informal settlers of Barangay Valenzuela, Makati City on

11
the previous 2013 Senatorial election using different influencing factors. The

researchers have also sought to ground its assumptions regarding the voter-candidate

relations on the political dynamics field of inquiry of political science which indeed

support the researchers claim regarding the necessity of revisiting our electoral laws at

least through an undergraduate study that targets specific classes of voters at the heart

of the Metro Manila in Makati city.

12
 Conceptual Framework

I.P.O Model
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Independent variables
Dependent variable
Type of Settlement:
Respondent’s evaluation Voting Preferences of the
Formal and Informal
of 2013 Senatorial Formal and Informal
Characteristics of Senatorial
Candidates through Settlers of Brgy.
Candidates:
questionnaires Valenzuela, Makati City
Popularity
dddddddddddddddd
on 2013 Senatorial
Educational Background
ddd Elections
Family Background
dddddddddddddd
Experience
dddddd
Platforms

Feedback:

Differences in preferences ascertained

This framework is based upon the Input-Process-Output model wherein the

independent variables are the inputs which are type of settlement of the respondents

and the characteristics of the senatorial candidates. The independentvariables are

considered as the inputs which are the factors which affect the voting preferences of

formal and informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial

[Link] order to determine their voting preferences which would serve as the

13
dependent variable of this model, the respondents from the formal and informal settlers

wouldfirst evaluate the characteristics of the candidates through answering the given

questionnaires by the researchers. The gathered data will be interpreted by the use of

different statistical method which will be explained in the following chapters of this

paper. The interpreted and collected data will reflect the voting preferences of the

[Link], the output will determine if there is a difference in the voting

preferences of the formal settlersand informal settlers of Barangay Valenzuela, Makati

City on the 2013 Senatorial [Link] resulting feedback would then ascertain the

differences in preference of the two kind of settlement.

Statement of the Problem:

The main objective of this study is to determine the difference in the voting

preferences of the formal settlers and informal settlers of [Link], Makati City

on the 2013 Senatorial Election.

Specifically it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of

1.1 Age;

1.2 Gender;

1.3 Educational Attainment;

1.4 Income;

1.5 Type of Settlement?

14
2. How did the following characteristics of the 2013 Senatorial candidates affect the

voting preference of the respondents?

2.1 Popularity;

2.2 Educational Background;

2.3 Family Background;

2.4 Experience;

2.5 Platforms?

[Link] there a significant difference on the voting preferences of the formal and informal

settlers of [Link], Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial Election?

Significance of the Study

This study is deemed significant for a number of reasons:

LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF BARANGAY VALENZUELA –Thestudy could enlighten

thelocal government about the needs of their residents. As this research study would

provide a ratio of some of the informal settlers in the locale which may help their local

government to properly deal with them.

LEGISLATORS/ POLICY MAKERS - The result of this study will identify factors that

affect the voting preferences of the citizen of the country. Identifying the needs of the

citizen will help the policy makers to formulate policy or programs that will seek to

answer the needs of the citizens. Understanding the ends of these voters would not

15
only hasten possible solutions towards the illness that deteriorates our society. This

country needs sustainable development. Thus, this study could back this eventuality

through adding ideas and research that are esteemed towards long term progress.

ASPIRING POLITICIANS/ PUBLIC OFFICIALS -The study would give them the ideas

on how to garner the support of the voters and the things that they needed to consider

in order to win the elections. Identifying the factors that the voters consider to support a

candidate will help the politician to think of the strategies and formulating platforms that

will suit perfectly to the interest of the voters and will surely encourage the people to

vote for them.

RESIDENTS OF BARANGAY VALENZUELA –This study would be beneficial to the

residents of the said barangay, with them being the respondents of the study they

would know and learn the methods and system of their voting. This will make them

more conscious and analytical of the candidates that they vote in the succeeding

elections and will maximize the utilization of their suffrage, therefore, having a real

government official which would represent their needs.

FUTURE RESEARCHERS – This study would also be beneficial to future researchers

if ever they are conducting a study that has similar context as this current study in

which this could be used as their reference. This will also serveas a guide in utilizing

theories related to their studies and the most relevant statistical methods to be applied

in their study.

POLITICAL SCIENCE STUDENTS- As a political science student, this study would

provide an additional drumbeat and empirical basis for the theories of politics that we

16
are studying. Similarly, this study would provide an additional experience and training

regarding the students researching and field application as we shall formulate our

study in the realm of practical politics here in the Philippine context.

Hypothesis

Ho: There is no significant difference on the voting preferences of the formal and

informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial Election.

Scope and Delimitation

This study determines whether the type of settlement of the respondents affects

their voting preferences. Furthermore, this research study also focus on identifying if

the voting preferences of the formal and informal settlers would have a significant

difference from each other on the on the 2013 Senatorial Elections

This study covers only and used the following factors such as personal

characteristics of the senatorial candidates their Popularity, Educational Background,

Family Background, Experience and Platforms. The respondents Type of

Settlementwill be taken into account by the researchers in interpreting the voting

preferences of the respondents on the 2013 Senatorial Election. Furthermore, this

study ought not to interpret other factors that are not stated which affect the voting

preferences of the respondents.

17
 The study will survey the randomly selected formal settlers and informal settlers

of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City. The respondents are registered as a voter in their

respective places and have participated in the last 2013 Senatorial Elections.

18
Definition of Terms

Educational Background

- In this study, it is the academic attainment and learning of a senatorial

candidate. It involves the candidate’s level of education, academic honors, the

educational institution that he attended to and the degree program that he or

she finished.

Experience

- It is the service of the candidate while holding a public office. It is seen as the

overall political career of a politician that includes his or her political tactics

and how he or she has worked for the people and the number of years

he/she worked as a politician. (Retrieved as of 8/30/13 at

[Link]

Family Background

- In this study, it is the reputation or influence of the family of the candidate to

the government or [Link] involves the genealogical clan of the candidate

as well as his or her personal relationship to that clan.

Formal Settlers

- De Leon (2008) stated that they are seen as private individuals who own

private lands in this study; these are the voters of Barangay Valenzuela who

own the parcel of land in which they built their houses.

19
Informal Settlers

- The National Census Office has defined Informal Settlers as “households

occupying a lot rent-free without the consent of the owner”.These are

residential areas where a group of housing units have been constructed on

land to which the occupants have no legal claim, or which they occupy

[Link] this study, these are the voters of BarangayValenzuela residing in

a place which they lack of ownership to the land parcel on which they built

their houses as well as living in the areas that are not viable to live in

according to the city government.

Platforms

- It is the objectives drafted and forwarded by the candidates during election

which could be turned into policies if they are elected for office. It often

comes in the form of a manifesto, a carefully worded political document that

appeals to voters by touching on a number of issues which are important to

them. (Retrieved as of 8/30/13 at [Link]

[Link])

Popularity

- It is the reputation and charisma of the candidate. It may include the ties of a

candidate to an icon or his or her familiar name. (Retrieved as of 8/31/13

at[Link]

20
Senator

- De Leon (2008) defined a senator as one of the persons who compose the

Senate. He or she is one of the legislators of the Senate that are tasked with

making laws and policies of the state.

Senatorial Candidate

- A person who ran as a candidate in the election to be a member of the

Senate. De Leon (2008) stated that a person is qualified to run as a Senator

if he or she is a natural-born citizen, able to read and write, resides in the

state for not less than two years and must be at least 35 years old.

Senatorial Election

- Aligada-Reyes &Ayson (2000) defined election as an act of expressing a

voter’s choice among political candidates for a public office. In this case the

people will select on who will have the seats in the Senate. This is done by

voting the candidates running for the said elective government office.

Voter

- According to De Leon (2008), voters must be citizens of the Philippines and

must be at least 18 years of age, able to read and write and resides in the

state for 1 year and resides in his or her area of residence for 6 months. In

this study, the voter is defined as the registered voters in Barangay

Valenzuela, Makati City which participated in the 2013 Senatorial Elections.

21
Voting Preference

- IPER (2003) defined voting preference as the group of factors that affect the

voting decision of the citizens when it comes to the election. In this study, the

type of settlement and the evaluation of the respondents of the

characteristics of the candidates are the factors that are considered to be

their voting preference

22
 Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the literature and studies reviewed by the researchers

which have significant bearing with the present study.

Popularity

The study entitled Does Local Candidate Matter is a study done in Canada by

Blais, Gidengil, Dobrzynska, Nevitte, and Nadeau (n.d.)has the popularity of a local

candidate as a factor of his or her wins or losses in past elections and that of his

parties as one of its focuses. There were two questions posed on this study; that is

whether rural and/or more sophisticated voters were more likely to form a preference

for a local candidate than those voters who are in the urban areas and those voters

who are less sophisticated and whether preference for a local candidate had a greater

impact on the voting choice of the rural voters as well as sophisticated voters than that

of the urban voters and less sophisticated voters.

Overall Blais, Gidengil, Dobrzynska, Nevitte and Nadeu’s study showed that 5%

of the Canadian voters voted on the basis of their preference of the local candidate and

his or her personal characteristics one of which is popularity. This implied that even

though local candidates and their personal popularity matter less when it comes to their

parties and its leaders’ popularity the voter’s preference on the former which are the

local candidates is not negligible and still has an impact on winning elections.

23
 In their study,Blais, Gidengil, Dobrzynska, Nevitte and Nadeu saw popularity as

one of the characteristics of a local candidate and a party. Here, popularity is

manifested in terms of the personal identity of the candidate aside from his or her

political party identity. People tend to identify with the candidate that is of close to

them, a candidate who they see every day of their life because he or she is a neighbor.

Due to this, the study is related to the researcher’s study because the researchers,

through this study, believe that the personal popularity of the candidate could be a

factor in the voting preference of the respondents involved in the researcher’s study as

it showed a little bit of the culture of the Filipinos when it comes to their local

candidates wherein the Filipinos care more for their local candidate than their local

candidate’s political party.

Regarding the influencing factors upon the voter’s decision Max Weber (1964)

believed that “the authority of government originally stemmed from what he termed

charismas that is to say, the outstanding personality or personal qualities of an

individual”. Therefore, it enabled the researchers to consider popularity as a factor to

consider that may affect the votingbehaviour of the respondents.

Popularity of the candidate is also one of the focuses of the study of Institute of

Political and Electoral Reform (2003) which entitled Restudying the Filipino Voter

Today. According to the study, popularity of the candidate in terms of him or her being

a celebrity before running in the elections is one of the key determinants when it comes

to the voting of Filipinos. An example would be Joseph Ejercito Estrada winning the

presidential elections in 1998 over Jose de Venecia. The former was a famous showbiz

celebrity while the latter was the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

24
 This implied that during this time the Filipino voters based their votes upon

whom they know more and since majority of the citizens know Estrada than de Venecia

Estrada won the elections. In this study,IPER stated that after the ousting of Ferdinand

Marcos the political arena in the Philippines which were ruled by political clans before

were invaded by showbiz personalities. IPER stated that key informants see popularity,

public image, political machinery and platforms to be the main factors or basis of the

votes of Filipinos. The intelligent voters look upon the political machinery of the

candidates which are their speeches, opinions on the issues and brochures as well as

their platforms since these factors show how the candidates are going to contribute in

addressing the country’s problems. Other voters on the other hand look upon the

candidate’s popularity and image because the candidates who are famous or popular

with a good image are well known and liked by majority of the public.

According to IPER, popularity on the other hand,is reflected through the

candidate’s reputation and attitude. Here, the voters judge the candidate’s social

interaction as to how he or she express his or her ideas to the public and if he or she

can be approached by the people easily. The disadvantage here comes from the lack

of guarantee that the other qualifications of the candidate such as his or her education

are met, the voters if they see that the candidate has good image and can be

approached easily, can still rely on him or her to listen to their needs and representing

them in Congress, thus, airing the said needs to his or her fellow legislators in a way

that could be easily understood and help in addressing the said needs quickly and

properly.

25
 This study helped the researchers in seeing that popularity is a factor in knowing

the voting preference of the respondents involved with their study which are the formal

and informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City during the 2013 Senatorial

Electionsespecially since it was done in the same country where the respondents are

citizens. Thus, it showed the attitude of the Filipino voters electing showbiz celebrity

turned politicians.

These two studies implied that popularity whether it is personal or for a political

party does affect voter’s choice and preference. Since elections are held on a majority

of the people basis, it is quite important that the people know who their choices for

government officials are. Popularity signifies the knowledge of the voter about the

identity, reputation and attitude of the candidates. The voter sees the candidate’s face

and bearing. Although education and experience is not assured, from the way the

candidate interacts and the way he or she could be reached by the people, the voters

could judge if he or she could serve the people whole heartedly.

Educational Background

In the study “What voters want: Reactions to candidate characteristics in a

survey experiment” by Campbell and Cowley, the authors compared the impact of the

religion, education, occupation, age, sex and residence of the candidate’s on the voting

choice of the respondents. Campbell and Cowley (2013), concluded through a survey

experiment in which respondents rate two candidates based on short biographies that

age, sex, religion and education of the candidates have only minimal effect on the

26
voting decisions of the respondents but the occupation and the place of residence of

an electoral candidate have more sizeable effects.

The study showed that educational status of a candidate does have a small

effect on the voting choice of the respondents wherein Campbell and Clowey stated

that “the less educated version of George was seen as less experienced compare to

the other candidate, John, but in every other way he was seen as a better candidate

than the university-educated version. The version of George with a PhD was perceived

to be slightly more approachable, but on other traits a higher level of education merely

made him seem less experienced and less effective”. A candidate which is eighteen-

year-old school leaver is perceived by respondents to be more mature, achieved and

have more experienced compare to the other candidate to a sixteen-year-old school

leaver. In terms of effectiveness as a public official, the respondents observed and

preferred a candidate who is a sixteen-year-old school leaver but have acquired more

life experience or `life outside the school premise to be more competent rather than a

candidate which dedicate most of his life in studying in school. Furthermore,

respondents preferred a candidate which are presumed to be more approachable

although having a lower educational status rather than choosing a candidate with a

PhD which is seen by the respondents to be unreachable.

The paper explained that voters highly consider a candidate with a high

educational attainment but also take into consideration the candidate’s approachability.

The author provided the researcher’s knowledge of the impact of demographic profile

which an electoral candidate’s affects the voting decision of the voters and specifically,

on how the voters give importance to one candidate’s educational background.

27
 Educational background of the candidates is given importance by the voters as

one of the factors which influence the votes of the people belonging to the low class as

stated by Dean Tony Laviña. In his article, “The vote of the poor” which base in the

book “The Vote of the Poor: Modernity and Tradition in People’s Views of Leadership

and Elections”, a study conducted by Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) of the Ateneo

de Manila University which seeks to answer whether the respondents of the study were

lack of rational principles and their cynic attitude towards the electoral [Link]ña

(2013), “the preponderant weight of literature depicts them as lacking in rational

principles, susceptible as they are to the “traditional” aspects of Philippine politics like

“patron-client relationships, and highly personalistic electoral system. Because of their

lack of rational principles and are often considered generally cynical about electoral

exercises and politics in general, they are most vulnerable to demagogues and

unscrupulous politicians who pander to them during elections.”

The results of the study contradicted to the assumed notion on the voting

behaviour of the poor in which the respondents of the study have an idealize view of

leadership, wherein a leader must be morally upright in order to prevent the abuse of

position. Furthermore, Laviña stated that “participants understand elections as a

legitimate “democratic” process for putting into office their preferred candidates and for

removing from office those in whom they have lost confidence”, which can be seen that

the respondents thinks rationally in choosing their candidates and see election as a

legitimate tool in responsibly using their right to vote. The voting behaviour of the

respondents is also influenced by other factors such as the mass media, religion,

family etc.

28
 On the participants evaluation of candidates, they acknowledge and give most

important the candidate’s platform of government moral uprightness, experience as a

leader, help given to people and specially the candidate’s educational background. The

poor despite of being stereotyped were able to identify important factors that needed to

be consider before supporting for a candidate although they seek for a candidate which

have a genuine heart in helping the poor, the study showed that the respondents does

not only vote for a candidate because of the benefits that they will receive but they

support candidate because of its competence as a public official.

The article provided the researcher’s idea that educational attainment of the

candidates is highly regarded by the poor class, that a knowledgeable and educated

candidates are seen to be a prospective efficient public officials and thus, will lead the

voters to support them. The paper also yields information to the researchers on the

voting behaviour of the poor or the low class and their perception on the characteristics

of candidates.

The above mentioned research study and article enabled the researches to

determine the importance of the educational background of the candidates on the

voting preferences of the voters. Furthermore, both of the literatures inferred to the

researchers of the effect of the educational status of the candidates as on how they will

be perceived by the voters and whether or not their education would serve as an

advantage in garnering the supports of the voters.

29
Family Background

According to the study of Carnes and Sadin (2012), when citizens evaluate a

policy or a political figure, they sometimes seek out detailed information. The authors

conceded with the idea that most of the time they simply infer which option best suits

their interests on the basis of facts or considerations that are easily and immediately

available to them. Authors have shown that when voters evaluate a politician, for

instance, many investigate her policy positions and learn about her general ideological

orientation. However, many voters also make guesses and inferences about her views

based on her party affiliation, endorsements, race, gender and religion. Some voters

even seem to take cues from a candidate’s physical appearance.

Politicians often talk about how hard they had it growing up. Members of

Congress raised in working-class families cast themselves as populists who carry the

torch of their working-class upbringings. Some politicians even exaggerate how difficult

their childhoods were. Politicians presumably spin narratives like these in the hopes

that voters will see them as attentive to the problems facing ordinary citizens or as

allies to middle- and working-class Americans. Most people use social class

stereotypes at least some of the time: they make snap judgments about how intelligent,

friendly, hard-working, and trustworthy other people are based on class markers like

clothing, occupation, and behavior. The underdog people who work their way up from

positions of disadvantage to positions of advantage seem to enjoy especially favorable

evaluations: people tend to see them as harder working and more deserving. When

politicians invoke how hard their families had it when they were growing up, many

probably hope that voters will make similar associations and many are probably right.

30
 More often, though, the politician who highlight their working class childhoods

seem to be trying to influence how voters perceive their political priorities they seem to

be attempting to convince voters that they will support policies that help less affluent

Americans. In other words, that they will be more progressive or liberal if elected, more

pro-worker and less pro-business. Many campaign messages that highlight candidates

poor or working class families have a strong progressive bent. When candidates

mention their working-class upbringings, many voters will probably have an easier time

recalling the more readily available examples of liberal candidates from working class-

families and a harder time thinking of conservative ones. Voters probably infer that

candidates who grew up poor or working-class have more progressive views on

economic issues.

In relation to our study, the social class a particular candidate belonged to

greatly affects the way voters cast their votes. It follows that the voters give importance

to the candidate’s origin most especially the biological history. The voters tend to

reflect themselves to the candidate’s personal life as to how he was brought up and

what kind of family he grew into.

An additional research entitled The Dynasty Advantage: Family Ties in

Congressional authored by Brian D. Feinstein (2010) concluded that dynastic

politicians enjoy a substantial electoral advantage in open-seat contests. Furthermore,

dynastic candidates seem to be similar to first generation candidates in terms of two

important campaign-related factors: spending and prior political experience. The author

observed that electoral bump for dynastic candidates is highly suggestive of a brand

name advantage a competitive edge that second generation politicians enjoy because

31
of their association with office holding [Link] in a world of party-centered

elections, this boost to second-generation politiciansaffirms the electoral importance of

individual candidates’ characteristics. Scholars have long known that incumbent status

provides politicians with a means to craft an electorally beneficial brand name.

With regard to our study, we sought to determine if the candidate’s legacy in

politics plays a significant role in shaping the voting preferences of the voters. We

wanted to know if such legacy guarantees the vote of every voter in a way that if a

candidate belongs to a dynasty, then it is conceivable that voters give importance to

the works and experience of the relatives that the running candidate have.

These two studies only imply that the candidate’s family background is one of

the factors that shape the voting preferences of the voters. This goes to show that the

researchers utilized the importance of the candidate’s family background with which

constitutes to the aspects conceived to be influential in the voter’s preference. The

researchers concluded that the candidate’s family or rather the social class he

belonged to played an important role by which the voters looked upon as one of the

cues why should they vote this particular candidate. Moreover, the researchers found

that the voters infer the fact on how influential the clan of the candidate is as well as its

reputation in the field of politics. Thus, in general, the family background of the

candidate is essential and it is one of the features that every voter take into

consideration when they are about to vote.

32
Experience

The study entitled The Electoral Advantage to Incumbency and Voter’s

Valuation of Politician’s Experience: A Regression’s Discontinuity of Close Elections of

Lee (2001) focused on the valuation of the political experience of the candidate by the

voters. It asked the question whether political incumbency of the candidate is valuable

when he or she runs again in the next elections. According to Lee, incumbent

candidates who are running for a seat in the U.S House of Representatives enjoy a

high electoral success.

He stated inhis study that politicians who would like to win in the next elections

do political favors in the form of influencing tax expenditure and monetary policies and

voting on legislation in a way that conforms to the ideological make-up or orientation of

their candidates. The structural model of the study showed that two-thirds of the

apparent electoral success of incumbents can be attributed to the distribution of

political experience differences across Congressional districts of U.S. The findings of

Lee’s study showed that voters prefer to examine the candidates experience as well as

his or her achievements, laws passed and how he or she voted for in legislation for

certain issues. The voters base their vote on the service done by the candidate and

how these services became advantageous to them.

The experience of the candidate in the study of Lee was manifested by his or

her term of office, in other words service. How he or she served the public in his or her

last term is judged by the voters and it becomes a basis for their voting decision. Was

his or her service during his or her last term became an advantage for them or not?The

33
disadvantage here is that new ideas or solutions to problems could be limited because

people vote for those candidates who ran for the elections again after just finishing a

term frequently. The research is related to the study of the researchers since because

of it they were informed that experience is a factor for the voting preference of their

respondents which are the formal and informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City

during the 2013 Senatorial Elections especially if the candidate was someone who was

already a government official by being in a government office before.

Encabo, (2010) in her study entitled The Filipino Language and Culture in

Political Advertisements stated that part of the advertisements of candidates were their

political achievements or experiences. According to her, candidates through television

advertisements are able to give vital information about them and that includes their

political records. The study stated that one of the types of appeals in a political

advertisement is the personal characteristic of the candidates and that includes his or

her experience. This implies that the experience of the candidates in the political arena

could also be valued by the voters since these experiences give the voters a chance to

judge the candidates when it comes to how they could handle the issues of the

country.

In Encabo’sstudy, an example would be Richard Gordon’s and GiboTeodoro’s

during the 2010 Presidential Elections. Gordon, according to Encabo, included his

experience as the chairman of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority wherein 18 world

leaders were impressed with the said city’s facilities and cleanliness as well as the

discipline manifested by the locals. GiboTeodoro showed in his advertisement that he

was the Secretary of National Defense and also the Chairman of National Disaster

34
Coordinating Council showing that he has a wide experience with governmental

administration. Encaboalso stated in her study that voters who voted for Teodoro said

that they voted for him because he is qualified for the job as he has the willingness to

serve the citizens as well as the experience in doing so.

The experience was manifested in Encabo’s study through the achievements of

the candidates which are shown in their political advertisements. The advantage here

is that the voters could see what the candidates did in order to address the problems

that the country was facing at the time of their incumbency in another government

office. The achievements of the candidates could give the voters an insight to the

governance that the candidates could give if they are elected for office therefore having

a guarantee to the abilities of the [Link] becomes disadvantageous when the

achievements of the candidates overshadow the scrutiny of the new problems that

these services could cause if ever these achievements cannot follow the changes that

happens to the environment as well as the people it affects.

This study helped the researchers in knowing that the governmental experience

of the candidates could be one of the reasons of the voting preference of the

respondents which are the formal and informal settlers of Brgy, Valenzuela Makati City

during the 2013 Senatorial Elections especially if the candidate had achievements

before in his or her last term in a government office.

The findings of the two studies implied that experience is also important if a

citizen of any state would like to run for a public office. The experience in being in a

public office before and having done achievements while in it are a value for voters.

35
Because as citizens, who are in need of the government’s services, they must choose

their officials in such a way that they are sure of his or her capabilities and these are

seen in his or her experience in dealing with government matters and giving services to

the public. The disadvantage at voting candidates with experience frequently is that the

same governance and solutions are created and new ideas and approaches to

problems are set aside therefore also setting aside the solutions to the problems that

the changing environment and the new needs of the people could cause. That could be

remedied by the people choosing candidates that has the same views and opinions as

they do as well as choosing candidates who are known to have the ability to predict

and address the said problems quickly which are reflected through the candidate’s

experience.

Platforms

There are several perspectives on voting behaviour that usually constitutes

separate strands. Some may say it was the impact of social background on vote choice

while others may say it is the relationship between policy makers and the voters and

others may say it is because of the effect of party platforms on the electoral success of

parties although they apply to the same entity which is the relationship of political

platforms of the candidates to the voters.

An article entitled Do Voters Affect or Elect Policies? Evidence from the US

House by David Lee, Enrico Moretti and Matthew Butler focuses on the relationship of

the Voters and the government policies in US. Lee, et. al., (2004) questioned how do

voters influence government policies? According to Lee, et. al., competition for voters

36
can force even the most partisan Republicans and Democrats to moderate their policy

choices.

Lee, et. al., emphasized that voters can influence policy in two distinct ways, first

is when the political candidates adopt the preferences of the electorate, in this way the

political candidates raises the chances that they may win the election. Because of that,

the voters can affect the policy choices of the politicians. Second, voters always impact

policy outcomes by selecting a leader among several candidates, who each may have

already decided on a particular policy based on other reasons. In this way, we can say

that voters may simply elect policies. In addition, Lee, et. al., discussed one model of

political competition, that model is known as “median voter model”. In this model,two

candidates, who care only about winning office, compete for votes by taking a stance in

a single dimensional policy space. Voters cast their vote based on these positions, and

the equilibrium result is that the politicians carry out identical policies. In other words, it

is the assumptions which include a majoritarian election system in which political views

are along a one-dimensional spectrum.

In relation to our study, political platforms of the candidates are one of the major

factors that may affect the voting behaviour of the citizens of Barangay Valenzuela,

Makati. Basically the researchers wanted to know if the formal and informal settlers of

Barangay Valenzuela, Makati has the same methods on how they will choose their

candidates.

Another article entitled Political Parties and Electoral Landscapes by Ken

Kollman, John Miller, and Scotte Page focuses on the relationship between the voter’s

37
preferences and the emergence of party platforms in a two-party democratic with

adoptive parties. In this study by Kollman,et, al. (1998), the preferences of the voters

and the opposition party’s platform determine an “electoral landscape” on which the

challenging party must adaptively search for the voters. Kollman et, al. discussed a

formal model on how, under plausible assumptions, the behaviour of the political

parties changes when voters’ preference distribution change, in addition, the

incumbent parties can often in the elections because the challenger parties cannot find

optimal platforms. The model that they demonstrated was “Two Party Competition”,

where parties are adaptive organizations competing for votes in a multi-dimensional

issue space. Basically, political parties respond to popularity polls by incrementally

adapting their platforms. Kollman,et. al, also considered different classes of voter

preference distributions that vary in the level of ideological consistency andstrengths

attached to moderate and extreme positions.

In relation to our study, we wanted to identify if the political platforms of the

candidates are in accordance to the preferences of the voters of Makati, specifically the

Formal and Informal settlers of Barangay Valenzuela. In addition, the study of

Kollman,et. al., just like in the Philippines, different political candidates from different

parties tend to adapt their political platforms to the preferences of the voters. They also

conducted surveys and polls before they made a political platform.

These two studies implied to us that candidates from different political parties

tend to change their political platforms in accordance to the preferences of the people.

Since we have an election to represent us, the political candidates must have an idea

on what the majority of the people want. These two studies may help the researchers

38
in seeing the political platforms of the candidates as one of the factors in knowing the

preferences of the respondents of Barangay Valenzuela, Makati, respectively the

formal and informal settlers.

Educational Attainment

The study of Barry C. Burden focuses on the relationship of the vote buying and

voter’s education in the Philippines. Burden (2009) emphasizes the word “iatrogenic

effect of clean election reform”, so basically what does he mean? Iatros comes from a

greek word which means “doctor” and genic means “produced by”, an iatrogenic illness

is a treatment induced illness, the author used the word “illness” in relation to the dirty

electoral practices in the Philippines such as vote buying, intimidation, double voting

(registration fraud), and “treatment” clean election reforms such as secret ballot, tighter

registration rules, and improved voting technologies. According to the author these

various forms damages our democracy.

This study of Burden (2009) suggest that there are four iatrogenic mechanism,

first is the legal disenfranchisement, where it prohibits other people to vote, like fail to

comply requirements, indifference and political conviction. Second is administrative

exclusion, where an election official enforces a clean election rules applying them

falteringly or subvert them altogether in way that may also result to the first

mechanism. Third partisan demobilization, this takes place when candidates reacting

to clean election reforms, alter their mobilization strategies in ways that keep people

away from the polls. This kind of mechanism is effective especially in strengthening

vote secrecy and to avoid vote buying. Last mechanism is disciplinary actions, election

39
reformers should attempt to impose standards of moral electoral conduct. Burden also

emphasizes the importance of those civic educators to train the voters to act correctly.

There is also a significant relationship to the social class and the educational

attainment of the Filipinos. Class distinctions are important, for example if you are from

class A-B you are expected to have a high educational standard while class C is none.

Those in the Class C were being used by the politicians directly and indirectly, directly

in a way that those people would sell their votes to the politicians before or during the

election while indirect by the means of using the Class C as their political Slogans or

Campaigns the best example of this was the “ErapparasaMahirap” used by former

Estrada.

In addition, the article Educational Level and Voting Behaviour Florin,

(n.d.) said that the most important predictors of turnout and partisanship is Education.

Florin, (n.d.) emphasizes that the Education enhances people's normative commitment

toward the act of voting, as well as their political skills and interest, which in turn lead to

a higher turnout. In his article different people have different interest depending on your

educational attainment; he added that the people with higher education have a higher

sense of civic duty, and stronger allegiance to the political system. Education gives

various political resources needed by the voters in order to make informed choices. In

relation to the voting turnout education is a determinant factor for policy preferences

and partisan choice.

In relationship to our study which is the voting behaviour of the citizens of the

Barangay Olympia, Makati, Educational Attainment is one of the factors that may affect

40
their voting behaviour. As to the study of Fesnic Florin, through education we can

determine the knowledge and awareness of the people in politics.

Therefore proper education is important for the voters to “vote wisely” and it may

only happen if those educated or in the top of the social class will help the poor people.

Socioeconomic Status

PeLero (2008) in her study The Effects of Socioeconomic Factors on the Voting

Behaviour in the Philippines believes that income is one of the primary socioeconomic

factors that affect the voting participation of Filipinos. In international literatures those

with higher income would have a higher voting participation PeLero stated that in the

context of Philippine elections and that she hypothesized that communities with lower

incomes are more likely to vote because they are more susceptible to political

operators and electoral fraud mechanisms especially vote buying and because unlike

those with higher incomes who may engage the political process through personal

connections or civic involvement, voting remains the major way low-income people can

be involved in the political process. PeLero, in this study cited the result of IPER’s

study during 2004 wherein it believed that voters’ income affect their acceptance of

electoral fraud. Voters with the income of lower than Php.5000 would be more likely to

accept fraud or bribery in the elections. Because they are powerless but at the same

time they feel that there is an authority that could stop fraud. While those voters with

the income of Php.5,000 to Php.10,000 feel less likely that there is an authority that

could stop electoral bribery nor do they care about why, while those with the income of

Php.10,000 or more feel that bribery would always be in the Philippine election. PeLero

41
used all the municipalities in the Philippines except municipalities in the cities of

Manila, Paranaque, Quezon, Valenzuela, Kalookan and Makati as of 2000. These

cities due to their large size were subdivided to their legislative districts for the purpose

of the analysis of PeLero in her study. Income is one of the dependent variables used

by PeLero. PeLero did two tests on the variables, separately and it was run through all

the variables involved at the same time. The results PeLero gathered in her study

when it comes to income was that income when it was tested individually has a great

impact on the voting participation of the respondents in the settings used by PeLero.

When it was tested with the other socioeconomic variables utilized by PeLero, income

along with occupation turned out to be a great factor as well. In PeLero study those

with higher income and occupation are more likely to participate in voting than those

with lower income and lower occupation.

The study of PeLero demonstrated how income became a factor in the voting

participation of the Filipinos. Although PeLero study is about the voting participation of

the electorate it still nonetheless discussed within the parameters of election. PeLero in

her study also used income as a socioeconomic factor along with others. Therefore it

was seen by the researchers as a study related to the one which they have conducted.

The brief entitled Voting Behaviour Based on Socioeconomic status by

Christopher Ryan Brown and Raymond Arthur Smith tackled about on how the

socioeconomic status of a person affects their voting behaviour and whether these two

variables are correlated with one another. Brown and Smith (2009) first identify the

main component that makes up the socioeconomic status of a person which is their

income, education, and occupation. In their report it stated that “for social scientists,

42
studies show that a person’s socioeconomic status, a measurement which factors in a

person’s education, occupation, and income, will directly influence their behavior. This

measurement is used to predict health, spending habits, and other factors related to a

person’s quality of life, including a person’s voting behavior, or whether they register

and vote in elections.” Socioeconomic status of an individual affects their voting

behaviour in two ways: their voting participation and their voting preference. Brown and

Smith said that a people with a lower socioeconomic status are more apathetic towards

politics, have a low level of political efficacy, and participate less in the voting process.

An individual with a low educational attainment only reaching high school level and

have a low occupational status tends to participate less when in terms of civic

engagement and that’s include participating in terms of voting. Moreover, the reason

behind their low participation is the reason that people who are low wage earner are

forced to spend most of their time working in order to have sufficient income in order to

support their living. In comparison, people who have a high level of socioeconomic

status are more likely active to participate in political process. Brown and Smith said

that generally, theyhave achieved higher education at the undergraduate or

postgraduate level that often stresses a greater importance of civic activity. Since these

people have a larger income, they always have a lot of time to spent in terms of voting

compare to those who are poor and considering the fact that they belong in the

professional circle, they are usually pressured by their peers of the importance of

exercising their right to suffrage.

In terms of their voting preferences people who have a lower socioeconomic

status support Democrats because their policies promotes universal healthcare and

43
welfare in which the poor needed the most. People with a higher socioeconomic status

tends to vote for Republicans as they advocated policies which cut the government

spending on social programs and taxes to promote economic growth. These shows

that since people with a higher socioeconomic status are rich, they didn’t need the

support of government in terms of their welfare as they have the capabilities to provide

and support of such things. They prefer Republicans in which will assure the stability of

the economic growth and which they think are much more important. This shows that

the poor class who have low socioeconomic status and the rich who have high

socioeconomic status differs in their voting preferences.

The report of Brown and Smith helps the researchers to understand that the

income, educational attainment and occupation which reflect their socioeconomic

status of voters affect their voting behaviour. It gives knowledge to the researchers that

the class in which a person belongs have a relationship on how they will choose their

candidates.

Class and Home Settlement Type

Election outcomes produce “mandates”. A mandate is presumably more precise

and more concrete than the “general will” of Rousseau as well as the “public opinion” of

most 19-century political writers. Needless to say, through time, election and the

exercise of suffrage have expanded a lot upon its scope. In our country, Article 5

Section 1 of the 1987 Constitutionstipulates that “no literacy, property, or other

substantive requirement shall, be imposed on the exercise of suffrage”. Sison (2013)

44
said that “The informal settler’s right to vote in the election seems to be the very reason

behind the chronic squatter problem in this country because politicians themselves

largely depend on squatters’ vote to win elections.”

Similarly, Amoranto (2010) concluded that “The middle class is on average more

politically active than the lower or upper classes. This is consistent with the story that

the middle class is important in its demand for better goods and services and keeping

governments accountable.” Thus, this goes to show that a rising middle class like those

living in a formal settlement that pay real estate taxes and income taxes follows to be

the more ideal class of electorate compare to those in the upper and lowest strata of

the society.

On the other hand, Fukuyama (1992) cited that “Middle-class status does not

mean that an individual will automatically support democracy or clean government”.

That upon his discussion he furthered that liberal democracy would continue to

recognize equal people unequally. Thus, from these ideas of Fukuyama we could

suggest that class status and the mode of living would implicitly result to a varying

behaviour or preference regarding political participation, hence voting preference.

In a similar vein, “Local Dynamics in Informal Settlement Development”

Setiawan (1998) showed that the success of particular kampong (Informal settlement)

communities in developing their settlements depends on the ability of kampung people

to develop informal-reciprocal relations with external agencies. The nature of policy

formulation and implementation in relation to kampung problems is characterized by a

fluid and reciprocal series of interrelations among many individuals and agencies,

45
within and outside government. Patron-client relations existed between government

officials and kampung people, and these relationships significantly determine the level

of government support to each kampung. This study concluded that the Indonesian

government needs to treat housing and kampung issues as part of a broader social

welfare policy and should create more transparent and fairer mechanisms to guarantee

equal opportunities for access to urban resources and decision making processes.

Hence, just like here in the Philippines such relations continue to exist, particularly

because of the persistence of imbalances in control over resources and power

between the government and the informal settlers’ communities.

From the previous study cited above, the government agencies support

kampung people only if they also get advantages, in terms of both the individual,

pragmatic interests of government officials and agencies, as well as in terms of the

state's interests in general ( maintaining social stability or legitimizing the state’s

authority). And from that note follows as well the similar trend that our country faces

regarding the informal settlers dynamic influence upon democracy and election. Thus,

it was deemed that the socio-economic status implied through the difference in home

settlement (formal or informal) a factor to consider regarding the voting behaviour of

individuals.

Synthesis

46
The above literatures and studies showed that class status indeed have that varying

dynamics in relation to voting preference. The literatures and studies tackled about the

socio-economic class of voters and their voting preference which affects the

governance and democracy. Nevertheless none of the literatures and studies cited

above has directly focused on the voting preference in relation to status implied by the

type of settlement like that of the formal and informal settlers which this study tries to

bridge.

Therefore, following the above factors is the idea of possible difference of voting

preferences among the two different classes of voters that is the formal and informal

settlers. The researchers backed with the above literatures and studies discussed

earlier posit that class status, manifested through the type of home settlement

produces a significant variation and dynamics vis-à-vis to voting behaviour and

preferences. Similarly, the researchers also used the candidate’s profile of popularity,

educational background, family background, experience and platforms as factors that

may affect their voting. Collectively, the studies and literatures go to show that

grouping the respondents according to their class status and settlement may result to a

significant voting behaviour which the researchers view as a pivotal consideration

especially with the growing problems of squatters here in our country and upon its

efficacy towards our environment, political dynamics and democracy.

47
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This Chapter discusses the research method used, the population and the

determined sample size, the description of the respondents, instrumentation, the data-

gathering procedure and the statistics used to treat the data.

Method of Research to be used

The method of research employed in this study is the descriptive method.

According to Gay (1976) descriptive method involves the collection of data in order to

test hypothesis and to answer questions concerning current status of the subject of the

study. The researchers used this method in order to interpret the results of the data

gathered. In relation to this research, the descriptive method was utilized because it is

the most appropriate with regard to the purpose of the researchers, that is, to gather

data in order to answer the specific questions as well as to test the hypotheses related

to the subject.

According to Libero (2003), descriptive research describe what is it involves in

describing, analyzing and interpreting the conditions that now exist. It involves some

kind of comparison and contrast and must attempt to discover relationships between

existing non-manipulated variables.

Thus, in relation to the study that the researchers are conducting, the descriptive

method was used to systematically describe the situation at hand factually and

48
accurately. This then, would include the population census of the respondents,

questionnaire and interview results and analysis.

Population and Sampling Size

With the study focusing primarily on the voting preferences of two groups of

voters: the Formal settlers and Informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela in Makati City, the

researchers utilized the Stratified Random sampling technique; since subpopulations

within an overall population vary. It is advantageous for the researchers to sample

each subpopulation (stratum) independently. The researchers pre-classified the

respondents with the help of Brgy. Valenzuela officials to identify the formal settlers

and informal [Link] [Link] officials used the data that they already

have regarding the location of the formal and informal settlers by doing the mapping

procedures (see appendix B Mapping, p90). That consistently went in line with the

definition of the formal and informal settlers in our [Link] and Ymaz Jr. (2008)

said that Stratification is the process of dividing members of the population into

homogeneous subgroups before sampling.

The strata should be mutually exclusive: every element in the population must

be assigned to only one stratum. The strata should also be collectively exhaustive: no

population element can be excluded. Then, simple random sampling or systematic

sampling is applied within each stratum. This often improves the representativeness of

the sample by reducing sampling error. It can produce a weighted mean that has less

variability than the arithmetic mean of a simple random sample of the population.

49
 There are 6, 703 registered voter in Barangay Valenzuela as of 2013 Senatorial

Election. The researchers employed the random sampling technique in order to attain

the data.

The Slovin’s Formula was used to determine the sample size:

n= N

1 + Ne

In which:

n = the size of the sample

N= the size of the population

e = the margin of error

where:

n =?

N = 6, 703

e = 5% or 0.05

Computation:

n =6, 703

1 + 6, 703 (.05)

n =6, 703

1 + 6, 703 (.0025)

n =6, 703

1 + 16. 75

N= 378

50
 Base on the above computation, the actual sample size was 378

respondents with a 0. 05 margin of error.

Instrumentation

The researchers used the inquiry form in the collection of data. The inquiry form

was then in Likert scale questionnaire and opinionnaire or attitude scale. This scale

assumes that the strength of the experience is linear. It assumes and reflects on its

form that attitudes can be measured. Likert scale questionnaires often have choices

provided by the researchers to the respondents. The researchers ought to know the

voting preferences of the formal and informal settlers of Barangay Valenzuela Makati

City on the 2013 Senatorial elections.

Thus, in the formulation of the research questionnaire the researchers gathered all

the necessary reading materials in order to develop the rough draft of the

questionnaires. These include books in political science, journals and newspapers that

featured articles related to the voting behaviours of a varying class and group of voters.

From the various sources, the researchers were able to develop the rough draft of the

questionnaires.

Data Gathering Procedure

After approval of concerned authorities to administer the instruments, the

researchers validated the questionnaires by conducting a pre-survey to 15 randomly

selected respondents from both the formal and informal settlers of the selected locale.

Then the researchers identified the target population from the result of the sampling

51
procedure conducted thereof. Those selected respondents were included in the list for

an organized checking. The researchers administered the instruments and conducted

interviews, when necessary, individually or in groups depending on the convenience on

the part of the participants for the validation of the respondents answers. The type of

questionnaire used in gathering information and data was a survey type and composed

of close- ended questions. Some of the questionnaires, however, might be distributed

through the help of the barangay assistants and volunteers of the selected locale

where the respondents belong.

The data or the answered questionnaires by the respondents were collected by

the researchers with the help of officials from Barangay Valenzuela for a speedy

accumulation of data (questionnaires). The questionnaires were coded to identify the

respondents who participated in the study. This aided in the speedy retrieval of the

floated questionnaires. All the profiles in the roster of respondents were coded for an

evaluation and analysis.

Statistical Treatment of Data

To translate the gathered facts, figures or data into meaningful constellations,

the researchers used statistics as a language of expression to interpret the meaning of

the gathered data. Statistics as the collection, organization, presentation, analysis and

interpretation of quantitative data was applied. Similarly, through the use of the

Statistical Package for Social Sciences or SPSS, indeed help the researchers in the

treatment and analysis of data.

52
Frequency Distribution Table

The frequency of a particular observation is the number of times the observation

occurs in the data. The distribution of a variable is the pattern of frequencies of the

observation. This statistical method is used in summarizing the raw data. The

researchers used the frequency distribution table to determine the ratio of the

respondents when group according to their demographic profile: age, gender,

educational attainment, income, religion and type of settlement.

Descriptive Statistics

This statistical method measures central tendency including the mean while

measures of variability include the standard deviation. The researchers used this

method in order to interpret and measurethe answer of the respondents on the likert

scale questionnaires. Furthermore, it is used to summarize the responses of the

respondents in their evaluation of the characteristics of the senatorial candidates.

Mean

Formula for mean:

Where:

= standsfor mean

 = symbol for summation

X =symbol for the scores

N = symbol for the number of scores

53
 The mean is used to obtain the average answers of the respondents on their

responses on the candidate’s characteristics.

Standard Deviation

Formula for Standard Deviation:

s = ∑ (x−x)2

n-1

Where:

s = standard deviation

x = each value in sample

x = the mean of values

N = sample size

The standard deviation is used to determine the consistency of the responses of

the respondents.

T- Test

The researchers employed t-test to compare responses from two groups of

respondents: informal and formal settlers as to how their type of settlement affects their

voting preference. Furthermore, T- test was used to ascertain the differences on the

voting preferences of the respondents and to test the hypothesis.

54
 CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the findings, analysis and interpretation of the gathered

data whose main objective is to determine the voting preferences of the formal and

informal settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela, Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial Election.

Moreover, the researchers specifically seek to answer the following questions:

Sub problem No. 1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of

their:

Type of Settlement

Age Formal Informal Total

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Less than 20 years old 4 1.05% 7 1.84% 11 2.9%

20 – 29 69 18.11% 51 13.39% 120 31.5%

30 – 39 60 15.75% 70 18.37% 130 34.1%

40 – 49 33 8.66% 41 10.76% 74 19.4%

50 – 59 18 4.72% 16 4.20% 34 8.9%

60 and above 9 2.36% 3 0.79% 12 3.1%

Total 193 50.65% 188 49.35% 381 100%

Table 4.1

Age of Respondents

The table above showed that 34.1% of the respondents belong to the 30-39 age

group with 34.1% as being the most; followed by the 20-29 age group with 31.5% and

55
the less than 20 years old age group being the least in number with 2.9%. This goes to

show that the researchers gathered a fairly distributed age group with most of it coming

from the age of 20-39 years old with 65.6% thereof.

It showed that among the formal settler respondents most belongs to the 20-29

age group garnering18.11% of the total population; followed by the 30-39 age group

with 15.75% thereof; while the less than 20 years old age group being the least with

only 1.05 %.

In addition, the table above also showed that among the informal settler

respondents most is in the age of 30-39 years old age bracket with 18.37% thereof:

followed by the 20-29 age brackets with 13.39%; and the 60 and above bracket being

the least with only 0.79%.

Among the two type of settlement, the condition showed that in terms of age

group, the researchers gathered a fairly younger group of formal settlers with 19. 16%

thereof are in the age of 18-29 years old as to compare to the informal settlers 15.22%

younger group range of 18-29 years old.

Table 4.2

Gender of Respondents

56
 Type of Settlement

Gender Formal Informal Total

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Male 98 25.72% 94 24.67% 192 50.4%

Female 95 24.93% 94 24.67% 189 49.6%

Total 193 50.65% 188 49.35% 381 100%

This table shows that the respondents are almost equally distributed with 50.4%

thereof is male and 49.6% thereof female. Thus, with a fairly distributed gender implies

that gender representation bias is low enabling the gender difference representation

equal upon its response percentage.

Similarly, it showed that the respondents of both the formal and informal settlers

are equally distributed in terms of gender.

Table 4.3

Educational Attainment of Respondents

57
 Type of Settlement

Educational Formal Informal Total

Attainment
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Elementary 3 0.79% 63 16.54% 66 17.3%

High School 33 8.66% 105 27.56% 138 36.2%

College 125 32.81% 12 3.15% 137 36.0%

Vocational 10 2.62% 8 2.10% 18 4.7%

Post 22 5.77% 0 0% 22 5.8%

Baccalaureate

Total 193 50.65% 188 49.35% 381% 100%

The table above showed that in total most of the respondents attained high

school level of education with 36.2%; followed by College level of educational

attainment with 36%; elementary with 17.3%, post baccalaureate with 5.8%; and

vocational with only 4.7% .

It is also showed that among the informal settler respondents majority are in the

High school level of educational attainment class with 27.56% of informal settlers

thereof only reaching high school; followed by those who belong to the Elementary

educational attainment class with 16.54%; while markedly slim percentage coming

from those who at least reach education higher than high school 3.15% and non from

the post baccalaureate level of attainment.

58
 This also showed that among the formal settlers majority are able to reach a

college level of educational attainment with 32.81%; followed by High school with

8.66% and there are only 0.79% of the respondents which belong in the formal settlers

who only reached the elementary level.

Thus, from the above data follows that most of the formal settlers were able to

reach a decent level of educational attainment with about 41.21% thereof were able to

reach beyond high school. While on the other hand44.09% of the respondents

comprising the informal settlers have only reach an elementary to high school can be

considered to having low educational attainment.

59
 Table 4.4

Type of Settlement

Monthly Income Formal Informal Total

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Below 10,000 23 6.04% 174 45.67% 198 51.7%

10,000 – 19,999 79 20.73% 13 3.41% 92 24.1%

20, 000 – 29, 999 49 12.86% 1 0.26% 50 13.1%

30,000 – 39, 999 17 4.46% 0 0% 17 4.5%

40, 000 – 49, 999 8 2.10% 0 0% 8 2.1%

50, 000 -59, 999 6 1.57% 0 0% 6 1.6%

60, 000 – 69,999 4 1.05% 0 0% 4 1.0%

70, 000 and 7 1.8% 0 0% 7 1.9%

above

Total 193 50.65% 188 49.35% 381 100%

Monthly Income of Respondents

The table above showed that among the formal settler respondents most have a

monthly income of 10,000- 19,999 with 20.73%; followed by those whose income reach

from 20,000- 29,999 with 12.86%; 6.04% with below 10,000 and a total of 11.02% for

those who have an income of 30,000 and above.

While also showed that majority of the informal settler respondents have a

monthly income of below 10,000 with about 45.67% thereof; followed by those who

have a monthly income of 10,000-19,000 with 3.41%; and only 0.26% with 20,000-

29,000 monthly income with none reaching beyond that.

60
 The average income of the respondents who are formal settlers is Php.

48,289.66, this showed that they belong to the middle class sector. The informal

settlers on the other hand have the average income of Php. 5,797.37 this implied that

they belong to the poor class sector. Therefore the respondents who are formal settlers

can afford a better quality of living in terms of property, education and other needs

while the respondents who are informal settlers cannot do so as they are financially

incapable.

Therefore, monthly income of respondents which are informal settlers shows

that about half of themhave an income of 10,000 below of about 45.67% of the

respondents thereof; Similarly, this also shows that most of the Informal settlers belong

to the urban poor having an monthly income of 10,000 below as to compare to the

formal settlers with only 6.04% of them are low income earners of 10,000 below.

61
 Table 4.5.1

Religion of Respondents

Type of Settlement

Religion Formal Informal Total

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Catholic 154 40.42% 167 43.83% 321 84.3%

Iglesiani Cristo 14 3.67% 10 2.62% 24 6.3%

Islam 2 0.52% 0 0% 2 .5%

Born Again 18 4.72% 10 2.62% 28 7.3%

Others 5 1.31% 1 0.26% 6 1.6%

Total 193 50.65% 188 49.35% 381 100%

The table showed that the religion that dominates both the formal and informal

settlers is Catholic, followed by Born Again from a far margin, then Iglesiani Cristo. This

implies that religion distribution wise the respondents from both the formal and informal

settlers are dominated by a single catholic religion followed by a few minority religions.

62
 Table 4.6

Type of Settlement of Respondents

Type of Settlement Frequency Percentage

Formal 193 50.7 %

Informal 188 49.3 %

Total 381 100 %

The table above showed that the respondents are almost equally distributed in

terms of the type of settlement with 50.7% formal and 49.3% informal. Thus, with an

equal distribution of respondents from the two types of settlement the researchers

would be able to evaluate more precisely and proportionately the voting preference of

the two varying class of voters.

63
2. This table shows the voting preference of the formal and informal settlers in

accordance to the candidates’ characteristics.

Summary of the Responses of the Formal and Informal Settlers on their evaluation
of Candidate’s Characteristic

Descriptive Statistics: Type of Settlement and Characteristics of Candidates

Group Statistics
Type of Settlement N Mean Std. Std. Error
Deviation Mean
Formal 193 1.63 .785 .056
Popularity
Informal 188 2.48 1.084 .079
Educational Formal 193 3.72 .889 .064
Background Informal 188 3.20 .813 .059
Formal 193 2.29 .944 .068
Family Background
Informal 188 3.06 .913 .067
Formal 193 4.29 .663 .048
Experience
Informal 188 3.45 .971 .071
Socio-Economic Formal 193 3.59 .771 .056
Platform Informal 188 3.40 .739 .054
Formal 193 3.76 .768 .055
Political Platform
Informal 188 3.39 .893 .065
Formal 193 3.32 .975 .070
Education Platform
Informal 188 3.05 1.035 .075
Formal 193 3.39 .872 .063
Moral Platform
Informal 188 3.30 .628 .046

The table above tells of the respondents answer to their voting preference. First,

it showed that both the formal and informal settlers disagreed on the likeness of voting

base on popularity with a mean of 1.63 for the formal settlers and 2.48 for the informal

settlers. Formal settlers have an inconsistent response on disagreeing in the

importance of popularity of a candidate having a standard deviation of .785.

64
Similarly, the informal settler’s responses are also inconsistent for not voting for a

candidate on the basis of their popularity, having a standard deviation of 1.08. Blais et

al (n.d.) study found that only 5% of voters voted for a local candidate which has

popularity as one of his or her personal characteristics. This goes to show that

popularity is not much of a factor influencing the choice of candidates of the

respondents from both formal and informal settlers in Barangay Valenzuela.

Second, with regard to the educational background of the candidate as a factor

that influences the respondents vote results showed that the formal settlers

heterogeneously agreed on the likely of voting to a candidate with a good educational

background with a mean of 3.72 and a standard deviation of .889, while the informal

settlers being indifferent have a contrasting responses about its necessity with a mean

of 3.20 and standard deviation of .813. Campbell and Cowley (2013) explained in their

paper that voters highly consider a candidate with a high educational attainment but

also takes into consideration the candidate’s approachability. Thus, this shows that

albeit educational background was important upon their view of choosing a candidate,

the informal settlers who are often than not lacking in confidence upon their

communication skills would rather choose an approachable candidate than to its

educational credentials that as a result made them indifferent on the matter.

Third, the table showed that the formal settlers disagreed on the importance of

the family background of the candidate with a mean of 2.29 while the informal settlers

again answered indifferently with the Likert mean of 3.06. In terms of the uniformity of

their responses, the formal and informal settlers’ responses are heterogeneous, the

former with standard deviation of .944 and the latter with standard deviation of .913.

65
This showed that the informal settlers are more prone to the influence of family

branding than to the formal settlers. Feinstein (2010) observed that electoral bump for

dynastic candidates is highly suggestive of a brand name advantage a competitive

edge that second-generation politicians enjoy because of their association with office

holding relatives. Thus, dynastic politicians enjoy a substantial electoral advantage in

open-seat contests especially in the case of the informal settlers who mutually trade

their vote to these family related politicians for their settlement in the locale.

Fourth on experience, the results shown above tell that the formal and informal

settlers are divided. Encabo (2010) found that voters would elect a candidate not just

because of his or her willingness to serve but also because of his experience in doing

it. Thus, the formal settlers responded on the agree scale with a mean of 4.29 but have

a different responses with a standard deviation of .663, affirming on the necessity of an

experience candidate to capture their vote. While the informal settlers responses

disparate with each other with a standard deviation of .971 and answering on the

neither agree nor disagree having an unknown stance with a mean of 3.45.

Then, fifth regarding the platforms once again the formal settlers agreed with its

importance but have a heterogeneous responses with standard deviation of .771 in

socio-economic platform, .768 in political platform, .975 in education platform and .872

in moral platform as a part of their voting preference for a candidate with a mean of

3.52, while the informal settlers as a whole almost consistently answering indifferently

with answers ranging to the neither agree nor disagree scale with a mean of 3.29 but

differ individually in their responses whether the platform of a candidate affects their

votes with a standard deviation of .739 for socio-economic platform, .893 for political

66
platform, 1.035 for education platform and .628 in moral platform. In the study of Lee

[Link] (2004) they discussed the political model known as “median voter model” which

stipulates the idea of two candidates competing for vote by taking a stance in a single

dimension policy space. This goes to show that with an indifferent informal settler

response on the candidate’s platforms the informal settlers have indeed contributed to

the decline of a platform base election for the respondent do not have a clear lines of

stance with regard to specific platform choices which is contrast to the much decisive

formal settlers.

3. Is there a significant difference on the voting preferences of the formal and informal

settlers of [Link], Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial Election?

Table 4.8

T- Test: Type of Settlement with the Characteristics of Senatorial Candidate

Characteristics T Df Sig. (2-tailed) Interpretation

Popularity -8.761 379 .000 Highly significant
Educational Background 5.992 379 .000 Highly significant
Family Background -8.046 379 .000 Highly significant
Experience 9.909 379 .000 Highly significant
Socio-Economic Platform 2.523 379 .012 Significant
Political Platform 4.358 379 .000 Highly significant
Education Platform 2.638 379 .009 Highly significant
Moral Platform 1.094 379 .275 Not significant

*If Sig. (2 tailed) is (less than or equal to) ≤ .05 the correlation is significant

*If Sig. (2 tailed) is (less than or equal to) ≤ .01 the correlation is highly significant.

67
 The table above showed that with a P-Value of less than or equal to .01, the

Formal and Informal Settlers significantly differed within their response to such factors

as: Popularity, Educational Background, Family Background, Experience, Political

Platforms, and Educational Platforms. Similarly, the formal and informal settlers

differed significantly with a 95% level of confidence on the Socio-economic platforms

while having no significant difference in the Moral Platforms issue support. In addition,

with a T-value of -8.751 on popularity and -8.046 on family background shows that the

informal settlers are more likely to conform to the popularity and family background

characteristics of the candidate than to the informal settlers.

It is shown that the formal and informal settlers significantly different in line with

the view of the candidate’s educational background, family background, and

experience, platforms on socio-economic and political. And in relation to a study by

Amoranto (2010) concluded that “The middle class is on average more politically active

than the lower or upper classes. This is consistent with the story that the middle class

is important in its demand for better goods and services and keeping governments

accountable”.Thus, as a result, the formal settlers agreed on the necessity of

educational background of the candidates with the average of 3.72, while the informal

settlers neither agreed nor disagreed with a mean of 3.20 on the statements regarding

the influence of the educational background of the candidates. This implies that the

formal settlers are more cautious than to an indifferent informal settler class in terms of

the value of educational background of a candidate.

68
 In terms of family background, the formal settlers disagreed with its necessity

with a mean of 2.29. While informal settlers neither agree nor disagree on the

statements of family background of the candidates with the total mean of 3.06.

Regarding the candidates experience, the formal settlers agreed with its

importance with a mean average of 4.29. While the informal settlers neither agree nor

disagree with the total mean of 3.45 on the statements indicating about the experience

of the candidates.

Another difference is that of between the platform stance regarding the socio-

economic and political issues. The formal settlers agreed with the average of 3.59 on

the socio-economic platforms of the candidates, with a neither response on the issue

about 4P’s, while the informal settlers neither agree nor disagree with the mean

average of 3.40 on the statements indicated by the socio-economic platforms of the

candidates yet agreeing with the 4’Ps . This implies that economic issues and

platforms support was important among formal settlers, especially on the position

concerning FDI and taxing laws like the sin Tax which is in contrast to the informal

settlers indifferently neither agree nor disagree stance on the issue and strong support

of the 4 P’s. This goes to show that in terms of platforms or reforming strategy in the

society and economy, the formal settlers are more akin to long term and viable

solutions like the sin tax law and FDI than to the short term 4’Ps of the informal.

On the other hand, in terms of the political platforms like anti-political dynasty,

charter change and AFP modernization the formal settlers agreed with the average of

3.76 on the political platforms of the candidates, while the informal settlers neither

69
agree nor disagree with a mean average of 3.39 on statements covered by the political

platforms of the candidates.

Therefore, it follows that in terms of priorities the formal settlers mostly agreed

on the educational background, experience, socio-economic and political platforms of

the candidate as a factor that influences their voting preference. While the informal

settlers rather preferring on the neither agree nor disagree and indifferent side of the

scale. Nevertheless, for both formal and informal settlers results have shown that

popularity did not serve a factor affecting their voting preference.

All the above presentations of tables, analysis and interpretation have made the

researchers reject the hypothesis that there is no significant difference on the voting

preference of the respondents on the 2013 Senatorial Election when group according

to their profile.

Findings:

Quantitative

In terms of demographic profile:

1. Age- Among the two type of settlement the condition showed that in terms of

age group the researchers gathered a fairly younger group of formal settlers

with 37.9% thereof are in the age of 18-29 years old as to compare to the

informal settlers 30.8% group range of 18-29 years old.

2. Gender- the respondents are almost equally distributed with 50.4% thereof is

male and 49.6% thereof female. Thus, with a fairly distributed gender implies

70
 that gender representation bias is low enabling the gender difference

representation equal upon its response percentage.

3. Educational attainment- results showed that most of the formal settlers were

able to reach a decent level of educational attainment with about 81.4% thereof

were able to reach beyond high school. While on the other hand most of the

informal settlers with about 89.4% reaching only elementary to high school can

be considered to having low educational attainment.

4. Income- About half of the respondents have a monthly income of 10,000 below

of about 51.7% of the respondents thereof ; This also shows that most of the

Informal settlers belong to the urban poor with 92.6% thereof have a monthly

income of 10,000 below. As to compare to the formal settlers 11.9% low income

earners of 10,000 below.

5. Religion- the religion that dominates both the formal and informal settlers is

Catholic, followed by Born Again from a far margin, then Iglesiani Cristo. This

implies that religion distribution wise the respondents from both the formal and

informal settlers are dominated by a single catholic religion followed by a few

minority religions.

6. Type of settlement- the respondents are almost equally distributed in terms of

the type of settlement with 50.7% formal and 49.3% informal. Thus, with an

equal distribution of respondents from the two types of settlement the

researchers would be able to evaluate more precisely and proportionately the

voting preference of the two varying class of voters.

71
 The effect of the Characteristics of the 2013 Senatorial candidates to the

voting preference of the respondents:

1. Popularity- the formal and informal settlers disagreed on the influence of a

candidate’s popularity on their vote choice with a 1.63 and 2.48 mean

respectively. Yetwith a T-value of -8.751 on popularity shows that the informal

settlers are more likely to conform to the popularity characteristics of the

candidate than to the formal settlers

2. Educational Background- The formal settlers agreed on the importance of a

candidate’s educational background with a mean of 3.72, while the informal

settlers neither agree nor disagree with a mean of 3.20. This shows that the

formal settlers prefer more an educated candidate than much as the informal

settlers do.

3. Family Background- The formal settlers disagreed on the effects of a candidates

family background on their vote choice with a mean of 2.29, while the informal

settlers answered neither agree nor disagree with a mean of 3.06. Yet with a T-

value of -8.046 on family background shows that the informal settlers are more

likely to conform to the influence of family background of the candidate than to

the formal settlers

4. Experience- The formal settlers agreed on the necessity of a candidates

experience by responding with a mean of 4.29, while the informal settlers once

again answered indifferently about the matter with a mean of 3.45

72
 5. Platforms- The formal settlers are more likely to consider the kind of platforms of

a candidate with a mean of 3.52, while the informal settlers remain indifferent

with a neither agree nor disagree response of 3.29 mean.

Voting preference of the formal and informal settlers

1. Type of settlement- with a P- Value of less than or equal to .01, the Formal and

Informal Settlers significantly differed within their response to such factor as:

Popularity, Educational Background, Family Background, Experience, Political

Platforms, and Educational Platforms. Similarly, the formal and informal settlers

differed significantly with a 95% level of confidence on the Socio-economic

platforms while having no significant difference in the Moral Platforms issue

support.

2. Null rejected- There is a significant difference on the voting preference of the

formal and informal settlers of Barangay Valenzuela Makati City.

Qualitative

The gathered data supports the studies that the socio-economic status

which modifies the type of settlement (See Descriptive statistics table p.62 & table 4.3

and 4.4) results to a behavior that similarly affects their vote choice and preference.

Florin (n.d.) said that the voters’ educational background is one of the factors that

affect their voting behavior and preference. He added that the people with higher

education have a higher sense of civic duty, and stronger allegiance to the political

73
system. Education gives various political resources needed by the voters in order to

make informed choices. This showed thateducation is a determinant factor for policy

preferences and partisan choice. Similarly, in terms of socioeconomic status Pelero

(2008) stated that in the context of Philippine elections communities with lower

incomes are more likely to vote because they are more susceptible to political

operators and electoral fraud mechanisms especially vote buying and because unlike

those with higher incomes who may engage the political process through personal

connections or civic involvement, voting remains the major way low-income people can

be involved in the political process.

With the findings it showed that the formal settlers (better income and

educational status) prefer to vote based on critically evaluating the candidates

educational background, experience and platforms. While the informal settlers (low

income and education status) answering indifferently and unsure of their type of

candidate preference that shows their lack of civic involvement that results their

vulnerability to political operators and maligning. This social and group identity reflects

and supports the sociological approach to voting theory andLazarsfeld et al. (1944) that

showed that majority of the voters voted according to their original political

predisposition. And, it is said that the association between electoral behavior and the

social groups to which they belonged was so strong that it was possible to explain the

electoral choices using factors such as socio-economic status, religion and area of

residence. Thus, given the different of type of settlement and their socioeconomic

status the research findings showed that there is a significant difference on the voting

74
preference of the formal and informal settlers when group according to their type of

settlement.

CHAPTER 5

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions drawn and

the recommendation of the researchers. The objective of the study is to determine the

voting preference of the Formal and Informal Settlers of Barangay Valenzuela, Makati

City during the 2013 Senatorial Elections. The respondents of the study are the

randomly selected formal and informal settlers of the involved locale. The researchers

used instruments such as questionnaires in order to gather the data from the

respondents. The collected data is interpreted and analyzed through the use of tables

and statistical methods such as Frequency and Percentage Distribution Table,

Descriptive Statistics and T-test.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Based on the data gathered from the respondents the following findings were drawn:

1. Majority of the respondents belong in the middle age group. 34.1 % of the

respondents have the age of 30- 39 years old.

2. The gender distributions of the respondents in Brgy. Valenzuela are almost

equally distributed with an average percentage of 50.4% in males and 49.6% for

the females with a fairly distributed gender it implies that the gender

representation bias is low.

75
 3. 81.4% of the formal settlers were able to reach college level. Meanwhile, most

of the informal settlers with about 89.4% have only reached the secondary level.

4. About half of the respondents of Brgy. Valenzuela have an income of 10,000

below with an average percentage of 51.7%. The Informal settlers belong to the

urban poor with 92.6% have a monthly income of 10,000 below while most of

the Formal settlers have an income of 10,000- 19,000 covering 40.9% of their

population.

5. Both of the formal and informal settlers are devoted Roman Catholic having a

percentage of 84.3 %.

6. The formal and informal settlers differed significantly with a P. Value of less than

or equal to .01 level on assessing the characteristics of the candidates while

having the same responses when it comes to the Moral Platforms issue support.

7. Null hypothesis rejected: For there is a significant difference between the voting

preferences of the respondents when group according to their profile in Brgy.

Valenzuela, Makati City during the 2013 Senatorial Elections.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. Base on the demographic profile of respondents, the formal settlers belongs to

the upper to middle class for having able to earn an above average monthly

income and able to reach college level. Gathering an income of below 10, 000

and have only acquired a secondary level of education, the informal settlers are

considered to belong in the poor class.

76
2. Popularity as a factor that influenced the vote of the respondents was rejected

by both the formal and informal settlers. Albeit the informal settlers has more

tendencies to vote in accordance to popularity with a T-value of -[Link]

formal settlers didn’t vote for a candidate just because they are popular, this

shows that they are not being easily persuaded by a senatorial candidate’s

popularity and tend to give importance to the other characteristics of the

candidates which measure their competency as a public officials.

3. In terms of evaluating the characteristics of the candidates, the formal settler

respondents are more likely to critically evaluate the candidates on 2013

Senatorial Election in which they seriously take into consideration the

educational background, experience and platforms of the candidate before

voting for them. A candidate which have a high educational status and have

serve the people as a public official for a long time are preferred by the formal

settlers and seen to be deserving as legislator of our country. Moreover, formal

settlers give weight to the candidate’s platforms as a factor which leads them on

supporting the senatorial candidate; nevertheless the family background of a

candidate is not important for them. Formal settlers tend to have a stable

response in evaluating the characteristics of the candidates. Formal settlers

being more educated and privilege one, are more rational in terms of evaluating

and voting for a senatorial candidate, they support for a candidate in which

competent enough to represent their interests.

4. In the case of the respondents who are informal settlers, they are unconcerned,

indifferent or did not give much importance on evaluating the characteristics of

77
 the candidates. They tend to take a neither agree nor disagree response on

evaluating a senatorial candidate. The indifference of the informal settlers in

their responses on factors that affects their voting preference shows their lack of

knowledge in some issues in our society today and immaturity in terms of voting.

5. The researchers concluded that the type of settlement of the respondents

affects their evaluation of the characteristics of the candidate which lead to their

significant difference on their voting preferences.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

In the light of findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are made:

1. For the future researchers who will make a similar study, they must involve a

larger scope of respondents (e.g. city level) and should employ qualitative type

of this study. A qualitative study of this topic will enable the respondents to

express their ideas and opinions.

2. The informal settlers should be responsible enough in raising their awareness

with regard to the background of electoral candidates such as their platforms,

experience and capabilities through the use of valid and accessible information

sources such as: barangay seminars, caucuses and election awareness

program.

3. The informal settlers should be mature enough in exercising their right to

suffrage. They must elect an educated and efficient public official that will truly

represent not just their needs, but the ones who will consider the long term

needs of this country. This means that they must choose their vote upon long

78
 term and viable solutions proposed by the future policymakers. And not on the

basis of short term promises offered to them during election in exchange of their

vote. Similarly, the COMELEC must address the issue of exploitation applied by

the politicians upon this kind of transaction and must consider the residential

requirement more strictly in order to avoid this kind of patron-client relationship

among voters and candidates.

4. Lawmakers should address the problem about the increasing number of

informal settlers. The legislators should formulate laws that will penalize those

people that would illegally reside in property owned lands; implementation of

such laws will decrease the number of informal settlers.

5. The national government with the help of local government should strengthen

programs which would solve this kind of housing problems through viable

projects. It is not enough that in solving these housing problems that the

government would address this by providing them houses like of the provider

model in the other countries. But rather must consider revisiting housing and

relocation projects with the mixture of the idea of support for a sustainable

community that would generate those means to sustain themselves

economically to avoid the cycle of being informal settlers again in the metro.

Thus in doing such the researchers highly suggest that:

a. Traditional work procedures within the topic of urban planning must be check

and revisited to adapt to the present need.

b. Cooperation among local government faced with this kind of dilemma to

collectively solve the problem. And;

79
 c. More participation from the residents which is a necessary feature of a sound

democracy and a prerequisite for a sustainable society.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Amoranto, G. [Link] (2010) “Who are the middle class and what values do they hold?

Evidence from the world values survey”. Retrieved August 17, 2013 from

[Link]

strong-middle-class-is-key-for-a-stable-democracy?blog=10

Andersen, R, & Heath, A. (2000). Social cleavages, attitudes and voting patterns: A

comparison of Canda and Great Britain. Retrieved February 26, 2014 from

[Link]

Antunes, R. (2010). Theoretical models of voting behaviour. Retrieved February 26,

2014 from [Link]

[Link]

Ayson, G. F., & Reyes, A.D. (2000).Fundamentals of Political Science

(2nded.).Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore

Bartels, L. M. (2008). The Irrational Electorate. In The Wilson Quarterly (1976-), Vol

32, No. 4, pp. 44-50. Retrieved August 28, 2013, from

[Link]

Brown, C. & Smith, Raymond.(2009). Voting behaviour based on socioeconomic

status. Retrieved March 7, 2014 from [Link]

80
Burden, Barry C. (2009).The dynamic effect of education on voter turnout. 1050

Bascom Mall Madison, WI53706.

Calvert, P., & Calvert, S. (2001). Politics and Society in the Third World.(2nd ed.).

Edinburgh Harlow, England: Wingman Pearson Education

Campbell, R. & Cowley, P. (2013, June 17). What voters want: Reactions to candidate

characteristics in a survey experiment. Available from Winley Online Library.

(DOI No. 10.1111/1467-9248.12048)

Carnes, N., and Sadin, M. (2012).The Other John Edwards Lie: How Voters Perceive

Politicians from Working-class Families and How They Really Behave in Office,

3-6. Retrieved from: [Link] on

February 16, 2014

Cruz, J. (2010). Estimating informal settlers in the Philippines. Retrieved October 5,

2013 from [Link]

15/03_Estimating%20Informal%20Settlers%20in%20the%[Link]

De Leon, H. S. (2008) .Textbook on the Philippine Constitution.(2008 ed.). Recto

Avenue, 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr., St.: Rex Book Store Inc.

Do Voters Affect or Elect Policies? Evidence from the U.S. House*. (2004). Retrieved

February 19, 2014, from [Link]

Does local candidate matter.(n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2014, from [Link]

[Link]/pdf/[Link]

81
Encabo, A. E. (2010, January 15). The filipino language and culture in political

advertisements. Retrieved February 16, 2014, from

[Link]

[Link]

Feinstein, B., D. (2010). The Dynasty Advantage: Family Ties in Congressional, 591-

592. Retrieved from: [Link] on February 17, 2014

Fesnic, Florin. (n.d.).Educational Level and Voting Behavior. Retrieved from

[Link]

Francis, F. (1992).The end of history and the last [Link] York: The Free Press, A

Division of Macmillan, Inc.

Goldman, R. M. (1993). Behavioural Perspective on American [Link],

Georgetown, Ontario, Illinois: The Dorsey Press

Hay, C. (2002) Political Analysis A Critical Introduction Houndmills, Basingstoke,

Hampshire,England: Palgrave Macmillan

How Barack Obama works. (n.d.) . Retrieved August 30, 2013, from

[Link]

Institute of Political Reform. (2003). Restudying the Filipino voter today. Retrieved

September 12, 2013, from [Link]/documentation/Chapter [Link]

[Link]. (n.d.).Descriptive Statistics. Retrieved February 20, 2014 from

[Link]

82
Laviña, T. (2013, June 18). The vote of the [Link] Standard Today. Retrieved

February 16, 2014, from [Link]

of-the-poor/

Lee, D. S. (2001, August).The electoral advantage to incumbency and voter’s

evaluation of politician’s experience: a regression of close elections . Retrieved

February 16, 2014 from [Link]

Maor, M. (1997).Political Parties & Party Systems Comparative Approaches &The

British Experience. 29 West 35th Street, New York: Routledge

Measures of Central Tendency: The Mean, Median, and Mode. (n.d.) Retrieved

February 2, 2014 from [Link]

Pelero, C. (2008). Election forensics- the effect of socioeconomic characteristics on

voting. Retrieved August 20, 2013, from

Http://[Link]/2008/07/lero-eclection-forensics-june-

[Link]

Philippine elections: to those who say Filipinos are stupid. (n.d.) . Retrieved August 31,

2013 from [Link]

Political Parties and Electoral Landscapes. (1998). Retrieved February 19, 2014, from

[Link]

Retrieved February 16, 2014, from

[Link]

83
Schaffer, F. C. (2005). Clean elections and great unwashed vote buying and voter

education in the Philippines. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from

[Link]

Setiawan , B. (1998). “Local dynamics in informal settlement development: A case

study of Yogyakart, Indonesia” date retrieved August 17, 2013 from

[Link]

Sison, J. (2013) “Squatters and Suffrage”. Retrieved August 17, 2013 from

[Link]

Statistician Canda.(2013). Frequency Distribution Table. Retrieved February 20, 2014

from [Link]

Cruz, J. (2010). Estimating informal settlers in the Philippine. Retrieved March 8, 2014

from [Link]

15/03_Estimating%20Informal%20Settlers%20in%20the%[Link]

Thompson, M. (2010) After Populis: Winning the ‘war’forbourgeoisdemocracy in the

Philippines Date retrieve March 7, 2014 from

[Link]

Tornquist O. (1999). Politics and Development a Critical [Link] Oaks,

New Delhi, London: Sage Publications

National Statistics Office.(2012). Statistical tables on family income and expenditure

survey(fies) from the results of 2012 fies. Retrieved March 8, 2014 from

[Link]

84
 %201%20Number%20of%20Families%2C%20Total%20and%20Average

%20Annual%20Family%20Income%20and%20Expenditure%20by%20Region

%202012_0.pdf

University of Minnesota.(2012). Basic statistics 2-sample T-test. Retrieved October 9,

2013, from [Link]

What is political platform.(n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2013, from

[Link]

85
 APPENDICES

Appendix A- Questionnaire

Thesis Title: Voting Preferences of the Formal and Informal Settlers of Brgy. Valenzuela,
Makati City on the 2013 Senatorial Elections

Greetings Sir/ Ma’m,

We are students of Far Eastern University Major in Political Science. We are conducting a
research regarding the voting preference of informal settlers and formal settlers in your
respective barangay as a requirement to our subject POLS26 (Research Output).

We guarantee your utmost security and privacy Sir/Ma’am and we are grateful for your time
and your cooperation in answering our questionnaires truthfully.

Age: ____ Gender: Male  ☐Female  ☐

Educational Attainment: Elementary  ☐ Highschool ☐College  ☐

Vocational  ☐ Post Baccalaureate  ☐

Religion:

Catholic ☐ Iglesia Ni Cristo☐ Islam ☐ Born Again ☐ Others __________

Income (monthly):

Below 10, 000 – 29,999  ☐ 30,000 – 49,999  ☐ 50,000 – 69,999  ☐

70,000- 89,999 ☐ 90,000- 109,999 ☐ 110,000 and above ☐

Directions: Put a check (√) on the number that corresponds to your statement.

5 = Strongly agree

4 = Agree

3 = Neither agree or disagree

2 = Disagree

1 = Strongly disagree

86
I. Popularity

Statements 5 4 3 2 1
1.) Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsya ay
isangkilalangartista/sikat.
2.) Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsadam
i ng komersyalnitosatelebisyon
3.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base sa
kung sinongartistaang nag-
eendorsosakanya.
4.) Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsya ay
maganda/ gwapo

II. Educational Attainment

Statements 5 4 3 2 1

5.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base

samgaparangalnakanyangnakuhahabangsy
a ay nag-aaral pa.
6.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base
saantas o lebel ng edukasyonnanataposnya

7.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base

saunibersidad o
paaralannakanyangpinanggalingan.
8.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base
sakanyangkursongnatapos. (Hal. Law,
Engineering, Architecture etc.)

III. Family Background

Statements 5 4 3 2 1

9.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base

sarelasyon/ koneksyonnitosaangkan o
pamilyanakanyangpinanggalingan.
10.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base
satagal ng
kanilangpamilyabilangisangpulitiko.
11.) Angpagiging may
kaapelyidosaSenado ng kandidato ay

87
 nagingbasehan ng akingpagboto.
12.) Angkontrobersiya o
isyunanakasangkutan ng pamilya ng
isangkandidato ay nagingbasehan ng
akingpagboto.

IV. Experience

Statements 5 4 3 2 1

13.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base

sakanyangkaalamanbilangisangpulitiko.
14.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base
sakatagalan o
sataongsya’ynagserbisyobilangisangpulitiko
.

15.) Angmgaparangalnanatanggap ng
kandidatomulasapanunungkulansaSenado ay
nagingbatayan ng akingpagboto

16.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base

sadami ng
panukalangbatasnakanyangnaipasa.

V. Platforms

17.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakanyangplatapormang socio - ekonomikal:

5 4 3 2 1

a.) Pagsuportasa 4 P’s(PantawidPamilya ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Pilipino Program)

b.) Pagsuportasa Sin Tax Law ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

c.) Pagsuportasakaragdagan ng ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Foreign Direct Investment

18.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakanyangplatapormangpolitikal:

88
 5 4 3 2 1

a.) Pagsuportalabansa Political Dynasty: ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

b.) Pagsuportasa Charter Change: ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

c.) Pagsuportasa AFP Modernization ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

19.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakanyangplatapormangedukasyon.

5 4 3 2 1

a.) Pagsuportasa K+12 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

b.) Pagsuportasa Sex education ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

c.) Pagsuportasapagbabago ng buwan ng pasukan ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

20.) Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakanyangplatapormang moral.

5 4 3 2 1

a.) Pagsuportasa RH Law ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

b.) Pagsuportalabansa Abortion ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

c.) Pagsuportasa same sex marriage ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

89
Appendix B

Mapping

The HUDCC proposed defining the term “informal settlers” as those households living

in:

i) lot without consent of the property owner;

ii) danger areas;

iii) areas for government infrastructure projects;

iv) protected/forest areas (except for indigenous people);

v) Areas for Priority Development (APDs), if applicable; and

vi) other government/public lands or facilities not intended for habitation.

Operationally the HUDCC has made arrangements with the National Statistics Office

and the National Statistical Coordination Board through the Technical Committee on

Population and Housing Statistics (TCPHS) that this definition be adopted during the

2010 Census of Population. The HUDCC moved for the inclusion of the following

question to be answered by the enumerator through observation:

Encircle the actual or the nearest physical location of the housing unit of the

respondent:

1 Residential area

2 Along river/creek/canal/estero/waterways

90
3 Along the railroad

4 Easements of road and/or highway and/or under the bridge

5 Inside cemetery

6 Areas for government infrastructure projects

7 Within dumpsites

8 Within protected areas and forest lands

9 Within compound of government hospital, school, military camps or other public

institution and facilities

10 Within private lands

11 Others, specify______________________

The NSO, through Administrator Ericta considered the request of HUDCC as a

post census activity. The HUDCC was also required to come up with maps delineating

barangays boundaries, limits of danger areas, and even extent of right-of-way to guide

the post-census validation. The HUDCC offered to concentrate first on Metro Manila

informal settlers in coordination with Metro Manila Development Authority.

The National Statistical Coordination Board, through the TCHPS took

cognizance of the strong demand for population data for danger areas/zones and

recommended that the “HUDCC first provide an operational definition of these areas

and then identify and prepare a listing of these areas by barangays. With the

91
operational definition and listing of danger areas/zones, the HUDCC may coordinate

with NSO for the generation of the population data for these areas as part of the post

census activities.”

The classifications and directions given by the HUDCC, Brgy. Valenzuela in

Makati City officials were able to locate the informal settlers in their locale. Those

residents which didn’t fall within the classifications of the informal settlers and indeed

have a legal claim in the area where they reside are considered to be a formal settlers.

*The Shaded parts are the location of the Informal settlers. Non-Shaded parts are the Formal

Settlers

92
Appendix C- Academic Class Models

Dennis Gilbert (2002)

Class Typical Characteristics

Capitalist class Top-level executives, high-rung politicians, heirs. Ivy League

education common.
Upper middle class Highly-educated (often with graduate degrees), most commonly

salaried, professionals and middle management with large work

autonomy.
Lower middle class Semi-professionals and craftsmen with a roughly average

standard of living. Most have some college education and are

white-collar.
Working class Clerical and most blue-collar workers whose work is highly

routinized. Standard of living varies depending on number of

income earners, but is commonly just adequate. High school

education.
Working poor Service, low-rung clerical and some blue-collar workers. High

economic insecurity and risk of poverty. Some high school

education.
Underclass  Those with limited or no participation in the labor force. Reliant

on government transfers. Some high school education.

William Thompson & Joseph Hickey (2005)

93
 Class Typical Characteristics

Upper class  Top-level executives, celebrities, heirs; income of $500,000+

common. Ivy league education common.

Upper middle class Highly-educated (often with graduate degrees) professionals &

managers with household incomes varying from the high 5-

figure range to commonly above $100,000.

Lower middle class  Semi-professionals and craftsmen with some work autonomy;

household incomes commonly range from $35,000 to $75,000.

Typically, some college education.

Working class  Clerical, pink- and blue-collar workers with often low job

security; common household incomes range from $16,000 to

$30,000. High school education.

Lower class  Those who occupy poorly-paid positions or rely on government

transfers. Some high school education.

Leonard Beeghley( 2004)

Class Typical Characteristics

94
 Multi-millionaires whose incomes commonly exceed $350,000;

The Super-rich  includes celebrities and powerful executives/politicians. Ivy

League education common.

Households with net worth of $1 million or more; largely in the

The Rich  form of home equity. Generally have college degrees.

College-educated workers with considerably higher-than-

Middle Class (plurality/ average incomes and compensation; a man making $57,000

majority? and a woman making $40,000 may be typical.

Blue-collar workers and those whose jobs are highly routinized

Working class with low economic security; a man making $40,000 and a

woman making $26,000 may be typical. High school education.

Those living below the poverty line with limited to no

The Poor  participation in the labor force; a household income of $18,000

may be typical. Some high school education.

References: Gilbert, D. (2002) The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality.

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth; Thompson, W. & Hickey, J. (2005). Society in Focus. Boston, MA:
Pearson, Allyn & Bacon; Beeghley, L. (2004). The Structure of Social Stratification in the
United States. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon. The upper middle class may also be
referred to as "Professional class" Ehrenreich, B. (1989). The Inner Life of the Middle Class.
NY, NY: Harper-Colins.

Typical Characteristics

Class

95
 High income segments are families or

people earning an average of P200,000 a

High Income Group month or P2.4 million a year. Thus, they

may be described as the “rich” segment.

They are very few, numbering only 0.1%

of total families in the Philippines.

The middle income class is said to earn

an average of P36, 934 per month while

Middle Income Group the low income segment earns an

average of P9,061 per month.

The low income segment earns an

Low Income Group average of P9,061 per month.

Reference: “Family Income and Expenditure Survey” (FIES) of the National Statistical
Coordination Board (NSCB)

Appendix D – Responses of Formal settlers

Table 9

Formal Settlers Evaluation of the Candidate’s Popularity

96
 Type of Settlement Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsiya ay Disagree
1.68 1.055
isangkilalangartista/sikat.
2. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsadami ng Disagree
1.64 1.133
komersyalnitosatelebisyon.
3. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sa kung Disagree
1.64 .919
sinongartistaang nag-eendorsosakanya.
4. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsiya ay Disagree
1.55 .924
maganda/gwapo.
Total 1.63 Disagree 0.055

The table showed that senatorial candidates’ appearance, being a showbiz

personality and their campaign advertisements on television during 2013 election does

not make the formal settlers vote for them. The data showed that the formal settlers

disagreed on the popularity factors affecting their votes with a mean average of 1.63

Table 10

Formal Settlers Evaluation of the Candidate’s Educational Background

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation
1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor
samgaparangalnakanyangnakuhahabangsiya ay nagaaral 3.46 disagree 1.410
pa.
2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base saantas o lebel ng Agree
4.29 .946
edukasyonnanataposniya.
3. Binotokopinaggalinganangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor
3.26 1.329
saunibersidad o paaralannakanyang. disagree
4. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Agree
sakanyangkursongnatapos. (Law, Engineering, Architecture, 3.87 1.245
etc)
Total 3.72 Agree 0.457

The table above showed that the formal settlers agreed on the necessity of

educational background of the candidates with the mean average of 3.72,

Nevertheless in statements 1 and 3 they responded Neither agree nor disagree.

97
 Table 11

Formal Settler’s Evaluation of Candidate’s Family Background

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation
1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base
sarelasyon/koneksyonnitosaangkan o 2.38 Disagree 1.258
pamilyanakanyangpinaggalingan.

2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base satagal ng Neither agree nor

2.55 1.319
kanilangpamilyabilangisangpolitiko. disagree
3. Angpagiging may kaapelyidosaSenado ng Disagree
1.90 1.130
kandidato ay nagingbasehan ng akingpagboto.
4. Angkontrobersya o isyunanakasangkutan ng Disagree
pamilya ng isangkandidato ay nagingbasehan ng 2.33 1.393
akingpagboto.
Total 2.29 Disagree 0.2765

The table showed that the formal settlers disagreed on the necessity of the

family linkage of the senatorial candidates which affects their votes with the mean

average of 2.29 regarding the influence of the family background of the candidates

Table 12

Formal Settlers Evaluation of Candidate’s Experience

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

98
 Deviation
1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Agree
4.47 .860
sakanyangkaalamanbilangisangpolitiko.
2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakatagalan o Agree
4.19 1.036
sataongsiya'ynagserbisyobilangisangpolitiko.
3. Angmgaparangalnanatanggap ng
kandidatomulasapanunungkulansaSenado ay 4.02 Agree 1.248
nagingbatayansaakingpagboto.
4. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sadami ng Agree
4.47 .924
panukalangbatasnakanyangnaipasa.
Total 4.29 Agree 0.2219

The table above indicated that the formal settlers give importance to a

candidates experienced of being a public official with the mean average of 4.29.

Formal settlers agreed that they voted for candidates that have serve the government

and people for a long time and the awards that a candidate received as a public

officials lead them to support them.

Platforms

Table 13

Formal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Socioeconomic Platforms

99
 Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Pagsuportasa 4Ps (PantawidPamilya Pilipino Neither agree

3.25 nor disagree 1.419
Program)

2. Pagsuportasa Sin Tax Law 3.76 Agree 1.322

3. Pagsuportasakaragdagan ng Foreign Direct Agree

3.76 1.188
Investment
Total 3.59 Agree 0.2944
The table above showed that formal settlers agreed with the average of 3.59 on

the socio-economic platforms of the candidates, however on the first statement they

responded neither nor disagree on voting for a candidates which support 4 P’s.

Table 14

Formal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Political Platforms

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Pagsuportalabansa Political Dynasty 3.96 1.262

Agree
Neither agree nor
2. Pagsuportasa Charter Change 3.15 1.415
disagree
3. Pagsuportasa AFP Modernization 4.18 Agree 1.056
Total 3.76 Agree 0.5424

The data above showed that formal settlers elected senatorial candidates which

support the Anti- Dynasty Bill and AFP modernization. Over all, they agreed with the

average of 3.76 on the necessity of political platforms of the candidates that affected

their votes, however on the second statement they responded neither agree nor

disagree.

Table 15

Formal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Educational Platforms

100
 Statements Mean Interpretation Std.
Deviation
1. Pagsuportasa K+12 3.78 Agree 1.361
Neither agree nor
2. Pagsuportasa Sex Education 3.23 1.411
disagree
Neither agree nor
3. Pagsuportasapagbabago ng buwan ng pasukan 2.95 disagree 1.386

Total 3.32 Neither agree 0.4223

nor disagree

The table above showed that the formal settlers neither agree nor disagree with

an average mean of 3.32 of supporting a candidates based on their education

platforms. However in the K+12 program, they agreed that they voted for a senatorial

candidates which pursue the said program.

Table 16

Formal Settlers Evaluation of Candidate’s Moral Platforms

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation

1. Pagsuportasa RH Law 4.09 Agree 1.236

2. Pagsuportalabansa Abortion 4.10 Agree 1.454

101
 3. Pagsuportasa same sex marriage 1.98 1.250
Disagree
Total 3.39 Neither agree nor 1.2211
disagree

The table above showed that the formal settlers neither agree nor disagree with

a mean average of 3.39 of voting for senatorial candidates based on their moral issue

platforms. However, they agreed that they choose candidates which support the RH

Law and who are against abortion while disagreed on voting for candidate which

support legalizing same sex marriage.

102
Appendix E- Responses of Informal Settlers

Table 17

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Popularity

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsiya ay Neither agree
2.63 1.257
isangkilalangartista/sikat. nor disagree
2. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsadami ng Neither agree
2.52 1.217
komersyalnitosatelebisyon. nor disagree
3. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sa kung Disagree
2.34 1.147
sinongartistaang nag-eendorsosakanya.
4. Binotokoangisangkandidatodahilsiya ay Disagree
2.42 1.344
maganda/gwapo.
Total 2.48 Disagree 0.1255

The informal settlers disagreed with the total mean of 2.48 on the statements

related with the popularity factor of the candidates. Though, on the first and second

statement, it showed that they neither agree nor disagree.

Table 18

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Educational Background

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree
samgaparangalnakanyangnakuhahabangsiya ay nagaaral 3.03 nor disagree 1.099
pa.
2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base saantas o lebel ng Neither agree
3.51 .995
edukasyonnanataposniya. nor disagree
3. Binotokoangisangkandidato base saunibersidad o Neither agree
3.02 1.097
paaralannakanyangpinaggalingan. nor disagree
4. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree
sakanyangkursongnatapos. (Law, Engineering, Architecture, 3.22 nor disagree 1.120
etc)
Total 3.20 Neither agree 0.2293
nor disagree

103
 The table above showed that the informal settlers neither agreed nor disagreed

with a total mean of 3.20 on the statements regarding the influence of the educational

background of the candidates which affected their votes.

Table 19

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Family Background

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor

sarelasyon/koneksyonnitosaangkan o 3.03 disagree 1.167
pamilyanakanyangpinaggalingan.
2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base satagal ng Neither agree nor
3.49 1.032
kanilangpamilyabilangisangpolitiko. disagree
3. Angpagiging may kaapelyidosaSenado ng kandidato Neither agree nor
2.88 1.166
ay nagingbasehan ng akingpagboto. disagree
4. Angkontrobersya o isyunanakasangkutan ng pamilya Neither agree nor
2.83 1.162
ng isangkandidato ay nagingbasehan ng akingpagboto. disagree
Total 3.06 Neither agree nor 0.3006
disagree

The table showed that informal settlers are undecided whether the family name

that a candidate carries, the candidate’s family’s history of public governance and the

involvement of its family on certain issues influenced them on voting for particular

senatorial candidates. Therefore, it indicated that the informal settlers neither agree nor

disagree that the family background of a candidate affected their votes on the 2013

Senatorial elections.

Table 20

104
 Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Experience

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Agree

3.72 1.192
sakanyangkaalamanbilangisangpolitiko.

2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sakatagalan o Neither agree nor

3.44 1.184
sataongsiya'ynagserbisyobilangisangpolitiko. disagree
3. Angmgaparangalnanatanggap ng Neither agree nor
kandidatomulasapanunungkulansaSenado ay 3.35 disagree 1.212
nagingbatayansaakingpagboto.
4. Binotokoangisangkandidato base sadami ng Neither agree nor
3.27 1.200
panukalangbatasnakanyangnaipasa. disagree
Neither agree nor
Total 3.45 disagree 0.196

The table above showed that the informal settlers neither agree nor disagree

that a candidate experienced of being a public official affected their votes with the total

mean of 3.45. Though, they agreed that they voted for candidates who have a full

knowledge on public governance having a mean of 3.72.

Platforms

105
 Table 21

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Socioeconomic Platforms

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation

1. Pagsuportasa 4Ps (PantawidPamilya Pilipino Program) 4.48 .798

Agree
Neither agree
2. Pagsuportasa Sin Tax Law 2.60 1.323
nor disagree
Neither agree
3. Pagsuportasakaragdagan ng Foreign Direct Investment 3.11 1.137
nor disagree
Total 3. 40 Neither agree 0.9722
nor disagree

The table showed that the informal settlers neither agree nor disagree with the

mean average of 3.40 that they voted for candidate based on their socio-economic

platforms. However, they agreed that they elected senatorial candidates who support

the PantawidPamilya Pilipino Program of the government.

Table 22

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Political Platforms

Statements Mean Interpretation Std. Deviation

1. Pagsuportalabansa Political Dynasty 3.58 1.059

Agree

Neither agree nor

2. Pagsuportasa Charter Change 3.36 1.047
disagree

Neither agree nor

3. Pagsuportasa AFP Modernization 3.23 1.340
disagree
Total 3.39 Neither agree nor 0.1769
disagree

106
 The table identified that the informal settlers neither agree nor disagree with a

mean average of 3.39 of supporting a candidates on 2013 Senatorial Election based

on the political platforms that candidate’s offered. However, they agreed that they

voted candidates who were pro- Anti- Political Dynasty.

Table 23

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Educational Background

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation
1. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor
3.35 1.268
sakanyangplatapormangedukasyon: Pagsuportasa K+12 disagree

2. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor

sakanyangplatapormangedukasyon: Pagsuportasa Sex 2.89 disagree 1.210
Education
3. Binotokoangisangkandidato base Neither agree nor
sakanyangplatapormangedukasyon: Pagsuportasapagbabago 2.90 disagree 1.233
ng buwan ng pasukan
Total 3.05 Neither agree nor 0.2627
disagree

The table clearly informed that the informal settlers neither agreed nor disagreed

with an average mean of 3.05 on choosing candidates on last 2013 senatorial elections

based on the educational platforms of the candidates.

107
 Table 24

Informal Settlers’ Evaluation of Candidate’s Moral Platforms

Statements Mean Interpretation Std.

Deviation
1. Pagsuportasa RH Law 3.93 Agree .837

2. Pagsuportalabansa Abortion 4.00 Agree 1.029

3. Pagsuportasa same sex marriage 1.99 Disagree 1.039
Total 3.31 Neither agree nor disagree 1.1408

The table showed that the informal settlers neither agree nor disagree with a

mean average of 3.31 that they elected a senatorial candidates based on its moral

platforms Nevertheless, they agreed that it is important for them that a candidate

supports the RH Law and were against abortion which leaded them to elect the

candidate last 2013 senatorial elections

108
Appendix F- Tables

Table 25.1

Age of Formal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Less than 20
4 2.1
years old
20 – 29 69 35.8
30 – 39 60 31.1
Formal
40 – 49 33 17.1
50 – 59 18 9.3
60 and Above 9 4.7
Total 193 100.0

Table 25.2

Age of Informal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Less than 20
7 3.7
years old
20 – 29 51 27.1
30 – 39 70 37.2
Informal
40 – 49 41 21.8
50 – 59 16 8.5
60 and Above 3 1.6
Total 188 100.0

109
 Table 26.1

Gender of Formal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Male 98 50.8
Formal Female 95 49.2
Total 193 100.0

Table 26.2

Gender of Informal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Male 94 50.0
Informal Female 94 50.0
Total 188 100.0

Table 27.1

Educational Attainment of Formal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Elementary 3 1.6
High school 33 17.1
College 125 64.8
Formal
Vocational 10 5.2
Post Baccalaureate 22 11.4
Total 193 100.0

110
 Table 27.2

Educational Attainment of Informal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Elementary 63 33.5
High school 105 55.9
Informal College 12 6.4
Vocational 8 4.3
Total 188 100.0

Table 28.1
Monthly Income of Formal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Below 10,000 23 11.9
10,000 - 19,999 79 40.9
20,000 - 29,999 49 25.4
30,000 - 39,999 17 8.8
40,000 - 49,999 8 4.1
Formal 50,000 - 59,999 6 3.1
60,000 - 69,999 4 2.1
70,000 and
7 3.6
above

Total 193 100.0

111
 Table 28.2

Monthly Income of Informal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Below 10,000 174 92.6
10,000 - 19,999 13 6.9
Informal Valid
20,000 - 29,999 1 .5
Total 188 100.0

Table 29.1

Religion of Formal Settler Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Catholic 154 79.8
Iglesiani Cristo 14 7.3
Islam 2 1.0
Formal
Born Again 18 9.3
Others 5 2.6
Total 193 100.0

Table 29.2

Religion of Informal Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Catholic 167 88.8
Iglesiani Cristo 10 5.3
Informal Born Again 10 5.3
Others 1 .5
Total 188 100.0
Appendix G- Letter to the Barangay Officials

112
113
Appendix H- Figures

Figure 2

Pie Graph of Age of the Respondents

3% 3%
9%

Less than 20
32%
20-29
19%
30-39
40-49
50-59
60 and above

34%

Figure 3

Pie Graph of Gender of the Respondents

50%
Male
50%
Female

114
 Figure 4

Pie Graph of Educational Attainment of the Respondents

6%
5% 17%

Elementary
High School
College
36% Vocational
Post Baccalaureate
36%

Figure 5

Pie Graph of Monthly Income of the Respondents

1% 2%
2% 2%
5%

below 10,000
13% 10,000-10,999
20,000-29,999
30,000-39,999
52% 40,000-49,999
50,000-59,999
60,000-69,999
24% 70,000 and above

115
 Figure 6

Pie Graph of Religion of the Respondents

2%
1% 7%

6%

Catholic
Iglesia Ni Cristo
Islam
Born Again
Others

84%

Figure 7

Pie Graph of Type of Settlement of the Respondents

49% Formal
51%
Informal

116
 Figure 2.1

Age of Formal Respondents

20 – 29 30 – 39 40 – 49
50 – 59 60 and Above Less than 20 years old
2%
5%

9%

36%

17%

31%

Figure 2.2

Age of Informal Respondents

1.6
3.7
8.5

Less than 20 years old

27.1 20 – 29
30 – 39
21.8
40 – 49
50 – 59
60 and Above

37.2

117
 Figure 3.1

Pie Graph of Gender of Formal Respondents

Male
Female
49.2 50.8

Figure 3.2

Pie Graph of Gender of Informal Respondents

Male
Female
50 50

118
 Figure 4.1

Pie Graph of Educational Attainment of Formal

Respondents
1.6
11.4
17.1
5.2 Elementary
High school
College
Vocational
Post Baccalaureate

64.8

Figure 4.2

Pie Graph of Educational Attainment of Informal

Respondents
4.3
6.4

Elementary
33.5 High school
College
Vocational

55.9

119
 Figure 5.1

Pie Graph of Monthly Income of Formal Respondents

2.1 3.6
3.1
11.9
4.1 Below 10,000
10,000 - 19,999
8.8 20,000 - 29,999
30,000 - 39,999
40,000 - 49,999
50,000 - 59,999
60,000 - 69,999
70,000 and above
40.9
25.4

Figure 5.2

Pie Graph of Monthly Income of the Informal

Respondents
0.5
6.9

Below 10,000
10,000 - 19,999
20,000 - 29,999

92.6

120
 Figure 6.1

Pie Graph of Religion of Formal Respondents

2.6
9.3
1

7.3 Catholic
Iglesia ni Cristo
Islam
Born Again
Others

79.8

Figure 6.2

Pie Graph Religion of Informal Respondents

0.5
5.3
5.3

Catholic
Iglesia ni Cristo
Born Again
Others

88.8

121
 Figure 8

Pie Graph of the Summary of the Formal Settler’s

response in accordance to the Candidate’s
Characteristics
Popularity
1.63 Educational Background
3.39
Family Background
3.72 Experience
3.32 Socio-Economic Platform
Political platform
2.29 Education platform
Moral platform
3.76
4.29

3.59

Figure 9

Pie Graph of the Summary of the Informal Settler’s

response in accordance to the Candidate’s
Characteristics
Popularity
3.3 2.48 Educational Background
Family Background
3.2 Experience
3.05 Socio-Economic Platform
Political platform
Education platform
3.06 moral platform
3.39

3.45
3.4

122
Appendices E- Pictures

Pictures of the Informal Settler’s House

123
Pictures of the Formal Settler’s House

124
 ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Boquiron, Shiela Mae A. was a consistent academic

honours awardee since elementary. She was supposed to

take Legal Management but the program was not offered

by the university during those times so she decided to

take Political Science instead and have learned to love

the course as well. She was an academic scholar during

the 2010-2011 S.Y of Far Eastern University but because

of her failure to comply of the maintaining grades she loses her scholarship but able to

regain it in the following school year. After finishing her current course, she planned to

pursue Masters Degree in Business Administration or to take Law in University of

Santo Tomas.

Hilario, Jose Noel B. was a former civil engineering

student of Mapua Institute of Technology wherein he spent

one semester. After he realized that his passion belongs to

a different field he transferred to AB Political Science in Far

Eastern University. In FEU and with the right field of

specialization Jose Noel have found his home in FEU and

with the degree of Political Science. His academic life and extracurricular activities

goes well in his stay in FEU wherein he actively engaged himself in the affairs of the

student government wherein he became an Executive Committee member of the

Institute of arts and Sciences during the 2010-2011 S.Y. And the Treasurer of the

Political Science Society S.Y 2013-2014.

125
 Flores, John GabrielleFlores, John Gabrielle S. graduated

High School from Paco Catholic School. He was a former

Political Science student of University of Santo Tomas wherein

he spent one academic school year. Due to his academic

problems in UST he transferred to Far Eastern University to

continue Political Science. He is simple and happy-go-lucky guy that may sometimes

mistook him as irresponsible and carefree, despite all negative judgements about him,

He still believes that God is always there to help us and because of that his dream to

be the Richest Person in the World is guided by that principle.

Macadato, Milsum F.-graduated high school from Virginia Centurione Bracelli School.

He wanted to pursue military at the prestigious Philippine Military Academy. However,

his parents encouraged him to take a pre law course then proceed to law since they

want someone from the clan to be a lawyer to serve as the legal counsel of the family

as well as protection from external threats. He is a typical guy who did not excel but did

not fail in academics. Furthermore, he made sure that he enjoys his college life without

putting his academic life at risk. He conceived that life should be balanced in a way that

you learn things, give respect, be humble, always pray and not forget to have fun and

enjoy once in a while.

Orlino Maria Gladys B. was a student of Far Eastern

University ever since 2010. Her course was supposed to be

Bachelor of Arts in Literature but due to her interests and

126
parents’ urging she shifted to Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She never got a

failing grade during her academic years in the university. Following the career paths of

some of her relatives and the dreams of her parents as well as her own she proceeded

to study in law school. Her advocacy in life is to serve the country by changing how the

government legislates and executes its laws that would be beneficiary for the people

for a long time.

127