*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM
I remember a quiet conversation with a local politician years ago. He was not loud, not headline-driven, yet he kept winning. I once asked him what his secret was, and he simply smiled and said, “I don’t follow trends. I follow direction.” That insight has stayed with me over the years, and today, as I observe the evolving dynamics inside the House of Representatives, I realize how profoundly accurate that statement is. What we are witnessing now is not mere political noise or routine party activity. It is movement—measured, calculated, and deliberate. This is not casual observation but an analysis grounded on patterns, behavior, and the subtle signals that often precede major political shifts.
On paper, the dominant force in the House remains Lakas–CMD. Its dominance in the 2025 elections was anchored on a strong organizational machinery and reinforced by the leadership of Speaker Martin Romualdez. The numbers were decisive, and the coalition was cohesive, allowing it to command the legislative agenda with confidence. However, as I analyze the present situation, I must emphasize that dominance in Philippine politics is never permanent. It is always subject to recalibration. What we see today as stable may, in fact, already be in transition.
The movements within the House are not loud, but they are unmistakable. There are quiet shifts taking place as members begin to reposition themselves. Some are formally transferring, while others are signaling alignment with parties such as Partido Federal ng Pilipinas, National Unity Party, and Nationalist People’s Coalition. This is not the traditional form of party-switching driven by immediate opportunity alone. What I see is something more strategic, a pre-2028 migration pattern where legislators are already positioning themselves based on anticipated future power configurations. As an analyst, I focus less on public declarations and more on behavior, and the behavior clearly indicates that lawmakers are hedging their political futures.
To understand the present, we must revisit the past. The sudden rise of PDP–Laban during the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte is a classic illustration of how proximity to power can trigger mass political realignment. From having only a handful of members in Congress, PDP–Laban rapidly expanded as politicians across the country shifted allegiance to align themselves with the new administration. This phenomenon extended beyond Congress to the grassroots, where local leaders and political actors sought membership in the ruling party, often with the expectation of access to influence and potential appointment to government positions. It was a moment when party identity became secondary to political survival.
However, the more recent experience of the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas presents a contrasting outcome that deepens our understanding of electoral behavior. Despite being chaired by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the party struggled in the 2025 senatorial elections. It failed to produce a winning senator, and even incumbent Francis Tolentino, who aligned himself with the party, did not perform strongly. Candidates perceived to be winnable, such as Benjamin Abalos Jr. and Manny Pacquiao, also fell short.
From an analytical standpoint, this outcome reveals a critical insight. The electability of a sitting president does not automatically transfer to the electability of his party’s candidates, whether at the national or local level. The Partido Federal ng Pilipinas case during the 2025 elections becomes a clear manifestation of this limitation. While the party enjoys institutional strength due to its association with the presidency, this strength does not necessarily translate into voter support for its candidates.
This leads to a deeper conclusion about the nature of Philippine electoral behavior. Voters do not primarily vote for parties; they vote for personalities. The strong mandate secured by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in the 2022 elections was largely personal in character. It was driven by individual appeal, historical narrative, and political branding, rather than by party ideology or structure. As a result, while the presidency confers institutional advantage to a party, it does not guarantee that voters will extend that support to all candidates carrying the same party label.
In contrast, the National Unity Party demonstrates a different kind of strategic discipline. By choosing not to field a senatorial slate, it avoided the risks associated with national-level exposure and instead focused on consolidating its strength in the House and in local government units. This approach reflects an understanding that stability can sometimes be more valuable than expansion.
The Nationalist People’s Coalition, however, represents a distinct and enduring model. Since its participation in the 1992 elections under Eduardo Cojuangco Jr., the NPC has consistently built its strength not through presidential victories but through sustained presence in Congress, the provinces, and local governments. It has outlasted multiple political cycles, maintaining its leadership core and retaining many of its pioneers. Unlike other parties such as Lakas–NUCD, Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino, Partido Reforma, Partido ng Masang Pilipino, the Nacionalista Party, United Nationalist Alliance, Kampi, Aksyon Demokratiko, People's Reform Party, and the Liberal Party, which experienced fluctuations in cohesion and membership, NPC has maintained continuity and institutional integrity.
Today, NPC is not merely surviving; it is regaining momentum. It continues to expand its influence while preserving its internal structure, demonstrating that long-term relevance in Philippine politics is not solely dependent on capturing the presidency. Rather, it is built on consistent engagement at multiple levels of governance.
When these dynamics are viewed together, the current situation in the House becomes clearer. There is movement toward immediate power, reflected in the growth of the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas. There is movement toward operational stability, reflected in the steady positioning of the National Unity Party. And there is movement toward long-term strategic relevance, reflected in the increasing attraction of the Nationalist People’s Coalition. Lakas–CMD remains dominant, but it is no longer insulated from these shifts. What we are witnessing is a signal phase, and in politics, signals always precede structural change.
In conclusion, the House of Representatives is no longer in a phase of static dominance but in a period of transition. While Lakas–CMD continues to lead, and the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas rises through presidential alignment, the deeper currents of political behavior suggest that long-term influence will belong to those who can sustain relevance beyond a single electoral cycle.
Because in the Philippine political system, the true measure of power is not how strongly one wins an election, but how consistently one remains part of the system long after the election is over.
________________
*About the author:
