In an earlier commentary (“The federalism project in PH,” 11/9/16), I listed three key points from the institutional design literature that undermine the federalism project and the overall Charter change campaign.

This one, still an extension of my lecture as speaker at the recent Jaime V. Ongpin Annual Memorial Lecture, focuses on the most political of the three: the argument that a constituent assembly (Con-ass) which also functions as a legislative assembly and is riddled by vested interests is a highly risky mode of overhauling a constitution.

The leaders of both chambers of Congress have signaled that they are about to move into the Cha-cha (Charter change) phase of this administration’s national development plan. The debate being framed in this regard is a constitutional convention (Con-con) versus a constituent assembly (Con-ass).

How to explain the stunning victory of the Donald as President of the US of A, and of Brexit and even our very own PRRD victories? Some analysts and even President Obama picture it as the “populist backlash” against globalization, its super elites and governing institutions that seems to be run by paid hacks of corporations. In other words, a stiff reaction of voters against the great inequality — between the 1% who have and the 99% who can only trying to get by — produced by rapid globalization in the past 40 to 50 years.