HOUSE WATCH | When Impeachment Meets the Floodplain

Timing, once again, is the subtext.

Navotas Representative Toby Tiangco urged Congress to exercise caution in handling impeachment cases, citing the ongoing controversy surrounding flood control projects and their implementation.

Tiangco warned that impeachment proceedings, if mishandled or perceived as politically motivated, could further erode public trust—especially at a time when communities are questioning how billions allocated for flood mitigation translated into results on the ground.

His statement subtly reframes the debate. The concern is no longer just whether impeachment complaints have legal basis, but whether Congress itself is standing on firm moral footing while unresolved infrastructure issues linger.

Supporters interpret Tiangco’s caution as prudence: that lawmakers should avoid adding political fire to an already volatile situation. Critics, however, hear something else—a reminder that accountability debates become uncomfortable when budget scrutiny intensifies.

Quietly, the flood control issue casts a long shadow. As long as questions about project effectiveness, insertions, and unprogrammed funds remain unanswered, any impeachment move risks being read not as justice—but as diversion.

In politics, credibility is cumulative.
And right now, Congress is being judged not only by what it investigates—but by what it avoids.