Whichever their political allegiance - red or yellow, Pheu Thai or Democrat - the village heads and kamnan across the country have found themselves joining hands in the same fight to keep their positions until age 60.
"Withdraw the legal attempt to limit our terms to only five years. Otherwise, we will stage mass rallies nationwide. Also forget our support for the Pheu Thai government in the next election," they threatened.
The same day the world is watching how the US democratic system allows its citizens to elect their national leader every four years, our village heads and kamnan have won the war cry to hold onto their power.
The Pheu Thai-led government, despite its rhetoric about representative democracy, yesterday agreed to put the draft bill on the back burner.
It's common knowledge that the puyai baan, or village heads and kamnan, or sub-district heads, are powerful vote canvassers. Their influence through the entrenched patron-client networks remains crucial in deciding election outcomes in many "swing" communities.
When these local godfathers issue a joint threat, politicians need to listen. The government's decision to delay deliberation of a draft bill that would limit the kamnan and village heads' terms to five years came as no surprise.
Who can blame them? I don't think the Democrat Party would have done any differently.
Actually, when the Abhisit government was in power, it dared not touch the 60-year-old retirement age of the village heads and kamnan. Instead, it tried to woo them by doubling their salaries to 10,000 baht for kamnan and 8,000 baht for village heads.
Had it not been for the 2006 coup d'etat, the retirement age issue would have been long dead.
Following the 1997 charter's decentralisation drive, the retirement age of village heads and kamnan was revoked and replaced by a four-year term, in line with the elections of provincial administration organisations (PAOs) and tambon administration organisations (TAOs).
The Surayud government, however, reverted its terms on retirement age in a bid to win support. Now back in power, the Pheu Thai Party wants to erase the policy fingerprints of the coup era, only to face fierce resistance.
According to the village heads and kamnan association, frequent elections dominated by fierce mud-slinging and vote-buying have shattered kinships and old local ties, which severely hampers community development.
On this much, I agree.
But when they insist the solution lies in doing away with their election by letting them stay on until age 60, I cannot see their logic, only their desire to hold onto power.
I'm not alone. Two polls on this issue recently showed that more than 85% think the terms of village heads and kamnan should be limited to four or five years.
Although the government cannot convince the village heads and kamnan to say "no" to staying in office until retirement, I once met a man who could.
Financial transparency is the key, kamnan Tuen Thongseenuan of tambon Namkhao in Songkhla's Chana district told me many years ago. When the budget allocation meetings were opened to the public, "corruption is impossible", he said. "So no one wants to stay on very long." I still remember his mischievous smile.
When TAOs have become part of the local scene, the roles of kamnan and village heads have greatly diminished, while their organisational rivalries have intensified. Yet, Ban Tapaed, also in Songkhla, has shown the solution is also financial transparency, not the eradication of regular elections.
They have done so by setting up a people's council called "Sapa Suro" where TAO leaders regularly meet with village heads, kamnan and religious leaders to identify local needs and discuss budgeting. The process has also produced electoral candidates, which subsequently reduces community conflicts.
Meanwhile, the calls for governor elections as well as more financial and administrative decentralisation for PAOs and TAOs have met fierce resistance from the Interior Ministry. Why? Because centralising power is still a powerful tool to strengthen political strongholds. Without bureaucratic reform at the Interior Ministry, decentralisation remains cosmetic and political reform is only lip service, as governments _ red or yellow _ show their same true colours by sticking to central control.
Sanitsuda Ekachai is Editorial Pages Editor, Bangkok Post.