Professional Documents
Culture Documents
First the pros. In a federal government, federal states devise their own solutions based on their situation, culture,
aspirations, preferences and peculiarities. They need not rely on imperial Manila’s one-policy-fits-all approach to
problem solving.
Economic development plans will be devolved to the federal states and this allows them to specialize on industries
where they are competitive. As for the national government, it can better concentrate on national issues without being
bogged down by regional concerns.
With the current system, local government units cannot spend without imperial Manila’s approval. And when funds
are released to LGUs, they are pressured to consume it in total so as not to reduce next year’s allocation. This
provides no incentive for local governments to save. Under a federal system, however, regional governments
manage their own funds. This motivates them to exercise frugality.
Regions who have been chronically dependent on the national government for their sustenance will now have to level
up to survive. It will be a sink or swim situation which hopefully, will strengthen the weaker regions.
Federalism encourages experimentation with multiple solutions. Three different regions may have three different
solutions to the same problem with equal or varying results. This enriches the nation with experience and best
practices.
Citizens of federal states will invariably compare themselves to their neighbors in terms of economic development,
per capita income, quality of life, etc. This encourages competition among regions which pushes them to be more
efficient.
And now, the cons: Political and economic dynasties will be further entrenched in a federal government.
The entire nation will be more ethnocentric, leading to a degradation of national unity. Tagalog will be replaced by
local dialects and this will further diminish our sense of nationhood.
Since the national government will have no say on how each federal state develops, they will do so in an
uncoordinated fashion and at varying paces. The result will be an uneven distribution of wealth among federal states.
This inequity could be a breeding ground for friction. In this light, federalism promotes dissonance rather than unity.
Federalism promotes regional loyalties more than it does national allegiances. Hence, the likelihood of certain regions
rebelling against the national government is heightened. Quebec in Canada and Cataluña in Spain are prime
examples of how regionalism can divide a country.
The very nature of federalism necessitates more bureaucrats in both the national and regional levels. More
bureaucrats mean more bureaucracy. This leads to duplicity of functions, inefficiency and opportunities for corruption
Studies have shown that only Central Luzon, Southern Luzon and NCR have gross regional products (GRP) large
enough to be self sufficient. Thus, the greatest blowback of federalism is that eight out of the eleven regions will spiral
deeper into poverty due to their inability to survive without subsidies from Manila.