Will federalism address PH

woes? Pros and cons of

making the shift
At least 3 presidential and vice presidential candidates in 2016 are pushing for a change
in the Philippine system of government

Pia Ranada and Nico Villarete

Published 9:30 AM, January 31, 2016

Some candidates in the 2016 national elections have been vocal about their support for
federalism.Presidential candidate Rodrigo Duterte, and vice presidential bets Alan Peter
Cayetano (his running mate) and Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr, in particular, have
been championing it.Supporters of federalism say it will evenly distribute wealth across the
country instead of the bulk going to "imperial" Manila. Detractors, like presidential
candidate Grace Poe, say it will further entrench political dynasties in the regions and
create confusion over responsibilities.

Read on to find out more about federalism and its perceived advantages and
disadvantages.

What is federalism?

It is a form of government where sovereignty is constitutionally shared between a central

governing authority and constituent political units called states or regions.In basic terms, it
will break the country into autonomous regions with a national government focused only
on interests with nationwide bearing: foreign policy and defense, for example.The
autonomous regions or states, divided further into local government units, will have
primary responsibility over developing their industries, public safety, education,
healthcare, transportation, recreation, and culture. These states will have more power
over their finances, development plans, and laws exclusive to ther jurisdiction.

The central government and states can also share certain powers.

How is it different from what we have now?

We presently have a unitary form of government. Most administrative powers and

resources are with the national government based in Metro Manila. It's Malacañang that
decides how much to give local government units. The process is prone to abuse, with
governors and mayors sometimes having to beg Malacañang for projects they believe
their communities need.How local government units spend their budget has to be
approved by the national government.In federalism, the states will have the power to
make these decisions with little or no interference from the national government.

Examples of federal countries: United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, India, Malaysia.
PROS

Locals decide for themselves. Regions have their own unique problems,
situations, geographic, cultural, social and economic contexts. Federalism allows
them to create solutions to their own problems instead of distant Metro Manila
deciding for them.The states can establish policies that may not be adopted nationwide.
For example, liberal Metro Manila can allow same-sex marriage which the state of
Bangsamoro, predominantly Muslim, would not allow. In the United States, some states
like Colorado and Washington have legalized recreational marijuana even if other states
have not.This makes sense in an archipelago of over 7,000 islands and 28 dominant
ethnic groups. For decades, the national government has been struggling to address the
concerns of 79 (now 81) provinces despite challenges posed by geography and cultural
differences.With national government, and thus power, centered in Metro Manila, it's no
surprise that development in the mega city has spiralled out of control while other parts of
the country are neglected.
More power over funds, resources. Right now, local government units can only
collect real estate tax and business permit fees. In federalism, they can retain more
of their income and are required to turn over only a portion to the state government
they fall under.
Thus, local governments and state governments can channel their own funds toward their
own development instead of the bulk of the money going to the national government. They
can spend the money on programs and policies they see fit without waiting for the national
government's go signal.

Promotes specialization.The national and state governments can specialize in

different policy domains. With most administrative powers now with the regional
governments, the national government can focus on foreign policy, defense, and
other nationwide concerns, like healthcare and taxation.
States have more autonomy to focus on economic development using their core
competencies and industries. The state of Central Luzon can focus on becoming an
agricultural hub. The state of Mimaropa, home to Palawan, can choose to use eco-tourism
as its primary launch pad.

Possible solution to the Mindanao conflict. The creation of the state of Bangsamoro
within a federalist system may address concerns of separatists who crave more autonomy
over the administration of Muslim Mindanao.

Decongestion of Metro Manila. Through fiscal autonomy for state governments,

federalism will more evenly distribute the country's wealth. In 2015, 35% of the
national budget went to Metro Manila even if it represents only 14% of the Philippine
population.Lessens dependence on Metro Manila. When there is political
upheaval in Metro Manila, other regions that have nothing to do with the chain of
events are left waiting for the resources that ony the national government can
release. With federalism, regions work independently of Metro Manila for most
concerns.Brings government closer to the people. If detractors say federalism
will only make local political dynasties more powerful, supporters give the argument
that, in fact, it will make all local leaders, including those part of political dynasties,
more accountable to their constituents. State governments will no longer have any
excuse for delays in services or projects that, in the present situation, are often
blamed on choking bureaucracy in Manila.
Assuming more autonomy for regions leads to economic development, there will be more
incentive for Filipinos to live and work in regions outside Metro Manila. More investors
may also decide to put up their businesses there, creating more jobs and opportunities to
attract more people away from the jam-packed mega city.Encourages
competition.With states now more self-reliant and in control of their development,
they will judge themselves relative to how their fellow states are progressing. The
competitive spirit will hopefully motivate state leaders and citizens to level up in
terms of quality of life, economic development, progressive policies, and
governance.

CONS

Possibly divisive. Healthy competition among states can become alienating –

creating rivalries and promoting the regionalism that some say already challenges
the sense of unity in the country. It could enflame hostilities between ethnic groups
in the country like Tagalogs, Cebuanos, Bicolanos, Ilocanos, Tausugs, and
Zamboangueños.

Uneven development among states. Some states may not be as ready for
autonomy as others. Some states may not be as rich in natural resources or skilled
labor as others. States with good leaders will progress faster while states with
ineffective ones will degrade more than ever because national government will not
be there to balance them out.But in some federal countries, the national government
doles out funds to help poorer states. A proposed Equalization Fund will use a portion of
tax from rich states to be given to poorer states.

Confusing overlaps in jurisdiction. Where does the responsibility of state

governments end and where does the responsibility of the national government
begin? Unless these are very clearly stated in the amended Constitution,
ambiguities may arise, leading to conflict and confusion. For instance, in times of
disaster, what is the division of responsibilities between state and national
governments?
May not satisfy separatists in Mindanao. Separatists are calling for their own
country, not just a state that still belongs to a larger federal Philippines. Federalism
may not be enough for them. After all, the conflict continues despite the creation of
the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
How the Philippines would look when federalIn some proposals, there will be 10 or
11 autonomous states. Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr envisioned 11 states plus the Federal
Administrative Region of Metro Manila.Here's how the Philippines will look like as laid out
in Pimentel's 2008 Joint Resolution Number 10.

Cost of federalism

Shifting to federalism won't come cheap. It would entail billions of pesos to set up state
governments and the delivery of state services. States will then have to spend for the
elections of their officials.

Attempts at federalism in PH

There was an attempt during the administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
One of her campaign promises was to reform the 1987 Constitution.

A consultative commission she created recommended federalism as one of the goals of

the proposed charter change. But the attempt failed because of opposition from various
sectors who believed Arroyo wanted to use the reform to extend her term limit.

(Note that shifting to a federal government does not necessarily mean an extension of
term limits for the sitting president. Such an extension would only take place in a shift to a
parliamentary government.)

In 2008, Pimentel Jr and Bacolod City Representative Monico Puentevella filed joint
resolutions to convene Congress into a constituent assembly with the goal of amending
the constitution to establish a federal form of government. – Rappler.com