GERONIMO, CAMILLE PATRICIA B.

Grade 12 - Saint Teresa of Calcutta

FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES: IS IT GOOD OR BAD?

The Philippines is presently under a unitary type of government, which implies that the
central government is the largest governing force. It gets a big portion of the revenue from each
region and redistributes it, often disproportionately so. Our autonomous regions, provinces,
municipalities, and barangays can only exercise authority and implement policies that the central
government decides to delegate to them.
The Founders, Federalism. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and George
Washington were federal system proponents. In their attempt to balance order with liberty, the
Founders identified several reasons for creating a federalist government: to avoid tyranny, to
allow more participation in politics, to use the states as "laboratories" for new ideas and
programs.
Federalism is a notion of government in which a state's political sub-units are provided
some defined autonomy for self-government with restricted independence from the central
government. ... Democracy, unlike federalism, is not a technique of handling a government, but a
description of the government's source of authority.
Federalism is a suggested form of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally
split between the national government and subdivisional governments (such as states or regions).
Federalism is dividing the nation into several independent nations with a national government.
The objective of federalism is to maintain personal freedom by dividing public powers so
that one state or group may not dominate all powers. The Framers thought that divided power
was restricted authority and implemented that theory as they formed the Constitution.
The independent countries are further split into units of local government. They will be
primarily responsible for improving their local sectors, government health and security,
education, transportation, and culture. These countries have greater power over their finances,
policies, development plans, and legislation. Examples of nations with a federalist type of
government are the United States, Switzerland, Germany and Australia, Canada, India, Malaysia
and Brazil.
In the past, the Philippines had efforts to reform towards a federal government scheme-
during former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's administration, she suggested federal
decentralization as one of the objectives of the suggested change in the charter. However, the
effort failed because opposition from different industries thinks that this reform was used to
extend her term limit.
First, under a federal government, countries are empowered to create their own choices.
They no longer have to depend on the central government to decide for them. This is essential to
note in the context of the Philippines because of the vast geographical and cultural variations
between regions-variations that the central government may not always be able to address.
In addition, decentralization in the Philippines would allow countries to maintain more of
their revenue for themselves. They don't have to depend on collecting real estate tax and
company license fees-80 percent of their total earned revenue stays, while only 20 percent go
back to the national government. This implies that countries can channel their own revenue for
their own growth, establishing policies and programs appropriate for them without having to wait
for the approval of the national government. Within the 80 percent budget that stays with these
countries, 30 percent will be funneled to local government, and 70 percent will be allotted to
provinces, towns, municipalities, and barangays.
Because countries can both make their own choices and maintain the revenue they need
to finance these choices, it is feasible for federalism to encourage specialization and competition.
This impacts both the national government and the countries-since the national government has
handed over certain administrative powers to the regional governments, it can now more
intensively funnel its funds to the problems it is allocated to, such as foreign policy and domestic
defence. Likewise, the countries are now better prepared to nurture their individual strengths and
selling points because the individuals who have the choices and financing are the individuals
who are genuinely engaged in the growth of the state.
These self-reliant countries will compare their development with the development of
neighboring countries. Hopefully, this will lead to friendly competition between nations that will
assist increase the quality of life and economic development for everyone concerned.
Instead of enforcing the Bangsamoro Basic Law, Mayor Duterte presents federalism as a
possible alternative to the Mindanao dispute. According to him, "Nothing brief can give peace to
Mindanao." This is probably a reference to the various revisions that the BBL has experienced
and the amount of years it has been in Congress.
All in all, a federal type of government in the Philippines is a hot subject among Filipinos
because it is anticipated to accommodate regional preferences and diversity–a matter of excellent
significance in a nation with 7,107 islands and more than 40 distinct ethnic groups.
Geoffrey de Q. Walker, Emeritus Professor of Law at Queensland, thinks that "through
these means, I can maximize general satisfaction and alleviate the winner-takes-all issue,"
particularly in policies with split views. If we enable individuals to make choices with regard to
their cultural and ethnic views, as well as their financial and social backgrounds, we enable them
to coexist with others and to attain solidarity as a whole.
Like all types of government, federalism also has its hideous side. The first issue the
Philippines would have to iron out would be overlaps in jurisdiction. Unless the duties of state
governments and domestic governments are obviously mentioned in the revised Constitution,
there will be ambiguities that can lead to conflict and confusion.
Next, there is always a possibility in the Philippines that it will bring more division than
unity. It can result from more than just enhanced hostility between ethnic groups-rivalry between
nations can rapidly become unhealthy, and can lead to regionalism that is already challenging the
country's unity.
Moreover, the growth of nations in a federal type of government might not operate at all.
Some countries may not be as talented or as prepared for autonomy as others. A significant
problem is that while some countries may advance quicker, the conversation is also true because
other countries may devolve quicker as well - even more so without a national government to
back them up. In some federal nations, however, the national government offers resources to
assist underdeveloped states. A suggested equalization fund will use portion of the tax from
wealthy countries to finance poorer countries.
Past proposals have split the Philippines into 10 or 11 independent nations. President
Duterte envisages 18 federated areas–16 federated areas (including the new Negrosanon area)
and the federated Bangsamoro and Cordillera areas.
Regional countries will have greater power to raise their own income, determine their
own legislation, and choose their models of economic development.
 Billions of pesos will have to be spent in a federal system on setting up state
governments and delivering state services. States will then have to spend on their own officials '
election.
While the idea of federalism in the Philippines is attractive to most Filipinos, the
potential benefits marketed by the idea will inevitably come at a cost and will require extensive
time and effort from both governments and citizens alike. President Duterte must ensure that the
individuals are satisfied with the division of duties that will be indicated in the amendment and
that the job to build a federalist nation will not alienate or leave other countries behind, the way
they are left behind right now.
There are many benefits as well as disadvantages when it comes to the federalism
scheme. Some of the pros and cons of federalism will be provided, with reasons why it is thought
that the advantages of federalism outweigh its detriments.
What are the benefits and disadvantages of federalism as a type of government, and are
the benefits outweighing the disadvantages? Our federal government system has many
advantages and disadvantages, the benefits of which many think outweigh the negative.

Arguments for Why Federalism is Beneficial:

 As a Protection Against Tyranny – One of the most significant points of federalism in

separating authority between the domestic government and state governments, and
spreading the authority of the domestic government among three branches that serve as a
check and balance on each other, is that it serves as a deterrent to tyranny and runaway
power. One of the most significant points of why the system was designed the way it was
is is the protections we have in our scheme against a tyrannical, runaway government.
 Diffusing Power – The type of federalism we have in our nation, where authority is
shared with state governments, and where the federal government is divided into three
branches, serves as a means of ensuring that all authority is not centralized into a single
individual or group of individuals, as excessive authority among a single group tends to
be corrupting.
 Increasing Citizen Participation – By not centralizing all authority into the hands of a
domestic government, but sharing that authority with state governments that are nearer to
the common citizen's level, our founders effectively improved the capacity of a citizen to
carry out their government, public policy, and lawmaking.
 More Efficient – When some of the government's authority is distributed among
countries, offering states the right to solve some of their own issues, you enable more
effectiveness within the scheme. To attempt to find a domestic solution to all issues that
could be referred to as a' cookie-cutter technique' of law making and policy making, you
end up with alternatives that are more efficient in some countries and less efficient in
others. To enable countries to develop alternatives to their own issues, using policies and
regulations that work best in their state, implies that each state can come up with its own
solution, making government more effective.
 Conflict management – By enabling distinct groups and countries to develop their own
strategies, they enable individuals with irreconcilable differences or very powerful
disagreements to live in distinct fields and develop their own alternatives or policies that
would be completely unpleasant to other individuals in other countries or regions of the
nation.
  Innovation in law and policy is encouraged – By enabling many governments, distinct
sets of strategies can be attempted and those discovered most efficient in solving their
issues can then be enforced in other countries or at the domestic level. Imagine
Christopher Columbus attempting to get financing to travel across the Atlantic Ocean if
there was a unified Europe back then, with his head stating' no!To him; instead, he had
several governments from which he could attempt to obtain his financing–he was turned
down by several governments before Spain gave him the right thing. The same principle
applies to our many countries today–something that is dismissed in one country can most
probably be attempted in another country, with competition leading the way, depending
on the efficacy of those legislation.
 State Governments Can Be More Responsive to Citizen Needs – The nearer a public
entity is to its people, the more probably it is to react to citizens ' requirements. States are
more likely to listen to and react to citizens ' requirements than would be the domestic
government.

Arguments Given Why Federalism has a Detrimental or Negative Impact on Society:

 It had a History of Protecting Slavery and Segregation – This is often quoted as one
of the primary detrimentalities of the federalism scheme that we have in this nation, that
since slavery was a government problem, it was something that could not be removed at
the domestic level.
 It Allows for Inequalities Between Different States – For instance, instead of education
financing being the same across the nation as it is a government problem, some countries
will spend more per capita on schooling than other countries, causing what could be
deemed a disparity. The same also applies to other factors, such as taxes, health care
programs and welfare programs.
 Blocking nationalist policies by states – states can fight against the presence of certain
domestic legislation by challenging them in court, or by not enforcing those domestic
rules, or even intentionally hindering the implementation of domestic legislation.
 Racing to the bottom – One argument is that states will compete with each other in an
oppositional manner by reducing the amount of benefits they give to welfare recipients
compared to, say, a neighboring state, motivating the undesirable to go to the neighboring
state, thereby further reducing their welfare costs. This decrease in state benefits to the
poor has been considered the' race to the bottom.'
REFERENCES

Dela Cruz, H. 2018. Federalism in the Philippines, explained. Retrieved from:

https://kami.com.ph/2492-federalism-philippines-explained.html#2492. Retrieved July

28, 2019.

The Regents of the University of California and Monterey Institute for Technology and

Education. 2006. Defining Federalism. Retrieved from:

https://www.hippocampus.org/homework-help/American-

Government/American%20Federalism_Defining%20Federalism.html. Retrieved July 28,

2019.

Wiseman, R. 2019. Advantages & Disadvantages of Federalism. Retrieved from:

https://bloomp.net/articles/benefits-of-federalism.htm. Retrieved July 28, 2019.

Tracey, D. 2018. What is the difference between federalism and democracy?. Retrieved from:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-federalism-and-democracy.

Retrieved July 28, 2019.

Ushistory. 2008-2019. The Founders and Federalism. Retrieved from:

http://www.ushistory.org/gov/3a.asp. Retrieved July 28, 2019.