Federalism: The good, the bad, and the ugly
After the submission by the Presidential Commission of their recommendations on federalism and the eager push of the Lower House for a referendum in the 2019 elections, there have been more main and social media coverage on the issue, and more discussions. Hopefully more understanding, because the first quarter of 2018 survey showed that majority of the Filipinos did not really understand or even have an idea of federalism. The proponents are posing it as a possible “cure all” for the problems of the country to gain adherents, but there are also very credible objectors which are swaying the informed middle class against it.
A good aspect of federalism is the decentralization of power and authority. Bureaucratic delay and red tape will be shortened as the needed approvals from the central office in Manila will no longer be needed as most permits and clearances will be done in the regions. The flattening of the organizational structure, if truly implemented is a good management initiative and brings the government closer to the public. Another good effect is the expected faster economic development of the regions, as they will have bigger shares of the national and regional tax revenues. And federalism might be able to address the local autonomy desires of Muslim Mindanao and of the
THE GOOD:
communist’s National Democratic Front.
The possible weakened central authority may make it difficult for the national government to deal with global/ foreign policy issues and military matters. Even with the provisions on centralized military, monetary/banking, and foreign policies, international perception will matter if the regional states become more aggressive and powerful. There is also the governance capability/capacity of the regional governments which will make it difficult and costly to operate the bureaucracy and implement projects. Then, there is the additional cost and expenses of creating the regional offices both in terms of physical offices and additional officers and employees. It will probably double the current National Budget to over P3 trillion which will increase the budget deficit beyond the five percent of GDP limit.
The ugliest side of federalism would be the strengthening, entrenchment, and perpetuation of political dynasties by the political families in the regions. This runs counter to one of the objectives of federalism and will not correct the graft and corruption problems of the country. The transition to federalism is also hobbled by the ambitions of some politicians and government officials that are pushing for no elections in 2019, and for the incumbents to stay in their positions until the full implementation of the federal government, giving them extended stay in their positions.
Trust in the government is very important to make federalism successful, and the transition provisions could erode government credibility. Already Justice Puno already opined that if the anti-dynasty provisions are not included by Congress, he will not endorse federalism. The no election scenario is also a downer, and the more Congress pushes it, the more objections there will be to federalism. It is also good to revisit the experiences of successful federal governments, and that a lot of them were strong independent states that federated to enlarge and coordinate markets and their economies and increase their international influence. There is also a need for a “Plan B.” If federalism does not get approved, the objective of more local autonomy and decentralization can still be achieved by improving and amending the Local Government Code. Downloading more power and authority to the provincial, city and municipal governments has always been welcomed by the local officials.
THE BAD:
THE UGLY:
CONCLUSION:
‘Trust in the government is very important to make federalism successful, and the
transition provisions could erode government credibility.’