Santiago, Kimberly D.
Position Paper
BSED 1-1
Federalism: A go or not?
“A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty,
once lost, is lost forever.” –John Adams
Although Federalism has its focus in solving the problems within the country, it is not an
assurance that changing the form of government from democratic to federal can really improve
the lives of Filipino citizens and shows equality on its budgetary system and power distribution.
As the time that Former Davao – Mayor Rodrigo Duterte formally sits as the president of the
Philippines, it was also the beginning of execution of Federalism in the Congress. Duterte
believes that Federalism is the answer in poverty that’s prevalent in the country and solution
among the issue in the Mindanao.
On the other hand, Federalism is a system of government in which the same territory is
controlled by two levels of government: the national government and smaller political
subdivisions that can be referred to as regions or states. According Elazar (1987), he sees a
federation as being “self rule plus shared rule”. Here, every state is given an ability to be
autonomous and implement own laws and constitution or is called decentralization. States are
also allowed to use the majority of their funds for their own and allocate it for their needs. In
Federalism also was being less dependent in Metro Manila because people can find jobs within
their local states. It has been tried many times in Philippine history to change its form of
government but none of those attempts progressed.
Changing a unitary to federal type of government is not an easy thing to do. First, there
will be the revision of the entire Constitution which is a long term amendment. According to
Section 4 of Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution,
“No law shall be passed abridging the freedom to speech, of
expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances”
Every Filipino have their rights to understand the laws and be considered without any
exceptions whether in what are their religion, group, state of life, gender or race. Definitely, it
clearly requires a lot of time not only for the legislators but also to the people who will
experience Federalism to fully grasp its idea. It is about redefining the constitution, the
sovereignty and the powers of the particular unit. It is a long time process to make laws be
possibly understood by all the people of the Philippines considering that Philippines is an
archipelagic country that consist of many different islands.
In the latest survey of Pulse Asia conducted June 15 to 21, there are 62% that opposed
replacing the present unitary system of government to a federal one. Meanwhile, 69 percent of
Filipinos know little or almost have no knowledge about the federal system proposed by several
government official and various groups. Therefore, shifting to federalism and changing the
constitution are not only about on how the country will benefit to it but also on how people will
cope up or adopt in this type of government system. According to the same survey, 74% of
Filipinos have little or almost have no knowledge about the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Therefore, how much more if the Philippines will take a big step in this kind of transition; it is
more difficult to grasp the idea of Federalism.
Second, changing the constitution is a way of powerful men to suspend the elections and
extend the term of the current administration which considered as “power grab”. It was done by
different powerful men or presidents that in order to be elected again, they planned to maneuver
the Congress and allow them for term extension. The best examples here are Peru and
Venezuela.
According to Levitt (2000), Fujimori has been elected in 1990 and came up with the new
Constitution of 1993 and got himself elected in 1995-2000. Fujimori was able to maneuver the
Congress to pass a legislation allowing him to run again and extend his term up to his 3rd term. In
Venezuela, according to Carias, Hugo Chavez has been elected in 1998 and came up with a new
constitution in 1999 that allowed him to escaped the term limit of the old Constitution of 1961.
He extended his term by another 6 years. Marcos tried also to change the constitution and
allowed him to extend his term. He declared Martial Law in order to make people shut their
mouth about his power extension. And it is clearly being seen on the current administration
under President Duterte. He planned to change the Constitution and allow the term extension.
And then after its term limit, an official can run again after 3 years. It is clearly a kind of
grabbing power to prevent accountability and cover their faulty things done in current
administration. Therefore, allowing changing of constitution is a stupid action.
Third is that there is no assurance in federalism that the fund or budget shared by the
local states in the national government will surely be donated in poor states. Federalism is
proposing an “anti-poor” system of governance, which in fact it is only an ideology done by
corrupt officials to make people to believe in. According to Bayley (1966), “Corruption is a
general covering misuse of authority as a result of consideration of personal gain which need not
be monetary”. Corruption is one of the most serious social issues the Philippines is facing today.
Every government official was given a certain amount of money for their projects in helping the
Filipinos to rise out from poverty. But the recent discoveries have shown that these projects were
never put into action. It was spent out for their own desires. Then if corruption is still prevalent
in the government, there is no assurance that the fund shared to the local states and the national
government as well will surely be spent for greater purposes, for the improvement of the lives of
Filipinos, for the poor states to be empowered and gain equality. Most especially that every
states have the capacity now to decide in the distribution of their budget collected from the taxes
over its dominion. Therefore, the budgetary system under Federalism will only worsen the issue
in corruption among the country.
Lastly, there will be confusion in the laws made by the states. Each state will be
independent and provide own sets of laws that will be followed only among that area. Like for
example, using marijuana has been legalized in State A. While on the counter side, State B did
not accept the adaptation of marijuana for some different reasons. The federal government can
send a memo to whether prosecute or not the people who use and distribute marijuana in order to
have a standard law. Take a look in the case of Gerald Duval Jr. that claims to be in the frontlines
of war over medical marijuana. Michigan a state in US, Gerald’s home, allows the farming and
use of marijuana. Duval Jr. thought his Michigan weed farm was protected under state law – then
the federal agent came. Now, he will soon serve a 10-year prison sentence for breaking the US
government’s marijuana regulations. It means that confusion among different laws made by
different states and the federal government will arise and cause danger to the rights of a person.
Federalism is not an assurance that changing the form of government from can really help
the Philippines to resolve its current issues because of these three strong points: (1) revising the
Constitution is a long time process, (2) it is a way of powerful men to do their personal desires
“power grab”, (3) the budgetary system under it will only worsen the issue in corruption among
the country and, (4) there will be confusion in the laws made by the states that’ll cause danger in
human rights. Rejecting the new form of government system is a must because Federalism is an
unmitigated impertinence in the life of the nation. Shifting to Federalism is not the answer but
improving the laws, the constitution, removing the corrupt officials in the system, proper
distribution of budget among Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, giving more importance in human
rights and making the Filipinos understand the Philippine Constitution are what the country need.
Everyone wants to change for a better nation but think about what will be the
consequences it can cause for the lives of many people. Federalism is a formula for failure.
REFERENCES
Bataveljić, D. (2012). Federalism: the concept, development and future. International Journal
of Humanities and Social Science. (2,14). Retrieved from
http:www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_24Special_Issue_December_2012/4.pdf
Bayley, D.H. (1966). The effects of corruption in a developing nation. Western Political
Quarterly. (19,4).
Cariño, L. (1979). The definition of graft and corruption and the conflict of ethics and law.
Philippine Journal of Public Administration (13,3-4). Retrieved from
http://lynchlibrary.pssc.org.ph:8081/bitstream/handle/0/4709/05_The%20Definition%20o
f%20Graft%20and%20Corruption%20and%20the%20Conflict%20of%20Ethics%20and
%20Law.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Daunt, L. (2014). State vs. federal law: who really holds the trump card?. Retrieved from
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4676579
Espiritu, A. (2013). Corruption in the Philippines. Retrieved from
https://a58despiritu.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/exit-essay-corruption-in-the-philippines/
Gomez, B. (2018). Opinion: why federalism is a formula for failure. Retrieved from
http://news.abs-cbn.com/blogs/opinions/03/10/18/opinion-why-federalism-is-a-formula-
for-failure
Levitt, B.S. (2000). Continuity and changes in Peru’s political parties. Retrieved from
http://lasa.international.pitt.edu/Lasa2000/Levitt.PDF
Ogu, M. (2011). Federalism as essentially contested concept: a discus . Retrieved from
https://nigeriaworld.com/articles/2011/jan/301.html
Santiago, Kimberly D. Case Report
BSED 1-1
Suitability of Federalism in the Philippines
Abstract
Issues on shifting to federalism of the Philippines as the new form of government system
was a popular discussion in current administration today. The goal is to show that Federalism
was not suitable for the Philippines by the critiques made by some Filipino citizen in the City of
Valenzuela. Participants were composed of 10 who are in college education, professional
teachers, guard, and other residents. Respondents were asked a question whether if they agree
with Federalism or not, including reasons to support their opinions. Results are discussed in
terms of how people see it and its effects in their daily lives.
Introduction
Philippines is currently being underfed by a unitary system form of government.
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte believed that Federalism was the best alternative solution for the
issues prevalent within the whole country. He also believed that shifting to federal governance
will increase the Philippine’s economic growth, lessen criminality, empowered the poor areas in
the country by giving subsidies and immediate response for needs. Daniel Elazar, a very popular
scholar defined federalism as a system of political organization uniting separate states or other
units in such way as to allow each to remain a political entity. In other words, it is a system of
government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government: the national
government and smaller political subdivisions that can be referred to as regions or states.
According Elazar (1987), he sees a federation as being “self rule plus shared rule”. Wherein,
states will be autonomous and was given the right to have their own Supreme Court that will
create laws and be implemented within that certain area.
Federalism has evolved over the course of American history. At different point in time,
the balance and boundaries between the national and state government have changes
substantially. It started with Dual Federalism (1789-1945) or was called layer-cake federalism.
Like a layer cake, national and state government had their own distinct responsibilities and
different levels rarely overlapped. In year 1945 to 1969, Federalism became more closely
resembled like a marble cake wherein the federal authority and state authority have become
intertwined, called Cooperative Federalism. It has now come to the New Federalism that started
from 1969 up to present and is now use by different countries like Argentina, Brazil, Canada,
and Venezuela. As of today, 40% of the countries are under a federal type of government. The
President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte looked at that perspective as a way to make the
country globally caompetitive.
Case Presentation
This case involved 10 participants from different sectors in the society. They are
composed of college students, maintenance, guard, barangay official and residents of Valenzuela
City. They were aged 18 years old and above for they already have a wider understanding about
the topic. An interview was conducted among the respondents that asked in whether the
proposed Federalism should be implemented or rejected in the Philippines including their
reasons to support their claim.
Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Figure 1. Measurement on whether Federalism is suitable or not in the Philippines.
Figure 1 revealed that 3 out of 10 Filipinos in Valenzuela agreed that Federalism helped
to reduce the problem within the local state and central government. While 6 percent of them are
do not in favor of Federalism because they are afraid to the possible result of budgetary system
and on the condition of poor and rich; wherein poor will suffer more and rich will become richer.
Then the other 1% said that it depends on the government if it will be implemented. If it passed
in the Congress then he has no choice but to follow the ruling system under it. Then if not, it
does still be okay to him.
The findings found out that most of the Valenzuelanos rejected a federal type of
government for the country. Simply because of the possible consequences of Federalism that will
affect their daily lives and that it will just worsen the phenomena existing within the Philippines.
While, there are some people that has a little or almost no knowledge about the new form of
government that made hard to decide.
Discussion
Federalism has been used in almost 40 percent of the countries worldwide like United
States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, and Venezuela. Discoveries showed that those countries which
are under a federal government, increased their economic growth and seen to have good
governance. But according to research, none of democratic countries shifted to federalism
became more progressive. Currently, Philippines is experiencing its democracy after defending it
for hundreds of years in the history. The administration of Duterte proposed to change the form
of government from unitary to a federal one. Filipinos has been alienated about on how will it
works and doesn’t even know its definition and how it compared with the current form of
government in the Philippines.
“I only know was the word “Federalism” but I didn’t understand 100% its whole
context and its possible outcomes for our country.” (R7)
In the latest survey of Pulse Asia conducted June 15 to 21, there are 69 percent of
Filipinos know little or almost have no knowledge about the federal system proposed by several
government official and various groups. The government lacked of information to discuss it with
the people and that made them to hardly grasp the idea of Federalism.
“I disagree with federalism because in the geographical area of the Philippines,
the federalism form of government is not suitable here. Unlike in the US, their
areas are landlocked to each other. Meanwhile, ours is an archipelago. So, I think
it will be hard.” (R4)
“I’m not in favor of Federalism being implemented in our country. In Federalism,
there are possibilities that might happen because it forms 3 classifications:
national, regional and local state government. Those 3 kinds will surely increase
the taxation.” (R5)
The thing here was that being an archipelagic of the Philippines was taken as one of the
factors of its unsuitability in the country. The government will have difficulties on reaching those
different states. Also, the taxation believed to be a burden to some workers to pay most
especially the price of goods today is increasing every season.
Conclusion
Though Federalism was seen to be one of the best ways to change the society, Filipinos
were not ready to take this big step of transition because of lack of knowledge and some factors
like taxation and being archipelago of the country. Therefore, shifting to Federalism was seen to
be a burden not a solution for the countrymen.
APPEDNDIX
Interviewer: Does federalism suitable for the Philippines? Why?
Interviewee 1: Its all about changing the administration, government, that has a two leader which
are the prime minister and the president ahh, that’s my main idea about changing and then there
is a certain controlling that the minister have a superiority than the president and then it’s
actually faded, not totally but there is a certain façade when the outcomes are we are not
democratic country, then it depends on our leader which are good in our country under their
provision that the good things to do… like the administration of Cory she proclaim democracy in
the country, which people grab the opportunity that cause the downfall of our country because of
their ambitious act.
Interviewee 2: I only know was the word “Federalism” but I didn’t understand 100% its whole
context and its possible outcomes for our country.
Interviewee 3: I disagree with federalism because in the geographical area of the Philippines, the
federalism form of government is not suitable here. Unlike in the US, their areas are landlocked
to each other. Meanwhile, ours is an archipelago. So, I think it will be hard.
Interviewee 4: I’m not in favor of Federalism being implemented in our country. In Federalism,
there are possibilities that might happen because it forms 3 classifications: national, regional and
local state government. Those 3 kinds will surely increase the taxation.
