FEDERALISM: YES OR NO?

I AM SURE YOU WILL NOT READ THIS ARTICLE. IT IS ALL ABOUT BORING POLITICAL STUFF AND IS PROBABLY NOT YOUR TOP PRIORITY LOOKING AT THIS PUBLICATION…
SAY WHAT? I CAUGHT YOUR ATTENTION? OH, GOOD. LET US START.
Have you ever tried to ponder alone, trying to weigh stuff in your mind and think about our country for a change? Has it ever crossed your mind that what if our system of governance simply does not compliment the needs of the people?
The past Marcos regime proved that Filipinos hunger for freedom from oppression and the liberty from any type of injustice, and so, the people rose to have the system changed and create a government “of the people, by the people and for the people”.
For years we truly have enjoyed the democratic system that the People Power in 1986 has created for the good of the masses but in the recent heat in the Philippine politics as the 2016 elections approach, and with so many problems that arose after the eventful rise to power of the Filipinos, many of the candidates presented their platforms for change and development that most of us already heard in the past. Some are tiring to even listen to. But with Mindanao’s Mayor Rodrigo Roa Duterte’s bid for presidency, a lot became interested in his proposal of changing the system of government to a system used by some big shot countries --- Federalism.
Federalism might sound very frightening to others as they commonly associate it with communism or socialism, but this very system of government seems to be the new approach that several officials deem to try and heal the wounded structure of the republic’s government.
FEDERALISM, AMERICA AND THE SYSTEM
Federalism is a system of government where two or more entities are allowed to share government sovereignty over a geographic region. Federalism divides power between a strong central government and several smaller local governments. It is different from a Unitary government where one central body holds all jurisdiction and a Confederation where associations of different governments operate independently of each other. The Philippine Republic uses the Democratic form of government that is to be classified under the Unitary type of government.
One good example of a country using this system is the United States of America. Each person the United States is subject to the laws of the city, county, state and the federal government. The Articles of Confederation which was the first system used before all the states united founded the very roots of their federal country. Before, the US was a confederation with its states operating separately from each other.
The framers of their present Constitution felt the need of a new system due to the states having too much power. They wished to create a stronger federal government resulting to a balance of powers between the states and the federal government, with the federal government clearly in charge.
The United States Constitution set up their current federal government and replaced the Articles of Confederation. Their Constitution recognizes the federal government as the highest governmental power, though it also acknowledges that the American people are subject to several different powers. This stirred a lot of confusion as to whom and where the jurisdiction of certain cases must be given.
The United States’ Constitution expressly grants broad powers to the federal government but not to the states. Instead, the Constitution stresses what the states can't do. The addition of the Bill of Rights, including the Tenth Amendment, helped temper some of this imbalance. The Tenth Amendment gave the states all powers not delegated to the national government or denied to the states. In other words, under federalism, the states get to regulate whatever is left over.
Hence, a supremacy clause should be formulated and included in a country’s constitution to emphasize the power that the federal (central) government has over the states stating that the Constitution and federal laws are the “Supreme Laws of the Land”.
PHILIPPINES AS A FEDERALIST NATION
With this in mind some of our politicians aspire to change the way the government is running by changing the system of governance. Federalism is preferably and suitably used in large countries but though the Philippines is not a very large nation, some hope that the change in charter might do the trick and uplift our native land.
Duterte, being the primary candidate that drives Federalism in the Philippines hopes to balance powers between the national government and the local governments giving Mindanao a heads up to development which encased Luzon. Mindanao, being the largest tax contributor to the national treasury receives a bit too little of the benefits that a large tax payer should enjoy and federalism is the only way that politicians like Duterte see to be able to balance the powers among the three main islands of the archipelago.
Corruption is said to be annihilated if ever this type of government is also implemented since the national government will now only receive a quarter or less of the gross products of each state since the states have control to their local budgeting and the national treasury will receive less monetary support from each locality. This step, should federalism be founded in the Philippines, would pertain to the national government having money that is precisely budgeted for national affairs that would be assigned to them.
PROS AND CONS
Federalism also paves ways for easier creation of tailored laws, laws can be direct and be fitted to what a particular region needs, as national policy sometimes may not be applicable to all contingencies, and addressing, making, passing and ratifying laws are also made possible. Greater level of civic participation is another advantage of this system where people, having been near to the very center of their governments have the power to easily see needs for change if deemed necessary. People tend to participate more in the governmental transactions since it is closer to home, unlike unitary governments where only representatives will be able to go directly to their congress and some concerns might not be given importance.
More importantly. Centralization in one area for development will be stopped. True tyranny, which is the governing of many by the few will unlikely happen in a federalist nation since powers are evenly distributed to states. With Federalism, the rights of states ensure that power will always be divided between participating entities and the overarching government. As a result, the two must work together in order to accomplish a goal, making true tyranny and the centralization of power very difficult.
Moreover, a federalist system opens floodgates for researches for better policies to be formulated. Local governments and states on the whole are amazing laboratories for democracy in a Federalist system. States can devise their own laws regarding the regulation of controlled substances. Each state can have slightly different language in their law, leading to different outcomes. If the national government ever wants to enact the best possible law, all they have to do is look at the individual states and see what law has worked the best.
But like any other concepts, federalism holds banes for people to debate with. Federalism, having given control to states to have their own policies hinder national policies by slowing down the passage of law to national level and may take decades to enact.
Issues with overlapping jurisdiction can also be observed. Sometimes, national policies say that abuse of drugs are prohibited but some states have laws that allow some drugs to be used. Say, in the US, national policy states that marijuana is not in any way good for medical or legal use, but Colorado allows the buying, selling, and ingestion of marijuana, with this, many people become confused as to what law really has the right to rule in a region.
Greater ignorance in national issues is also a problem in federalist systems since people, as stated above have closer access to concerns at home so they would not, likely, want to indulge and involve themselves in any national issue and may become, well, negligent of much larger national disputes. In addition to this, cross border conflicts also are another disadvantage of this system, as different states may compete for supremacy in economic aspects such as businesses. It is a common practice for different states to try and poach businesses from other states, enticing them to relocated for better taxes as well as special perks. While this system may help the state in question, it may hurt the citizens of the nation and does nothing for the betterment of the country as a whole.
THE VERDICT
Nonetheless, federalism proved to be a good scheme of a government since the not only the United States but Mexico, Germany, Canada, Australia and Brazil used and succeeded under this type of governance.
So now, what do you think? As new generation voters of this era, will you consider such radical change to occur in the country?
Will federalism be the solution to the jeremiad that Juan has endured? Will the change in government system be the answer to the problem of corruption which cages the nation in debts? We might as well think now. Act fast. Elections are coming, so let us think of the country first before anything else, maybe it is time for us to start considering unconventional things and think outside the box. Think. Reflect. Act.

Photosource: Google