You are on page 1of 3

Cost 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.

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. Indeed, the answer to our query here is also the most important
realization in the discourse on the Bangsamoro Basic Lawthat the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao is a failed experiment. The lesson is that increasing the autonomy of local
levels of government ultimately amounts to nothing if local leaders are incompetent and
incapable of properly utilizing the expanded powers and resources.

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.

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 Zamboangueos.

THERE is the question of authority where does the responsibility of state government
end and the responsibility of the national government begin? Unless these are clearly stated
in the amended constitution, ambiguities may arise, leading to conflict and confusion;

It is not a perfect form of government

Many or most of the suggested states are artificial and do not reflect cultural or historical
realities. Central Luzon, for instance, is an artificial entity to which no one would owe loyalty.
The Tagalog and Ilocano portions should be transferred to their respective states, while the
Kapampangan portion, 27% of the population, should be constituted into a separate state.
According to Dr. Rene Azurin:But, of the proposed eleven (or so) federal states, no more
than a few like the Cebuano state or the Pampangueno-Tarlaqueno state would actually
be able to stand on their own financially.
(Azurin, Rene. On Decentralizing Government, p. 5. Paper presented at the Dialogues on
Federalism. Center for Local and Regional Governance, NCPAG, UP Diliman, Quezon City,
3 August 2007. Originally published in the book Stationary Bandits: Essays in Political
Power, also by Dr. Azurin. Platypus Press, 2007).

The Kapampangan Region has a sufficiently large area and population to become a region
or federal state. Kapampangan-majority areas Pampanga province, plus the highly
urbanized city of Angeles, the Tarlac towns of Bamban, Capas and Concepcion, and the city
of Tarlac together registered a population of 2,398,144 in 2000 (it would be even larger if
historically Kapampangan areas, like adjoining areas of Bataan and Nueva Ecija where
Kapampangan is still spoken, are included). This is larger than that of the Cordillera and
Caraga regions (1,365,412 and 2,095,367, respectively, in 2000) and nearly as large as that
of the ARMM (2,412,159 in 2000). Its area (3,424.68 sq km) is much bigger than that of
Metro Manila (636 sq km), a separate region and a proposed autonomous entity in a federal
system. Moreover, it is larger in area and population than at least 26 independent countries,
including Barbados, Grenada, Liechtenstein, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius and Seychelles,
and in population than another 26 including Brunei, Cyprus, Estonia, Fiji, Gabon, Guyana
and Swaziland. It is larger in area than both Singapore and the Chinese Special
Administrative Region of Hong Kong.

Of the eight major language groups, only Kapampangans and Pangasinenses do not have
regions of their own, and consequently, only the two have not been given separate states in
most proposals for federalization.

local communities continue to suffer inept and corrupt dynastic leaders, those who can, and
are willing to, push for reforms but do not have the inherited political advantage are
effectively denied the right to run for public office because of the monarchical nature of local
government. Indeed, Filipinos who are more qualified, passionate and patriotic, including
many from the youth ranks, are deprived of the opportunity to establish clean and effective
local governance.
This situation has become a bane to local communities clamoring for socioeconomic
progress. Numerous studies have shown that standards of living, lower human
development, and higher levels of deprivation and inequality persist in the districts governed
by local leaders who are dynasts. A more alarming development is that the fattest
dynastiesthose with the most family members in officeare ensconced in the poorest
parts of the country.

Hence, it is definitely unwise to proceed with federalization, with the quality of local
leadership still in an untenable state. It is certainly justified to be concerned that federalizing
with political dynasties still lording it over local communities would make socioeconomic
development more inequitable than it currently stands.

It will serve the federation cause better if the president, rallies all his political capital behind
reform measures aimed at improving the quality of local leadership in the country.
Legislation regulating local dynasties, establishing a genuine political party system, and
ensuring transparency and accountability in local governments are just some of the steps
that can drastically improve the governance mindset of our local officials. that effective
leadership is an indispensable requirement of local development.

You might also like