Abstract:
There is an emerging movement calling federalization today. The farther one
goes to the South, the greater the people accept and support the federal idea.
A number of related studies and researches had been made in preparation for a
possible federal transition, including a draft constitution and an official resolution
advancing the federal cause. Academics and public officials backed with a considerable
nationwide mass support are behind these efforts. Their demand revolves around two
main objectives that Senator Aquilino Pimentel outlined. That is, it is by federalism
where the promotion of economic development is faster and more equally distributed,
secondly, it is by federalism that the age-old problem of Moro secessionism in Mindanao
can be addressed adequately, squarely and completely.
Parallel to the federalist idea is another school of thought which believes that
decentralization measures, as espoused under the 1991 Local Government Code, should
be fully implementing first. It argues that the provisions of the Code had not been fully
utilized and optimized. Hence, there is therefore no need, as of yet, to take any more
drastic step, such as federalism.
It is in this context that this thesis shall anchor its foundations on: the idea that
federalism is a good alternative system of government for the Philippines. The study will
determine the relationship of federalism and the system of public service provision, one
of the most critical problem areas in the country today.
Federalism is the system of government where power is distributed among the
independent states of a nation under the supervision of the central government as opposed
to the unitary system, where power is firmly concentrated in the hands of a strong central government. The federal principle pertains to the method of dividing powers in such a
way that the general and the regional governments are each within a sphere, coordinate
and independent to each other. It is characterized by a tendency to substitute
coordinating to subordinating relationships.
This research works under the hypothesis that the interplay of local autonomy,
fiscal autonomy and the local chief executive under a federal system can better address
the problem. It is maintained, given stronger linkages and stronger power and fiscal
foundations conferred to LGUs, and the heightened role of the local chief executive under
a federal system, that policies and programs related to the delivery of basic services will
be more locality-responsive, more accessible for a greater number of people.
Local autonomy involves the devolution of powers to local government units, thus
it is equated to political decentralization. Local fiscal administration is the conduct and
management of the financial affairs and operations of provinces, cities, municipalities,
and barangays. Fiscal autonomy therefore refers to the freedom of LGUs to conduct and
manage their own financial affairs with minimum central government regulations.
There are however, several arguments that can refute this study's assumptions.
For instance, the contention that some regions and provinces are not developed enough to
financially support itself, and that the local taxes and IRA shares of LGUs is not enough
to finance local development operations, much more be financially independent.
Especially in depressed areas, there is no strong and stable fiscal base to begin with.
Also, there is the issue that development, more particularly the improvement of the
quality of the delivery system under a federal government becomes highly dependent on
the local chief executive's effort. This is based on the perception that local officials are not politically mature and experienced enough to hold the reigns of greater power and
responsibility in a more complex governmental arrangement. Then, there is also the
critical issue of revising the 1987 Constitution to change the current political order.
These are just some of the arguments behind anti-federalist sentiments.
On the other hand, there are also equally attractive arguments in favor of
federalism, particularly when public service provision is concerned. Federalism
highlights the role of the LGU and its constituencies in developmental efforts. This
measure highly benefits the local government unit, especially the LGUs in far-flung areas
dependent only on the insubstantial trickle down benefits for their own development.
This situation often lead to retarded growth and mediocre policies and programs. Since
federalism will change how policies and laws are enacted and executed, then it can
arrange for closer and more open channels for citizen participation in policy-making,
law-making and governance as a whole. The federal system of government affords to the
people the choice to make a more proactive stance in charting their political, social and
economic growth.
Among the major findings of this research, include the discovery that the history
of governance in the Philippines is one of an alternating pattern of centralization and
decentralization. The level of centralism depends largely on the political, economic, and
military interests of the political elite in power. Recent trends show, at least policy-wise,
that there has been an increasing bias toward decentralization. In reality however,
'overcentralization' still prevails. Major decisions are still made in Metro Manila and in
the few power centers, to the detriment of the marginalized majority. Backlogs in the
bureaucracy are an indication that the central government is being plagued by small-town and provincial concerns that should be handled locally in the first place.
Overcentralization result to LGU dependency on the national government.
Notwithstanding constitutional and statutory provisions, the majority of the LGUs in the
Philippines today are far from being self-reliant and self-sustaining partners of
development as they were envisioned to be.
Furthermore, it has been found that generally, the local government system in the
country is one wrought of problems in funding and fiscal administration. Respondents
observed that the LGU budget and revenue sources are not enough to sufficiently support
local government operations, adversely affecting quality and quantity of basic services
delivered. Although the Code provided for additional sources for revenue generation,
other studies point out that the traditional means are still generally applied. Only a few
LGUs with diligent local chief executives venture on practicing more innovative and
productive means of fiscal administration and revenue generation.
The primary barriers that would defeat the passage of the federal proposal is the
fundamental trait to be aversive to change, not to mention the wariness of the Filipino
people, understandably so, to be vigilant on the issue of charter change and the hidden
motivations behind it. There is also the fact that the current political, economic and
security conditions in the Philippines today is too erratic to sponsor an environment
strong enough to withstand the initial destabilizing effects of the federalization process.
Personally, given the advantages and disadvantages of both the unitary and the
federal systems, the researcher believes that federalism can become a better system of
governance for the Philippines, especially when the issue of the basic service delivery is concerned. Theoretically, federalism is a beautiful concept but the issue of the
practicability of transforming the unitary system into a federal one at this point in time, is
another matter. The question on whether federalism can function effectively in the
Philippine setting given the context of the times is another important consideration.
Federalism can be made to work, if and when, public officials, the people and all
other sectors of the society make a conscious, collective and constant effort to make
federalism work. Generally, given the merits and the demerits of applying the federal
system, and the unsupportive and unstable conditions mentioned, the researcher
recommends to continue working for full implementation of the provisions of the Local
Government Code. But with the stipulation that while measures are being taken to
address the problem of public service provision, with the short run solution of fully
decentralizing first, federalization studies and federalization plans should continue and
even be made to intensify.
Thus, fully decentralize now, but federalize later. A transition period should
ensue, first and foremost, to warrant a smoother, popularly accepted and less painful
federalization process. The appropriate structures should be properly enshrined first.
Continuous education and information campaigns should be done to fully define as well
as to explain to the public officials and the people of their new and critical role in this
massive national endeavor.
The challenge of federalism is before us. Let us make a choice.