Prana Renee S.

Pambid 2008-67795 The Case for Federalism There have been discussions about the federalization of the Republic of the Philippines, a traditionally unitary system. Most of these discussions arise because of the desire of ARMM to become more represented in the government. Upon reading Heywoods Politics, we saw the advantages of a federal system over a unitary system. For example, it gives considerably more power to the regional government that cannot be encroached upon by the central government (Heywood, 2007: 1967). I can see how this seems appealing to the Filipinos living in Mindanao, since most policies applied by the central government might only be ideal to people living in Metro Manila and can be irrelevant to those living in distant regions of the Philippines. These policies include money allocation and disbursement. As a middle-class citizen living in Metro Manila, my life is pretty comfortable, already considering corruption of government funds. I get to experience quality education at a fraction of the cost, albeit a lot can still be improved (such as facilities and wages). On the other hand, I know for a fact that the same is not enjoyed by Filipino students living in far-off places. The things I consider basic needs here are already considered luxuries in certain places. Proponents of federalism argue that better representation and more independence might serve to equalize these disparities. After all, how can they voice their needs when there is nobody to speak for them in the central government? Senators serve as the lawmakers of the country, and most of the seats go to politicians who live in Metro Manila. This results in laws that are catered to those they are most exposed to: citizens of the metro. Aside from this, the Philippines, is an archipelago. Certain regions of the country have their own regionalist characteristics that make them unique and different from those living in the already represented metro. We have to remember that the Republic of the Philippines is a product of centuries of colonization. I believe that we are a hodge podge of cultures that were forced to come together for

easy governing by our colonizers. They were probably thinking that the islands were geographically near each other enough to be under the same government. However, unlike the US which is the benchmark of federal government, the archipelagic nature of our country and not the metric distance contributes to the cultural differences in the Philippine regions. Colonizers did not care about the differences in culture and beliefs. It was simply more convenient to make laws that applied to the whole archipelago instead of making laws catered to each region. Currently, this is still how our country goes about law-making. Laws are made and voted upon in Metro Manila, but implemented on a country-wide scale. Some laws produced by metropolitan legislators might not be relevant to certain regions, while some regions call for laws that cannot be applied on a national scale. A certain level of government independence can result in an increase in the participation and responsiveness of regional residents and an overall more organized state. I believe that our country is built to become a federal state. There will always be internal conflicts within regional units, and economic growth will always be slowed down because of this. However, there are a lot of pressing matters that currently bother our government and transforming our country from a unitary state to a federal one will cause a lot more stress and hardships in the country as a whole. We will have to devote much of our resources in the changes that will follow such change. There are a lot of barriers preventing the country from becoming a federal state (I wont go into the details), but I believe that once the country is ready to make the change, federalism will definitely make the Philippines a well-represented and united country.

Reference cited: Heywood, Andrew. Politics, 3rd ed. UK and US: Plagrave Macmillan, 2007.