https://www.philstar.
com/headlines/2016/0 What is the argument of those
5/31/1588742/federalism-what-filipinos-
need-know.
Federalism: What Filipinos need to know
2.1KSHARES531
Levi A. So (philstar.com) - May 31, 2016 - 11:22am
MANILA, Philippines — Incoming president Rodrigo
Duterte is an ardent advocate of federalism.
Long before he decided to run, Duterte made rounds
in the country to promote it. It was during these
listening tours that he would float “if I were president”
scenarios, which kept people guessing whether he
would run or not.
When he finally decided to run, one of the reasons
Duterte said prompted him to do so was that he was
asked by his party, Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-
Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban), to carry the torch of
federalism.
His pitch for it mainly involves two things: economic
development not just for Metro Manila but for all the
regions and peace, particularly in the south.
In a nutshell, what is
federalism?
Currently, the Philippines employs a unitary form of
government with much of the power — decisions,
policies, and programs — emerging from the central
government.
Under federalism, however, power is divided or
shared between the central government and local
state governments.
Countries that employ a federal system of government
includes the United States, Australia, Austria,
Germany, Ethiopia, Brazil, Canada, Malaysia, India,
and Mexico, among others.
In the US, the national government has sole power or
authority to print money, declare war, maintain the
armed forces, enter into treaties with foreign
governments, regulate interstates and international
trade, and establish a postal system.
A power that states have, meanwhile, is to establish
their own local governments. The power to tax,
regulate business, set up courts, and build and
maintain roads, among others, are shared by the
national government and the local state government.
pushing for federalism in the
Philippines?
Budget and fiscal autonomy have been a long-
standing issue among local government units (LGUs)
in the country, according to political analyst Jan
Robert Go, assistant professor of political science at
the University of the Philippines Diliman.
And most of the time, programs of the national
government are "downloaded" to lower-income
municipalities without the benefit of evaluating
whether they are applicable and sustainable, he
added.
One contention of federalism advocates is that major
tax revenues are turned over to the national
government.
The Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) collects
national internal revenue taxes which include income
tax, estate and donor's taxes, value-added tax, other
percentage taxes, excise taxes, documentary stamp
taxes, and such other taxes that may be imposed and
collected by the BIR.
The pooled collection of national internal revenue
taxes is split 60-40, with 60 percent going to the
national government and 40 percent to the LGUs
through the internal revenue allotment or IRA. This
distribution of the IRA is also contested by federalism
advocates.
In one interview, Duterte said it was unfair that what
Davao City gets from the IRA wasn't even at par
compared to the amount it remits to the national
government.
LGUs are seen as the primary service providers but if
funds are lacking, these services may be difficult to
run and be provided to the public, Go said.
There have been attempts in the past to raise the IRA
share given to local governments. One of which was
by Duterte's party mate, PDP-Laban founder and
former Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr., who wanted it
raised to 50 percent.
Attempts were also made to include in the IRA the
tariff and duties collected by the Bureau of Customs to
increase the share that LGUs would be getting.
Is it the road to economic
growth in poorer regions?
Duterte as the first Mindanaoan president and having
served as Davao City mayor for nearly two decades is
seen as someone who understands the issue well.
He has described Metro Manila as "imperial" and has
even refused to stay at Malacañang, saying that it is a
symbol of oppression.
Federalists lament the big share Metro Manila gets
compared to other regions.
A look at the 2016 national budget showed that Metro
Manila got a 14.27 percent share with P428.5 billion,
excluding the budget for the Office of the President,
Office of the Vice President and Congress which are
based in the capital region.
Meanwhile, Luzon got 20.94 percent with P628.3
billion, Visayas got 9.94 percent with P298.3 billion,
and Mindanao got 13.23 percent with P396.9 billion.
image: http://media.philstar.com/images/the-
philippine-star/infographics/20150527/2016-National-
Budget-per-region-infographic.jpg
Out of the more than 100.98 million population in the
country, 12.75 percent of the people are found in the
densely-populated Metro Manila. Luzon, excluding
Metro Manila, accounts for 44.16 percent of the
population followed by Mindanao at 23.9 percent and
Visayas at 19.18 percent.
Duterte hasn't laid out how his proposed shift to
federalism would go about, but in one campaign rally
he said that LGUs can keep most of their income. For
every P100, the LGU would get P70 and the P30
would go to the national government, he said.
He also has yet to detail how states will be divided.
But under Joint Resolution No. 10 proposed in 2008
by then Sen. Pimentel, he suggested the creation of
11 federal states out of the existing political
subdivisions of the country with Metro Manila as the
federal administrative region akin to Washington D.C.
of the United States.
Will it bring peace to Mindanao?
Duterte argues that federalism is primarily about
peace.
Poverty is seen as one of the roots of armed rebellion,
considered as a national security threat by the Office
of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process.
Likewise, historical neglect and injustice are seen as
factors behind the emergence of secessionist groups
in Mindanao.
Philippine Statistics Authority data showed that for the
first semester of 2015, 11 of the 20 poorest provinces
in the country are in Mindanao. These are Lanao del
Sur, Sulu, Sarangani, Bukidnon, Maguindanao, Sultan
Kudarat, Zamboanga del Norte, Agusan del Sur,
North Cotabato, Lanao del Norte, and Camiguin.
image: http://media.philstar.com/images/the-
philippine-star/infographics/20150527/federal-states-
infographic.jpg
Go said that it is possible for federalism to bring
peace in Mindanao but warned against making it
appear like the ultimate solution.
"Insofar as autonomy and self-government are
concerned, perhaps federalism may provide the
framework," he said.
"But I also want to point out the agential aspect of it.
Simply changing the structures, but retaining the
same actors will not bring federalism far."
Criticism and efforts to push for
federalism
A change in the system of government requires a
constitutional change and past attempts to push for
federalism in the country have failed.
In support of Joint Resolution No. 10 which got the
backing of 16 senators, Bacolod Rep. Monico filed the
House Concurrent Resolution No. 15 in 2008.
Differing from the Senate resolution which called for
the convening of Congress as a constituent assembly
to amend the Constitution, the House version included
constitutional convention as an option.
As mandated by the 1987 Constitution, constitutional
amendments could be made through a constitutional
assembly, constitutional convention, or people's
initiative.
Then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo supported
the constituent assembly proposal of Pimentel. Under
this method, the Constitution states that any
amendments to it may be proposed by Congress
"upon a vote of three-fourths of all its members."
Many, however, saw Arroyo's push for charter change
as a ploy to extend her term.
"Charter change is and has been a sensitive topic for
us," Go explained. "Any attempts to introduce change
is welcomed by protests and criticisms."
Critics are also wary that federalism will lead to
fragmentation given the ethno-linguitic divide in the
country.
Many are also divided on whether it could strengthen
regional communities or deepen the hold of political
dynasties.
"On the one hand, federalism may indeed empower
local political elites and keep their hold of power. On
the other hand, the creation of state governments may
pose as a challenge to political families in different
localities," Go explained.
Read more at
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/05/31/
1588742/federalism-what-filipinos-need-
know#yKKS4mfOJzTB0XzQ.99
https://kami.com.ph/2492-federalism-philippines-
explained.html#2492.
Federalism in the Philippines, explained
Author: Holden De La Cruz UPDATED: A
MONTH AGO VIEWS: 48540 Category:
Political News, Tagalog, Features, Opinion
Introducing a federal form of government in
the Philippines is one of the goals of
President Rodrigo Duterte in his six-year
term. KAMI wants to tackle the question on
how federalism works and how it can affect
the country. With this topic explained,
Filipinos would hopefully be better equipped
in judging whether a federal government in
the Philippines is a good idea or not. PAY
ATTENTION: Click "See First" under the
"Following" tab to see KAMI news on your
News Feed The Philippines is currently
under a unitary form of government - this
means that the central government is the
highest governing power. It receives a large
part of every region's income and
redistributes it, often disproportionately so.
Our autonomous regions, provinces,
municipalities and barangays can only
exercise powers and enact policies that the
central government chooses to delegate to
them. What is federalism in the Philippines
(Filipino: Pederalismo sa Pilipinas)?
Federalism is a proposed type of
government wherein sovereignty is
constitutionally divided between the national
government and subdivisional governments
(such as states or provinces). Federalism
divides the country into several autonomous
states with a national government. How
federalism works? The autonomous states
are even further divided into local
government units. They will have the main
responsibility over developing their local
industries, public health and safety,
education, transportation, and culture.
These states have more power over their
finances, policies, development plans, and
laws. The United States, Switzerland,
Germany and Australia, Canada, India,
Malaysia and Brazil are examples of
countries with a federalist form of
government. In the past, the Philippines has
had attempts at a reform towards a federal
system of government - during the
administration of former President Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo, she recommended
federal decentralization as one of the goals
of the proposed charter change. However,
the attempt failed because opposition from
various sectors believes this reform was
used to extend her term limit. Pros and cons
of federalism in the Philippines What are
advantages of federal form of government
and why is it attractive to Filipinos? Firstly,
under a federal government, states are
empowered to make their own decisions.
They no longer need to rely on the central
government to decide for them. This is
important to note in the Philippine context
because of the vast geographical and
cultural differences between regions -
differences that the central government may
not always be able to cater to. Furthermore,
decentralization in the Philippines would
allow states to keep more of their income to
themselves. They do not have to rely on
collecting real estate tax and business
permit fees - 80% of their total earned
income stays, while only 20% goes back to
the national government. This means that
states are able to channel their own income
for their own development, creating policies
and programs suitable for them without
having to wait for the national government
to approve. Within the 80% budget that
remains with these states, 30% will be
funneled to the local state government, and
70% will be allocated to the provinces,
cities, municipalities and barangays.
RELATED: Advantages of federalism in the
Philippines Because states are able to both
make their own decisions and retain the
income they have to fund these decisions,
it's possible for federalism to promote
specialization and competition. This affects
both the national government and the states
- since the national government turned
certain administrative powers over to the
regional governments, it can now funnel its
resources more intensively towards the
issues it is assigned to, such as foreign
policy and nationwide defense. Likewise,
the states are now better able to nurture
their individual strengths and selling points
because the people who have the decisions
and funding are the people who are
personally involved in the state's
development. These self-reliant states will
compare their growth to the growth of
surrounding states. Hopefully, this will lead
to friendly competition between states that
will help raise the quality of life and
economic development for everybody
involved. Mayor Duterte presents federalism
as a possible solution to the Mindanao
conflict instead of implementing the
Bangsamoro Basic Law. According to him,
"nothing short can bring peace in
Mindanao.". This is likely a reference to the
numerous revisions the BBL has
undergone, and the number of years it has
stayed in Congress. All in all, a federal form
of government in the Philippines is a hot
topic among Filipinos because it is expected
to accommodate regional preferences and
diversity - a matter of great importance in a
country with 7,107 islands and more than 40
different ethnic groups. Geoffrey de Q.
Walker, Emeritus Professor of Law at
Queensland, believes that "by these means,
overall satisfaction can me maximized and
the winner-takes-all problem alleviated,"
especially in policies with divided opinions. if
we allow people to make decisions with
reference to their cultural and ethnical
beliefs, as well as their economic and social
backgrounds, we allow them to coexist with
others and achieve solidarity as a whole.
What are disadvantages of a federated
Philippines? Like all forms of government,
federalism has its ugly side too. The first
problem the Philippines would have to iron
out would be the overlaps in jurisdiction.
Unless responsibilities of state governments
and national governments are very clearly
stated in the amended Constitution, there
will be ambiguities that can lead to conflict
and confusion. Next, there is always a
chance that it will bring more division than
unity in the Philippines. It can arise from
more than just increased hostility between
ethnic groups - competition between states
can quickly become unhealthy, and can
lead to the regionalism that is currently
already challenging the unity of the country.
READ ALSO: Disadvantages of federal
government for Filipinos Moreover,
development of the states in a federal form
of government might not even work at all.
Some states may not be as gifted or as
ready for autonomy as others. A major
concern is that while some states may
progress faster, the converse is also true
because other states may devolve faster as
well - even more so without a national
government to back them up. However, in
some federal countries, the national
government provides funds to help
underdeveloped states. A proposed
Equalization Fund will use part of the tax
from rich states for the funding of poorer
states. What would the Philippines look like
under transition to a federal form of
government? Past proposals divided the
Philippines into 10 or 11 autonomous
states. President Duterte envisions 18
federated regions – 16 federated regions
(including the new Negrosanon region) and
the federated regions of Bangsamoro and
Cordillera. Regional states will have greater
power over raising their own revenues,
determining their own legislation and
choosing their economic development
models. In a federal system, billions of
pesos will have to be spent on setting up
state governments and the delivery of state
services. States will then have to spend for
the elections of their own officials. While the
idea of federalism in the Philippines is
attractive for most Filipinos, the possible
benefits that are marketed by the idea will
inevitably come at a cost, and will require
extensive time and effort from both
governments and citizens alike. President
Duterte has to make sure the people are
satisfied with the division of responsibilities
that will be stated in the Amendment, and
that the work towards building a federalist
country will not alienate other states or
leave them behind, the way they are being
left behind right now. POPULAR: Read
more news about President Rodrigo Duterte
here In this episode, we are going to find
out what makes someone true Filipino. We
will ask people of different gender and age
to give you an unbiased answer. Are you
ready to face the truth? You Are Filipino If...
What Makes Us Unique? – on KAMI
HumanMeter YouTube channel! Read
more: https://kami.com.ph/2492-federalism-
philippines-explained.html#2492
https://www.quora.com/Would-a-federal-government-be-
beneficial-to-the-Philippines.
Would a federal government be
beneficial to the Philippines?
Ad by Lusha
Uncover personal contact details.
Lusha is the easiest way to find email addresses and phone
numbers from anywhere on the web.
Free trial at lusha.co
40 Answers
Jason, I work in finance
Answered Feb 25, 2018
Originally Answered: Do you think federalism is applicable to the
Philippines?
Federalism is applicable in countries with strong local
institutions. If provincial governments are
independent and more importantly corruption-free,
then a federal system of government may work for a
country.
You can even argue that a federal form of government
is better for citizens, since they could better
participate in the crafting of the direction their
provinces would take.
However, our local institutions are not strong.
They are not independent because many are ruled by
local political clans. I don’t have the exact figure now,
but more than 2/3 of provinces are ruled by clans
which have members as governors, mayors,
congressmen, and others. Federalism with political
clans is as good as handing over the provinces as their
own kingdoms.
It is now against the interest of family-linked
congressmen to pass a law that prohibits dynasties in
government.
They are also not corruption-free. Currently, the anti-
corruption authorities already has a hard time
 prosecuting national officials. So local officials still
have some room for small-scale corrupt practices.
If the national government can now hold erring
officials accountable and if it has strong audit powers
over local governments. We have to have a clean slate
before making grand changes. Eliminate government
corruption first.
3.4k Views · View Upvoters
By Quora for Business
A great advertising solution to get high
quality customers.
Get your business to appear alongside the most relevant and
popular topics. Set up simple ads in minutes.
Start now at quora.com
Related QuestionsMore Answers Below
 If we change our political system, How can federalism
work here in the Philippines?
 What type of government would be the best for the
Philippines?
 Should the Philippines adopt federalism as its system of
government?
 Do you agree that the Philippines will convert proposed
Federal states into proposed Federal prefectures?
 If the US ever granted independence to Guam, would the
Philippine government want to take them?
Ask New Question
Ohmel Paguirigan, Software Engineer (Noob Artist)
Answered Jan 23, 2018 · Author has 95 answers and 22.9k answer
views
Originally Answered: Will federalism be effective in the Philippines?
Why or why not?
Let’s say you have an old hammer…
And you want to change it to a new one with better
features…
Both can pin a nail just fine…
Now… the question is, are you skilled enough?
Regardless of the tool, it’s always gonna be dependent
on the person using it.
But features of the new tool that will somehow lessen
mistakes regardless of the user is better.
Let’s get back to you question.
Federalism will be effective just as the same with what
the 1987 constitution offers, but Federalism offer
better features that minimizes political positions,
scatter opportunities, and decentralizing budget from
central gov’t.
The main problem with the suggested CHACHA is
that some congressmen are putting unreasonable
amendments in between some laws. Some examples
are, extending their term from 3–4, no election on
2019, taking out the running limit, and political
dynasty support (These are not all).
Having these congressmen putting personal agenda
on the newly proposed law is generating frowns from
spectators resulting unwanted suspicion towards the
current administration.
The current admin is pretty much doing it’s job
studying the proposed laws but these lawmakers are
making it hard.
Let’s go back to the anecdote, the users still affects
how the tool is used.
I remember when the 1987 constitution was
synthesized. It was formed by the group who were
against the Marcos Admin. They built it for their
benefit because they know the loop holes and look at
what happened (These are just my opinion).
Same will go for Federalism as what we are seeing
right now. If those congressmen happen to push their
amendments. Then it’s going to be just like the its
predecessor.
Effective or not effective? I can’t say but try to think
about the scenarios I cited there and then you decide.
:D
1.9k Views · View Upvoters
Promoted by Atlassian

What's the hardest thing about creating
your roadmaps?
There are no two roadmaps that look the same, and they
come in many shapes and sizes. How do you do it?
Read more at community.atlassian.com
Robert Anthony Ramos, Manila born and bred. Filipino since
conception and proud of it
Answered May 17, 2016 · Author has 543 answers
and 498.3k answer views
This is a question that’s hard to answer with a clear
yes or no. I say this because, in my opinion, a lot
hinges on these two things:
1. The Articles of Federation, and
2. Our sociopolitical culture
I don’t have to read the other answers to know what
they contain because in the ten years I served with the
Liberal Party (2000–2005 for the unified, 2006 -
2010 for the Atienza Wing during the LP Civil War)
Federalism was one of the things you not only learn
(given you’re part of a political party) but also
technically fight for (since it’s in the Party Program of
Government).
Besides, we can always look at existing federations
today to see what’s good and not with their
arrangements. Just right next to us is Malaysia, a
federation. The United States is a federation.
But that’s also what colors my answer.
First, you have to clearly define your Articles of
Federation. Most importantly, what the States and the
Federal Government can and can’t do. Most of the
time, States retain the right to pass local laws and
govern their state as they see fit within the boundaries
of the larger Federal Constitution.
For example, you can’t be Emperor of Ilocandia,
Absolute Ruler of the North Where Your Word Is Law
and still be part of a Federal Republic of the
Philippines whose core governance mechanism is that
of a representative body elected by popular vote like a
Congress or Parliament. Neither can you declare that
you will run Katagalugan the way Marx, Lenin, Mao
and maybe Joma, says so while part of a Federal
Republic of the Philippines that will most likely stick
to its liberal democratic roots.
A good sticking point with current, real-world
examples are same-sex marriage and marijuana use,
both from the United States (from whom, by the way,
we derive a great deal of jurisprudence). When the
United States Supreme Court declared in Obergefell v.
Hodges that marriage is a fundamental right accorded
to all in the United States of America regardless of
gender, that meant every single one of the fifty States
had to comply. In the same way, lacking a Federal
statute on Marijuana use, each of the same fifty States
are free to decide whether they want to legalize MJ
and on what levels.
In view of situations like this, how will each state in a
Federal Republic of the Philippines deal with matters
of law? What are they allowed to do and when does
Federal Law supersede State Law? If Bangsamoro
wishes to strictly adhere to shari’a, what happens
when its pronouncements conflict with a religion-
neutral but liberal democratic Federal Law?
What about licenses? In the United States, just
because you are a member of the Bar of California
doesn’t mean you can automatically practice law in
New York, as far as I know. Each State has its own Bar
and Professional Boards. Right now, just passing the
Bar or the Board for your profession means you can
practice in any territory of the Republic; will it be the
same in a Federal Philippines?
How about military? Usually, the Federal Government
handles external security through the Federal Armed
Forces, but even in the United States each State has its
own National Guard that the Governor can call on to
quell local disturbances that need an extra military
oomph to the response.
In the current Constitution, even rebellions like that
of the CPP-NPA or terrorism is supposed to be the
jurisdiction of the PNP since they handle internal
security; the AFP should only concern itself with
invasion by a belligerent state actor. The AFP acts
against the NPA and similar groups only because
we’ve redefined it as a “internal” invasion.
What about disaster response? A lot of people
(including me) criticized Dubya’s government with its
slow response to Hurricane Katrina but, apparently,
because of their laws and jurisprudence on their being
a Federal country, the United States President can’t
immediately step in to help a State suffering a
calamity until its Governor requests it. So no matter
how well-equipped a federal-level disaster unit is, if
the Articles of Federation say that there must be a
request from a high-ranking State official for the
Federal Gov to step in, then they won’t do so for fear
of being sued.
Taxes. If you’re a registered tax payer in Katagalugan
or the National Capital Region but do work in the
Bisaya State, do you pay twice? How about social
welfare? Salary Standardization, anyone?
What happens when one State suddenly
wants to secede from the Federation?
And those are just the legal matters.
I’ve always maintained that a Federation is an
advanced political system. Instead of striking out on
your own, your State decides to abrogate certain of its
privileges to be part of a supposedly stronger, bigger,
whole. There has to be that idea of a single nation
comprised by many smaller nations for it to work.
There is a regionalism that comes with each State in
America but someone from Ohio and another from
Illinois will agree that they are both American and
proud of it.
We don’t even know half the time what being Filipino
really is.
In fact, we identify more readily with our home
provinces or sociolinguistic group. You’re more
Kapampangan, Ilocano, Tagalog, Bisaya or even
Muslim before you’re Filipino.
Will we be able to set aside our high level of
regionalism to make a Federal Republic of the
Philippines work?
There is also an element of the ideal with the States
because its leaders have more power than, say, a
provincial head has because he or she “rules” their
State until such time as what he or she does is
unconstitutional (or inhumane) that the Federal Gov
has to step in. Governors will fully control not only the
apparatus of government on a local level - social
welfare, infrastructure, utilities, etc. - but they will
also be in charge of an armed force in the State Militia
or National Guard.
Given what you know of Philippine local leaders, are
you ready for the likes of Chavit Singson or the
Ampatuans to formally and legally be given the
privilege to be at the head of substantial legal military
forces that, by the way, your taxes pay for? Right now
it’s all private armies and creative application of state
funds, but what happens when the Articles of
Federation allow the warlord families to raise loyal
armed units for zero expense to their own riches?
Federalism isn’t a simple matter of letting locals run
the store almost as they wish. It’s a give-and-take
between local and national. It also presupposes a level
of political maturity where local leaders care enough
about the national to not shaft the Federal
government when they can for their or their State’s
advancement.
I’m not saying it’s bad. It could be what the doctor
ordered. But I’m saying that it’s not as easy nor as
simple the way many who’ve been romanticized to
think this is some sort of magic bullet view it.
31k Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Richmond
Acosta, Koleen Baes Paunon, and 2 more
Your feedback is private.
Is this answer still relevant and up to date?
Raj Chauhan, average indian who had seen this politics for 5
years thoroughly
Answered Jan 8, 2016 · Author has 131 answers and 508.3k answer
views
Originally Answered: How could the Philippines be improved through
federalism?
As my friend Cristine told me that she is talking about
Philippines........
Here is what i have got.
Philippines is geographically and entholinguistically-
fragmented and the needs of one group of people may
not always be the same as the needs of another group.
Painting broad brushstrokes on what the "entire
country" needs doesn't work very well for a country
that has diverse conditions, cultural/linguistic
contexts, etc.
That's why Federalism is part of what the Philippines
needs. Policy-making ought to be relevant at the
regional level (the level at which Federalism is
proposed), especially since the current situation in the
Philippines is one of over-centralization with most
real economic opportunities being concentrated in the
Capital, while the rest of the country experiences a
dearth of such opportunities. Moreover, in the current
centralized set-up, the regions all have to send most of
their money to the Capital, and then surplus is re-
allocated back to them.
Federalism would allow each of the regions to be
autonomous in how their manage their economic
policy-making, how they attract businesses to invest,
how they run their are based on what makes sense to
the people in the region, etc... It also allows the
regions to use the money that they make instead of
sending most of it over to the Capital. Spreading out
economic opportunities is the whole point of
Federalism in the Philippines. Attempting to do so in
a centralized fashion will cause the central
government to arbitrarily decide which regions to
develop first and which ones next...
Federalism, on the other hand, will give the regional
governments (once they are set up) the ability to set
up their own economic policies that will pull and
attract investors to come over and create
opportunities for their citizens. In other words, the
regional governments will have to compete against
other regional governments in developing their
economies. Regional governments will have to strive
to come up with the best and most attractive policies
that will bring investors in and ultimately, the entire
country will benefit, since the whole country will be
seen as being very attractive to investors as the
regions compete to become attractive.
Size and wealth aren't the reasons to go Federal. Most
countries that went with federalism weren't
necessarily rich when they first went federal. Malaysia
uses Federalism but in terms of land area, it has the
same size as the Philippines. Switzerland too is federal
as is Austria, but they are smaller than the
Philippines.
Besides, sticking with the current system that the
Philippines has - in being centralized AND being
presidential is a big NO-NO! That's the worst
combination possible for the Philippines. Better to go
with a Parliamentary System to ensure that there is no
gridlock, and that the executive branch has the
support and backing it needs from the majority bloc in
parliament so that it also has legislative support. No
need for ridiculous shut-down scenarios that happen
because of incompatibilities between one branch and
another. (Parliamentary Systems also make it easier to
replace non-performing leaders and even parties
when need be. They also tend to have much higher
quality leaders - in terms of intelligence and
competence - than the leaders produced in
Presidential Systems).
Hope it helps :)
7.3k Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Cristine Bajao
Orion Pérez D, worked at SuccessFactors
Answered Nov 14, 2014
Originally Answered: Will the Philippines be better off with a federal
government?
Yes it will.
The Philippines is geographically and
entholinguistically-fragmented and the needs of one
group of people may not always be the same as the
needs of another group. Painting broad brushstrokes
on what the "entire country" needs doesn't work very
well for a country that has diverse conditions,
cultural/linguistic contexts, etc.
That's why Federalism is part of what the Philippines
needs. Policy-making ought to be relevant at the
regional level (the level at which Federalism is
proposed), especially since the current situation in the
Philippines is one of over-centralization with most
real economic opportunities being concentrated in the
Capital, while the rest of the country experiences a
dearth of such opportunities. Moreover, in the current
centralized set-up, the regions all have to send most of
their money to the Capital, and then surplus is re-
allocated back to them.
Federalism would allow each of the regions to be
autonomous in how their manage their economic
policy-making, how they attract businesses to invest,
how they run their are based on what makes sense to
the people in the region, etc... It also allows the
regions to use the money that they make instead of
sending most of it over to the Capital. Spreading out
economic opportunities is the whole point of
Federalism in the Philippines. Attempting to do so in
a centralized fashion will cause the central
government to arbitrarily decide which regions to
develop first and which ones next...
Federalism, on the other hand, will give the regional
governments (once they are set up) the ability to set
up their own economic policies that will pull and
attract investors to come over and create
opportunities for their citizens. In other words, the
regional governments will have to compete against
other regional governments in developing their
economies. Regional governments will have to strive
to come up with the best and most attractive policies
that will bring investors in and ultimately, the entire
country will benefit, since the whole country will be
seen as being very attractive to investors as the
regions compete to become attractive.
Size and wealth aren't the reasons to go Federal. Most
countries that went with federalism weren't
necessarily rich when they first went federal. Malaysia
uses Federalism but in terms of land area, it has the
same size as the Philippines. Switzerland too is federal
as is Austria, but they are smaller than the
Philippines.
Besides, sticking with the current system that the
Philippines has - in being centralized AND being
presidential is a big NO-NO! That's the worst
combination possible for the Philippines. Better to go
with a Parliamentary System to ensure that there is no
gridlock, and that the executive branch has the
support and backing it needs from the majority bloc in
parliament so that it also has legislative support. No
need for ridiculous shut-down scenarios that happen
because of incompatibilities between one branch and
another. (Parliamentary Systems also make it easier to
replace non-performing leaders and even parties
when need be. They also tend to have much higher
quality leaders - in terms of intelligence and
competence - than the leaders produced in
Presidential Systems).
Check out this article:
Let's CoRRECT™ Asia's Basketcase of Wasted
Democrazy!
12k Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Miguel Paraz
Jake Nasol Loria, lives in The Philippines
Answered Mar 11, 2016 · Author has 376 answers and 268k answer
views
Originally Answered: Can Philippines adopt federalism?
Yes, federalism can be adapted and in my
personal opinion should be implemented for
the sake of this country.
As we all know, the Philippines is a rotting and
decaying country. Though Bloomberg TV and other
news outlets project the Philippines as a "Developing"
country, in truth and in reality, this country is dying.
We are governed by morons and idiots and 80% of the
people living in the archipelago are illiterates in one
way or another. (The best evidence on this claim is the
Filipinos' love for voting plunderers, thieves and liars
into government positions; The Estrada's, The
Binay's, Enrile, Revilla, Ampatuan, etc)
Now that I have laid down that frustration, let me
expound as to why it should be implemented.
If and when the regions/provinces are given more
independence to govern their territories (i.e. create
individual laws, taxes within their region), it will
create a more conducive working environment for the
people to improve their livelihood.
Instead of concentrating all the power to Malacanang,
the regions/provinces can work independently to find
ways to enhance their economies or to protect their
constituents.
Federalism will allow each sovereign province to
implement their own laws. For example, one province
might be allow same-sex marriage while the other
may allow use of medical marijuana. Each for their
own.
I lived the first 20 years of my life in Albay (Region 5)
and let me assure you, we don't identify ourselves with
those people in Region 6 or 7 or whatever region that
doesn't belong on the 5th. Yes, we love other Filipinos
but there are plenty of major cultural differences in
every region.
So, in my beloved Albay, I can ask for my
representative to lower down income tax so it could
increase my business profit and allow for expansion
and hire more staff (increase employment). The
provinces in Visayas and Mindanao may adapt a
different law to improve their economy and that
would be there own problem.
Right now, income tax law is tied to the central
government. Whatever their decisions are, the local
government will just follow like a little dog. You get
my drift?
Here's a good answer from LegalMatch about as
to: Why Do States Have Different Laws? [in the
US]
Note: This would totally work in the Philippines.
Why Do States Have Different Laws?
Federal laws are generally applicable in the same
way across all state borders. However,
under constitutional laws, states are allowed to
create, implement, and enforce their own laws in
additional to federal laws. This is because every U.S.
state is also a sovereign entity in its own right and is
granted the power to create laws and regulate them
according to their needs.
Another reason behind this is that each state has
unique characteristics in terms of factors such as:
 Geography and natural resources
 Location
 Demographics of the population
 Historical operations of business,
commerce, and industry
 Public policies and community standards
in the state
What Are Some Types of Laws that Are Different by
State?
Some laws, such as certain voting laws and criminal
laws and statutes, tend to be somewhat uniform
across states. However, some areas of law can be
very, very different from one state to the next. Some
types of laws that can vary widely across state
regions include:
 Gun control laws- these are often
dependent on crime rates in the area
 Child custody laws
  Trucking and motor carrier laws
 Business and corporate laws
 Marriage licensing laws, especially with
regards to same-sex marriage
Lastly, (and I think this is relevant for your question)
User Estherxyu from The Q&A wiki had a good
answer for What are the benefits of a Federal
system of government?

By dividing power between the states and the national

government, one level can serve as a check on the
other. This should provide a "double security" to the
rights of the people. According the James Madison,
this system was especially fitting for American
because the nation was one of diverse interests. Each
of these interests would constitute a faction that
would seek its own advantage, and one faction might
come to dominate government or a part of
government in one place, and a different faction might
come to power in another. The tugging and pulling of
these factions would prevent any single region of the
United states from dominating all of government. The
division of powers among several governments would
give to virtually every faction an opportunity to gain
some-but not full-power. One of the major concerns of
the Framers was the prevention of tyranny in a
concentration of power. They believed that federalism
checks the growth of tyranny while inhibiting the
formation of single-interest majorities. The system
promotes unity without uniformity and promotes
experimentation in public policy. For example, the
states often serve as testing grounds for policies that
later translate to the national level. Lastly, federalism
keeps the government close to the people, giving them
a greater say in affairs at both levels.