THERE is the persistent misconception about federalism being merely a division of governmental functions: essentially one layer but of two levels. This is not true. That’s what we have right now with the present Constitution and the Local Government Code. It can be mostly top-down or bottom-up depending on how Congress formulates implementing legislation.
Federalism actually creates two layers of government. Or to be precise: two parallel authorities each equally exercising sovereign power over the citizenry.
Each “State” (i.e., province or region) is left to its own devices to generate income and is responsible in providing basic governmental services. It has the capacity to make its own laws, as well as judicial and law enforcement. Business permit or driver’s license requirements, for example, would be different in Makati from Davao.
Any legal document, say, a marriage license or marriage contract, would only be valid as to the issuing “State.” Other States are not compelled to recognize such marriage unless reciprocity arrangements are made with the issuing “States.”
By right, citizens are free to leave poorly managed “States” and transfer to those providing a better way of life: lower business taxes and less government regulation, as well as better health care or education.
Remember that, as we have regions rich in fish, marine resources, and minerals, but depend on “Imperial Manila” for their survival (e.g., Masbate, Samar, Ifugao, Bukidnon, Bicol, Negros Oriental; for ARMM, that amounts to 98%, which in 2014 reportedly amounted to P24 billion).
In a true federal system, the national government cannot logically be obliged to help failing “States.” Otherwise, what is the point of shifting to a federal system?
Which leads us to the ridiculous “Imperial Manila” charge.
What is Imperial Manila? When the current president is a Davaoeño? And before him were a Caviteño, Rizaleño, Ilocanos, Batangueño, Zambaleño, Pampangueños, Pangasinense, Cebuanos, Capizeño, and Boholano. Only one president came from Manila and he didn’t even finish his term.
Congress, the Supreme Court, the Cabinet — all have a healthy representation from the provinces. Manny Pacquiao is a Senator from the South. And Muslims have the privilege of exclusive recourse to Sharia law.
As discussed here previously, MindaNews (02 June 2014) reports: of the 234 elected representatives to the House of Representatives, Mindanaoans themselves chose 59. Add to the foregoing the 9 Mindanaoan party-list representatives who were voted nationally. Notably, as further reported by MindaNews, of the 68 Mindanao members of Congress, “one is a billionaire, 66 are millionaires and only one has a net worth of under a million pesos.”
Is it about seat of government? But nothing in the Constitution says that the government offices, even the presidential residence, should be in Manila. The offices can be scattered all over the country, and this is immensely allowed now by transportation and communication developments.
Is it about so-called concentration of powers? The fact is, Congress can delegate taxation and tariff powers to the LGU’s. Along with giving the education, health, welfare, public works authority and responsibilities to the LGU’s.
There may be an ensuing debate on the source of power, whether it be from national to local rather than the simultaneous holding of powers that the federal system brings, but this is more a constitutional/intellectual discussion rather than pragmatic or practical. It would also entail a debate on the tug of war between the federal and state government powers.
Frankly, this federalism matter boils down to money. Particularly the Internal Revenue Allocation. LGU’s currently remit 60% of taxes collected to the national government. The proposed federal system reduces that to less than 30%. But flexibility under the current Constitution is certainly there, as demonstrated by the Supreme Court in Mandanas vs. Executive Secretary (GR 199802): “The basis for the ‘just share’ of local government units under Section 6, Article X of the 1987 Constitution as being based on all national taxes and not only national internal revenue taxes.”
Which is why the aims of federalism can be achieved by simply amending the Local Government Code (and without changing the Constitution). The LGC can be amended so as to give greater powers to the LGU’s, with greater share or even 100% of their earnings retained by LGU’s. The power to make investment, trade, and customs regulations, and provide education, welfare, and health services can be devolved to, with primary responsibility in the hands of, the provinces. The national Departments for Trade, Education, Welfare, and Health can be relegated to mere coordinating agencies.
The LGU’s shall be solely responsible for raising domestic revenue and developing export markets, with the national government focusing on national security issues. As their entire earnings remain with the LGU, the hated national government is no longer expected to help destitute regions/provinces, the latter being now left to fend, sink or swim for themselves.
Which is the essence of federalism.
Otherwise, as mentioned above, we’re just fooling ourselves in federalizing but retaining dependence on the national government.
Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.
jemygatdula@yahoo.com
www.jemygatdula.blogspot.com
facebook.com/jemy.gatdula
Twitter @jemygatdula
