I think that would be impossible. Filipinos love shortcut and the easiest way for politicians to get money is through the status quo — waiting for the largesse from Malacanang.
Besides, the first thing we need to do is to convince our Congressmen as you say, to pass a reinvigorated Local Government Code. But would they work on something that will hurt their pockets? Of course not especially considering that the present system allows them to dip into government budget in the guise of pork barrel, etc.
Okay, I may sound pessimistic. Our Congressmen are pro-people and they love their constituents. But retaining the unitary system with all powers still centralized will do no better even if there is this “new LGC”. Why? Because what is the “purse” without the corresponding power and autonomy to use it? Look at the CAR and the ARMM who, according to some officials, are still dependent on Malacanang because they have no autonomy to enact their own budget, etc., etc. This is because the problem now is the system and as such we need to address the system and not just offer simple reforms (or vulca seal solutions) like taking paracetamol in dealing with our fractured bones.
My whole take on this issue is at: http://politechwatch.blogspot.com/2008/08/federalizing-philippines-right-track-at.html
(Original post and comment is found here.)
September 4, 2008 at 8:14 pm
You say Congress will not pass a reinvigorated Local Government Code because of selfish interests. Federalism goes much farther beyond just giving more powers to LGU’s. It means losing more of it control and largess. What makes you think that the same set of officials will go for the new system?
What is wrong with CAR, ARMM and even LGU’s?
A limited purse that is controlled by Malacañang! Again, the problem is legislative in nature. It is something that Congress could very well remedy. Again, the question: why don’t they?
With federalism we will just be complicating the issue but the basic problem will remain. Congress does not want to lose its power and perks. Would a con-ass make it change its mind?
Federalism would make a patient undergo a major operation where a simple band-aid application would suffice.
Federalism does not guarantee autonomy for LGU’s. A State could be more pervasive and domineering than Imperial Manila.
Fiscal federalism is not just for federal forms of government. It also applies to unitary systems.
It is not true that amendments to the 1991 LGC require a cha-cha. The present charter does not set a limit to how far Congress can go with local autonomy.
Federalism will not spur economic development. LGU’s are the proper venue for it. States will only provide more red tape.
Federalism will not solve the Mindanao problem. It will only aggravate it. Ancestral domain is not about politics or religion. It’s economic, stupid!
Federalism is expensive. The estimate given by the Primer is a handiwork of an engineer who wants his clientele to renovate a house. Wait till the bills come in!
It would take years before a State can be operational. Here’s what the Primer says: “the type of federalism suited for the Philippines can be determined only through discussion, consultation and debate among our people. The Philippines can develop its own unique model of federalism based on the various models that have been adopted by other countries.”
Federalism complicates a simple solution to our problems: decentralization.
September 4, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Mine is not exactly a band-aid solution. It requires a revolution, no less. Yours too, most probably. The question therefore should be: which is worth fighting or dying for?
I maintain that more local autonomy will achieve the goals of your federalism. Federalism itself will defeat its own purpose. I think this is made clear enough in my preceding post.