Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In addition, Pulse Asia published in the same year their survey regarding public
support towards the proposed charter change. Their report stated that four out
of ten Filipino adults or 42% of all respondents opposed the amendment.
Meanwhile, 25% were still undecided and 33% were in favor. Pulse Asia
furthered that from 2006 to 2009, there was no significant change of sentiment
against charter change, but indecision increased by 6%.
Beginning in late 2014, Davao City mayor Rodrigo Duterte launched a
nationwide campaign promoting a charter change for federalism. During his visit
to Cebu City in October of the same year, Duterte stated that federalism will
facilitate better delivery of services to the people.
He added that the current unitary form of government has not worked well given
the ethnic diversity in the country.
In spite of rejecting several calls for candidacy for the 2016
presidential elections, he also cited his reforms if he were to be
president. Parallel to his campaign for federalism, Duterte plans to
privatize tax collection and abolish the Congress to make way for a
unicameral legislature, contrary to the originally proposed Joint
Resolution No. 10.
We all know that Pres. Duterte and PDP Laban are proposing the
Federal Form of Government. This issue is all over the news and
people, some people don't agree to this. Federalism is but an
instrument, a vehicle for carrying solutions in a new constitution. It is
a structural platform that will constitute the base in which the nuts-
and-bolts solution to our social problems will be grounded and
fastened. You cannot judge the beauty of a house by just looking at
its foundation.
The way to unpack the President’s federalism project is through a clarification of
purpose(s), by asking which problems he is trying to solve.
Does he see our unitary state as a source of the political and bureaucratic
bottleneck that has only served as a barrier to provincial growth? Has our
Manila-centric politics failed to unlock the vast potential of the other regions,
and sapped resources away from them? Is the attention lavished on Manila so
undue as to suppress the identities of the various ethnic communities in the
country? Is this about the flow of taxes and wealth, such that we need a
constitutional repiping of the channels of resources to allow a more equitable
distribution of income? Is this about who gets to control our natural resources?
Or is this about the sale of agricultural lands? How will a federal structure
change the way basic services are conceptualized and delivered?
These questions must be raised not only so that we can have reasonable bases
for buying into the project or rejecting the offer but also because we need to
assess whether such out-of-the-box, extraconstitutional measures can be
accommodated by more modest, less expensive, within-the-box solutions.