Fedparl advocates desire subnational government and economic reforms

It is noteworthy that advocates of the federal parliamentary (fedparl) system of government look at an overhaul of the subnational government system and economic liberalization, which are ultimately resolvable by amending parts of what they describe as the "inferior" 1987 Philippine Constitution rather than introducing a new constitution and installing federalism. The fedparl advocates cite an inappropriate local government system, particularly the independent city category, and the 60-40 rule as oppressive aspects that perpetuate poverty. Applying Occam's razor, which prioritizes simpler solutions over more complicated ones, amending or revising Article X and Article XII of the 1987 Constitution is more achievable. Introduce amendments or new revisions of those articles, get voters to approve the changes, and we're good to go. The 1990 Local Government Code, which establishes the current subnational government system of the Philippines, is an implementation of Article X of the 1987 Constitution.

Background

In federalism, a written constitution expressly divides a government system into at least two levels and those levels may have powers and responsibilities exclusive to them. In a parliamentary system, there is a fusion between the legislative and executive branches and the legislative is supreme to the executive. The Philippines is has a unitary presidential government. In a unitary state, the national government determines the whole government system and may delegate powers and responsibilities to subnational governments via ordinary legislation or regulation. In a presidential system, the legislative and executive branches are completely separate. The Americans invented the presidential system as a reaction to an abusive British parliament.

On subnational government, independent cities in the Philippine context refers to the channel of separating wealthy localities from provinces. Since the comeback of political reform activism in the mid-2010s, the independent city concept is slowly becoming a divisive topic, as the channel so concerned entails depriving provinces of crucial resources or (as demonstrated to Manila) even dissolving provinces. The Americans introduced independent cities to the Philippines by dissolving the Manila province in 1901, in line with how Americans in the United States govern rural areas (counties) and urban settlements (municipalities) as separate entities.

Undesirability

Federalism in undesirable to the Philippines because that entails a constitution and sets of laws that become extremely difficult to amend or repeal once found defective. Federalism also frustrates the passage of crucial bills, as offending regions or states invoke an obscure concept called "dual sovereignty" for the sake of opposition. Federalism exacerbates the issues of local warlords and political dynasties, as localities with dynasties have limited citizen participation. Federalism would further justify the concept of independent cities, as the independent city concept in the Philippines was introduced by the United States, a federal republic. Citing the likes of Malaysia or Russia as a successful case in federalism and decentralization is a display of hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty, as those such countries harbor highly centralized government systems.