Jump to content


Photo

Anything About Federalism

DU30s Era Charter Change

  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#101 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2018 - 11:25 AM

What about the existing national debt?

Existing national debt naturally has to automatically fall under Federal Government's responsibility.



#102 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2018 - 11:32 AM

 

As it is, wala namang national tax under the current legal regime ang macoconvert to a state tax under the proposed federal setup, so I don't see that as being too large a problem, all other things being the same.

 

 

Not a whole lot different from the setup under the current laws. LGUs have direct access to foreign aid sources, while national govt can relend funds from foreign lending institutions to LGUs.

 

Essentially, shift to Federal system will not change the way we handle foreign loans.

 

In case of taxation, there's really no hurdle that cannot be ironed out.



#103 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2018 - 12:05 PM

I support Federalism because I believe it will effectively spread out the political power and the responsibilities among the federated states.

 

The leaders of the States will be tasked to manage their own development. Regional leaders will have sense of ownership of the tasks at hand and responsibilities the comes with it.

 

Imbes na nakanganga lang ang LGUs for dole-outs of the  central government, federalism will empower them to be pro-active - because the people will now look at them as the ones directly responsible for the development or the failure of their State.



#104 johncarter44

johncarter44

    Chaser

  • (03) Newbie
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2018 - 04:31 PM

I support Federalism because I believe it will effectively spread out the political power and the responsibilities among the federated states.

 

The leaders of the States will be tasked to manage their own development. Regional leaders will have sense of ownership of the tasks at hand and responsibilities the comes with it.

 

Imbes na nakanganga lang ang LGUs for dole-outs of the  central government, federalism will empower them to be pro-active - because the people will now look at them as the ones directly responsible for the development or the failure of their State.

 

LGUs are already mandated and empowered under the Local Government Code to plan and manage their own development. A number of LGUs have succeeded in doing this. Why create another intermediate layer of bureaucracy?

Our experience with regional governments is limited, but not encouraging: ARMM.



#105 jomi_schwartz

jomi_schwartz

    Cutie

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 275 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Makati City
  • Interests:Real Estate, Computers, SPA, Cars, Condominiums, Townhouses, House and Lot.

Posted 05 September 2018 - 05:24 PM

me too. i support federalism



#106 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 September 2018 - 08:23 PM

 

LGUs are already mandated and empowered under the Local Government Code to plan and manage their own development. A number of LGUs have succeeded in doing this. Why create another intermediate layer of bureaucracy?

Our experience with regional governments is limited, but not encouraging: ARMM.

Yes, they are mandated under LGU Code, as it is in any country, Federal or Unitary.

 

But at the present set-up they depend on National government initiative. Primarily in the release of funds. Pag di kumilos ang Malacanang, wala rin silang gagawin o magagawa. Their development is subservient to the priorities of the central government.

 

Since development projects are managed at the national level, its project managers do not necessarily have the commitment to implement the projects with the same sense of urgency than if it were managed directly by federated LGU. Even the National government priorities on which projects to implement first maybe  different from the point of view of the state.

 

A federated state would have more authority to manage their own development. 

 

The key is the behaviour. They acquire a sense of ownership of the responsibilities given to them. An opportunity for them to develop themselves on their own terms, based on their own priorities.  


Edited by camiar, 05 September 2018 - 08:29 PM.


#107 johncarter44

johncarter44

    Chaser

  • (03) Newbie
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 September 2018 - 10:36 AM

But at the present set-up they depend on National government initiative. Primarily in the release of funds. Pag di kumilos ang Malacanang, wala rin silang gagawin o magagawa. Their development is subservient to the priorities of the central government.

 

Since development projects are managed at the national level, its project managers do not necessarily have the commitment to implement the projects with the same sense of urgency than if it were managed directly by federated LGU. Even the National government priorities on which projects to implement first maybe  different from the point of view of the state.

 

A federated state would have more authority to manage their own development. 

 

The key is the behaviour. They acquire a sense of ownership of the responsibilities given to them. An opportunity for them to develop themselves on their own terms, based on their own priorities.  

 

No they don't. By law, release of LGU IRA is automatic. Kapag hindi i-release ang IRA ng LGUs, puwede nilang kasuhan ang DBM, at mananalo sila. Aside from IRA, LGUs have the mandate to generate their own funding via fees, local taxes, ODA grants, and debt. 

The threshold for NEDA approval of devt projects are set by executive fiat. Don't even need to amend a law. Kayang palitan by amending the NEDA Operations Manual.

 

Bottom-up Budgeting was a clear example of localities developing themselves on their own terms based on their own priorities, and did not require changing form of govt.

Am still not seeing the value-added of a shift to federalism. Especially considering that the relationships between regional govt and included LGUs are currently black boxes, no one can predict kung ano mangyayari based just on the current draft kasi those would be the parts that would be developed during transition pa. It would be a lot easier to discuss this if there was at least a draft proposed regional organic law that takes the federal govt framework into consideration.



#108 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 September 2018 - 07:03 PM

 

No they don't. By law, release of LGU IRA is automatic. Kapag hindi i-release ang IRA ng LGUs, puwede nilang kasuhan ang DBM, at mananalo sila. Aside from IRA, LGUs have the mandate to generate their own funding via fees, local taxes, ODA grants, and debt. 

The threshold for NEDA approval of devt projects are set by executive fiat. Don't even need to amend a law. Kayang palitan by amending the NEDA Operations Manual.

 

Bottom-up Budgeting was a clear example of localities developing themselves on their own terms based on their own priorities, and did not require changing form of govt.

Am still not seeing the value-added of a shift to federalism. Especially considering that the relationships between regional govt and included LGUs are currently black boxes, no one can predict kung ano mangyayari based just on the current draft kasi those would be the parts that would be developed during transition pa. It would be a lot easier to discuss this if there was at least a draft proposed regional organic law that takes the federal govt framework into consideration.

 

 

In an ideal world, the LGU's IRA are released on time, no strings attached. 

 

In real world it doesn't happen. I have seen our roads and facilities deteriorate for lack of maintenance because funds are not released on time. 

 

Sue DBM? Who does that? It's counter-productive. Many politicians realize that it's easier to just switch memberships and be subservient to the to the ruling party each time we have a new President rather than stand their ground for their constituencies.

 
Anyway, 40% IRA is for operation and maintenance of the LGU. It's barely enough to keep the LGU running, what more if they need money for their pet development projects?
 
Development projects are funded from the 60%  internal revenue share of the Central Government, and to a lesser extent, from PDAF. That's what the LGU practically begs from the Central Government and from congressmen to release to them. 
 
Congressmen and Central government project planners are not necessarily in tune with the priority needs of the LGU. 
 
In a federal system, state government will have more authority over choosing what projects needs priority and have more say in pace of their development projects.

Edited by camiar, 07 September 2018 - 07:06 PM.


#109 johncarter44

johncarter44

    Chaser

  • (03) Newbie
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 September 2018 - 11:45 AM

In an ideal world, the LGU's IRA are released on time, no strings attached. 

 

In real world it doesn't happen. I have seen our roads and facilities deteriorate for lack of maintenance because funds are not released on time. 

 

In the real world, LGU IRA is released on time and with no strings attached. LGUs are very particular about that. 

 

 

Sue DBM? Who does that? It's counter-productive. Many politicians realize that it's easier to just switch memberships and be subservient to the to the ruling party each time we have a new President rather than stand their ground for their constituencies.

 

 

Then what's to stop this practice from happening under a federal setup? Bumaba lang from OP to regional govt yung kowtowing. Even under the draft federal consti, federal govt has discretion to allocate additional funds to identified federal regions. Double layers of subservience.

 

 

Anyway, 40% IRA is for operation and maintenance of the LGU. It's barely enough to keep the LGU running, what more if they need money for their pet development projects?
 
Development projects are funded from the 60%  internal revenue share of the Central Government, and to a lesser extent, from PDAF. That's what the LGU practically begs from the Central Government and from congressmen to release to them. 
 
Congressmen and Central government project planners are not necessarily in tune with the priority needs of the LGU. 

 

 

NB: PDAF is gone.

Again, LGUs have the mandate to fund their own devt projects from ODA and local sources, even bond floats. If they are "begging" from national govt and from congressmen for more funds, then it begs the question of why they do that when there are alternative fund sources available.

 

In a federal system, state government will have more authority over choosing what projects needs priority and have more say in pace of their development projects.

 

 

 

LGUs already have that that authority.

Given everything that's been said, the proposed federal govt seems to be basically the same setup as now, but with more bureaucratic layers. Parang hindi worth it kung ganoon lang. 



#110 camiar

camiar

    Camiar

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3855 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 September 2018 - 12:21 AM

 

In the real world, LGU IRA is released on time and with no strings attached. LGUs are very particular about that. 

 

 

 

Then what's to stop this practice from happening under a federal setup? Bumaba lang from OP to regional govt yung kowtowing. Even under the draft federal consti, federal govt has discretion to allocate additional funds to identified federal regions. Double layers of subservience.

 

 

 

NB: PDAF is gone.

Again, LGUs have the mandate to fund their own devt projects from ODA and local sources, even bond floats. If they are "begging" from national govt and from congressmen for more funds, then it begs the question of why they do that when there are alternative fund sources available.

 

 

LGUs already have that that authority.

Given everything that's been said, the proposed federal govt seems to be basically the same setup as now, but with more bureaucratic layers. Parang hindi worth it kung ganoon lang. 

 

IRA released on time with no strings attached? During GMA's time and now under Diokno, maybe. For the rest of the other administrations, good luck.

 

Anyway, if you say all processes are already in place and would be the same as in a Federal System, then fine. Actually that is a good argument in favor of shifting to Federalism. Nothing much will change except governance will be decentralized and shifted to regional leadership.

 

Regional leaders are more attuned to the needs of their local constituents. They should have more say on how development should be prioritized e.g. :

 

Should they build a hydro dam to generate power for export to the national electric grid, or should it be primarily for agricultural irrigation?

 

Should they spend their road construction funds to build hi-ways that link them to Manila, or should it be used to build farm-to-market roads?

 

Should they build more basketball courts for each barangay, or should they build more communal palay drying and storage facilities?



#111 johncarter44

johncarter44

    Chaser

  • (03) Newbie
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 September 2018 - 12:40 PM

 

IRA released on time with no strings attached? During GMA's time and now under Diokno, maybe. For the rest of the other administrations, good luck.

 

Anyway, if you say all processes are already in place and would be the same as in a Federal System, then fine. Actually that is a good argument in favor of shifting to Federalism. Nothing much will change except governance will be decentralized and shifted to regional leadership.

 

Regional leaders are more attuned to the needs of their local constituents. They should have more say on how development should be prioritized e.g. :

 

Should they build a hydro dam to generate power for export to the national electric grid, or should it be primarily for agricultural irrigation?

 

Should they spend their road construction funds to build hi-ways that link them to Manila, or should it be used to build farm-to-market roads?

 

Should they build more basketball courts for each barangay, or should they build more communal palay drying and storage facilities?

 

Mali ni FVR at ni Erap yun. Pinakialaman nila yung IRA. Since GMA's admin up to now, no issue except for the recent Mandanas ruling.

 

We don't disagree on what local chief executives ought to have the power to do. Where we diverge is on whether or not we already have it. My position is that we do, it's in the Local Government Code, ergo the problem is in implementation and in the electorate demanding of their LCEs that they exercise those powers for the benefit of their localities. 

I'm of the opinion that if we are to shift to federalism, then there must be something we want to do different on a fundamental level. If "decentralization and greater autonomy" is the selling point of federalism, and if we already have decentralization and greater autonomy under the Local Government Code, then why bother?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users