Reaction to ‘Abolish Congress!’

Reaction to ‘Abolish Congress!’ | Daily Tribune

“Good morning pare, how are you today?”

“Tama ka Pare, dapat baguhin na ang sistema ng gobyerno natin. Dapat iabolish na ang Kongreso. Sana makita ni Presidente ang nangyayari. Bago maging huli na ang lahat.

“Nagustuhan ko ang mga obserbasyon mo, at lalo na ang mga rekomendasyon mo.

Too many cooks spoil the broth. Corruption is the name of the game!

“Everybody happy. Ito ang sa iyo, akin ito. Akin ito, at ito ang sa iyo, akin pa rin ito.

Greediness and hypocrisy are the orders of the day. The two most deadly enemies of our country.

“Sana makita ni Presidente ang mga nangyayari, Pagkukunwari at kasakiman sa yaman ng bayan. At kung hindi, Lulubha ang ekonomiya at lalong sumakit ang tiyan niya. Ipagdasal natin ang Pangulong Bongbong Marcos.

“At sabay nating recite ang last stanza ng Psalm of Life: Let us then be up and doing, with a heart for any fate, Still achieving, still pursuing, learn to labor and to wait… Pare, let us help the President save our country.”

Let us proceed with our main topic: Presidential or Parliamentary?

Whether a federal system with a unicameral parliament is a better alternative to the Philippines’ current strong presidential, bicameral system is a subject of intense debate, with arguments focusing on balancing efficiency with checks and balances.

1. Decentralization and Regional Development: Federalism is seen as a way to empower regions, allowing them to create specialized solutions for their unique needs, culture,and economies, rather than relying on centralized, “Manila-centric” government.

2. Faster Legislation: A unicameral system eliminates the need to reconcile differences between two chambers, which can speed up the lawmaking process and reduce gridlock.

3. Accountability: A single chamber can offer higher transparency and clearer accountability, as voters can easily identify which legislators are responsible for passing or failing specific laws.

4. Cost-Effective: A unicameral parliament is generally less expensive to maintain than a bicameral one, as it requires fewer institutions, staff and legislative procedures.

Arguments against Federalism with a unicameral parliament

1. Entrenching Dynasties: Critics fear that federalism could empower local elites and political dynasties, strengthening their hold over regional governments and potentially increasing corruption at the local level.

2. Lack of Checks and Balances: A unicameral system removes the “second look” (the Senate) that acts as a check against hasty and impulsive legislation, potentially allowing for the passage of poorly considered laws.

Contextual factors:

1. Unitary vs Federal: Studies suggest that federalism does not guarantee better decentralization; it can be achieved within the current unitary system, as shown by some ASEAN countries.

2. Preconditions for Success: Experts emphasize that for federalism to work, reforms in the party system, a reduction of political dynasties and a strong fiscal equalization formula are necessary preconditions.

3. Alternative View: Some believe the issue is not structure, but rather the need to reform the existing political culture and, as one perspective suggests, the focus on preparing for future elections.

Ultimately, while federalism with a unicameral parliament offers potential for faster, more localized governance, it carries significant risks of exacerbating local corruption and weakening national unity if not implemented with robust safeguards.

Email: arturobesana2@gmail.com