Advantages Of Federalism In The Philippines

“...We govern our children without their consent...Would not the people of the Philippines prefer the just, human, civilizing government of this Republic…” (Doc B, Albert J. Beveridge). I disagree with this black and white view of the world. The Filipinos are grown people capable of making the best decision for themselves. Children are not (due to their undeveloped frontal lobes). They do not need America to save them. They wanted freedom enough to attempt war with Spain, a global power, so they have earned that

Canadian Federalism emerged in 1867 and brought together disparate colonies under one centralized government. Initially, the colonies were opposed to the thought of federalism, as many believed they would lose their independence by giving up certain powers to a national government. The central government would control defense, foreign affairs, money, postage, and taxation; Furthermore, numerous colonists preferred dealing with London, as opposed to Canada East or Canada West. The colonies additionally did not feel a great attachment to the people of other colonies. French Canadians felt no desire to become a minority in a larger English-speaking majority country. Similarly, the maritime provinces had closer economic links to Britain and the Eastern United States than to the Canadas. The push towards federalism though took root after the threat of annexation by the United States, and the idea of Manifest Destiny; which led to the system of government that Canada utilizes today. Although, advocates of federalism argue that it promotes unity, and financial benefit, opponents believe the time-consuming process and special favoritism to Central Canada is a drawback to Federalism.

The Untied States of America is a country built on freedom, and the writers of the constitution made sure that this was guaranteed to all U.S citizens in our constitution. After the colonial Army won the Revolutionary war, a constitution called the Articles of Confederation was put into place, but it had many problems within it. Because of these problems a constitutional convention was called in 1787 to revise these articles, but instead an entirely new constitution was written. At the constitutional convention, a group called the anti-federalists opposed the constitution because they wanted to keep state sovereignty and limit the federal government. Another group called the federalists wanted to ratify the constitution because they believed that a stronger federal government was necessary for the new nation. Although some may say that the new constitution did not protect against tyranny, through a system of federalism, separation of powers and checks and balances the United States constitution prevented any form of tyranny.

Federalism is a fervently debated idea in which two parties, the Federalists, and the Anti-Federalists, argue whether or not the Constitution should be ratified. The main writers of the Federalists Papers include three Founding Fathers by the names of James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. The Federalists wrote of the need for a strong central government and a constitution, however, the Anti-Federalists sought for a guarantee of freedom with a Bill of Rights. The Constitution required a Bill of Rights in order to limit the large authoritative power of central government and to protect the voice of the common man from oppression. Federalist Paper Number 84, written, by Alexander Hamilton, focused on the concept of a Constitution and the containment of a Bill

Federalism is power divided between central and state government. The state governments can establish schools. The central government can declare war. The state government powers are local and the central government have nationwide powers (Federalism venn diagram). It provides double security by giving both the government and states the same/equal important power, Federalism guards against tyranny because it ensures that two levels share, one can’t accumulate.

Democracy in the United States: A comprehensive look at the Pros and Cons of a Federalist Society and Individual Freedoms.

In late eighteenth-century America, the ideal form of government was widely contested. When the American colonies were under British rule, they were subject to the almost-tyrannical British government, in which they were not fully represented. After the colonies achieved independence, two main political factions emerged: the Republicans and the Federalists. The Republicans, scarred by the overbearing British government, advocated for a weak federal government with individual state governments, which prevented the concentration of power in a single party and promoted a form of more direct representation. However, this system proved to be ineffective, for the federal government’s lack of power was dangerous and inefficient. The Federalists, on the other hand, supported a strong federal government. Cognizant of the negative implications of local state governments, the Federalists published a series of essays during 1787 and 1788 that supported the stronger national government that resulted from the Constitutional Convention. In “Federalist no. 51”, James Madison, a key component of the Federalist movement, described the role of government and its relationship with the people. He wrote,

Federalism is a mix of the central government and the states into one political system. The central government would have one role while the states have another. Additionally, federalism allows the central government and the states to share their powers. (Doc A) Federalism ensures the separation of powers and prevent tyranny. Even if one were have all the power of the branches of the federal government, federalism ensures that the central government and the states would still function independently. The central government would be the one that regulates trade while the states would be the one that establishes the schools. No matter what, the central government and the states help fulfill the needs that can benefit the nation in whole. Dividing powers and giving different responsibilities between the central government and the states is one way that the Constitution did to prevent

Late spring of 1898, The United States went to war with Spain in Cuba and the Philippines. We attacked the Spanish in the Philippines who had a large military presence there. The United States had an easy victory and suddenly became a major world power. The reasoning for this attack was because of the bad treatment of the Cubans by their Spanish masters.

Federalism is a system of government that divides power between a national government and a regional government with the use of a constitution. Throughout the United States history, federalism has played a significant role in the constitution and the system of government adopted by the United States of America. Federalism has also changed throughout the course of America's history to fit the constitution and the government.

Another is that Filipinos have a culture of apathy and tend to use religion incorrectly and passively. People depend on religion and settle for what’s okay. In addition, the initial reaction of Filipinos to change is resistance, and this is why the country does not necessarily progress, or at least, progress at a continuous rate. Then, countries like Spain and Portugal only rode the “economic tiger” after “they realized that the only way to survive was change” (3.Y). Plus, according to another critic, the Philippines already had the experience of being under the parliamentary system during the time of Marcos which only resulted in a People Power Revolution. So why should the country bother going back to that? (4.Y)

Looking back to the previous government systems in different periods in Philippine history, we can see that our present government system is somehow shaped and patterned from the previous systems that prevailed in our country. Pre – historically we have seen how they established their government and basically, we can say that it is far more primitive than the present system that we have. However, the basic principles like the consultation of the datus to the elders can somehow be seen in the present by the presence of political advisers where our president consults aside from the members of the senate and the congress. The barangay system

When talking about Philippine Administrative System, first thing that comes to mind is about the government and its political divisions in the country. It is about the nations’s political hierarchy such as the central government, provinces, municipalities and barangay. However, these divisions and subdivisions can be attributed to our past history. It is not a plant that simply blooms from nowhere. The Philippine Administrative System is dynamic, shaped and evolved through time. From Spanish colonial period to the present administration, the mode of bureacracy is adopted, patterned and improved depending on the needs and wants of the administration. Needs, in terms of the welfare of the society. Wants,

In modern times, the Philippines has been a central ally in the United States’ Asian and Pacific policies. The government structure is similar to that of the United States, including a legislative, judicial, executive branch that independent in their roles. Since becoming a nation independent from the United States, the Philippines has seen its share of success and failure. In the past three years the government has dealt with natural disasters, terrorism, and Chinese aggression. While the Philippine and United States governments have generally been cordial and cooperative, the Philippine president is currently weighing the decision to cut ties with the United States and align his country with China.

Political dynasty is a well known method of politicians in the Philippines wherein the members of the family is made also a member of the government in order for them to not lose power but to gain more power. This act is an unfair and unjust because the government is not a business that a family can run by themselves, but the government is for all and other people should be given chances wherein they can be the one that leads a community.