Benefits of Federalism:

As a Protection Against Tyranny One of the most important points of federalism in dividing the power
between the national government and state governments, and spreading the national governments power
among three branches that serve as a check and balance on each other, is that it serves as a deterrent to
tyranny and runaway power. The protections we have in our system against a tyrannical, runaway
government are one of the most important points to why the system was designed the way it was.
Diffusing Power The form of federalism that we have in our country, where power is shared with state
governments, and where the federal government is separated into three branches, serves as a means to
make sure that all power is not centralized into a single person or group of people, since excessive power
among a single group tends to be corrupting.
Increasing Citizen Participation By not centralizing all power into the hands of a national government, but
sharing that power with state governments, which are closer to the level of the common citizen, our founders
actually increased a citizens ability to effect their government, government policy, and lawmaking.
More Efficient When some of the power of the government is dispersed among the states, giving states
the right to solve some of their own problems, you allow for more efficiency within the system. To try to have
a national solution to all problems, which could be refered to as a cookie-cutter method of law and policy
making, you end up with solutions that are more effective in some states, and less effective in others. To
allow states to create solutions to their own problems, using policies and laws that work best in their state,
means that each state can come up with its own solution, making government more efficient.
Conflict Management By allowing different communities and states to create their own policies, they allow
for people with irreconcilable differences, or very strong disagreements, to live in separate areas, and create
their own solutions, or policies, that would be totally disagreeable to the other people in other states or
regions of the country.
Innovation in Law and Policy is Encouraged By allowing for many state governments, different sets of
policies can be tried, and the ones found most effective at solving its problems can then be implemented in
other states, or on the national level. Imagine Christopher Columbus trying to get funding to voyage across
the Atlantic Ocean if there was a unified Europe back then, with its head saying no! to him; instead, he had
several governments from which he could try to get his funding he got turned down by several
governments before Spain gave him the okay. The same principle applies today with our many states
something that is rejected in one state can most likely be tried in another state, with competition leading the
way, based on effectiveness of those laws.
State Governments Can be More Responsive to Citizen Needs The closer a government entity is to its
citizens, the more likely it is the respond to the needs of citizens. States are more likely to listen to citizen
needs, and respond to them, than the national government would be.

PROS
Locals decide for themselves. Regions have their own unique problems, situations, geographic,
cultural, social and economic contexts. Federalism allows them to create solutions to their own problems
instead of distant Metro Manila deciding for them.

The states can establish policies that may not be adopted nationwide. For example, liberal Metro Manila
can allow same-sex marriage which the state of Bangsamoro, predominantly Muslim, would not allow. In
the United States, some states like Colorado and Washington have legalized recreational marijuana even
if other states have not.

This makes sense in an archipelago of over 7,000 islands and 28 dominant ethnic groups. For decades,
the national government has been struggling to address the concerns of 79 (now 81) provinces despite
challenges posed by geography and cultural differences.

With national government, and thus power, centered in Metro Manila, it's no surprise that development in
the mega city has spiralled out of control while other parts of the country are neglected.
More power over funds, resources.Right now, local government units can only collect real estate
tax and business permit fees. In federalism, they can retain more of their income and are required to turn
over only a portion to the state government they fall under.

Thus, local governments and state governments can channel their own funds toward their own
development instead of the bulk of the money going to the national government. They can spend the
money on programs and policies they see fit without waiting for the national government's go signal.

Promotes specialization. The national and state governments can specialize in different policy
domains. With most administrative powers now with the regional governments, the national government
can focus on foreign policy, defense, and other nationwide concerns, like healthcare and taxation.

States have more autonomy to focus on economic development using their core competencies and
industries. The state of Central Luzon can focus on becoming an agricultural hub. The state of Mimaropa,
home to Palawan, can choose to use eco-tourism as its primary launch pad.

Possible solution to the Mindanao conflict. The creation of the state of Bangsamoro within a federalist
system may address concerns of separatists who crave more autonomy over the administration of Muslim Mindanao.

Decongestion of Metro Manila. Through fiscal autonomy for state governments, federalism will more evenly
distribute the country's wealth. In 2015, 35% of the national budget went to Metro Manila even if it represents only
14% of the Philippine population.

Lessens dependence on Metro Manila.When there is political upheaval in Metro Manila, other regions that
have nothing to do with the chain of events are left waiting for the resources that ony the national government can
release. With federalism, regions work independently of Metro Manila for most concerns.

Brings government closer to the people. If detractors say federalism will only make local political
dynasties more powerful, supporters give the argument that, in fact, it will make all local leaders, including
those part of political dynasties, more accountable to their constituents. State governments will no longer
have any excuse for delays in services or projects that, in the present situation, are often blamed on
choking bureaucracy in Manila.

Assuming more autonomy for regions leads to economic development, there will be more incentive for
Filipinos to live and work in regions outside Metro Manila. More investors may also decide to put up their
businesses there, creating more jobs and opportunities to attract more people away from the jam-packed
mega city.

Encourages competition. With states now more self-reliant and in control of their development, they will judge
themselves relative to how their fellow states are progressing. The competitive spirit will hopefully motivate state
leaders and citizens to level up in terms of quality of life, economic development, progressive policies, and
governance.