Hang Your Trash At Home; Off-Limits Here!
Warning: Don't hang
your garbage in public.
If I understand Mr Romero perfectly, he considers Federalism
some kind of trash. I don't.
Frank A Hilario is for Federalism!
I have my own Ifs and Buts, but I'm all for it.
I have my own Ifs and Buts, but I'm all for it.
Now, not to be habitually lazy, at once I begin with Mr
Romero's conclusion:
A House of Representatives
that presumes to propose charter change in fast-track mode but does not take
the time, energy and motivation to do a deep, multifaceted examination of the
federalist alternative is, I would think, an indolent legislature.
I myself fast-track my analysis of Mr Romero's column of
less than 640 words – and find that he himself has fast-tracked his analysis of
what the House has been doing!
I quote Apostle Matthew, "Why do you notice the
splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own
eye?" (Matthew 7:3, New American
Bible Revised Edition).
Now, let me reflect on Mr Romero's own reflection. I find
that his major lack is that he does not tackle the question of Vision, first of
all. What is his Vision of Federalism?
He does not mention it – so how can he evaluate all efforts at federalism if he
does not know where he is coming from!?
Appropriately, I quote Proverbs 29:18 – "Where there is
no vision, the people perish" – King
James Version.
Without that Vision of what a Federal Philippines should be,
Mr Romero cannot come up with the Mission; without the Mission, Mr Romero
cannot come up with the Strategy. His is a fragmentary view, part by part, but
not based on a whole. The parts do not belong to a whole. Without a Vision, the
federal people will meet accidents along the way because they will be led by the
blind!
To summarize Mr Romero's fragmentary parts he has hung in
public:
(1)
He does not say anything about the proper Rationale
for proposed federal states.
(2)
He merely says that estimating total cost of federal
states is "insufficient."
(3)
He proposes "inclusive security, inclusive
development, inclusive governance" of each state for the next 30 years,
without explaining.
(4)
He says "only Metro Manila and Bangsamoro (are)
truly compelling reasons to federalize" – because each is "divided against
itself." Inadequate analysis of why we should federalize.
(5)
Federal-state relationships – He says, "The
federalism contract must, in reality, be suited for governing a number of
different dyadic federal-state relationships." Of course! Who said it wasn't
so?
(6)
Draft state charters for pilot set of states –
Now Mr Romero wants to pilot federalism! No reason.
(7)
Federal-state relationship & policy areas – He
wants "to examine how the federal-state relationship will play out in
specific policy areas." Specifying without generalizing first.
All in all insufficient intellectualization. It's "Thinking whole is too much, just parts."
Isn't that Federalism by an Indolent Intellectual?517
Comments
Post a Comment