The Dark Reality Behind True Federalism

By Ismaheel Taofeeq Adisa

When you hear true federalism, you think of a utopian world where all voices are heard and decisions are made in a fair and equitable manner. But what if this Utopia isn’t all it’s cracked up to be? What if there’s a much darker side to true federalism that’s not being talked about? That’s exactly the topic of today’s article.
We’ll be discussing the real issue behind true federalism – the struggles between regional and national governments, as well as what happens when economic disparities exist among different regions. We put our magnifying glass on the details of true federalism and expose its not-so-happy reality. Let’s dive in!

Defining True Federalism

True federalism is a system of government where power is divided between the federal and state governments. This allows each individual state to retain its autonomy and make decisions on important issues such as taxation, education, and healthcare. On the surface, this appears to be a great idea, but when you look beneath the surface, it becomes clear that there are some troubling realities.
True federalism can lead to a disjointed system of policy making across states that can create discrepancies in civil rights protections and economic opportunities. For example, one state might have progressive laws related to reproductive rights while another might have very restrictive laws. Additionally, true federalism can lead to unequal access to resources such as quality health care due to unequal tax burden or funding for education. This means certain populations are at a disadvantage in terms of getting quality healthcare or education when compared to others.
In short, true federalism may seem like an attractive prospect on the surface - but its consequences can be far more complex and far-reaching than we often realize.

Pros and Cons of True Federalism

True federalism is widely considered to be the ideal model for a country, as it essentially allows autonomous states to govern themselves with much less interference from the central government. However, like most things in life, there are advantages and disadvantages to implementing such a system.
On the one hand, true federalism promotes local decision-making, giving citizens more of a say in how their own states are governed and allowing them to shape their states’ development paths accordingly. It also allows for greater economic and social stability, as different states can experiment with different policies and approaches independent of one another.
But on the other hand, true federalism can also be seen as disruptive—especially when there are vast differences between neighboring states. This can lead to tension amongst the respective state governments and could cause a deterioration of human rights standards if certain states try to escape federal regulations that protect citizen rights.
Ultimately, its pros and cons must be weighed carefully before deciding whether or not true federalism is the right fit for your country or region.

Regional Power Dynamics in a Federal System

True federalism puts the power in the hands of regional governments, but that's not always a good thing. Why? Because regional power dynamics can be problematic due to differences in wealth and population sizes.
The fact is, a wealthy region might have an undue advantage over smaller or less-wealthy regions by having more resources at their disposal. This could lead to an uneven distribution of political power across the nation, ultimately creating an unbalanced playing field where some regions are favored over others.
Another issue with regional power in a federal system is that larger regions might be able to dictate policy at the expense of smaller ones. This could give them too much control over the rest of the nation and create an imbalance between states that could eventually lead to major disagreements and even conflict.
Finally, it’s important to note that regional power dynamics can create a rift between states as they compete for resources or try to exert influence on other states. This kind of competition can result in increased tensions and mistrust, making it difficult for states to work together towards goals beneficial for everyone.
To ensure true federalism works effectively, it’s essential that governments take steps to regulate power dynamics among regions and ensure all states are treated fairly and equally.

Devolution of Power to the States

True federalism in the United States has a dark side: devolution of power to the states. Devolution means that power is transferred from the federal government to state governments, which means that state governments are responsible for major decisions and policy-making.
That kind of decision-making power can lead to some ugly outcomes. For one, power can be abused by state governments, resulting in policies that unfairly favor certain groups over others or lead to unequal distribution of resources.
Worse yet, granted power to states can lead to what is known as a "race to the bottom" in policy-making. This means that states seek to make their policies as lenient as possible so that businesses and people will flock there — leading to an overall decrease in quality across states.
For example, some states have relaxed labor laws and lowered taxes in order to compete with other states for business investment. This creates an uneven playing field where workers can end up being exploited or not paid fair wages.
It's important to remember that while true federalism may give more power and autonomy to state governments, it also presents serious risks if those powers are abused or ill-used.

Unequal Distribution of Resources in a Federal System

True federalism has an ugly side you should know about—unequal distribution of resources between states. Oftentimes, the richer states have more resources and access to power, leaving the poorer ones at a disadvantage.
So what does this mean for you in practice?

Power Dynamics

Those with higher incomes are usually those with the most political sway. This means that the will of richer states can often outweigh those of poorer ones, pushing their agendas forward — potentially to the detriment of people at a lower economic level.

Lack of Resources

The lack of resources in poorer states also means that they may suffer in terms of quality public services and infrastructure, such as healthcare facilities and education systems. This is not only unfair, but can also prevent economic growth in these areas.
A true federal system doesn't always guarantee equal resources for all—in fact, it can often result in an unfair concentration of power and money to the richest states, while leaving those less privileged in a weaker position.

Increasing Risks of Civil Unrest in a Federal System

True federalism is not without its downsides. One such risk is that of increased civil unrest and disorder when some states feel slighted or aggrieved. This can happen when certain states, who are in the minority, are not given enough power or when the needs of these states are ignored. In a system predicated on a strong central government, minority groups must necessarily be more vocal in order to be heard and to get their demands addressed.
People living in states that do not receive sufficient resources or representation can start feeling like their voices will not be heard and this can lead to unrest and violence. This kind of civil unrest is often caused by economic volatility, unequal distribution of wealth and power, and other associated factors.
When these kinds of feelings of resentment accumulates over time within a state, it can easily turn into mass protests which further threaten national security by destabilizing the country. The risk of these kinds of activities increase significantly as certain states come to feel increasingly as if their interests are being ignored by a federal system that does not listen to them properly or allocate resources fairly.

Conclusion

To conclude, true federalism has its benefits, but it also comes with a plethora of drawbacks when it comes to the national and regional interests. It can be used as a tool to centralize power, enrich the few, weaken the many, and even maintain social and economic inequality. Without a unified and common sense of national interest, true federalism can only create further divisions, instability, and chaos.
True federalism should be embraced when it is used to decentralize power, encourage economic growth, empower the people, and foster a sense of national solidarity. It is not the solution to the nation's problems, but it can be an effective tool when used correctly.

Owo

Let me drop this here.

True federalism can lead to a disjointed system of policy making across states that can create discrepancies in civil rights protections and economic opportunities. For example, one state might have progressive laws related to reproductive rights while another might have very restrictive laws. Additionally, true federalism can lead to unequal access to resources such as quality health care due to unequal tax burden or funding for education. This means certain populations are at a disadvantage in terms of getting quality healthcare or education when compared to others.

Everything mentioned here is a feature not a bug. People are allowed to move between states it doesn't matter. The politics of state will simply reflect the cultural and political values of the people of that State. Equality isn't a virtue in a vacuum. Resources being land, labor, and capital aren't equal to begin to begin with. Also people don't demand same amount of government programs. They're always going to be hierarchy in terms to access to quality healthcare and education.

States have to compete for business and people. These are incentives to be sensible about policies in theory. Businesses are first to leave when it's financially convenient. If all else fails sections of states can Succeed and join another state.

But is it Ok for Zamfara gold to be taken charge of by the Zamfara state government and its locals, and some Northern state destroy alcoholic products produced from the south while tax from the sale of the same alcoholic products, and proceeds of petroleum resources from the south are shared equally? Is it Ok that some natural resources lay idle in states which can be translated to income generation medium for these states?

There are some states in Nigeria that you will never hear their name in the newspaper for a whole year. Where their governor are not working on developmental projects to attract investors but wait to be spoon-fed from from tax generated from other states. The people from this state are impoverished and keep leaving their states in mass to become byke men and petty traders in other states.

The advantages of true federalism far more outweigh its disadvantages; especially for the dwellers of these less privileged states.

Don't knock it till you tried it.