In ideal system, probably not. Unitary government is a valid means of doing government and many times separation of powers can make government inefficient as it limits what Congress can and cannot do. This can make passing policy difficult, and also outsourcing enforcement of policy to the states and regions as must often be done can also be quite ineffective. On the other hand, there would be issues with administering a large unitary state, albeit these issues are less serious now in the age of mass communication and transportation, however administering far flung regions can still be tricky. On the other hand, I highly doubt the GM would simulate this, which takes away the main disadvantage of a unitary system. Anyways as a longtime advocate of big government, I believe a unitary system is worth a try.
The dark side of centralism is strong with this one.
We as a matter of design do not grant the Federal Gov't absolute power with which it then disperses out of some sense of benevolence. We grant the Federal Government a set of limit powers and those not placed in such care, are not its to begin with and it is so for a reason.
Concentrations of power yield tyranny.
It is worth noting that you could very easily design a government that indeed gives the Federal government absolute power which it then disperses out of some sense of benevolence
(Source: That is
exactly how Spain's irl division of power works; down to having a sort of "Reversed 10th Amendment"!)
And of course there are even more centralized systems of government where the feds just hog up all the power and don't give a single ounce like France or really most European nations.
I would radically oppose reforms in such a direction since they would be un-American (harder to relate for the average Atlasian) and also I am a federalist irl so it just follows easily into the game. But it could be theoretically done.
Poll
