by Jeff Barnet, Managing Editor
Voters in Ciudad Juárez soundly rejected the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) in elections July 6, choosing three National Action Party (PAN) candidates to represent the city's three districts in a direct election for La Cámara de Diputados, or Chamber of Deputies, the Mexican federal legislature.
In addition, Juárez voters also supported PAN over PRI in the elections for proportional representation in the legislature (a total of 200 nationwide were elected July 6) and for proportional representation of Senators. In the direct election, PAN beat PRI one-on-one 53% to 47%, city-wide. Factoring in all eight parties that slated candidates, PAN took 43% of the total vote to PRI's 38%. The left-of-center Revolutionary Democratic Party (PRD) earned 11% of the vote city-wide, with five other parties sharing 8% of the total. The percentages were identical in the vote for proportional representation in the Chamber of Deputies. However, in the Senate vote, PAN defeated PRI by a more comfortable 43.6% to 37.8% margin.
Although PAN is strong in Chihuahua, with a PAN governor, Francisco Barrio, and a PAN mayor, Ramón Galindo, in Juárez, the three-district sweep was still something of a surprise. Pre-election columns in the Diario de Juárez predicted the loss of one PRI seat, perhaps two, but certainly not all three. José Márquez Puentes, Presidente del Comité Directivo Municipal del PAN, said he felt the vote was more pro-PAN than it was anti-PRI. "There were some anti-PRI voters, but most people voted for PAN either because they like and know PAN and our training, or they see that the PAN government works well, " he said.
An official in the Juárez PRI headquarters downplayed the significance of the sweep, saying only "people are responding to the economic crisis." However, ten days after the election, the leader of the Chihuahua PRI delegation to the Chamber of Deputies, Miguel Etzel Maldonado, promised that national and state PRI leaders would make an analysis of PRI's recent defeats in Juárez a "priority," stressing the importance of the governorship to PRI. Also, in an exchange reported in El Norte de Ciudad Juárez, Maldonado also challenged Chihuahua Governor Barrio to discuss redistricting the state; Barrio countered that PRI just wants to be assured of a majority of seats in the legislature even when it no longer receives the majority of votes.
Voter turnout in Juárez for the elections was at its lowest since before 1992. Only 47% of those registered voted in Ciudad Juárez on July 6, down from 54.9% in 1995 and highs of 70% in 1994 and 64% in 1992. Lower voter turnouts tend to favor PAN. However, Juárez PAN president Márquez stressed that Juárenses "have seen that PAN has done a better job of running the government here than PRI." Mayor Galindo said the vote was "clear communication" that the citizens of the city can see that "Juárez is advancing" under his PAN municipal government.
PAN won easily in two of Juárez's three districts, which are number 02, 03, and 04 as part of the state of Chihuahua's nine-district map. In District 2, which borders western El Paso and includes most of downtown Juárez east to Panamericana, PAN took 45% of the total vote, PRI 38%, and PRD 11%. In District 3, which includes all of Juarez east of Panamericana, PAN defeated PRI 45% to 37%, with the PRD again picking up 11%. However, in District 4, all of the area west of the airport with the exception of the downtown area, PAN barely managed a 41% to 40% victory, with a winning margin of less than 1,400 votes out of over 101,000 cast. In District 4, the Workers' Party (PT) and the Green Party (PVEM) made strong showings that siphoned off votes from both PAN and PRI. In fact, throughout the city, nearly one in five voters chose not to vote for either PAN or PRI. PRD leaders asked Juárez's elected delegation to solve the problems of high energy prices and violent crime, and to push for a higher minimum wage for Juárez workers.
According to Diario de Juárez reports, PAN spent $311.29 U.S. per vote in Juárez, compared to 9.68 pesos (well over a U.S. dollar) spent per vote by the PRD. Figures for PRI could not be obtained. However, a PRI spokesman did note that whatever PRI spent didn't matter, since the ruling party suffered a 12 percent drop in support from 1995 to 1997. PAN also experienced a drop in support between the two elections--a negligible 0.0009%. The PRD, however, enjoyed a 183% increase in Juárez votes since the last election. Both PAN and PRI leaders expressed concern about the rise of the PRD. "I would like to tell the PRD that we are not dead," said Sergio Vásquez Olivas, president of PRI in Juárez. "We are going to recover the governorship and the city."
ELECTION RESULTS IN JUAREZ
Direct Election for Chamber of Deputies
District 2
PAN...........45%....42,507 votes
PRI............38%....35,869
PRD...........11%....10,449
Others......... 6%.... 6,051
District 3
PAN...........45%....46,800
PRI............36%....37,937
PRD...........11%....11,567
Others......... 8%.....8,157
District 4
PAN...........41%....41,342
PRI............40%....39,961
PRD...........10%....10,473
Others......... 9%.... 9,392
Totals, Districts 2, 3, and 4
PAN...........43%.....130,649
PRI............38%.....113,767
PRD...........11%......32,489
Others......... 8%......23,600
PAN vs. PRI, total: 53% to 47%
Total Results, Districts 2, 3, and 4,
Election for Proportional Representation
PAN............43%.....131,120
PRI.............38%.....114,255
PRD............11%......32,615
Others......... 8%.......23,697
Total Results, Districts 2,3, and 4,
Election for Senate, Proportional Reprsesentation
PAN............43.6%....131,383
PRI.............37.8%....113,936
PRD............11%........32,616
Others..........8%.........23,569
PREVIOUS ELECTION TOTALS, CIUDAD JUAREZ,
PAN-PRI ONLY, 1992-1995
1992
PAN............57%.......143,274
PRI.............43%.......107,618
1994
PRI.............61%.......201,538
PAN............39%.......127,448
1995
PAN............50.3%....128,779
PRI.............49.7%....127,448
Sources: Diario de Juárez, El Norte de Ciudad Juárez, El Paso Times, Juárez PAN Headquarters
by Jeff Barnet, Managing Editor
Despite losing all three districts in Ciudad Juárez, the centrist, ruling Institutional Revoluntionary Party (PRI) managed to win five of the remaining six Chamber of Deputies district seats in the state of Chihuahua, thus taking a slim 5-4 majority over the National Action Party (PAN) in the state's delegation to the Mexican federal legislature.
The results were so close in District 5 (Delicias) and District 8 (Chihuahua City) that official winners were not named until three days after the elections. At first, trends showed PAN taking both districts, which would have given the conservative party six out of nine legislature seats. However, the PRIistas rallied in both races, taking District 5 by 43.6% (46,128 votes) to 41.8% (43,975), and District 8 by 40.9% (44,827) to 40.5% (44,358) over their PAN rivals.
Overall, PAN won District 1 in Nueva Casas Grandes and Districts 2, 3, and 4 in Ciudad Juárez, while PRI captured the rest of the state. PRI won easily in District 6 (victory margin of nearly 6,000 votes), District 7 (over 10,000 votes), and District 9 (over 8,000 votes). In the direct election of deputies to the legislature, PRI took 42.1% of the vote state-wide (374,785 votes) to PAN's 41.2% (366,649). The left-of-center PRD earned 10.3% of the Chihuahua total and five other parties claimed 6.3%.
Voting patterns in the statewide results for proportional representation in the legislature were identical in percentage to the direct election. Interestingly, however, there was a small twist in the election for proportional representation in the Senate: PAN led the state with 41.5% of the vote to PRI's 41.4%. The PRD and the Green Party (PVEM) picked up several thousand votes between them to deny PRI the advantage. In fact, the Green Party took 26,751 votes to place fourth overall in party voting. According to Jose Garcia, professor of government at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, voting patterns tend to be the same for direct election and proportional election of legislature deputies, since voters are supporting named candidates in the direct election, and tend to support the same party of their chosen candidate in the proportional. However, the Senate ballot contains only the names of the parties, and, according to Garcia, "people may feel freer to support their favorite party."
Therefore, in the direct election results, PRI earned 8,136 more votes than PAN, whereas in the Senate election, PAN beat PRI by 791 votes. However, PRI's hold on the statewide electorate is very tenuous--less than one percent of the total vote separated PRI from PAN. In both the direct and proportional Deputy legislature seat elections, PRI won 42.1% of the vote to PAN's 41.2%. Considering that PAN still holds the governor's office and mayor's offices in ten of the most populous Chihuahua cities, the state is still decidedly PAN territory as of now.
PAN leaders, especially Governor Barrio, expressed their pleasure over the national and state results, despite the narrow defeats in Districts 5 and 8. Barrio said "there has never been a better moment for PAN candidates," and spoke optimistically of PAN's chances to hold the governorship in 1998. Several newspaper articles floated the name of Juárez mayor Ramón Galindo as a possible gubernatorial candidate in 1998.
ELECTION RESULTS, STATE-WIDE CHIHUAHUA, 1997
Direct Election of Deputies, Legislature
PRI............42.1%..........374,785 votes
PAN...........41.2%..........366,649
PRD...........10.3%............91,763
Others..........6.3%............56,413
Proportional Representation, Legislature
PRI.............42.1%.........376,290
PAN............41.2%.........368,286
PRD............10.2%...........92,135
Others...........6.3%...........56,661
Proportional Representation, Senate
PAN.............41.5%.........370,608
PRI..............41.4%.........369,817
PRD.............10.5%..........93,884
Others............6.6%..........58,673
ELECTION RESULTS, CHIHUAHUA, 1992-1995, PAN-PRI ONLY
1992
PAN.............52.4%.........382,640
PRI..............47.6%.........348,574
1994
PRI..............68.1%.........657,740
PAN.............31.9%.........307,903
1995
PRI..............54.2%.........428,591
PAN.............45.7%.........361,359
Sources: Diario de Juárez, El Norte de Ciudad Juárez
by Jeff Barnet, Managing Editor
For the first time since 1929, the Mexican federal government will no longer be the monopoly of one party. In elections held Sunday, July 6, the Mexican people gave the ruling Institutional Revoluntionary Party (PRI) only 38.86% of the vote, thus assuring that not one of the three main parties now vying for power in the federal legislature (La Cámara de Diputados, or Chamber of Deputies) will have a majority for the next three years. The opposition parties--the conservative National Action Party (PAN) and the left-of-center Revolutionary Democratic Party (PRD)--won 26.89% and 25.59% of the national vote, respectively. PRI will still have the most seats in the legislature with 239, but PRD (125) and PAN (122) combine for an even larger total. President Ernesto Zedillo will be the first PRI president who will have to work with opposition parties in order to see his directives passed into law. For nearly 70 years, the PRI-dominated legislature has served mostly as a rubber stamp for the decisions of Mexico's very powerful executive office.
The new alignment in the Chamber of Deputies means the legislators will have actual power for the first time. "All of a sudden these diputados become real players," said Ray Sadler, Mexico expert and New Mexico State University professor. "That's going to change everything." The Green Party (PVEM) and the Workers' Party (PT) also earned 8 and 6 seats, respectively. Their combined 14 votes are enough to either give--or deny--PRI a legislative majority.
Both opposition parties scored surprises in Sunday's elections. Only weeks before the elections, polls showed the PRI holding steady at about 50% of the vote. PAN pulled nearly even with PRI in polls published three days before the election, both showing approximately 30% support, with the PRD trailing far behind at 18%. PAN held that level of support nationwide, taking governorships in the states of Nuevo Leon (54%) and Queretaro (44%). Though stronger in the north, PAN's overall performance in the elections indicated it may be formidable enough to launch a bid for the presidency in the 2000 election. A few days after the election, PAN Governor of Guanajuato Vicente Fox announced he was investigating the possibility of a presidential run.
The PRD's 26% nationwide vote was a considerable surprise, and reflected a dramatic last-minute surge in Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas' successful bid for mayor of Mexico City. Cárdenas drew huge crowds to the Zocalo, Mexico City's political main square. Cárdenas, PRD party leader and presidential candidate in 1988 and 1994, won city mayor by a 2-to-1 margin over the PRI candidate, 47.11% to 25.08%. It was the first time the mayorship of Mexico City was decided by election; previously, the position had been appointed by the PRI. Cárdenas is now considered the second-most powerful politician in Mexico, and situated for another presidential run in 2000. The prospect of a Cárdenas presidency apparently has worried some bankers and investors, who fear the leftist might slow international investment. However, Jim Peach, an economics scholar at New Mexico State University, believes "the PRI has had nearly 70 years to fix the problems and investors have remained. So I find it difficult to believe that Cárdenas will send investors packing."
While some reports stated that the election results marked a decisive end to one-party rule in Mexico, President Zedillo felt the election was very positive for PRI. Zedillo said that the results "were very good," considering the "economic, social, and political contexts." Most importantly, he felt that "PRI has demonstrated in open and fair competition that it is still the majority, and nobody can say we are the only party, or the state party, or an appendage of the government." Many leaders and observers, both inside and outside the PRI, and including U.S. President Bill Clinton, praised the fairness and legitimacy of the elections. The only reported disruptions occurred in the southern state of Chiapas, where Zapatista rebels allegedly destroyed ballot boxes, polling places, and prevented people from travelling to vote. According to wire service reports, the Zapatistas are angry with Zedillo for reneging on peace accords reached last December which would have given Chiapas Indians some rights of self-determination.
In addition to its 239 seats in the federal legislature, PRI held onto 4 of 6 contested governorships--overall, the centrist PRI won 3.15 million more votes than PAN and led the conservative party by a comfortable 9 percent nationwide. The PRD trailed PAN by only 350,000 votes, but its concentrated power in Mexico City and the south resulted in more legislature seats. PRI also still controls the majority of the country's municipalities, but after the elections of July 6, its share fell to less than half. PRI mayors now govern 46.19% of the country's population, compared to PAN's 34.86% and PRD's 18.95%.
Some analysts predicted a weakening of the peso if the PRI did not maintain control of the legislature; however, the peso closed at 7.918 to the U.S. dollar on the Monday following the election, up nearly 3 centavos from Friday, and the Mexican stock market, La Bolsa, continued its recent upward trend, closing with a 2.1 percent gain Monday.
In opinion surveys and interviews, voters said they abandoned PRI because they were fed up with the country's debilitated economy and the ruling party's history of corruption. Still, PRI remains the dominant political force, with the only true nationwide machine. PAN's image is that of a urban, pro-business, regional party of the north, whereas PRD is strong with the poor and in the south-central regions of the state. For example, PAN received only 5 percent of the vote in southern Tabasco while PRD earned only 3 percent in the northern industrial state of Nuevo Leon.
Though undoubtedly Mexico made tremendous advances toward historic change in this one election, Robert Pastor, director of the Latin American program at the Carter Center in Atlanta, urged caution: "To jump to the conclusion that Mexico has consolidated democracy in which all parties are fully confident in the system is a bit of a leap." However, new election laws, specifically the law turning the counting of votes over to an independent agency, the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), and another law distributing campaign money more fairly (though PRI still has the lion's share), both of which were PRI reforms, are permanent changes that should help opposition parties. "The restoration of the old system is impossible, there's no way back," said historian Enrique Krauze. "And now that people know the PRI can lose, it will lose and lose and lose."
Sources: Diario de Juárez, El Norte de Ciudad Juárez, El Paso Times
by Samuel Schmidt, University of Texas-El Paso, and Jose Z. Garcia, New Mexico State University
Congressman Francisco Peralta, from the state of Tabasco, published a book last year describing what he called "the human side" of the 56th Mexican Congress, explaining that "since they don't legislate they have to spend their time doing something else." This assessment, essentially correct in the past, may not be true now that the ruling party for the first time has lost its majority in the House of Representatives. Final tallies for the July 6 elections show that the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) won only 239 out of the 500 seats in the lower chamber, 12 votes short of a winning majority. The Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD), a center-left party, won 125 seats, the center-right National Action Party (PAN) won 122 seats, the Green Party (PVEM) won 8 seats, and the formerly Maoist Workers' Party (PT) won 6 seats. In the Senate, where only 32 of 128 seats were contested in proportionally determined elections, the PRI held onto its majority, but by narrower margins.
With no party holding a majority, each piece of legislation passed will require support from at least two parties. The simple mathematic fact assures that the legislature will no longer function as a rubber stamp for the president as in the past when only a few token seats were held by opposition parties. Congress cannot only block and amend executive-branch initiatives but, since in Mexico the president has no veto, it may in theory singlehandedly enact its own government program. With no experience as a truly autonomous institution, however, a period of trial and error is likely as leaders learn to harness their newfound power.
Major issues:
* Coalitions: Some analysts predict a coalition will form between the PRI, the PVEM, and PT, producing a winning majority of 253 out of 500 votes. But the Green and Workers' parties, more dogmatic than other opposition parties, may insist on more concessions than the PRI is willing to give. A PRI-PRD coalition, more ideologically plausible, is unlikely since the PRD opposes the PRI's neoliberal economic policies, which are much closer to those of the PAN. Moreover, the strongest potential candidate to run against the PRI for president in 2000 is PRD leader--and now mayor of Mexico City--Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas. Coalition with the PRI might well tarnish his image.
But a PRI-PAN coalition is also problematic since it would force the PRI to move even more to the right, leaving it vulnerable to a strong attack from the left, the greatest danger to the PRI since 1988, when a faction within the PRI split off to form the PRD. Ever since, the PRI has struggled to mollify the left with symbolic concessions. It rewarded Donaldo Colossio with the presidential candidacy of the PRI, for example, after he had proven he was popular with the left under President Salinas--only to see him felled by an assassin's bullet in 1994.
While it is still too early to predict what may happen in the way of legislative coalitions, it is possible that for a while there will be no initial formal controlling coalition of parties. Temporary coalitions may be formed on an issue-by-issue basis. Already, however, the president of the PRI's national committee has declared that from now on everything, including the agenda, calendar, schedule, chairmanship of committees, etc., will be negotiated--something quite new in the history of the recent Mexican legislature.
* Chiapas: The PRD hopes sensitive negotiations over Chiapas will be moved over to the legislature. While a full transfer is improbable, it is likely Congress will play a larger role in fact-finding, hearings and initiatives.
* Revenue sharing: PAN advocates increasing federal transfers to the states (now at 20 percent of the national budget) by 5 percent per year. This is a popular proposal and should PAN find enough votes for approval, it might well produce the first major legislative defeat for the PRI.
* Budget: Housekeeping issues are likely to revolve around the extent to which Congress will increase the staff for legislative committees and individual legislators. Distributive issues, such as the relative proportion of the budget assigned to the various government agencies, are likely to be extremely contentious between the PAN and the PRI, both seeking moderate voters. Redistributive issues relating to the recent concentration of wealth to the rich will also surface in hearings about the future of the welfare budget, and will be articulated forcefully by the PRD.
*Three visions: Mexico has now completed its transformation from a one-party dominant political system into a three-party system, and it took less than a decade to consolidate this change. Two overall conclusions follow: first, there has been historic alteration in the distribution of power within the legislature and between the legislature and the executive branch, increasing the stature of the congress as an institution. Second, and perhaps even more important, the fundamental discourse of politics has changed. Three alternative visions, not just one, will be offered to the public. Information must be shared with opponents who hope to convince the public of their visions. Key decisions can no longer be made in secret by a small clique in the executive branch.
These changes "democratize" Mexico more profoundly than the mechanical changes wrought recently to force the electoral machinery to count the votes more accurately, and which made this outcome possible. Finally, while some are pessimistic about the possibility of legislative "gridlock" in Mexico, is this not preferable to authoritarian edict?