I’m Miguel Centellas, a political science professor at Mount St. Mary’s University. Because of academic interests, I post frequently on Bolivian politics. I also occasionally discuss interesting books, pop culture, and daily life in Baltimore.
Following the last two weeks’ events, Evo proposes a recall referendum for himself & the country’s nine prefects. In the announcement, he asked voters to decide whether they are “in favor of change” or “continuing the neoliberal model.” No date is scheduled yet. But this is an interesting turn of events.
But there is a recall law already on the table (submitted on January 19, 2007). It stipulates that presidents, prefects, or mayors elected by an absolute majority (50%+1) can be recalled only if they are opposed by one additional percentage point in the recall referendum. This means that a vote to recall Evo must win 54.7% of the national vote. But for those who won w/ simply pluralities, a simple majority will do to remove them from office. No prefect won election w/ an absolute majority.
Ironically, few (if any) prefects have lost significant support over the past months. The one key exception is the David Sánchez (MAS), the Chuquisaca prefect. But if he’s voted out of office, a new election would likely appoint an opposition figure. This would leave MAS w/ only two prefectures: Oruro & Potosí. It’s possible, of course, that MAS could wrest the La Paz prefecture away from Pepelucho (José Luis Paredes, PODEMOS).
The greatest danger of this kind of plebiscitary democracy, of course, is that it leaves little incentive for compromise or dialogue. If the government & its opponents go into campaign mode on a single, polarizing question, political divisions are only going to worsen. And what if the vote to reject Evo is close nationally but lopsided regionally? Imagine if Evo is approved by 52% (his current standing in the polls) but rejected by two thirds (or more) of media luna voters. What then?
Those are good questions that you pose. I have the impression that Morales is gradually painting himself into a corner. He seems to be going through (and running out of) options intended to keep the CA on track and himself in power, incidentally.
The trouble is, most folks have pretty good common sense, and they don't react well to things like the hideout at the miitary academy in Sucre/do-it-yourself Constitution approval, etc.
Running a popularity poll between himself and the Prefects is high-stakes poker, too, as you point out. More than one person and more than one blog have pleaded with Morales to act like the President of the entire country and extend the olive branch to the eastern part of Bolivia, but that hasn't happened, sadly.
Morales' failure to lead doesn't absolve the media luna folks of their responsibility in this mess, of course, but they'd have little grounds for justifying their behavior if Morales were to act more Presidential, as in President of all of Bolivia, not the west, not El Alto, not indigenous groups, etc....
Ivan Canelas of Morales' Movement to Socialism party said the government would barrel ahead and finish the constitution even if the opposition didn't participate.
"They've been doing nothing but boycotting and blackmailing us," Canelas said. "Change is happening in Bolivia , like it or not."
Yeah! Don't let those nasty citizens get in the way!
Posted by
roberto white
December 6, 2007 9:21 PM
Miguel,
Jim Schulz, over at his blog, makes the intersting point that rural vs. urban demographic trends make Bolivia an overwhelmingly rural country which favors Morales, and that families with eight to ten kids in them out in the campo will continue to support Morales for years to come.
What's your take on that statement? Reading the Bolivia blogs, get the impression that Morales supporters are the El Alto folks and indigenous from the the west end of the country; not campo vs. urban. There'll always be exceptions to that of course, but so what's the most accurate desription of voter trends down there?
There is definitely some anecdotal evidence that there are still pockets of rural voters in places like Santa Cruz who support Morales and may come out in force.
Prior to his presidency, Morales' base was far more rural. Before 2005, there is good evidence that he didn't even have the approval of the majority in La Paz or El Alto. Those cities seem to have "adopted" Morales as they have seen him fighting for their interests.
There is strong evidence that rural voters are more likely to back Evo than urban voters. And, yes, pollsters ask questions in cities, not rural areas. Thus, they oversample urban respondents. That said, Bolivia is actually more "urban" today than ever before, w/ somewhere between 50-60% of the country's population living in major cities (nearly 50% of the population merely in the La Paz-El Alto, Cochabamba, and Santa Cruz metro areas).
But Evo's supporters are also most heavily concentrated in El Alto, the La Paz-Oruro altiplano, and the Chapare coca-growing valleys. Beyond that, it starts getting less predictable.
