More photos at my Flickr page

About

  • 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.
  • Send questions & comments by email.

The Coffee Table

The Reference Desk

Noticias de Bolivia

  • A selected list of Bolivian news media:
  • Blogroll

One month to Bolivia recall election

July 7, 2008
Tags:

The recall referendum campaign has started in earnest in Bolivia. On August 10, Bolivian voters in 8 of 9 departments (not Chuquisaca, which only recently elected a prefect) will vote on whether their prefects should keep their posts. They’ll also vote (in all departments) on whether the president, Evo Morales, should keep his.

So far, only the prefect of Cochabamba (Manfred Reyes Villa) is opposed to the recall referendum. All of the other prefects have agreed. The opposition prefects at first were all opposed (Evo’s party controls only two prefectures: Oruro & Potosí) because of the referendum formula:

To remove Evo, the “No” vote must surpass 53.740% of the vote and 1,544,374 total votes. That was Evo’s margin of victory in December 2005.

To remove the prefects, the “No” vote only must surpass the number of vote tallies won in December 2005, which were much lower than those won by Evo. How low are those numbers? Pretty low. In Santa Cruz: 47.877%. In La Paz: 37.988%. In Tarija: 45.646%. In Cochabamba: 47.641%. In Beni: 44.637%. In Pando: 48.032%. The government’s prefects in Oruro & Potosí need 40.954% and 40.690%, respectively.1

Those numbers are clearly stacked in Evo’s favor. Even if a majority of voters want to remove Evo from his seat, they might not be able to. In contrast, even if a majority of voters want to keep their prefects, they might not be able to. In La Paz, nearly two thirds of voters must want to keep their prefect for him to keep his post.

There are, of course, various reasons why supermajorities should be justified for various kinds of votes. But the opposition is rightly nervous about its chances in these contexts. Of course, the Media Luna prefects (Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando, Tarija) may be counting on their recent autonomy referendum wins to propel them over the necessary mark. All four of those prefects currently have high approval ratings (higher than Evo). The question, of course, is whether approval ratings will translate into votes to keep them in office.

Evo, on the other hand, is relatively safe. Even if he’s lost supporters since December 2005 (which all polling data suggests he has), he can squeak by if he can manage at least 46.26% of the vote or if voter turnout is down or if there’s a high incidence of blank & null votes (reducing the number of “valid” votes). That’s a pretty comfortable position.

I’m surprised that the opposition prefects agreed, a few days ago, to go forward w/ the recall. They were, of course, in a corner. If they didn’t’ go forward w/ the recall, they looked scared, weak, and undemocratic. But they’re agreeing to go forward in a contest that is clearly stacked against them. And they are still negotiating to change the rules so that at least prefects are safe w/ 50%+1 results.

Either way, this is going to be an interesting election, since so much depends on turnout. On the one hand, the prefects will seek to turn out as many voters as possible—particularly their core supporters—to ensure that they can make their high cutoff targets. Evo, on the other hand, will benefit from low voter turnout; if turnout is low enough, he’s safe regardless of the result (hypothetically, if 100% of voters reject Evo, but only 1,544,373 voters vote to remove him, he’s safe). As the election nears, it will be interesting to see whether Evo’s supporters work to drive down voter turnout (as they did during the four recall referendums). The downside, of course, is that if voter turnout is too low, the referendum loses its legitimacy. It’s going to be an interesting month.

----
1 For details of the recall referendum law, see CNE’s “Referéndum Revocatorio 2008”.

Post this to: Digg del.icio.us Facebook Newsvine reddit Technorati Google


Comments

it will be interesting to see whether Evo’s supporters work to drive down voter turnout (as they did during the four recall referendums)

I don't think that's going to happen. They worked against voter turn-out in the autonomy votes (did you mean autonomy or recall?) because they were not legally legitimate and were, in their eyes, also a vote against Morales' power. This vote is supported by Morales, so there's no reason to believe such an orchestrated campaign based on a sophisticated and hypothetical electoral situation is going to develop.

Posted by Steve July 7, 2008 10:30 AM

    Steve: I hope you're right. So far, it seems like you are, of course. MAS is actively campaigning for the recall referendum. But I can imagine that if polling data were to turn against Morales (it's not quite there yet, reading the data optimistically), things might change. It's also troubling that MAS supporters already have a precedent of trying to bring voter turnout down. Might they try to disrupt voting in anti-Evo bastions? That's unclear (though I agree that so far it seems doubtful to happen on a wide scale).

    Posted by mcentellas July 7, 2008 12:57 PM

      As I read it, the total numbers requirement is valid for the prefects as well; that is, in order to be voted out they would have to have the same percentage vote against them as voted for them (ex. 37.988% NO votes in La Paz) and have the total votes meet or exceed the amount realized in the departmental election (361,055 total votes in La Paz). In that case, high voter turnout favors Morales since a significantly higher percentage would have to vote NO for him to lose his mandate - unlikely. Low voter turnout on the other hand would favor the prefects who could be voted out by a low percentage, but only if the total number of votes exceed XXX,XXX votes. They are more likely to lose the percentage game but could survive anyway.

      I'm also surpirsed that they agreed. they should have been pushing full force for a 50%+1 decision.

      Question: was the passing of the law defining the rules one of the instances that the opposition lawmakers were physically prevented from entering the chambers to vote?

      Posted by Norman July 7, 2008 3:07 PM

        Norman asks: "Was the passing of the law defining the rules one of the instances that the opposition lawmakers were physically prevented from entering the chambers to vote?"

        Actually, surprisingly, the opposition backed the measure. Earlier, opponents sought to change the specific rules (which clearly benefit Evo). But they eventually voted for it w/o modifications as a way to break the political impasse. See the La Razón report.

        Posted by mcentellas July 7, 2008 10:19 PM

          Actually, surprisingly, the opposition backed the measure. Earlier, opponents sought to change the specific rules (which clearly benefit Evo). But they eventually voted for it w/o modifications as a way to break the political impasse. See the La Razón report.

          The comment I see the most about this law is whether it is partisan to Evo or not. I find this is a cynical, though not necessarily untrue, view.

          I assume this law will outlive the Morales government therefore you would expect some debate about whether or not it is a good law for Bolivian democracy. Most countries do not have a recall mechanism and in that Bolivian has strengthened their democracy and accountability. As for the voting rules, a recall should be a exceptional event and it is not unreasonable to demand that the original mandate in percentage votes should be overcome. It makes sense that an exceptional event such as a recall should have an exceptional mandate to overturn a leader during their term.

          Of course, the way the chips fall at the moment, it obviously favours Morales but in viewing this law in only those terms, you risk falling into the trap of viewing absolutely everything through partisan colours.

          Posted by Steve July 8, 2008 5:43 AM

            Steve: Yes, perhaps this recall law will outlast the Morales government. But it will still be a bad one (like gerrymandering or other forms of vote fixing that survive long after they're instituted).

            Yes, a recall election is an extra democratic boon—and one quite common in the US. But most require only a simple majority (50%+1). Some require that the "No" votes supersede the original mandate, but none that I know of lower the bar so that someone can be removed from office even if he/she wins a majority (as is the case for all the prefects). Such a stipulation gives far too much power to electoral minorities.

            And in a country w/ multiple parties, hardly anyone can survive a recall (keep in mind that the prefect races were mostly three-way contests).

            Posted by mcentellas July 8, 2008 8:15 AM

              What if all ten lose?

              What next?

              Posted by Frank IBC July 8, 2008 10:24 AM

                That seems unlikely. But. What then, indeed.

                Posted by mcentellas July 8, 2008 3:16 PM

                  Such a stipulation gives far too much power to electoral minorities.

                  You are of course correct. I must have left my thinking cap at home for this one.

                  Posted by Steve July 9, 2008 1:09 PM


                    The Basics

                    Search


                    Categories

                    Archives

                    Posta Classico