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.
MABB already posted the exit polls. But it looks like Evo will keep his seat (no surprise), and so will all of the pro-autonomy prefects (as will the Potosí prefect).
The graphic above comes from tonight’s El Deber. Looking at the exit poll data, it’s clear how polarized the election results were (though I’m a little surprised at the Pando).
If the numbers hold, it spells a boost to everyone. The exit poll numbers MABB points to give Evo about 60% of the vote, a slight gain from his December 2005 numbers. But the prefects have massive gains. Each of them won their seat w/ about 40-45% of the vote; they look to have received between 50-70% of the vote.
What does this mean? Evo will claim a mandate to push forward w/ his model for change. And the prefects seeking regional autonomy will claim vindication, and incentive to also push forward. So it’s a stalemate, but the worst kind (where both come out stronger than before).
The key issue will be what the fallout will be in La Paz & Cochabamba (where two opposition prefects look to have lost their seats). If MAS wins the La Paz & Cochabamba prefecture, it could further drive the country’s regional polarization by producing two regional single-party dominant systems (MAS in the west, PODEMOS & its allies in the east).
Final numbers might start coming in tomorrow, as will media reports of incumbents’ reactions. Already earlier this weekend, Manfred Reyes Villa (Cochabamba’s prefect) announced that “whatever the referendum results” he would seek Bolivia’s presidency.
OK, Evo's victory and Paredes' loss were not huge surprises, but the vote in Cochambamba was a surprise, at least to me. I know about the rural/urban split, but I wonder if Reyes-Villa's lame/cowardly performance during the riots undercut his support in the city. (And before that, his trying to re-hold the referendum after only a few months had passed was incredibly stupid.)
What happened in Oruro? I remember there a few weeks ago that there was mention here of the prefecto's support for autonomy, did that create a backlash?
Posted by
Frank IBC
August 11, 2008 3:23 AM
Evo won Pando? Another surprise...
Posted by
Frank IBC
August 11, 2008 3:51 AM
The largest negative provincial shift from the 2005 presidential reuslts was in Chuquisaca, where Evo's support dropped by about 15 percentage points. However, he held relatively steady in Santa Cruz (only receiving 2.9% less than he did in 2005), picked up an additional 15 percent in Beni (his weakest province in 2005) and 6 percent in Tarija in addition to the surprise win in Pando (an increase of nearly 36 percentage points), and then had huge margins in his geographic base. So while the results were fairly polarized geographically, Evo's support in the Eastern rim has not changed dramatically from 2005 (by my VERY quick look at the data).
But Miguel is right about the ambiguous message from this-both sides can claim a mandate.
Posted by
Matt
August 11, 2008 9:23 AM
@Frank: I haven't yet seen any turnout figures, but one reason for Reyes Villa's fall could be voter abstention. He continued to insist that the vote was illegal, and called for a boycott. If enough of his supporters stayed home, it could help explain a drop. But, also, I suspect he's just not done a good job as prefect (though he was a very popular mayor for the better part of the 1990s).
@Matt: Evo's support hasn't changed much in the media luna, but the prefect's support has consolidated. Also, the defeat of Paredes & Reyes Villa suggest that the opposition has lost ground in the Andean regions. So I think regional polarization has increased.
But, also, I suspect he's just not done a good job as prefect (though he was a very popular mayor for the better part of the 1990s).
Sorry to bog down the discussion in what is probably elementary information, but can you please describe what the "job" of the prefect is versus the "job" of the mayors in Bolivia? I've often read accounts were the press equates "prefect" to "governor," but it's my understanding that prefects don't have--or at least didn't have until very recently--much power or authority. Can you explain what the roles and responsibilities of the prefects are?
Posted by
GS
August 11, 2008 10:46 AM
I think we have to wait until we can say La Paz and Cochabamba are in MAS' hands and behind Morales. I just thought about it when I was reading these commentaries. Morales has promised to have elections for the recalled Prefects. Unless he brakes his promise, which I don't think he will, it might just be that some other 'independent' thinking Prefect comes along.
If he appoints them, I would just say, ok, its safe ground. If, sooner rather than later, there are elections, and specially if the elections are free and fair, the danger is there for Morales to end up either again with Paredes or Reyes Villa or with other not so supporting Prefects.
I agree with Frank, I think Manfred's absenteeism often when the Department needs him most, usually in the form of jaunts to Miami have hurt him recently. He seems also to suffer from perception of corruption, justified or not, in the manner in which he aquired, and diverted public funds to develop, land holdings in Cochabamba.
Posted by
Miguel de los Shanqueros
August 11, 2008 12:35 PM
@GS: Until recently, yes, city mayors (but not rural mayors) were perhaps more powerful than prefects. Prefects do, however, have a significant ammount of bureaucratic power at their disposal. After all, they oversee what were once know as the "CORDES" (corporaciones de desarrollo) like CORDECRUZ, CORDEPAZ, etc. Each department had one, which oversaw development projects in their respective regions. After the municipal decentralization reforms (Participación Popular), these also coordinated most of those projects. But, yes, prefects are **NOT** "governors" in the way US state governors are. Prefects are "administrators" (agents of another executive, not independent executives). Though some, such as in Santa Cruz, have come to think of themselves as "governors".
