parties and citizens Horizonte
José Antonio Crespo political parties and citizens
parties seem willing to incorporate ordinary citizens to political life and decision-making. Apparently, the protest message issued at the polls in 2009, although initially upset them greatly to the games, I did see that was growing gap between citizens and politicians, and should be reduced. That can only be achieved with a net transfer of power still concentrated in the parties, to the general public. Would, if they do, to regain some of lost legitimacy. Remains to be seen how much reach agreement and how and to what extent do the transfer:
A) The PAN and the PRI agree to reinstate the eligibility consecutive legislators, removed in 1933 to grease the operation of the authoritarian PRI (as this would allow Congress to subject the Executive). The PRI does not approve of that figure for mayors and delegates, to manage a budget that they could be directly manipulated in the interests of their reelection. That's right. But by not providing the PRI nor the figure of revocation of the mandate for that office, looking to leave them in their current paradise of impunity.
B) the independent candidates are encouraged by the PRI and the PRD (next to front left), while the PRI is prepared to discuss the figure (but not with much enthusiasm). I do not think that figure harm in the case of legislators, but the case of the Presidency (and governors), as if to reach that office an independent candidate, by definition would have no support in Congress, exponentially increasing the likelihood of conflict between powers (without adequate mechanisms to resolve them, as if the has a parliamentary system). Furthermore, by providing the PRD legislators pure proportional representation suggests that independent candidates on a list as belonging to the same party, which is absurd, therefore unlikely to have one platform (in which case, as well as constitute a virtual party, as suggested by José Woldenberg).
C) Revocation mandate is given only by the PRD, and exclusively for the Executive (in three levels). Something that, at least in the case of the President, involves risks of instability, as contended by the PRI and the PAN (by virtue of the rigidity of presidentialism on parliamentarism). The PRD does not include the revocation instead of office for legislators (which would lower risk of instability). And given that neither party is in favor of a row eligibility of legislators, then encourages impunity and political irresponsibility of the Congress. The PRI, meanwhile, drives the motion of censure for cabinet officials and can be made to remove from office in certain circumstances. But does not propose any mechanism for the removal of the legislators.
D) The PAN and the PRD citizen initiative drive (the PRI is not pronounced), but the left gives preferential status to avoid simply be sent to the legislative freezer. Great point.
E) For its part, the PRI and the PRD figures include in their proposals for direct democracy, but with different modalities. The PRI promotes the popular consultation, which may be requested by the Executive or Legislative (always with the approval of its counterpart, which conveniently avoids this mechanism is used to subdue the rival power.) And it also allows citizens to convene the consultation on various legal provisions, requiring 2% of standard (about one and a half million signatures). The PRD proposes that citizens can promote the constitutional referendum or the repeal of 2% after obtaining signatures from the registration list within 60 days after the approval of the respective system. And for a referendum, the requirement is 1% of signatures in 30 days. Soon the number of signatures required in both cases. Should in any case, extend the period to collect that number of signatures.
The right combination of these three projects could result in a good political reform. But there is a risk that the parties end up neutralized each other and we delivered another delivery of the mountains.
Revocation of mandate is given only for the PRD and only for the Executive. Something that, at least in the case of the President, involves risks of instability.
Article published in the newspaper Excelsior:
http://www.exonline.com.mx/diario/columna/878652
