MAS proposes constitutional reforms

05.30.2006

Technorati tags:

Evo's MAS announced its constitutional proposals, which are in some ways similar to those proposed by Tuto & Podemos. The proposal includes a second-round election of the president if no candidate wins a simple majority (50%+1) of the popular vote. There's also a call for a constitutional way to shorten a president's mandate (other than through impeachment). And then there's some provisions for "communitarian" (that is, indigenous) legal procedures. Below are my thoughts on some of these proposals.

The second-round election was also proposed by Podemos. It's a popular electoral provision in presidential democracies. In theory, it helps voters narrow down their choices in a simpler, more direct way than by other preferential voting provisions meant to produce a Condorcet winner. Very simply, the runoff vote proposal would mean that if no presidential candidate won 50%+1 of the vote, voters would cast ballots a second time (as they're about to do in Peru) between the top two vote winners.

I've some problems w/ this proposal. First, this kind of voting system tends to polarize electorates & is one of the key features in the "failure of presidentialism" as described by Juan Linz. Second, this system isn't well suited to an electoral system (like Bolivia's) where votes for presidents also are used to determine legislative seats using proportional representation (PR). Currently, Bolivia's president is elected by the legislature in a parliamentary vote if no candidate list wins 50%+1 of the popular vote.

While a parliamentary vote is further removed from the popular electorate, it has advantages. But first, it's important to realize that parliament is composed by the same electorate that voted for president. So the popular will is still represented through the electoral system. But a parliamentary vote ties the executive closer to the legislature, and helps provide multiparty coalition governments. This can help reduce polarization. And it can help reduce the tendency of Latin American presidents to claim a direct popular mandate that allows them to run roughshod over legislatures. Essentially, it helps prevent what has been called Caesarism, Bonapartism, delegative democracy, or populism.

The bottom line is that (in my opinion) laws should be made by legislatures. By definition, legislatures are multi-member bodies, representing various different sectors of the population (class, gender, ethnic, regional, cultural, etc). Executive are single-person institutions

The idea of a recall election for the president is also appealing. The Podemos proposal calls for a vote of confidence to remove a president; the vote would require a two-thirds supermajority. The MAS proposal, on the other hand, would allow for a popular vote to remove a president — essentially, a referendum recall vote.

I think both proposals are fine, though I would rather the parliament have stronger powers to remove a president, not just a popular referendum. Essentially, there's good reason to insulate the president from responding only to the whims of shifting popular opinion & to tie the executive closer to the legislature to force cooperative strategies, rather than antagonism & confrontationalism. It's not that I think presidents should be immune from public opinion. But the history of Latin American presidents using popular mobilizations is a long, sad, torturous history that includes figures like Peron, Fujimori, and Chavez.

I prefer representative democracy — which emphasize parliaments — over plebiscitary or delegative democracy. The latter emphasizes popular majoritarian mandates. But these are too easily manipulated. And these tend to focus on a single leader, jefe, or caudillo maximo. In short, a Caesar (the first successful populist leader in a republic). I'd prefer the electorate have faith in institutions (electoral systems, parties, representative bodies, etc) rather than individuals.

The MAS proposal also calls for recognition of communitarian justice. Again, I support this. In principle. So long as communitarian justice includes respect for minorities, provides for due process of law, and other niceties of pluralist democracy, I've no problem w/ the concept. I even support changing electoral systems in "indigenous" electoral districts to allow for such traditional ways of choosing leaders.

Though one has to wonder why MAS proposes all sorts of provisions but oppose regional autonomies by departments. While I can see good reasons to recommend another kind of decentralization (such as by smaller regions), it often looks as if MAS supports any kind of provision that devolves power to its supporters, but not to its opponents. That's politics, of course. But I'd rather new institutions be more flexible than that.

Finally, the MAS proposal also calls for creating a Procuradurķa General (a General Procuratorship) to "represent the interests of the State." Though I'm entirely unclear why the Bolivian state needs a body to represent its interests (unlike, say, a people's ombudsmen). I assumed the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government represented the state's interests. Unless they mean to represent the state in the international arena. Again, that's what embassies & the chancellorship (the Bolivian department of state) is for.

Posted by Miguel at 11:43 AM