 |
Gabino Cue at a recent rally. |
|
As
Mexico continues to be plagued by organized crime, governmental
corruption and high unemployment, citizens look forward to the 2012
presidential elections. Due to it’s position as a recipient of federal
funds never accounted for, but assumed diverted to the governor’s
pocket, the poor state of Oaxaca emerges in a position to have a
powerful financial effect on deciding who will be Mexico’s next
president. On the other hand, if Oaxaca wrests fiscal control from
corrupt PRI party incumbents and candidates in the July 4, 2010
elections, a greater chance emerges that Mexicans will find a level
playing field in the 2012 elections.
The
current president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon has been labeled a
failure, both for the wretched drug war which has now cost close to
20,000 lives, and for his equally inadequate economic “program”. The
National Action Party (PAN) has set itself up for defeat by the
Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI) in 2012. Election analysts
assume Ulises Ruiz (URO), the governor of Oaxaca, will throw all his
state’s funds to re-elect the PRI in exchange for a national PRI
position for himself, perhaps as party head.
On
both local and national levels, 2012 elections loom large on the minds
of Mexicans. Concerns include whether the USA will “invade” Mexico over
the escalating drug war, or President Felipe Calderón will implement
military rule, or repression will spread, or narco-wars will infest
every state, resulting in an ever-increasing US military presence. The
present political and social climate in Oaxaca exemplifies that of
Mexico at large: fear of organized crime, exhaustion from pervasive
corruption, unresponsive government officials, high unemployment, and
sadly, increased suicides among youngsters in the under-thirty age
group, or their murders.
When
Hilary Clinton arrived in Mexico with Barack Obama on March 20, 2010,
accusations of a “failed state” had already been making the rounds.
Calderón hasn’t planned or exercised any policy beyond deploying the
army in a failed war on drugs. Meanwhile a 2008 backroom alliance of
convenience between the neoliberal National Action Party (PAN) and the
PRI crashed in March of 2010 with a public scandal of intrigue and
betrayals. Allegedly the PRI agreed to uphold Calderón’s fraudulent
2006 election results for certain pay-offs. According to the Mexican
weekly Proceso (No.1742), deals also included large additional
infusions of cash for the PRI states of Mexico, Veracruz, Durango and
Oaxaca, whose state governments then marched off with 2,302,000 pesos
requiring no accounting. During 2009, the PRI-dominated national
congress pledged to vote for higher taxes on products like food and
medicines. In exchange for this financial friendship, national PAN
politicians pledged to not permit alliances between the PAN and other
parties such as the Revolutionary Democratic Party (PRD) in future
state elections. In 2010, the PAN broke its word; a bitter
confrontation in Congress resulted as each party challenged the other
to submit to lie detectors. The state by state alliances became as
convoluted as a snakes in love among the eleven states which elect a
governor this year. Unsurprisingly, corruption in Mexico reached fifth
in global ranking in 2010.
The
PRI eyes a return to the presidency of Mexico in 2012. Previous to the
win by PAN’s Vicente Fox in 2000, the PRI controlled its governors with
an iron hand. Without presidential control, state robber-barons
declared themselves autonomous, stealing local funds, forming alliances
with narcotraffickers, and holding fire sales of state properties to
transnational interests.
The PRI in Oaxaxca
The
PRI has ruled Oaxaca for more than 80 years. The governorships Jose
Murat and then Ulises Ruiz employed increasing authoritarianism, since
those were the years when the federal PRI iron hand vanished. The
revolution of 1910 never loosened the grip of big landholders in
Oaxaca, and the transition to politically-controlled caciques, from
wealthy landholder-caciques, has been seamless. More than 60% of
Oaxaca’s population is indigenous. Until this decade they remained
largely isolated (no roads) and ignorant due to non-existent or poor
bilingual education; indeed education levels among all populations are
low by national standards. The PRI government routinely fights
community radio and rural electrification, and encourages shoot-em-up
rural border disputes.
95%
of Oaxaca’s funds come from the federal government. Historically,
governors like Ulises Ruiz Ortiz made huge contributions to each
governor’s favorite candidate by siphoning off these federal funds,
supposedly earmarked for municipal needs. Ruiz Ortiz diverted millions
of pesos to PRI candidate Roberto Madrazo’s presidential campaign in
2006. Madrazo lost, but then, so did the municipalities whose schools,
roads and sewage remain the same decade after decade. The election of
2010 is all about wresting that booty away from the PRI before they
begin their 2012 campaign spending spree.
Oaxaca,
Veracruz and Chihuahua all remain PRI dominated, for eight continuous
decades. However, the miserably poor state of Oaxaca has become a key
player in the 2012 presidential elections because of Ruiz’ ambitions.
How could Oaxaca become so important? Mexico’s fifth largest state,
Oaxaca, contains a disproportionate number of municipalities, 570. The
state of Chihuahua has eleven; Durango, the fourth largest state in the
nation has 39. Federal laws, called ramos, numbers 28 and
33 to be precise, remit monies to municipalities proportionally. Thus
if Chihuahua receives funds for eleven municipalities, Oaxaca receives
funds for 570.
The
Law of Fiscal Coordination in its article 6 states that municipalities
should receive their allotments via state governments within five days after the state receives them.
The funds cannot be given in the form of public works or non-cash
payments. If state government tries to retain the money, municipalities
can appeal to the Supreme Court. In practice, Ulises Ruiz accesses this
money first; the Law of Fiscal Coordination became a dead letter; the
governor diverts the funds. Fiscal Coordination could be implemented by
the Oaxaca congress if the governor didn’t also control the legislative
branch, which votes, as in all things, to suit him. Oaxaca presently
observes no separation of powers.
A
new party in power, if it also took a congressional majority, could
revive the fiscal law. The lawyer litigant, Amado López Hernández,
also ex-president of the municipality of San Jacinto Amilpas, explains
that deputies in the legislature won’t do so now because it was they
who approved a reform to the Fiscal Law in 2009 to permit this
retention of municipal funds in response to the governor’s demands.
In
the face of statewide economic hardship, only three elected deputies in
the 60th State Legislature, Ángel Benjamín Robles Montoya
(Convergencia), Zénen Bravo Castellanos (Frente Popular Revolucionario)
and Gustavo Velásquez Lavariega (Convergencia), objected to passage of
the state fiscal budget in December of 2009. According to them, Ulises
Ruiz can spend approximately 8,770,000 pesos daily at his personal
discretion, taking monies from state and municipal operations.
Thousands of Oaxacans live on less than minimum wage of 50.4 pesos
daily. The governor offers no aid to the Benito Juárez Autonomous
University of Oaxaca, nor to commercial establishments, despite federal
funds being the largest in history. No provision was made in state law
for the population in need. Oaxaca stands last among Mexico’s states in
health, education and human development—and this governor has not
released municipal funds because they were diverted to political
campaigns, as well as to public works in benefit to his cronies, such
as repaving streets and decorating parks.
Optimists
claim the present coalition candidate for governor, Gabino Cue
Monteaguda, would not steal, but would restore municipal money. Oaxacan
municipal “presidents,” or mayors, are not now all PRI members, and
after the 2010 election, perhaps even more PRI towns will have
abandoned the party, believing the handwriting is on the wall. All
present and future non-PRI municipalities — part of Cue’s alliance —
will demand their monies. Cue could send an initiative to congress, if
it’s not PRI dominated after this election, to restore the pre-2009
law. In the lead-up to 2012, it’s urgent to get that money away from
PRI control before it’s siphoned off to support a PRI presidential
candidate.
Who are the Oaxaca election 2010 players?
Since
June 14, 2006, Oaxacans have teetered on the edge of a renewed
uprising. The 2006 social movement was sparked by the National
Education Workers Union strike. While teachers and their families slept
in the city zócalo, the state government attacked them. The Oaxaca
population responded with fury, and 5,000 police retreated, leaving the
city between manned barricades of the social movement. Federal police
forces entered in November, 2006, at the command of PAN president
Vicente Fox, followed by military occupation for the first half of
2007. Ulises Ruiz asked for and received PAN support.
During
the famous five months of the Oaxaca rebellion, the PRI government
murdered about 26 people, imprisoned more than 350, and violated human
and civil rights. The cry during the movement occupation of the city
was, “Ulises out!” The fact that Ulises Ruiz was not deposed for
non-governability of his state was due to Fox and Calderon being
blackmailed by the PRI-dominated national congress. Thus the PAN-PRI
maneuvers continue to have repercussions. That the national PAN allowed
the state PAN to join state opposition coalitions speaks to the
confusions of the present struggle.
In
a personal poll of a range of Oaxacans, I asked what would happen if
the PRI won the governorship again (after 82 years of control!) in
July, and I received a100% response: trouble. Whether the
waiter and the lawyer mean the same thing by “trouble,” I don’t know,
and they might not either. Nobody believes the social movement of 2006
died, nor forgives the repression of that time. The principal problems
which must be resolved at this political moment in Oaxaca include the
prevalence of authoritarianism, lack of citizen input, conservatism,
poverty, social insensitivity, corruption — and the PRI.
The
sectors involved in this struggle include: the entrenched PRI and its
elite cadre of untouchable militants, the coalition United for Peace
and Progress and its unlikely alliance of politicians, and Civil
Society, which has launched an attempt to create even the tiniest space
for democracy based on the demands of 2006. Civil society includes the
rural populations whose networking skills sustained coordination in
2006, urban organized civil activists, and all Oaxacans who feel that “this is the year. . . or else.”
The potential candidates for governor 2010 jockeyed hard for their positions. The tradition of dedazo,
whereby the governor points to his successor, crashed and burned with
Ulises Ruiz Ortiz’s unsavory reputation. In this state, Oaxacans
scribble the word Assassin on their city walls, and accuse
Ruiz Ortiz on the street, only to be arrested five minutes later.
Foreigners are not immune: in 2010, three US citizens, and an
Argentinean were targeted for criticizing Ruiz Ortiz, as well as one
Mexican woman. Hence a desperate opposition coalition formed, aligning
the right-wing PAN with the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD), a
party once thought to be on the left, and joined by minor parties of
Convergencia, the Workers Party (PT), and the Communist Party. The
coalition named itself United for Peace and Progress. Spoilers for the
coalition, no doubt paid by the PRI to scrape off votes, are New
Alliance (PANAL) and United People (PUP). The PRI ally is the Verde
Party (Greens) who have little strength and less credibility. Nobody
imagines ideology or even politics binds United for Peace and Progress;
however its platform echoes the 2006 demands for participatory
democracy and autonomy. The coalition caters to this at every campaign
stop.
Both
the coalition and the PRI went through pre-candidate selection. For the
coalition, uniting political, social and civil sectors, Gabino Cue
emerged as candidate for governor for several reasons. First, he’s the
candidate from whom Ruiz Ortiz stole the election in 2004. Second, he’s
neither PAN nor PRD. Third, while nobody accuses him of being on the
left, at least he doesn’t seem to be in favor of massacring citizens
the way Ruiz Ortiz has. Fourth, Cue comes from an established Oaxacan
family, safe for elite voters. Wealthy families want peace to secure
their property, and elite voters are confident that Cue would agree to
that. Those undefined “troubles” if the PRI wins might include local
uprisings in desperately poor towns where one family owns everything.
In his March 21 appearance in Pinotepa Nacional, Cue told the crowd
that social justice will be his priority. He used the Zapatista phrase
“lead by obeying.”
The
PRl initially faced more disruption, because Jorge Franco Vargas, known
as El Chucky, believed that his closeness to Ruiz Ortiz as head of the
2006 repression and commander of death squads, assured that he, El
Chucky, would be named successor. Ruiz Ortiz, however, was more
politically savvy. Instead, he selected federal deputy Eviel Pérez
Magaña, the perfect puppet.
Both
Cue and Pérez, before their candidatures were even confirmed by the
state election commission in March, sallied forth to lay flowers at the
foot of the statues of Benito Juarez, native son, and first and only
indigenous President of Mexico. Cue went to Guelatao, Juarez’
birthplace; Pérez went to Juarez’ statue on Oaxaca’s Fortin Hill. If
prestige of statue locations and attendance of supporters indicates
anything, Cue wins.
The
PANAL candidate, Irma Piñeyro Arias, went instead through city and town
markets. Why? Because that’s where women are, and she will try to draw
the women’s vote. The PUP candidate is also a woman, María de los
Angeles Abada; she rallied voters in the city of Tlaxiaco. This adds up
to eight parties in the jockeying for gold on July 4.
The
July 4 election encompasses more than the governorship; it includes the
157 municipalities which govern through a political party, as well as
the state legislature. Oaxaca has no senate, only its Chamber of
Deputies, which consists of 32 representatives for the entire state.
Twenty-five are elected by the 25 state districts, while 17 are seated
by proportional representation, according to their party’s lists.
The
municipalities function under control by local caciques or with
movements, often mini-parties, like the worker-campesino-student
coalition of the Isthmus (COCEI) which in 1981 made Juchitán the first
non-PRI city on the left in Mexico. This was where Cue began his
campaign. Never before has it seemed possible that a majority of PRI
municipalities might not be of the governor’s party, the official state
party.
The
first campaign assassination has already occurred. Fifty year old
Zótico Silvestre López Quiroz, a taxi-driver by trade, and a member of
the Revolutionary Democratic Party (PRD), was shot several times while
riding in a car in San Andres Huaxpaltepec. López served as president
of the municipal committee, was a militant of the Democratic Campesino
Union, and president of the State Secretariat of the PRD. The car
belonged to the municipal president of San Andres Huaxpaltepec, a man
named Mario Magdaleno García Hernandez who happens to be a former
director of Section 22 of National Education Workers Union (SNTE), the
driving force behind the movement in 2006. The two men were heading
home around 2:00 A.M. after a long meeting when García’s vehicle was
attacked in the center of town by three men. They shot López several
times, and he died early Wednesday, March 17 in the Regional Hospital
of Pinotepa Nacional. García escaped unharmed. Amador Jara Cruz, a PRD
senator, indicated that the dirty war by the PRI is now underway, and
López has fallen as the first victim.
Jara
seems to forget that a year ago, in another unsolved murder in this
region, PRD activist Beatriz Lopez Leyva, was shot dead seated in her
office on April 6, 2009. On Monday, March 29, PUP candidate, María de
los Angeles Abada, who left the PAN to move to the PUP, filed a
complaint for being threatened and blackmailed. She denies being an
agent of the PRI, or acting to divert coalition votes. Note that the
PRI has never suffered any political murder victim in the state, not
even in the violence of 2006 when the social movement listed 26 dead.
Upside Down World