Evo reelected?

05.24.2006

Technorati tags:

I've been skeptical of Evo for a while. While I don't think he's quite as radical as some of his detractors point out, he's clearly a populist (in the negative sense of the word). The recent announcement that he's seeking a new constitution that allows for immediate reelection of the president & vice president is distressing.

Currently, Bolivia's constitution doesn't allow for the immediate reelection of president & vice president. That is, executives can only be elected to one term, and are then ineligible to run for the office in the subsequent election. Of course, members of parliament can run for reelection.

On the surface, the change isn't substantial. And a good argument can be made for reelection as a means to hold presidents accountable to voters. Parliamentary systems (usually) have no term limits on how long someone can serve as prime minister — so long as his/her party continues to win enough votes. Of course, parliamentary systems also have votes of confidence that allow parliaments to remove executives by a simple vote (and a process much simpler than impeachment) that leads to new "snap" elections.

The reality, of course, is that many executives in presidential systems — particularly in Latin America — have used reelection as a means to stay in power longer. Frequently enough, through unsavory means. This same problem plagues legislatures, of course, which prompts many term-limit movements. But at least legislatures are multi-member bodies, and long-term incumbents share power w/ other long-term incumbents. While presidencies are by definition (let's ignore the seven-member Swiss executive for a moment) one-person offices.

Historically, other Latin American executives have used constitutional changes to stay in power beyond their original mandate. The names Fujimori & Chavez come immediately to mind. Both used their popularity to push a new constitution that increased the executive's power & ensured immediate reelection. Both turned into dictatorships rather quickly after that.

If Bolivia decides to continue as a presidential system — and since 2003 it has been a "true" presidential system (rather than a "parliamentarized presidential" system) — then it should avoid immediate reelection. Peru & Venezuela are not models to imitate.

Of course, w/ corruption scandals already brewing against various MAS party members. And w/ a relatively strong & geographically concentrated opposition. I don't think Evo's in the same position that Fujimori was in 1993 or Chavez in 1999. But time tells all.

----
ADDENDUM: For some classic works on the subject of presidentialism (and its "perils"), I recommend: Juan Linz, The Failure of Presidential Democracy. Also, a classic working paper by Guillermo O'Donnell, Delegative Democracy?

UPDATE: As of today (25 May) it seems that reelection is not the official position of Evo's government. That's good to know. But the idea is floating around out there, and I'm not too keen on it.

Posted by Miguel at 10:18 AM