Post-election thoughts

07.10.2006

Technorati tags:

The official final count is still not posted (La Paz is still missing a final count in one district), but w/ 99.9% of the vote in, these results are likely to hold up pretty well. So I thought I'd toss my two cents into the question of whether MAS or the opposition (e.g. Podemos) did better/worse than expected or compared to December 2005.

MAS won 50.72% of the vote, compared to 53.74% in December. Podemos likewise dropped in its vote share — from 28.59% to 15.33%. But it's important to remember that this was a different kind of election (particularly in terms of how votes transferred to seats). It's especially important to keep in mind that while only eight candidate lists — all of them the same across the nine departments — competed last December, a total of 25 electoral lists competed this July. And not all lists ran in all departments. In fact, three of the lists made up different MNR lists, which ran under slightly different banners in different departments.

That said, one could look at the current results slightly differently. Keeping in mind that minor candidates who won only a sliver of the national vote (e.g. MCSFA w/ 0.15%) may have enough concentrated voting power to win seats in the smaller districts.

MAS did decline in vote strength by about three points. But if we add to MAS votes those for its "allied" lists that ran in hopes of winning extra seats for a broader MAS-led front, MAS breaks even. Conservatively adding votes for AS, AYRA, MBL, MCSFA, and MOP, the total comes to 53.70% — the total's 57.27% if we add Concertación Nacional's 3.58%. So it's clear that MAS did as well, perhaps slightly better, than it did in December. In large part, by surprisingly winning the first plurality in Tarija & Santa Cruz, where the party expanded its presence since December.

The biggest loser is perhaps Podemos, which lost more than ten points between elections. But the result isn't as bleak for the opposition party once we consider that several of the lists that ran in July represent Podemos alliance parties from December — and will likely continue to support Podemos. If we add the votes for AAI, ADN, APB, MIR, and UCS, the total comes to 21.19%. Though that figure still represents a seven-point drop. Still, Podemos' vote was concentrated enough to win it nearly a quarter of the assembly seats. Similarly, like MAS, Podemos was the only party able to win seats in each of the country's nine departments.

The other two parties currently in parliament — Unidad Nacional & the MNR — remained relatively stable. Unidad Nacional dropped half a point; the MNR increased its vote (if we add its three lists) by more than a point (from 6.47% to 7.54%).

The end result is that the votes were more widely dispersed in last week's constituent assembly election. And the largest loser was Podemos, though not by much. It's also difficult to tell, since 16.77% of the national tally were blank & null votes. While this is in line w/ uninominal (non-presidential parliamentary) votes, the numbers are high enough that if supporters from one or other tendency didn't cast a legitimate vote, it could skew results. The fact that the "Sí" vote on the autonomy referendum was so high in places like Santa Cruz & Tarija, and w/ much lower blank/null votes, suggests that voters in areas more predisposed to vote for Podemos (or similar tendencies) voted blank/null in disproportional numbers. But, of course, this is only conjecture.

Regional party systems

The constituent assembly elections also demonstrate a growing different in regional party systems, rather than a national party system. While MAS & Podemos are the two dominant alliances (neither is truly a "political party"), they not only have different regional strengths — they also face different regional competitors.

MAS dominates the Andean regions of Bolivia. Which is remarkable, since no party has been able to do that since the 1980s. In large measure, the splintered & highly volatile Andean vote allowed the more consolidated party systems in the media luna to dictate national politics — until the late 1990s. In places like La Paz & Cochabamba, the MAS position is downright hegemonic.

But in the media luna departments, we now see a reverse trend. While the Andean departments have clearly become dominant-party systems, media luna departments have remained competitive multiparty systems. They always were, of course. But prior to 2005, the effective number of parties was regularly higher in the Andes than in the media luna — w/ the notable exception of 2002 Cochabamba, which was a two-party system between NFR & MAS.

In Santa Cruz, MAS & Podemos evenly split half the department vote. Most of the remainder is taken by the MNR & APB (which holds the prefecture & is a Podemos ally). In Beni, Podemos nearly takes half the vote, w/ the MNR taking nearly a third, and MAS close behind. In Pando, it's a two-party contest between Podemos & MAS. In Tarija, MAS surprisingly won a plurality, but the MNR and Podemos are still highly competitive.

So long as MAS (or a similar alliance) can hold saw over both Cochabamba & La Paz, it will win presidential contests. Especially if the media luna based opposition remains divided. And as long as Podemos (or a similar opposition alliance) isn't able to peel away enough voters in either Cochabamba or La Paz (or both), it can't win the presidency. Peeling voters away in metropolitan Cochabamba is possible — so long as the NFR machine established by Manfred Reyes Villa (a Podemos ally) remains intact. Peeling votes away in metropolitan La Paz will be possible only if the MAS alliance w/ MSM (Movimiento Sin Miedo, a leftist/progressive middle class party led by La Paz intellectuals) breaks.

Nevertheless, so far it seems clear that Podemos can't govern. But MAS can't easily ride roughshod over the opposition, either. So. After two decades of neoliberal democratic politics, the pendulum has swung back towards national-populism. But the checks & balances that make Bolivia a democracy haven't yet been broken. Which is a good thing.

Posted by Miguel at 01:12 PM

Comments

Excellent post!

As I have understand the old parties UCS, ADN och NFR are now mainly under the PODEMOS umbrella. MNR is still there. MBL is still there (in the elections 2005 was it part of MAS???). MIR is still there but many of its old members are part of UN? What happened to MIP?

But what about the new small regional partie? MSM is only running in local elections and is under the MAS umbrella? PP is under the PODEMOS umbrella. APB is somtimes under the PODEMOS umbrella? Ayra, MOP, AS, MCSFA was under the MAS umbrella 2005 but participated on its own this time?

Posted by: Fredrik Lindqvist at July 17, 2006 09:34 AM

Fredrik:

The problem w/ the idea of "parties" now in Bolivia is that they've become even more flexible than before. This will hurt the abilty to form consolidated, institutionalized political parties.

UCS & NFR were never institutionalized political parties, since they were personalist vehicles for their founders (Max Fernandez, who left the party to this son, in the case of UCS & Manfred Reyes Villa in the case of NFR). ADN was on the road to become a political party, but didn't outlast the death of its leader, Hugo Banzer.

It's difficult to know whether even more ideological parties, like MSM, are parties or not. After all, MSM is also a small circle of public intellectuals surrounding Juan Del Granado. Similarly, PP is an organization based around the prefect of La Paz, José Luis Paredes. AS is, like PP, an alliance based around a person (in this case, Rene Joaquino). Most of other small groups are better labeled "factions" or "movements" rather than parties -- at least if we're using "party" to denote a more formally institutionalized organization.

In part, the recente constitutional amendments allow for organizations other than political parties -- social movements, indigenous organizations, etc -- to run candidates. This is why I prefer the term "electoral list" rather than "party list" when describing elections. Even MAS & Podemos are really just umbrella alliances concentrating an array of social movements, political factions, powerful individuals/notables, etc. Because it's been around longer, MAS looks more like a party, but it masks the large factionalism w/in the party itself.

As for MIP, Felipe Quispe's indigenous party. I'm not sure where it went. MIP lost its legal status when it didn't earn the minimum votes for the electoral threshold. But it seems that election was a powerful blow to the party. I've not yet checkd to see if any MIP names are on current MAS lists (though I doubt it, there was never much love lost between the two).

Posted by: mcentellas [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 17, 2006 11:51 AM

Great answer. I have checked the web-site of the Corte Nacional Electroal but not found any numbers regarding the parliament elections in 2005 (the plurinominal part). How did it look like? I know that Evo got 53,74 %, but how many votes did MAS get?

Posted by: Fredrik Lindqvist at July 17, 2006 03:10 PM

The breakdown of 2005 uninominal votes by electoral list is as follows:

MAS - 43.52% (down from 53.74% presidential/plurinominal votes)
Podemos - 28.10% (down from 28.59%)
Unidad Nacional - 11.70% (up from 7.80%)
MNR - 8.06% (up from 6.47%)
MIP - 3.30% (up from 2.16%)
NFR - 2.41% (up from 0.68%)
Frepab - 2.17% (up from 0.30%)
USTB - 0.73% (up from 0.26%)

The total valid vote was quite low, at only 71.91% of total votes cast, compared to 92.63% in the presidential/plurinominal vote.

There was clearly a significant amount of cross-voting. The sharp drop by MAS votes suggests that voters who cast votes for Evo Morales in the presidential/plurinominal portion of the ballot didn't necessarily support MAS candidates. The trend is more clear when one considers the prefecture elections (which went decidedly against MAS).

Posted by: mcentellas [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 17, 2006 04:04 PM

So the plurinominal votes are the same as the votes cast for presidential candidate. Are there any numbers yet for the uninominal votes in this years elections? Is the conclusion that MAS is not much worth without Morales?

Posted by: Fredrik Lindqvist at July 18, 2006 06:10 AM

Fred:

In "general elections" the ballot has TWO section: presidential & uninominal. The presidential section has the name/photo of the presidential candidates for each electoral list. Seats in the Senate & the plurinominal portion of the House of Deputies are determined from that vote. The uninominal section has the name/photo of the legislative candidates for that circunscripción (the single-seat district).

This year's constituent assembly election had both ballot sections, but neither was quite the same. The "plurinominal" section was used to determined the department-wide delegates. The "uninominal" section was used to determine the three delegates elected by circunscripción.

In the July 2006 election, MAS received 50.72% of the "plurinominal" vote. I've not yet added up the uninominal votes (the CNE hasn't released them as a department or national aggregates, so I'd have to add them myself from all 70 districts). But Evo wasn't a candidate, so the 50.72% plurinominal votes were votes for MAS proper.

I don't think we can say that MAS is worth little w/o Morales. But I do think we can say that Evo is more popular than MAS, based on the 2005 elections.

Posted by: mcentellas [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 18, 2006 11:06 AM