Heartbeat of Mexico 9/23/97 Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit source:Fronteras Comunes MEXPAZ ANALYSIS #141 "Heartbeat of Mexico" September 23, 1997 DISSIDENCE WITHIN PRI - AgustIn Basave Proposes New Decalogue for PRI - PRI Rebels in Senate for "Galileo Group" - Seven PRI Deputies Emulate "Galileans" Not all PRI legislators are inclined to continue with the same authoritarian mechanisms within their party. In the last few days, prominent reform advocates have proposed measures to break the cycle of inertia which led to the electoral disaster on July 6, and rescue the party from its posterior blunders and possible disintegration. On September 19, Agustin Basave, ex-president of the reformist Luis Donaldo Colosio Foundation, proposed a new agenda for the PRI which calls for profound changes in the methods and structure of the PRI (Reforma, September 20). Some of the more salient points of the proposal are: - For the PRI, whose political capital is nearly exhausted, democratization and independence from the executive is now urgent. - Legislators, governors and mayors need maneuvering room --that is, independence from the presidency and national party structure-- to regain credibility. - The party must finish off its corporatist structure, which implies a decentralized organization, social commitment, political ethics, dialogue with society, and a new image. Basave considered these changes imperative, since the PRI is presently headed on course for an unprecedented disaster that could include losing presidential elections in 2000 or disappearing altogether. He clarified that the new "10 Commandments" don't intend to create a new dissident tendency within the party. GALILEO GROUP In a separate, though related, event, 14 PRI senators announced the creation of the "Galileo Group" (for the name of the street where the senators met) on September 20 (La Jornada, September 21). The group's main objective is to establish complete decision-making independence from the executive branch. The following day, the group declared that it would present a document in short order to the new national president of the PRI, Mariano Palacios Alcocer, in which the senators will propose internal reforms, including a return to the original project of the PRI and democratization of internal election procedures. As Senator Humberto Mayans (Tabasco) put it in an interview published in "La Jornada", the form in which Palacios Alcocer was designated national president "did a lot of damage to party militants which had pronounced themselves in favor democratic selection processes." (September 22) Mayans elaborated on the future of the PRI: 1. The Galileo Group considers that the time has come to democratize the PRI. 2. However, the process won't be easy because "there are interest groups with economic and political power that are attempting to hinder change inside the PRI, as well as democratic transition in the country." These groups take advantage of a client relationship with the State, and thus have every motive to resist change. 3. The PRI has become a sort of election committee for the government, which removes it from national debate, deprives it of political cadres. This situation has resulted in discouragement among militants and sympathizers in Tabasco and Veracruz, both on the eve of state elections. 4. The failed attempts to reform the PRI of Carlos Madrazo in 1965 and Jesus Reyes Heroles in the mid-1970's led to resignation within the party where the PRI accepted the designs of successive presidents. Finally, on September 22, seven PRI deputies (who were colleagues of the 14 Galileo Group senators in the past legislature) issued a document in which they declared an open attempt to halt anti-democratic procedures on the part of their peers in the party as well as the Chamber of Deputies. Nevertheless, some of the supposed members of the lower house contingent have denied they are forming a group as such; but they have denounced a "lack of leadership" in the PRI and Congress, declaring that Ernesto Zedillo should "stick his neck out for the party." ANALYSIS Despite careful declarations by reformist PRI legislators in both houses that they are not seeking to generate dissident currents within the party or seek confrontations with their party mates, it is clear that the internal situation in the PRI is increasingly tense. The authoritarian designation of Mariano Palacios Alcocer appears to be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Many PRI legislators and militants feel alienated from strategic decisions and power distribution within the party. The popular discredit to which the PRI finds itself subject has led some to distance themselves from the hierarchy without, however, leaving the party. There has certainly been no wont of reformers in the last several decades; but they end up crushed (Carlos Madrazo), hushed (Reyes Heroles), or leave the party (Democratic Current in 1987 headed by Cardenas and Munoz Ledo, Manuel Camacho Solis, Demetrio Sodi de la Tijera). Successive reform movements have run up against the wall of entrenched interests who have used the party to further their own economic and political interests. Certainly, the same themes have cropped up in reform proposals in past years: independence from the presidency, legislative empowerment, restructuring the party to eliminate quid pro quo relationships with power groups, organizational decentralization, democratizing internal elections, oversight mechanisms, entering into true dialogue with society to recover lost representativeness, etc. There are two new elements, however, which make reform pressing: drastic losses at the polls (in this sense, July 6 can be seen as the culmination of a process which began with local elections in 1995-1996) and increasing disaffection of militants and legislators, which is only partly due to election losses. At least three scenarios are possible: 1. It is possible that the reforms proposed (or rather, re-proposed) by Basave and the Galileans be adopted or adapted by the party. The magnitude of the July 6 electoral defeat would certainly favor the reformers' arguments. Democracy is the byword, and the party needs to synchronize with this new reality if it is to flourish --or even survive. It would be difficult for the party to recover from the serious rupture that seems to be brewing. The obstacle, however, is the political power of those "accommodated" within the government. Only time will tell which side prevails. 2. If there isn't aperture toward change, the exit or expulsion of the reformers would be the foreseeable result (members of another reform group, Democracy 2000, speak of a possible 5,000 that would join the PRD). Thus, the PRI would be in the antechamber of its most historic defeat yet: disappearance. 3. An alternative to the reform or perish dichotomy would be to "concede" some degree of democratization. This would entail enacting cosmetic reforms and tolerating reformers, thus enabling the PRI to retain members without seriously affecting its underlying power structure. The 17th Assembly, with its theoretical repudiation of neoliberalism and internal election reforms, is an example of this tactic. The "democratic concession" strategy appears to offer short-term internal gains, offering a compromise between reformers and hard-liners for the time being. However, in the long run, neither will remain placated and this scenario merely defers an inevitable battle for the identity of the PRI. Also, to the extent that internal reform is related to electoral success (voters are increasingly turning away from a party whose internal practice is perceived as authoritarian), the strategy has little possibility of success. In short, necessity would point to success for the reformers', but history and current practice to their failure and continued crisis for the PRI. David Crow Javier Medina Fronteras Comunes e-mail: frontcomunes@laneta.apc.org ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org ================================================================= nytcamer-10.12.97-23:17:21-26782