The project of the principal political force in Mexico is that of the statist left. It is, without a doubt, the terrain best liked by the priístas, as well as all of the groups that benefit from the active intervention of the state in the economy.
Zuckermann supports this conclusion by noting that of 70 proposals, only four encourage a more competitive market (among them an anti-monopoly plan and a proposal to increase competition among banks to loosen credit awards), while proposals for regulation as well as subsidies and protectionism favoring certain industries abound. The big question for the PRI coming out of the election was whether the traditional statist or more market-based PRI was going to dominate the party, and the above certainly makes you think the former group is prevailing. However, market intervention to spur economic recovery following a year of negative 7 or 8 percent growth isn't necessarily indicative of a return to revolution-era economics. I also wonder how much wanting to mark some separation from Calderón following the elections played a role. Whatever the case, I think the struggle for the economic soul of the PRI remains incomplete, but this isn't very encouraging from the standpoint of bipartisan compromises.
Zuckermann's second observation is that the plan would divert a greater share of revenues toward state and local governments:Note the emphasis on the PRI's spending measures more than on the income of local governments. The PRI, in its project, only mentions that it wants "augment the taxation faculties of the states and cities to increment their income". What does this mean? Until now the local governments have lived in a sort of budget Eden. The collect less than 20 percent of the taxes of the nation without taking into account oil profits, but they spend more than 40 percent of public money including oil profit. They barely collect taxes, but they do spend a lot. And now the PRI wants them to spend more.He also notes that this will mean more local control over federal programs like Opportunities (which wouldn't be a bad thing if corruption weren't a factor), and that the PRI governors worked so hard to swing their local deputy races in large part to swing a larger share of the governing prerogative toward local government. Going beyond that, given that the PRI's success at the local level is on the whole more of a sure thing than at the presidential level, I'd say that this economic package reflects a long-term strategic interest for the party.
2 comments:
Diverting resources toward state and local governments has been a PRI strategy for much of this decade. Sen. Manlio Fabio Beltrones has been trying to dissolve Sedesol and have its resources distributed on the state level, as an example.
State and local governments are overwhelmingly run by the PRI - and more so after the July 5 elections. Transparency at these levels is generally absent. The PRI cleaned up in places with powerful PRI governors and little transparency such as State of Mexico, Puebla, Veracruz and Oaxaca. These deputies will fight to divert resources from the 2010 federal budget to their political patrons, just in time for the 2010 gubernatorial elections in Puebla, Veracruz and Oaxaca, and the 2011 election that will pick Enrique Peña Nieto's replacement in the State of Mexico.
That all makes sense, depressingly. Any idea what percentage of municipalities are run by the PRI? Also, how much that number has changed relative to three and nine years ago?
Also, have you heard any names being bandied about for Peña Nieto's post?
Post a Comment