The Democratization and the economic reform in Central America

The “independent” candidates

“Discredit” is probably the most frequently used adjective to describe the relation between the political parties and the voters. Some people think that the bonds of the political representation are forever broken. It is said that the parties do not represent anyone but their own leaders. They are accused of taking advantage of their position to promote their personal interests, their circle of friends, and the goals of a minority. They are criticized because of the excessive verticality they employ in the decision-making process inside the parties. In addition, politicians are considered the leading saboteurs of the political system’s renovation projects. They refuse to unlock the juridical door that hinders the participation of the “independent citizens” in the political competition.

The crisis of the parties and the loss of its legitimacy do not only affect El Salvador. The same problem is also present at the rest of the Latin American countries. To personalize politics is nothing new for the Salvadoran reality. That is why it is important to take a closer look at the result of the independent’s strategy.

An intermediate solution is being implemented between the critics, the important support that the public opinion gives to its detractors, and the jealousy of the political leaders who try to keep their influence over the political system. With the absence of a constitutional reform able to brake the monopoly of the parties over the designation and the presentation of the candidates, some people are taking advantage of a small portion of the Electoral Law. The Electoral Code allows the presence of the voters at the elections of congressmen, mayors, and municipal councils, without the need to present a proof of their affiliation to any of the parties.

At this point, the electoral propaganda becomes the “answer” to the problems of the political system. The candidates who are not affiliated turn into the novelty of the electoral campaigns. The parties proudly present their new harvest, aimed to neutralize their discredit and return them their lost credibility. To count the number of the independent candidates presented by each party is almost impossible. Many reporters usually measure how open is a party by the number of “non-members” it counts with. The meetings become a circus show, where the professional politicians dance to the rhythm of a cacophonous waltz wisely played by the recently discovered independent leaders.

The new stars become entertainers with a discourse. They rave about their capacity to understand the feelings of the population. They are sure that they will resolve the problems, and, in addition, they promise they will work with dedication. They are careful enough to ratify their independence form the party they represent. When it is necessary, they even criticize their past. Logic says that the more character they show, the more helpful they will be for their adoptive party.

Because of the formerly described situation, it would be convenient to make a series of considerations. About the behavior of the parties, there are signs that can lead to suspect that the issue of the independent candidates is an electoral tactic. As such, it is valid as long as it allows them to get the attention of the voters, and therefore increase the electoral strength of the party. Such arguments are based on an idea according to which the political parties are organizations aimed to achieve an electoral victory and conquer the government. Those who think the contrary should open their eyes. And if not, it is enough to pay attention to the maneuvers and the dishonest games that usually come along with the electoral campaigns, even at the consolidated democracies. The parties are always searching to increase their share of power, and that is the objective their leaders are after.

On the other hand, with the discourse and the behavior of the so called “independent” candidates, we could also talk about an opportunistic argument. There are reasons that can lead us to think that many of the candidates are interested in nothing but the salary they will earn after their election. In fact, ever since the independent candidates were included in the list of the parties there have been no relevant changes. None of these candidates has ever played an important role. In most of the cases, especially inside the municipal councils, they have not made any contributions, and they left the political life as soon as they received their first check.

The former considerations can be a parameter of answers for those who are wondering if the independent candidates will be able to give a new face to the political system. The every-day life experience can invite anyone to forget about trusting the exaggerated optimism of the parties. Moved by their desire to achieve more power, the parties should not neglect the political system. In the end, many opportunistic elements could be hiding beneath the surface. However, opportunism is not the most dangerous feature of the independent candidacies.

The first danger for the political system, which is related with the independent candidates, is the open campaign against the discipline of the parties. If the parties assume beforehand that they have a weak connection with the candidates, they should not find it odd if after the elections they reveal themselves against the leaders. On the contrary of what it is ordinarily made public, to strengthen the political system it is necessary to have strong parties, with a solid organizational foundation and the discipline of the elected members. It is not about denying the fact that inside the parties these are people who have their own opinions and their own interests. It is about observing that despite the differences between the members, the parties are stronger and more efficient when their members follow a specific line of work, previously approved at an internal discussion.

The former considerations lead to the idea of the possible disenchantment effect with the “independent candidates”. If it becomes an assumption that they have very little possibilities of keeping their promise to transform the political system, all that they will bring is more apathy towards politics. More than a contributing to resolve the crisis of the public representation, they will be acting against the little credibility of the system. The personalization of politics and the strategy of the electoral offer will bring more complications and very few answers to the demands of the citizenry.

The false economic solidarity

Today’s economic situation is presently important for the evolution of the Neoliberal policies implemented by ARENA. In fact, this situation allows us to critically analyze the group of economic policies that this party has used. A rigorous evaluation of the Neoliberal reforms, made through the analysis of the last decade’s social and economic variables, allows us to see that the public policies are concentrated in a strategy of external insertion. That strategy includes the economic openness through the free trade agreements, the progressive reduction of the tax barriers for commerce, the encouragement of the external investment on the maquila, the dependency on remittances, etc. The strategy is not being focused on the national sustainable development strategies, which should be planned under a visionary perspective and generated through a consensus with the civil society. What about the social solidarity with both the present and the future generations? In economic terms, this means that the lives of many Salvadorans are in danger. Because they live in precarious social conditions, they are more vulnerable to the changes in the public policies.

The accelerated dissemination of the Neoliberal economic policies has strengthened the expansion of a “savage Capitalism”, which ignores and excludes many people. Its potential benefits do not reach the majority, while the economic elite receives the benefits of those strategies. In fact, these economic strategies implemented by the government of ARENA have been surprisingly fast and dictatorial, following a style of an immediate imposition without any kind of consensus. Some economists call it “turbo-capitalism” (this concept was taken from Edward Luttwak, “Turbo-Capitalism: Who wins and who loses with globalization”). In El Salvador, the governments have used the concept of Neoliberalism in a dogmatic way since the nineties. It has specifically followed the line of the Programs of Structural Adjustment, recommended by the International Monetary Fund and the World’s Bank. They are circumscribed to 10 commandments proscribed by the Consensus of Washington, their efficiency has been as high as it was in Argentina during the last decade. These 10 commandments recommended to follow a fiscal discipline; a public expense focused on social needs; a tax reform, mostly aimed to enlarge the base of the tax collecting system rather than to the increase and the progressiveness of the taxes. It also recommended the positive interest rates determined by the market; the commercial liberalization and the promotion of the sector that takes care of the exportation; a competitive currency exchange type established by the market; free foreign investment without obstacles or requirements; the privatization of the state’s companies; an unregulated economic activity; and ownership rights with reinforced guarantees.

All of this has been accomplished, but there are just a few exceptions. Quoting Luttwak, and as the Spanish economist Francisco Javier Ibisate mentioned, this has been a process of the “Turbo-Neoliberalism”. In other words, a process of a turbo-dollarization, a turbo-privatization, and a turbo-commercial openness, in order to generate an easy access to the free accumulation of capital for the business elite, the international companies, and the national oligopolies. The common denominator has been the imposition and the absence of measures to analyze the impact of the decisions over the most vulnerable sectors of the society. Those who have more to lose keep growing; the extreme poverty and unemployment are a chronic phenomenon. The recent examples about this issue are explicit. The same Neoliberal pattern of imposition has been followed by two aspects that apparently have nothing to do with each other: the development of the present free trade agreement with the United States and the intention to privatize and reform the public health sector.

In the case of the free trade agreement with the United States, you can easily see certain anomalies. The turbo-commercial openness demands to sign and follow a free trade agreement of Central America with the United States in a period of one year, when it is well-known that the agreements of such importance take many years of negotiations. The free trade agreement subscribed with Mexico in the context of the Triangle of the North took almost six years to be completed, due to the enormous difficulty of analyzing each product. In addition, it is also necessary to consider the complex negotiations of the labor and the environmental issues.

For Roberto Rubio, the director of the National Foundation of Development (FUNDE), this agreement involves quite a few agendas and political cycles. He said that “we must remember that President Flores ends his period in 2004, and President Bush will try to be reelected during that same year; therefore, next year is an important date that accelerates this process”. The trap hides in the slogan shared by FUSADES and the government. They want the people to believe that with the free trade agreements the benefits will come immediately. According to this opinion, the free trade agreements are the panacea of employments, investments, and economic growth, assuming that there will be plenty of positive benefits. This perspective does not make sense if the government has not researched about the impact of these negotiations, if it has not evaluated the opinion of the affected sectors (for instance, with PYMES and the agricultural sector), and if it has not been willing to resolve the internal problems of the economy.

In economic terms, the original sin of the government is that the external insertion strategy is practically reduced to a simple access to the markets and to the promotion of the foreign investment, without encouraging a real strategy of development. Rubio explained that “the free trade agreements and trade itself have to be at the service of development, and not as it technically happens: what we call development is at the service of the international trade”. That is why the government is criticized by the excessive importance it has granted to the macroeconomic health, ignoring microeconomics, and overlooking the areas that should be protected according to the constitution. This means that under this economic strategy, the victims –those who live in poverty- will remain as the witnesses of the abandonment of the internal economic policies, the overlooked policies, the ignored importance and the role of the internal market, the lack of integration of the national economy. The integration is not only fundamental in relation to the exterior, but in relation to the internal economy of the country as well.

As far as the crisis generated by the reform of the social security and the pension scheme is concerned, the analysis has taken the same turn. The government has tried to make a turbo-privatization in the course of one year (in Costa Rica, for example, to implement the reform of the health sector in the context of a consensus and with the solidarity of the population, it took them 24 years of work). A year without considering the elements that any reform should have: a study of the expenses, the impact, the needs and the ways to benefit most of the population with the highest efficiency, and considering the budget restrictions imposed by the state.

In the words of Carmelo Mesa-Lago, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh, in a forum recently celebrated by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and FUNDE, the problem is that “there cannot be a reform in the health sector, if they do not know how much the health reform will cost per year for the fiscal system”, especially when the belligerent position of the government is based on an imposition of “everything or nothing at all”.

The problem, according to Mesa-Lago, is that they want to privatize an institution that being public has a reduced coverage. The Ministry of Public Health (MSPAS) gives service to 35% of the population; the ISSS looks after 15%, and the private sector takes care of only 17%. The public sector only covers 50% of the population, and if it is privatized it is very probable that the coverage will be reduced. The proposal presented by the government lacks transparency over one crucial aspect: where will the government get the resources to assist so many people without ignoring the sectors that live in poverty?

It seems that the economic solidarity does not have a place in the plans to reform the health sector. According to Mesa-Lago, what the present government has done is a bad copy of the failed reform model of the Chilean health sector, based on privatization, complemented by elements of equity and a solidarity. The privatization does not encourage solidarity or democratization in the health sector, because not everyone has the “freedom to choose”. Those who take advantage of the system are those who can pay for it, the most vulnerable ones are ignored once again.

From this perspective, the government cannot avoid its responsibility. The government cannot “hand” the institutions to the market without analyzing the impact that this will have, without considering the opinion of the different sectors involved in this matter. The economic solidarity with the poor means nothing when it is only superficial, it cannot be only a façade as the recent Tele-Marathon was, since this is precisely how the rich evade taxes. The regressive taxes are still a taboo for the business elite, which is always looking forward to maximize its benefits, even when it knows that El Salvador is one of the nations with the most unequal distribution of wealth in the world.