With neither arena nor the FMLN

Will there be a reduction in electric and telephone bills?

News Briefs

WITH NEITHER ARENA NOR THE FMLN 

Not so long ago, in Apopa, during the production of a YSUCA program, an older lady approached the director of the radio to say that she no longer listened to YSUCA because the "compañeros" (of the FMLN) had told her that the radio had changed and was now with ARENA. A little while later, a well-known FMLN deputy who was also participating in a program in which opinions were being expressed, up branded the director of YSUCA because, according to this person's opinion, the radio station was dedicating itself to fomenting division in his party and to demoralizing its members with the publication of the results of various poll results which were not favorable to his party. The director of the radio responded by informing the person know that the YSUCA limited itself to reporting on the reality of the country and making commentaries on it. Later, as the program developed, members of the FMLN in the area requested to speak in order to affirm that a vote for Facundo Guardado was a vote for ARENA. The director of YSUCA did not let the opportunity pass to explain to the deputy what was really happening in his party and remind him that the obligation of communications media is to report on that reality and comment upon it even when this might be contrary to their interests or inclinations.

If the FMLN has begun to think that because YSUCA does not support ARENA that it is unconditionally with the FMLN, it is mistaken. Likewise, if the FMLN thought that the results of the public opinion polls that were not favorable to it would not be made public or would be concealed or ignored, the FMLN was mistaken in this as well. Neither YSUCA nor the UCA taken as a whole are with ARENA, nor are they with the FMLN; they are with the Salvadoran people and with the truth. The UCA does not support and political party and if at some point in time the impression was given that it was part of the FMLN because it defended the interests and aspirations of the Salvadoran people, this was a false perceptions explained by the coincidence with the ultimate raison d'etre of the university. The UCA is in no way part of that political party.

It is for this reason that when the FMLN does not defend or promote firmly and with the necessary clarity those interests and aspirations, the differences become apparent. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the UCA has moved over to become part of the governing party. The UCA has made strong efforts to remain faithful to the cause of the majority of the Salvadoran people. It is not the UCA, then, which has changed position. On the contrary, the UCA has been criticized recently for its lack of conformity with the post-war transition, for its criticisms of neo-liberal capitalism, for its reluctance to accept as democracy in its finished state what is only the first stage in a long process, for its resistance to accepting as inevitable the poverty and deterioration in the conditions of life of the majority of the people. In a single word, for not accepting as new what is still caught in the past.

To report on and comment upon the results of public opinion polls which, in this particular case, were not favorable to the FMLN, does not mean that the UCA has abandoned the cause of those majorities, but rather that it is being objective and honest concerning current political reality. It is not the UCA which the FMLN should criticize for not saying what it would like to hear, but rather public opinion, which is saying that it is not worthy of confidence. To point out and reflect upon the internal divisions of the FMLN and upon those of any other political party means nothing more than to be honestly committed to reality. To do otherwise would be not to tell the truth and, in fact, to cover up the truth. As a result, the UCA, as in like manner a good part of the Salvadoran people, has suffered from bitter experience. Apart from the fact that the UCA is not obliged to follow slogans or accept official versions: neither of the FMLN nor of ARENA nor of the government. The attitude of the FMLN demonstrates that, on the question of power, it is no different from its principal adversary. If the results of the polls had favored the FMLN instead of ARENA, as happened during the elections of March, 1997, both parties changed position with reference to the UCA without flinching.

The credibility of the UCA rests upon its commitment to the cause of the poorest of the poor among the Salvadoran people, in its knowledge of reality and in its independence of thought and action. For this very reason it has suffered persecution. In the past the UCA has suffered insults and calumny; it was the target of bombs, and the victim of assassinations; Today it continues to be insulted and to suffer calumny, although with a certain degree of moderation; but it is discriminated against and regarded as suspect as much by the government as by its security agencies as well as by those who hold economic, political and social power.

The UCA is in favor a left party which represents popular interests and aspirations and, in this sense, it would wish the FMLN to be brought up to date with the times, and so change its horizon. Instead of looking exclusively inward at itself, it ought to look to the people to whom it is in debt. The analyses of the university are taken from this perspective. In a recent editorial in ECA, this problem is analyzed in detail (see, "The FMLN that El Salvador demands" No. 599 (1998) pp. 735 ff.). The UCA likewise favors a politically moderate, open, creative and educated right—as opposed to the right which El Salvador has at the present time. To hold the position that he or she who is not with the FMLN is against the FMLN—that is to say, with ARENA—is to foment polarization, from which position the two principal contenders might gain electoral advantages, but which, for the country would continue to be undesirable.

The FMLN and ARENA are not the only political options. In addition to these, and indeed over and above them, are the great impoverished Salvadoran majorities which ought to serve as the criterion for evaluating what is offered and practiced by political parties is acceptable or not, because they are the quantitative majority, one of the fundamental elements in all democracy. Moreover, because they are the principal victims of the misprisions of politicians and governments. The criterion is not, then, what is convenient for one political party or another, but rather that which is best for the Salvadoran people. The UCA's efforts are not directed towards supporting a specific political party in the electoral race, but rather towards illuminating, from the vantage point of reason and ethics, the road by means of which the majority of the people, now sunk in poverty and violence, might be liberated.

WILL THERE BE A REDUCTION IN ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE BILLS?

Reductions in international telephone and electrical bills are, for some, proof that privatization is the ideal measure in favor of consumers. Levels of competition which presuppose privatization provide, according to this line of argument, a reduction in service rates and improvements in the quality of goods and services.

Doubtless, reductions in international telephone and electrical rates are a positive indication for consumers, but there are various reasons for affirming that this does not necessarily represent a good for new private enterprises. In the first place, because even while the telephone company is state property the first reductions in international rates were noted; secondly, because the reductions in international rates have not necessarily meant a reduction in national rates, which affect all consumers; thirdly, because electrical rates will be diminished only for levels of consumption greater than 200 kilowatts per hour and this implies that, for all practical purposes, the majority of families will not benefit from the measure. Finally, one should remember that the rates for those consuming less than 200 kilowatts per hour must be subsidized in order to avoid rate hikes already agreed to by the General Superintendence of Energy and Telecommunications (SIGET, for its initials in Spanish) for new private enterprises.

Although it is not a question of affirming that the telephone company functioned on an optimal basis during the period of its administration by the state, neither can one omit to notice that its privatization will not necessarily imply that , in the long run, it will provide a service at lower cost to consumers. The primary indication of the foregoing is the case of the electrical energy sector because its privatization contemplated annual rate increases. For the moment, this measure has been held in suspension owing to the concession of a government subsidy for electrical rates. In what follows, some data is presented which may help to establish what the true effect is of the announced reductions in telephone and electric rates on the majority of consumers.

At the point in time when privatization of the National Telecommunications Administration (ANTEL, for its initials in Spanish), one of the measures adopted was the reduction of international rates (excepting those applicable to Central American countries) and the tripling of the rates applicable to telephone minutes of local calls. Evidently, this measure does not favor consumers, but it was not implemented by a private administration; nevertheless, with the privatization of ANTEL neither have tendencies been noted indicating a reduction of local telephone rates nor do indications exist that there will be reductions in the near future. Local call consumers still do not benefit from these rate reductions.

On the other hand, in this very moment, the state administration of the telephone company also proceeded to push forward a reduction in international rates for calls outside Central America or for local calls.

In the case of electricity bills, the recent announcement by SIGET establishes that these will be reduced by 10% during the next year for those who consume more than 200 kilowatts per hour, a rate of consumption which is achieved only by industrial and commercial businesses and by a limited number of high-income family homes with elevated levels of consumption. In this case, the foregoing implies that the majority of consumers will not have to deal with higher rates, but only thanks to state-provided subsidies because the law for privatization of the distributors provides for heavy increases in rates, a phenomenon which will be examined below.

From the point of view of privatization of the distributors of electrical energy, the government ought to have adopted a policy of subsidies for those who consume less than 200 kilowatts ours. Were it the case that these subsidies did not exist, the electrical rates would have been gradually increased with privatization. Only during the year 1998 did these rates go from 0.39 colones per kilowatt to 0.86 colones per kilowatt, which implies an increase of 120% during the first year alone of private operation of the electrical energy distributors.

It may be opportune to notice here that, since 1994 through 1997, the state has begun to implement a policy of rate increases in the following manner: in 1994 rates were increased by 30%, in 1995, by 25% and in 1996 by 17%. Nevertheless, none of these increases will have been equal to the adjustment of 120% which was proposed for implementation this year under the private administration of business distributors.

Faced with this evidence, the premises which hold that privatization presupposes lower rates for the majority of users is an argument definitively open for discussion. In the case of electrical energy, those benefiting from lower rates will be the sectors with higher levels of consumption and the owners of businesses. In the case of telephone rates, the beneficiaries will be only those who make international calls.

The major part of the population, or those who consume less than 200 kilowatt hours of electricity and how make predominantly local telephone calls are not benefiting from lower rates. On the contrary, electricity consumers face the threat of heavy increases in rates once the state subsidy which they presently enjoy is eliminated.

It may be the case that privatization is an important measure for reducing financial exigencies which arise in the operation of businesses offering basic services with rates below real costs Nevertheless, in the case of electrical energy, not even this pressure has been eliminated because the government maintains the subsidy even when the distribution of electrical energy is already in private hands. In the case of the telephone company the contradiction is greater because this business, far from generating a major public expense, generates income for the state.

The fact that international telephone rates have been diminished does not mean, in any way, that the process of privatization of the telephone company has been beneficial for local call consumers who represent the majority of consumers. In the same way, privatization of the distribution of electrical energy will be translated, sooner or later, into an increase in rates for the homes with consumption lower than 200 kilowatt hours. At least with regard to the rates applicable to the majority of consumers, which are the most determinant, it may be demonstrated that privatization is not beneficial. It remains to be seen whether privatization offers other benefits which its apologists attribute to it, such as, an increase in jobs, salaries of employees who work in private enterprise and the reduction of public spending for the elimination of subsidies, for example. For the moment, only those sectors which are blind to reality can say that the entry into the free market of the telephone and electrical distribution companies has lowered prices for the majority of consumers.

TARIFAS. The General Superintendence for Electricity and Telecommunications (SIGET, for its initials in Spanish) announced on December 3 that, beginning on January 1 and continuing through December 31 of 1999, electrical bills will be reduced by 10% for those who use more than 200 kilowatts per hour. For consumers whose consumption is less than 200 kilowatts their government subsidies will not be withdrawn, at least during 1999. Mr. Eric Casamiquela, head of the superintendence, declared that, although the opinions of the representatives of the six distributors of energy operating at a national level are awaited. At the same time, he declared that the measure will be possible in view of the heavy rainy season, which has allowed the dams throughout the country to achieve maximum water levels. The reduction in the prices of products derived from petroleum which are necessary for the generation of electrical energy, together with other technical factors and economics, also made possible the reduction in charges for this service, stated the head of SIGET. However, rates will be maintained in accordance with trimester changes which the distributors themselves consider pertinent, as a result of inflation indices, the increase in prices of fuel and the shortage of rains (EL DIARIO DE HOY, December 4, p. 40; LA PRENSA GRAFICA, December 4, p. 46).

AMNESTY. The U.S. Ambassador in our country, Ms. Anne Patterson, in statements presented on December 3, responded to false rumors that her government is planning to declare a total amnesty for Central American immigrants who live in the U.S. Ms. Patterson limited her statements to considerations that a halt to deportations which would be approved in the context of the disaster provoked by the hurricane "Mitch"; deportations would be halted until January 7 of next year. She asked the national communications media not to create false expectations on this question. According to declarations by the ambassador, authorities are studying the possibility of offering "some kind of relief" to immigrants but that this would be confirmed next week. Nevertheless, the U.S. ambassador in El Salvador underlined the fact that the extensions approved would be different for each country in the region, given that the magnitude of the tragedy is greater in some than in others. The presidents of the region are preparing themselves to present their petitions in a consultative forum which they will attend on December 10 and 11, where they will propose the introduction of reforms to the Nacara Law concerning immigrants. For the moment, President Bill Clinton is calling for the approval of 20 million dollars in additional aid to El Salvador. The aid would be earmarked for investment in community development projects (EL DIARIO DE HOY, December 4, p. 6; LA PRENSA GRAFICA, December 4, p. 12).

TRIAL. The Second Trial Court of San Salvador, on December 2, pushed for a decision in the public trial against Subinspector Walter Raymundo Lazo and Corporal Armando Mejía Araniva, both of the National Civilian Police who are charged with procedural fraud in the investigations surrounding the death of radio announcer Lorena Saravia. The murder took place in August of 1997 in circumstances which are still not fully known and for unknown motives. Since before the beginning of the debates on this case, prosecutors in the case have been firm that they possess proof concerning the carrying out of the crime by those charged with it, including Agent Albino Perez who is currently a fugitive from justice. In his declarations, Mr. Lazo declared himself not guilty. "I am innocent and the Attorney General's office did not prove anything", declared the Subinspector. The public trial ended on December 3 with a court decision to eliminate charges against the accused. Proofs presented by the prosecuting attorneys were insufficient to condemn the police. In the opinion of Judge Aristides Bonilla, the illegality of the act which the prosecuting attorneys were questioning was not established and that, supposedly, had been drawn up by the accused. To this was added the declarations of five witnesses which, according to the judge, were definitive in clearing up the fact that the police agents had no knowledge of the existence of the said act (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, December 3, pp. 6 and December 4, p. 10).