No interest in voting

Social policies in the ARENA and FMLN-USC platforms

Concerning Clinton’s upcoming tour of Central America

News Briefs

NO INTEREST IN VOTING 

The March 7 voting will not be a poll, as the politicians would like it to be, even though the adjective "real" is added qualifying factor. March 7 is when the real voting will take place. Conducting a poll is an altogether different matter. It is an instrument which helps to learn about the peoples' decision and the why and wherefore of it. If a poll is well constructed, its results tend to be confirmed by facts —in this case, the voting. All the rest are politician’s word games or confusion in concept. Whatever the case may be, it is an argument for not confronting reality as it really is.

There is no doubt that the majority of the population would like to see a change, but none of the big parties presents itself as a real option for such a change. The FMLN, as it is the biggest opposition party, ought to be more prepared to unfurl this banner, but it has not been able to explain to the electorate what the change will be. The majority of the population would like ARENA not to continue governing the country, but at the same time, they assume that, whoever wins, everything will stay the same and that the problems will continue to be the same. For this reason, a good portion of those who think this way will not go to vote on March 7.

The majority of those who vote will vote for ARENA because they do not see any other viable option. The two parties have promised almost the same changes. ARENA by means of alliances and the FMLN by means of a national consensus-building. ARENA has published a long list of things it will do. The FMLN has not lagged behind, but its promises are more general. The two lists coincide in not being articulate, not establishing priorities, not indicating strategies, nor sources of financing nor positions. Faced with two programs which are more or less the same, the majority of the population who will go to vote will prefer what is sure and opt for giving ARENA another opportunity. Many argue that the FMLN is still not prepared to govern. Those who deny their vote to ARENA think the contrary: that the FMLN should be given an opportunity. But they are a minority.

A debate on electoral proposals could have made a difference, but Francisco Flores not only refused to confront his promises but also imposed his rules on the adversaries. He demanded an electoral platform and the definition of what a second force is. Thus, Facundo Guardado, assuming himself to be the second force, according to all of the polls, took his electoral platform to Flores, hoping in vain that he would accept a public debate. But Flores received the plan with scorn. He congratulated Guardado for having been able to prepare the document only a few weeks before the election and added that he would send him his observations.

The meeting was presented in all of the spoken and visual news media: Guardado and part of the leadership of the FMLN presenting their document from the bottom of the staircase while Flores received it from above. The representatives of the popular interests presented themselves in suit and tie while the representative of the party of the rich appeared dressed in an informal manner. Flores did not even return the favor by presenting the ARENA platform to Guardado. In this way, at least they would have exchanged documents and agreed to send each other observations.

Parker, who, from a rather distant third position thinks that he occupies second place in the preferences of the electorate has not lagged behind either and has also presented his electoral platform. With more dignity than Guardado and with a great deal of pride he wrote a letter to Flores in which, in the language of a "machista", tells him that he has complied with the condition imposed and, as a consequence, he challenges him —as if to a last-century duel— to a debate. The cartoonists have made delicious fun of the attitudes of these politicians, who have, for many, become the butt of the joke.

The very astute Flores took advantage of the naivete of his adversaries. When they thought they had everything ready, Flores treated them with disdain and arrogance, indicating that he had more important things to do other than debate his opponents and that the second force will be defined in the March 7 voting. For now, Flores has done what he likes, in great measure because of the credulity of his adversaries. From the moment when he imposed the conditions on them it was evident that he had no intention of engaging in a debate. He did not have to. And it would have cost him dearly. However, the game could turn out badly for him in the medium rage. Not to keep one's word signifies a loss of credibility. Flores has undermined the possibility for his government to participate in alliances because it is not reasonable to ally oneself with someone who does not keep his word.

The debate, on the other hand, no longer has any importance. A debate under the conditions imposed by Flores would make no sense. A debate will not change electoral preferences; it might only make the candidates and their ideas a little better known to the public. But for this to happen, there must be the freedom to question and discuss —things which Flores does not tolerate. The debate which could have taken place during the campaign, questioning the ideas of the adversary, contrasting them with one's own ideas and demonstrating to the electorate who can best guarantee the resolution of national problems: but this will not take place.

When the population is asked who might be able to change the country, the first answers are ARENA and a strong leader, a possibility that has been appearing as a response to polls for some time now, but which has no place in these elections. Responses then indicate another party and only then does the FMLN appear in fourth place. A representative group places its hopes in the hands of God, either because this group responds on the basis of its faith or because it is so desperate that it thinks that only God can provide hope.

It is from this perspective that abstention must be interpreted. It is probable that this response is represented by 50% to 55%. This would mean that the next president of the republic will be elected by half or less of the electorate —that is to say, its representation will be limited and lack the necessary legitimacy to make the promised changes. Such a high level of abstention is harmful for democratization. It would be best, then, that the population go to the polls in a massive way, but for this to happen the electorate must be offered real options. This is precisely what is lacking. Thus there is scant interest in the campaign is explained. As a consequence, half of the population continues to think that the elections are not worthy of confidence and not transparent and they, therefore have no interest in going to vote.

SOCIAL POLICIES IN THE ARENA AND FMLN-USC PLATFORMS 

It is evident, from every point of view, that one of the weakest points in the democratic institutionalization in El Salvador has to do with social development. If it is undeniable that important steps have been taken to empower political democracy; it is also undeniable that too little has been done to advance in the consolidation of social democracy. During recent years, the rooting out of poverty has become a commonplace phrase in political discourse. Nevertheless, neither the official party nor the opposition parties have been able to respond to the basic needs which the population is demanding. Given that social policies are one of the determining aspects when one speaks of overcoming poverty, we present below some of the proposals that the two political parties with the greatest opportunity to achieve the presidency make about social policies in their platforms.

It is in the third section of his governmental platform that Francisco Flores presents the social policies which he will encourage from the vantage point of the presidential office for promoting social development. Thus, in the "Alliance based on Solidarity" the three principle areas of commitment are: (1) social participation and decentralization, (2) the creation of opportunities for progress; and (3) access to basic social services. Although in point 1 the "consolidation of democracy" is proposed as an objective and "success in decentralization", "social participation and decentralization" are better understood as a slow transference of property and administration to some of the basic services of the state into the private sector.

With this, according to the document, "better quality services" are guaranteed together with greater accessibility for the people. Taking into account these objectives, the actions to be taken for their implementation are: (a) to establish mechanisms for communication and coordination by the central government with local governments in order to guarantee effective implementation of public investment; to assure the transfer of financial resources from the central government to the municipalities in order to develop infrastructure projects to provide services which would provide municipal competence; (c) to promote social participation in the provision of basic services by means of contractual modalities of administration; and (d) institutionalize mechanisms for supervising and social auditing of the provision of public services.

On point 2, "the creation of opportunities for progress" the proposal is for policies aimed at strengthening the national educational system, beginning from the supposition that "greater levels of education mean greater well being and more opportunities for development." The objectives in this area of commitment are: (a) to elevate quality and pertinence in pre-school, primary, middle-level and superior education; (b) to increase efficiency and equality in the educational system; (c) to make of education an effective medium for forming a consciousness of values among children and young people; and (d) to link the educational process to development of technology and productivity.

Fundamentally, this area is oriented towards "a deepening of the educational reform", by means of (a) broadening of educational opportunity from the secondary level on in rural and suburban areas, establishing funds for scholarships for outstanding students and rehabilitation of the basic and medium-level educational infrastructure; (b) improving the quality of education, which implies introducing technical tools (computers, internet, television, video), the teaching of English, new curricular standards and a focus on systems of evaluation and supervision of education, among others; (c) establishing a system of incentives for excellence in teaching and promotion of teacher training; and (d) a decentralization of education by means of the participation of the private sector in the administration of technological institutes, the reorientation of educational and administrative financing of education together with a greater autonomy among the School Leadership Councils.

Understanding that basic social services "are the material support for the productive efforts of the communities and for improving the quality of life of all citizens", the third section of the "Alliance Based on Solidarity" ("Access to basic social services") proposes the following as its general objective: "to improve the quality of life among families and communities" and, more specifically: (a) facilitate access to dignified housing for the population; (b) assure a continuous supply of water at competitive prices; (c) increase quality and coverage of public health services, giving priority to preventive health programs and basic sanitation and the promotion of health; and (d) create a Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (MSPAS, for its initials in Spanish) strengthened in its function by regulation and oversight of the quality of health services provided.

The activities for implementing these objectives are grouped in three categories: access to housing, modernization of the water and sanitation sub/sector and reform of public health. The policies related to the access to housing are: (a) guaranteeing that the process of transferring titles of land are easy and fast, encouraging the promulgation of a law of territorial order and, in coordination with the pertinent sectors, a National Housing Police; (b) to facilitate the mechanisms for financing housing and increasing state resources oriented towards popular housing; and (c) strengthening municipal and community participation in order to facilitate access to basic services in FONAVIPO programs.

With relation to the second category, the most important policies are: (a) institutional reassignment of the roles of concession of water rights, its regulation, supervision and the operation of systems; (b) encouraging the promulgation of the Water Law and the creation of a n organism for overseeing and coordinating water policies and the administration and assignment of as well as concessions to water rights; (c) to decentralize the production and distribution of the potable water system of ANDA by means of administration or concessionaire contracts; and (d) liberalizing the production of potable water in order to facilitate private participation and to improve access to this resource.

Finally, policies related to the reform of the health sector are: (a) promote the establishment of an Advisory Council for Health in order to strengthen the coordination and reform of the sector; (b) reorganize and modernize the functions of the MSPAS; (c) apply strategies for the organization, financing and offering of health services in a decentralized form and with the participation of non-profit and community organizations and private enterprise; (d) promote the approval of a new Health Code and strengthen the offices of MSPAS responsible for its application; (c) create a public health system of information; and (f) modernize and strengthen the capacity for monitoring an oversight by MSPAS over the establishment of public and private health services.

Investing in the people is the first section of the governmental platform of the FMLN-USC coalition. In this section the different policies which each coalition proposes on social questions are presented. Such policies are aimed at the following areas: education, health, benefit system, housing, childhood and adolescence, sports, essential public services and transportation. For reasons of space, we will only detail here those which we consider to be most relevant.

The FMLN-USC government plan recognizes the efforts on educational matters up to this point. It points out, however, that that branch continues to be deficient in terms of infrastructure, formation of teaching and basic didactic resources. With the objective of responding to this problem, the platform in question establishes the following objectives: (a) to broaden educational coverage in rural and urban areas; (b) to increase the development of national education by increasing the potential of technical and scientific development; (c) to create a vision of the Salvadoran nation among those being education which strengthens the practice of appropriate values for a new society; and (d) strengthen national cultural identity by means of fomenting cultural and artistic values.

In order to achieve these objectives, the strategies and measures to be taken would be: (a) increase pedagogic research and the formation of teachers by means of Regional Normal Schools; (b) encourage the participation of governmental and non-governmental as well as community participation in the design and administration of educational policies; (c) guarantee free basic education; (d) facilitate access to the greatest possible number of women to education; (e) to promote scholarship and credit systems which would make possible the formation of secondary and higher education of students with limited resources; (f) make possible formal and informal technical formation in order to improve the possibility of entry into the labor force in accordance with productive needs; (g) incorporate into the curricular plans, central points such as human rights, equality of the sexes, environment and the culture of peace; (h) to encourage, in coordination with institutions which encourage cultural and artistic values, programs which promote the encouragement of national identity; (i) to create a national fund for the promotion and publication of cultural and historic patrimony; and (j) promote the arts in higher education.

On the question of health, the government plan of the FMLN-USC indicates that important sectors of the population are not receiving the attention they deserve, that there exists a tendency towards weak promotion of health and prevention against sickness and, moreover, the health system is fragmented and without leadership from the Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (MSPAS). For this reason, it is considered urgent to develop a "profound reform" of the health sector, fomenting broad participation in order to develop a "Social Pact for Health". The objective to be achieved would be: "to raise the level of health for the population by means of": (a) the construction of an integral national system of health directed by MSPAS which would be equitable, accessible, efficient, participatory and based on solidarity; and (b) the integration of actions on the question of health with the rest of the sectors which are directly involved with the development of fundamental human needs.

In order to implement this objective, the following strategies and measures are proposed, such as: (a) make financing more adequate to the health needs of the population (b) emphasize prevention, promotion and quality; (c) decentralize in an efficient way; (d) support health research; (e) strengthen the mechanisms of information and supervision of the system; (f) build a permanent consensus with the private sector; (g) reform social security in such a way as to permit it to be broadened and limit, as well, its tendency towards being bureaucratic (h) create a National Health Council; (i) formulate a policy of economic incentives and personnel training on all levels of the system; (j) develop research into the practice of community health and alternatives to traditional health practices; (k) regulate health services, medical practice and the supply of medicines by means of quality standards; (l) give priority to programs related to prevention and aid against illness which are products of violence, occupational health, integral health f women and children, mental health, rehabilitation, policies on medicines (quality, rational use, accessibility) and health and the environment.

On the question of housing policies, the platform of the principal opposition party questioned the absence of a national system for territorial planning and facility in the acquisition of housing. Given such a diagnostic, the following objective was formulated: to overcome the housing deficit which the country is experiencing in the rural and urban areas as well as to encourage advancement in the establishment of a system of territorial planning which would regulate the use of the soil in such a way as housing is benefited. In order to accomplish this, the following measures are proposed: (a) to re-structure the institutionality of the state linked to the housing question (The Vice-Ministry of Housing, FONAFIPO, etc.), in accordance with the current demands on housing; (b) decentralize housing programs in such a way that it would be the municipalities and the active portions of the population who would implement the projects in such a way that dignified housing would be guaranteed in the rural areas; (c) create or strengthen the state leadership body in the design and supervision of housing policy and subsidies to the social and economic sectors who are the least protected; (d) to encourage private participation in housing policies; (e) to promote a policy for extending lines of credit in the long run with accessible rates of interest which permit the poorest families to be able to acquire housing, remodel it or construct it, ( (f) encourage the planning of urban growth, assuring a better ordering of the territory; (g) encourage housing models which are in harmony with nature; (h) develop a policy of cost control for renting housing.

Below we will discuss, although only briefly, the left’s proposal on the question of basic services and social benefits. With respect to the first item, the FMLN-USC coalition proposes the following as an objective: "to guarantee broader coverage, quality and transparency in the provision of essential services", for which it proposes: (a) to establish rights and duties for the patron as well as faculties and obligations for those who provide public and private services; (b) to strengthen the arbitration capacity of SIGET and create regulatory bodies for the rest of the services; (c) to increase efficiency in the generation of energy and encourage a process of progressive decentralization of the service for providing water; (d) strengthen the FINET fund in order to assure the broadening of coverage and subsidy of tariffs to low-income sectors.

On the question of pensions, the government plan under discussion seeks to adjust itself "into a complementary mixed regimen which would assure a dignified old age for the population". In order to accomplish this, the following is proposed: (a)to take up again the constitutional role of the state in the benefit regulations incorporating the participation of the AFPs in a complementary way into the public system of benefits; (b)to extend coverage to the socially unprotected sectors; (c) to make a technical study of the fiscal cost of the current reform, which is not sustainable in the opinion of the coalition; (d) to reform the current law on pensions in such a way as to protect labor rights and respect constitutional right to a free choice of affiliation; and (e) to reorganize the Superintendence of Pensions in order to guarantee its transparency and impartiality.

As on the question of the topic of public security (see PROCESO, 842), the social policies proposed by the candidates of ARENA and the FMLN-USC coincide on many points, some of them fundamental. The official party as well as the coalition propose a reform of the health sector, a policy for broadening coverage and easing access to housing as well as education and they coincide on the need to expand, deepen and strengthen relations more closely with science and technology. As on such similar proposals, errors and weaknesses are to be found in both: in the first place, neither of the two principal contenders establishes a hierarchy of priorities or scheduling for the implementation of the social policies which they propose. Everything is equally important and without a timeline.

In second place, the social policies of both parties surpass the limits of the economic possibilities of the country: to propose an integral reconstruction of the educational infrastructure or access, on an urban and rural level, to housing are unrealizable aims in a context as poor and as needy as ours are. Thirdly, Francisco Flores as well as Facundo Guardado overlook the participation of private enterprise in the provision of basic services—especially because of the rapacity which characterizes the first and the weaknesses which characterize the mechanisms for controlling it—, do not necessarily translate into better efficiency and coverage, and even less so when the increase in costs would substitute for the absence of a physical infrastructure as a barrier against access for services.

CONCERNING CLINTON’S UPCOMING TOUR OF CENTRAL AMERICA 

In May of last year, the President of the United States, Bill Clinton, held a summit meeting with the presidents of the Central American countries in the midst of a difficult period of time for relations between these countries. The constant modifications taking place in U.S. immigration policy keep millions of undocumented Central Americans who live in the U.S. on the wire while the fragile economic situations in the region tremble before the impossibility of assimilating the return of this heavy burden of potential workers into their economies. This year, history is repeating itself with slight variations: during Mr. Clinton’s new tour of the region, the same topics are on the negotiating table, although this time they are minimally inclined in favor of Central America thanks to the enormous weight which the damage caused by hurricane Mitch had on international public opinion.

Some few days ago, the presidents of the region jointly defined the topics they will take up in the presidential summit meeting to be held on March 11 in Guatemala. Old fears and worries have come to occupy points on the agenda, among which immigration policy and the need to make concessions in the context of the economic guidelines which regulate commercial relations between Central America and the U.S. are the most pressing. The usual need for investment on the part of the world power in the region as a guarantee for economic stability in the area has also to be taken into account. The inclusion of other topics related to the transformation and reconstruction of the nations most affected by Mitch and the need, as well, for partial relief for the foreign debt of the region with the U.S. appear as points with equal priority.

The ineluctable need for Central America to organize its economy in an integral manner is still fundamental for the understanding of the current situation of the region. Here lies the importance that the meeting with Clinton has at this precise moment. On the basis of this, it must be determined from what point of view a real advance over other summit meetings can be measured; what attitude should be expected so that commitments acquired at this time can be seen to mark a highpoint in regional development in accordance with the old and new challenges which are presented to it.

In principal, it would be an error to consider the pretension of the Central American presidents to stick to a common agenda —presuming the existence of an illusory regional unity— in order to propose specific measures to the government of Clinton as an advance of sufficient weight and dimension to allow us to speak of a new era in relations with the U.S. In fact, the agreed upon objectives have not succeeded in overcoming the tendency of some countries to focus attention on agreed upon points of discussion, because of the benefits which, they presuppose. For example, Costa Rica continues to be the vanguard among efforts to obtain greater economic benefits for Central America, while the frosting on the cake represented by forgiving the foreign debt, Nicaragua and Honduras take the lion’s share. It is to be recommended that El Salvador, on the other hand, press for the rights of the undocumented residents in the United States.

But even more important is to observe that a critical evaluation of U.S. policy toward the region during the last decade has not been taken as a starting point upon which to base these objectives. If it is true that the reconstruction of the area represents an interest with historic dimensions, the "super agenda" of the presidents does not include any point designed to pressure the U.S. to reorient its policy towards the opening of markets. Several analysts coincide in indicating that Clinton’s efforts to push forward an expansionist trade policy respond more to the interests of U.S. transnational corporations —which, from their home base on Wall Street financed most of the president’s campaigns— than to the development and well-being of the regional economies. To confirm this tendency, it is enough to evaluate the priority of economic agreements have had on the efforts on political and social efforts in order to confirm this tendency.

Clinton has led the most important efforts of this century to consolidate commercial agreements with countries and blocks throughout Latin America; but cooperation in terms of pacification, strengthening state institutions and the modernization of political systems in underdeveloped countries have remained in the hands of minor dependencies inside the U.S. state apparatus. The efforts of these entities have, however, been valuable. The participation of the International Agency for Development (AID) in the peace process in Guatemala and in the development of community participation programs in El Salvador and Nicaragua, for example, represent positive support for certain sectors of the region.

However, the attention paid to these kinds of efforts has not been capitalized upon to the degree that it might generate real transformations in the quality of life of the population, much less in the form of the governments of the region’s countries. If the advances in benefits which the opening up of markets might have in Central America are still open for discussion, what is immediately noticeable in and of itself is that, to adhere to these strategies without sufficient planning means running the risk of accentuating old problems such as the tendency to base economies on speculation supported by inexperienced financial sectors, the weakening of industry and agriculture —or, in the worst of cases, to give birth to newer ills.

In his State of the Union Address for 1998, President Clinton insisted on the responsibility which his country has for world security and stability as the new millenium approaches. But what security can be offered to Central America when a sincere interest on the part of his administration for supporting political and economic sectors which would really serve as a basis for sustainable development is not perceived? How can a specific posture be identified which would be able to confront the xenophobic conservative Republicans in Congress, or which must deal with the flow of narcotics through the Atlantic Coast region, if what has characterized the Clinton Administration is the capability for adjusting itself with a certain flexibility to the unexpected crises which suddenly confront it? Where does that leave the proposals on ecology, support for education or crime control and the fast-growing violence which affects the region?

It is not a question of making the U.S. the panacea for all the ills of the Central American region. But there is no doubt that this country has sufficient power to influence the implementation of radical and effective solutions to those ills. It is clear that the implementation of a real ideal of mutual cooperation presupposes the abandonment of all kinds of strategies for maintaining the hegemonic rule over the economies of the countries of the Central American isthmus. However, the Clinton Administration seems to be far from abandoning such objectives. The presidents of the region ought to take notice of this in order, finally, to delineate the differences between this and other meetings and to offer real opportunities to the people for a new century.

VETO. On February 23, President Calderón Sol finally vetoed the Law for Rendering Accounts and Indemnification for Damages by means of which 100% of the agricultural debt would have been pardoned. In his declarations, the president not only justified his decision on the basis of maintaining judicial order but also stated that he would not permit this kind of "irresponsibility" and called upon the political class to act "with greater maturity". Calderón Sol alleged that the state is not obliged to render accounts to the agricultural and livestock sector because it has never administered its properties, that it could not disburse public funds for the payment of private debts and that the law aimed to resolve damages caused by "factions". Moreover, he pointed out that the deputies who supported the pardoning of the debt were only attempting to win votes for the upcoming March elections. CDU presidential candidate Ruben Zamora opposed the veto and the reasons put forth by Calderón Sol. "The President must learn to read the Constitution. The reasons he offers are banker’s reasons," he stated. Members of ARENA called the law "populist"; Kirio Waldo Salgado of the PLD called it "an aberration", and Manuel Melgar of the FMLN complained that, on this issue, reason had not triumphed in the end (La Prensa Gráfica, February 24, p. 4; El Diario de Hoy, February 24, p. 6).

UTEC. On February 17 the results of a poll carried out by CIOPS-UTEC were published and, contrary to the results yielded by a IUDOP-UCA poll, it showed a decline in the support of potential voters for ARENA from 39.18% to 34.53%. In the general voting, ARENA reached 46% of the voters, but the law requires 50% plus one in order to declare a winner in the first round. This reflects a 15.83% advantage of ARENA over the FMLN which can only count upon less than 20% of the intended vote of the populace. On the other hand, these results encouraged expectations of the PDC and the CDU for the possibilities of a second round of elections because they are the third and fourth in position with a 5.04% and 4.90% respectively. The PCN appears to be threatened, once again, with the possibility of extinction, given that it does not count on the 3% minimum votes required by law. The PCN received only 2.03% of the votes, LIDER 1.93%, followed by PUNTO, with 0.52%. Faced with the possibility of a second round, the respondents to the polls are divided over the convenience of permitting the formulas to readjust themselves in a later runoff election. Some 43.29% of those interviewed considered that in a second round they would be in agreement that changes in presidential formulas might take place. Some 43.76%, however, demand that the pre-established formula be respected (La Prensa Gráfica, February 18, p. 15).