Obstacles in presidential discourse

Empty patriotism

The history of those who won

Nicaragua: shady deals in privatizations and financial laws

News Briefs

OBSTACLES IN PRESIDENTIAL DISCOURSE

Echoing the almost unanimous demands of public opinion, President Flores announced a review of the communication lines of his administration. He also announced that once a week he would visit the rural areas of the country, a promise made since he began his term in office, but with which he has not yet complied. Another change not announced, but of which there is proof in the news media, is a propaganda campaign, paid for by taxpayers’ money, which reproduces the image of and some few sentences by President Flores. This campaign is in the traditional style and runs the danger of saturating the environment through growing bills to publicity agencies and favored media agencies. It is evident that the clamor of public opinion has felt an echo in presidential circles, but the changes announced, even though they are sensible, run the risk of not dealing with the problem at its root.

President Flores recognizes that his schema for communication has not functioned. His plan was that the ministers and presidents of the autonomous entities would be spokespersons for their own administrations. Apparently, he had dedicated a lot of time to setting up this novel scheme together with his government team. Flores attributes this failure to overriding presidentialism which he wishes to transform. And he is not incorrect on this account because the associations, trade unions and individuals seek to speak personally with the president of the republic himself. They know that he wields power in such a degree that if he used it he could resolve their particular problems. Even so, it is necessary to consider other aspects.

One thing is the presence of the president or his high-level government functionaries in the news media and another is the message which they transmit. One of the major problems of the current government is not the frequency with which his high-level functionaries appear in the media; it is his discourse. It is not a question of his appearance, but of what he communicates to a society which perceives itself to be in an economic crisis with a growing social unease. This is a malaise which might even have advanced in some sectors of the army. Given this reality, governmental discourse is irrelevant and empty. We take as an example the three-month report which the high-level functionaries have rendered to the media, following instructions from President Flores.

Invariably, everyone declares themselves to be satisfied for having reached the proposed measures at the beginning of his administration; but no one knows for certain what these measures are because they were never explained to public opinion. His optimistic evaluations are in contrast, moreover, with the appreciation of a generalized crisis which prevails in society. The majority of the population has the impression that the measures announced by the president not only will not be favorable to them, but will even make the cost of living more expensive. This rendering of accounts of the three-month period has turned out to be very similar to the reports which these same functionaries present annually before the Legislative Assembly, which are limited to the presentation of the longest list possible, of their presumed successes. In not reporting anything and not being even minimally critical, these reports produce an effect contrary to that which was originally intended because they contribute to discrediting the government. Nevertheless, none of these reports are dissonant with those of President Flores himself.

The weakness of the Flores administration is not in the communications lines he has established, but in the irrelevance and incredulity of his discourse —which is also a communication problem, but of another order. The governmental discourse still has not succeeded in touching the nerve points of national affairs in spite of the fact that President Flores ends his speeches by declaring that he is working to resolve the problems which concern every one of us.

ARENA and President Flores himself have defended themselves by arguing that the population has not understood the new way of governing. The truth is quite different. Governmental discourse becomes incomprehensible when the buying power of money is less and less each day, when unemployment is a very real and present threat, when public services are cut back and their quality lowered and when the voracity of the banks and the multinational corporations places the survival of medium-sized businesses in serious danger. It is President Flores who seems not to understand reality or, what is worse, who seems to ignore it. Just as he ignored the grades which public opinion gave him for his work and achievements during the first three months of his term in office. In some incomprehensible way, President Flores appears to interpret marks of 5.3 and 5.76, given him as a result of the polls, as popularity points.

The major difficulty confronting President Flores when he speaks today is his lack of credibility and truthfulness. This has been posed in terms of communication, because what is most lacking in his discourse is the absence of consideration of national reality. What is being called to account is not so much the presence of the president as one who takes national reality into account. It would do little good for Flores to visit the rural areas of the country or meet more frequently with the press, if his discourse does not take up national reality. A president of the republic ought to know how to speak as much about the daily affairs of the country as well as about his medium and long range plans. He ought to demonstrate that is he informed about what is happening and demonstrate that he is a leader of the nation's future. He ought to get close to the population at large and listen to them and their social organizations without preferences of any kind, demonstrating that he understands and identifies with the suffering of the people.

Instead of this, President Flores exercises power from a great distance and from a great height. He has located himself far from national reality, so much so that he seems not to be able to reach it and he speaks of it from the elevated height of president power. From this position he makes an effort to accommodate reality to his particular conceptions when he ought to do precisely the reverse. All that does not fit in with his preconceived schemes he leaves out, without paying any great attention to it. This separation from national reality is what makes his governmental discourse irrelevant.

EMPTY PATRIOTISM

Every September 15, the news media, the schools, public entities, certain individuals and some private institutions feel the obligation of commemorating "that glorious day in which our forefathers signed the declaration of independence on the Central American isthmus in Guatemala". It is a day of national celebration. "The birthday of the fatherland". "The moment to honor it and venerate it". Children must go out and march with baton-twirlers showing their legs and skills and soldiers making an exhibition of the military strength of the country. Good citizens, on this occasion, must hang a flag, visibly, on the front of their houses, attend parades —or at least watch them on the television or listen to them on the radio— and sing the national hymn with fervor.

It is a good opportunity to declare a paid holiday in general, exercise historic memory in a simplistic way as the moment permits and, above all, in order fully to rest from their daily occupations. And to take advantage of the deluge of pubic opinion polls in order to measure the participation of Salvadorans in "civic" activities, one would doubtless be surprised at the lack of "commitment" of the majority with patriotic "values". It is not out of line to suppose that this celebration is not able to create a lot of enthusiasm among the popular masses who are overcome by the serious problems to which they see no quick solution, disenchanted about everything which represents public authority and overwhelmed by the sensation of being on a ship without a rudder, without a guide and without clarity as to the horizon.

Even so, the effort to make of this a date of major patriotic enthusiasm perseveres. It is a question of establishing an unquestionable identity between the native land and the flag; between the home for all and the emblem: between beautiful landscapes and the national hymn. As if to sing the national anthem, learn the pledge of allegiance to the flag or consider that the exhibition of arms by the military is a thing worthy of admiration were an unequivocal demonstration of love for country. A patriot is, according to the traditional discourse for each September 15, everything which reverence for the founding fathers for having "liberated" Central American from the Spanish "chains" —as if the forefathers were really thinking of all of Central America when they achieved independence—: he or she who swells with pride when they hear the popular song "El Carbonero": it is he who feels himself to be the object and spokesperson for the insignias and words "Dios, Unión y Libertad"....

On this date, those who love the country tend to concern themselves as never before with the future generation. They insist on the importance of young people being familiarized with the past and they tremble before the white and blue or before the singing of: "from peace to supreme happiness...". What the patriots seem not to notice is that the future generations are not precisely moved by unlimited respect for their forebears, or interest in knowing what they did: nor do the national colors and melodies awaken sentiments in them.

Basically, one would have to see how many schoolchildren would be willing to march on the streets if the commemoration of the independence of the country were optional. Moreover, it would be interesting to explore how many of those who do so, do so with enthusiasm, are conscious of the significance that the defenders of "civic values" these activities are meant to foment: and how many are willing to share that. Salvadoran young people are, currently, on the one hand, more critical, and more reflexive about what is happening, what they need and how things go in the adult world: and, on the other hand, have a greater propensity to reject that which most patriots would call "national identity", to prefer what comes from afar more than what their own country can scarcely offer them, to wish for better lives or lives different from those circumstances in which they find themselves.

It is for these reasons that to aim to cultivate love for country with formalities empty of specific content, that is to say, close to palpable reality, is a futile effort, and even one which arouses suspicion. One does not have to be overly insightful to take note of the fact that between the veneration of the patriotic symbols and the daily activities of public figures, a flagrant contradiction exists. To honor the country is easy —it is the message that those given to being "civic-minded" seem to want to send to young people—, it is enough to stand up to listen to the national anthem or hang a flag in the window, anyone can do it. In fact, politicians and businessmen can be corrupt and exploitative, but standing at attention with a look of ecstasy before the national emblem is enough to show the pride that they feel at belonging to the country in which they steal and to be the compatriots of those whom they exploit.

It would be difficult not to seem to be a hypocrite when painting such formalities in shades of ethical values, while certain attitudes which affect us all and daily attack our living together pass by unperceived in these national fiestas. It could even be understood as a joke in bad taste that teachers, functionaries and parents want to inculcate in their young children civic values while in this country anyone can disobey traffic signals, contaminate the environment, be intolerant when dealing with diversity, easily violate the laws, hold the life of others as of little value, be dishonest and use violence to resolve conflicts.

 That society needs to seek arenas for collective celebration which would serve as cohesive factors, underline the social dimension of individuals, raise the majority out of their daily routine and become an expression of diverse talents is something which is not open for discussion. Religious festivals and carnivals seem traditionally to fulfill these functions, each one with very precise objectives. What is questionable about the commemoration of September 15 is the celebration of certain habits which, far from leading to the transformation of incorrect ways of doing things, inflate irrelevant norms of behavior and contribute to ignoring what is bad.

We may remember that this exaltation of patriotic symbols and "civic values" is traditionally the province of the military and of conservative sectors. It is doubtless convenient to encourage allegiance to such banners in order to reduce the presence and importance of critical and transforming ideas. That abysmal differences exist with regard to the possibilities of development between some sectors and others it is secondary with relation to the fact that the same sky is above us all and the same volcanoes surround us. That the majority of people is not protected from the imminent danger of violence, while those who govern seem to experiment about what measures deepen and what measures diminish the scourge. It is irrelevant at that moment to feel that we are all free, united and in communion with God, as the slogan on our flag says: "Dios, Unión, Libertad".

Moreover, this cult of patriotism is at the same time an incentive for nationalism; a reinforcement of that deeply rooted concept that each country ought to stay inside the borders which someone, using doubtful criteria, established. It is curious that September 15 is fiesta common to the whole Central American region but that, nevertheless in that celebration no one mentions anything other than the flag, the national anthem and their own emblem--precisely what distinguishes it from other nations. Is appealing to those emblems the best way to love one's country? And moreover, is one's country, represented by such icons, a value which is necessary to cultivate, honor and defend?

THE HISTORY OF THOSE WHO WON 

In 1992, the formerly armed left declared that they had won the peace. And, that they had won the war as well. The fact that it was impossible for the army to defeat the guerrilla in a definitive way and the recognition of this reality by part of the right-wing (the recognition of which was encouraged by international pressure —or did international pressure obligate them to?—), led to the signing of the peace. For the FMLN and its sympathizers, the changes taking place in the country from this moment on would be the fruit of revolution, no longer armed but negotiated, but a revolution for all that. The war ended, the guerrilla became part of the logic of political parties and electoral campaigns became the substitute for arms as the instruments to achieve power. Then the proud FMLN began to lose. The battles for victory dissipated in the bitter electoral failure and profound deception with the sloth with which changes could be achieved; pragmatism came to substitute for ideals and the futility of the heroic gestures of the past became apparent. Had it all been worth it? So much death and pain for so little?.... These began to be the questions some of the members of the former guerrilla began to ask themselves each day.

Eight years later, the right is the big winner in the post-war process. They face an FMLN which has become very small because of its inexperience in the political arena, weakened by its internal conflicts and incapable of penetrating the skepticism of the population, ARENA has been able to hold the executive office for three consecutive periods and have carried their economic project forward, almost without external interference. It is, nevertheless, in the history of its (de)construction and manipulation, that ARENA comes forth as the true winner of the war. With the manifest collaboration of the big communications media, the right has sold a history of the country which is a product of simplistic cartoons—and it is their own version. So, from the vision of history according to the winners, during the war years (the period of "subversive aggression", as they like to say) there were only two types of actors: the communists (or, terrorists responsible for the destruction of the country) and the anti-communists (or patriots who defended freedom and private property). The first were those who attacked; the second, their victims.

In this, the logic of official history is implacable. While a figure such as Monsignor Romero, true martyr in the search for justice, is dealt with in terms of faintly disguised scorn ("puppet of the subversives" or "a mistaken pastor" are some of the phrases with which his memory is celebrated in the most recalcitrant circles of the right-wing) which is done to ignore the date of his assassination, while to Domingo Monterrosa, for example, columns are dedicated (see the article written by Ernesto Vargas on September 11 in La Prensa Gráfica) and there are reports which highlight his ability as a genius of military strategy (the same genius who designed and implemented some of the most deadly and savage counterinsurgency techniques). Not to speak of the enthusiasm which is awakened in the majority of the media and reporters in the country by the sadly famous figure of Major D'Aubuisson, the patron saint of a broad sector of the right-wing. There is such enthusiasm afoot that even the prudent Escobar Galindo could not resist writing a chronicle of his childhood friendship with the still innocent "Robertillo" D'Aubuisson.

That the friendship with people who have passed into posterity for their bloody manias might be a motive for pride; that their memory is fed without the most minimal critical effort says much of the history which is to be inherited by the coming generations. Much is also said of the magnitude of the victory of the right-wing after the war ended. If the ARENA victory is already a great one, in having succeeded in maintaining and focussing its status within society, greater still is the collective imagination which is to be peopled with heroes cut to measure and convenience. Not without a certain cruelty and fatalism is it said that a people inherits the government it deserves. Are these the historic figures which a nation as violent as ours must remember?

NICARAGUA: SHADY DEALS IN PRIVATIZATIONS AND FINANCIAL LAWS

On August 30, in the midst of the confusion left on the playing field by the signing of the Liberal Party-Sandinista pact, the General Comptroller of the Republic of Nicaragua issued a resolution that was as much hoped for as it was daringly unexpected: the resolution annulled the privatization of the Nicaraguan Industrial and Commercial Bank (BANIC), the fruit of a process begun in 1997 and consummated in January 1999. This, doubtless, is the most significant resolution issued by the Comptroller’s Office after what in February would signal the unheard of increase in the personal holdings of President Alemán, an activity which would remain frozen pending the expectation that the President would comply with the law and testify before the Comptroller’s Office as to how his personal holdings were increased to such an extent.

After several months of investigation —begun after national bankers and news media presented denunciations—, the new resolution by the Comptroller’s Office proved, using multiple and substantiated reasons, that serious irregularities in the whole process of capitalization existed, and that they also existed in the hurried construction of a corporation named Ibero-American Investments, to which the Hamilton Bank of Miami, Florida was affiliated in order to buy the BANIC shares and stocks.

Just as in other scandalous cases of corruption, illegalities and anomalies which marked the whole process of capitalization of this bank point to the people closest to President Alemán. The investigation shows, for example, that, before the anomalous operation, BANIC issued irregular credits by the millions to the presidents friends and associates and to the corporation which, for some years now, has been buying lands all over the country for the president’s family. Other reports from the Comptroller’s Office demonstrated that the guidelines issued by BANIC —some continued at the leadership level— were issued in an illegal way during the process of the privatization of more than 1.6 million dollars in indemnizations, bonds, emoluments and payments over and above salaries. With this resolution on the question of BANIC, the Comptroller’s Office has placed in evidence the heaviest and clearest lines of a complex intrigue involving influence peddling and abuse of discretion.

But perhaps the most serious part of the case is the involvement of a bank established in the United States in the capitalization operation. This allowed the Comptroller’s Office of Nicaragua to request the Attorney General of the U.S., Janet Reno, that an investigation be conducted in order to determine if the illegality of the financial operation violated only Nicaraguan laws, or if it also violated U.S. federal law, which is very touchy about bank operations internationally which could be linked to narcotics trafficking. Will the government of the U.S. participate in clearing up the activities denounced in Nicaragua?

The World Bank, for its part, distanced itself from the BANIC operation immediately after the Comptroller’s Office published its resolution. As is well known, the World Bank is the international institution which supervises the structural reforms to which it places a conditioning factor for the obtaining of credits in the adjustment programs which are implemented in the countries to the South. The most important of these reforms is the privatization of the state bonds. "For the World Bank, what is fundamental is that the privatization process should take place in a transparent way and on the basis of market criteria, and no on the basis of obscure maneuvers using criteria [characteristic of] the mafia, as in the case of BANIC, as the Comptroller’s Office is demonstrating," stated an independent economist to an Envío correspondent.

The "USA connection" and the position of the World Bank —which even provided information on the case to the Comptroller’s Office— has placed the Alemán government in an extremely delicate position. The Comptroller, Augustín Jarquín, spoke of the "discomfort" and "unease" in the World Bank over the issue. And, to complicate the panorama on privatizations even further, another thorny case was discovered, at a point in time when the anomalies in BANIC had only recently been made public. This one revealed, once again, a high level of irresponsibility which exists in the handling of state goods: it deals with seven properties of the state telecommunications enterprise, ENITEL —also undergoing the process of privatization—, over which hangs a 100 million dollar mortgage in favor of a construction business which is part of the Cuban-American consortium, Mas Canosa.

"Escape" from the BANIC case is not a simple matter for the government. In the case of ENITEL, the President had already said that the mortgage would be annulled. Will this be the end of the scandal? What is certain is that the questions which arise from recent resolutions and investigations by the Comptroller’s Office will continue to point the finger at the President and several of his high-level functionaries —but for how long? Jumping from one scandal to another, it is difficult to understand the intrigues which make up each one, but it is much more difficult to distinguish which is the major and which the less unfortunate for the future of the country.

Also on the eve of the resolution of the Comptroller’s Office concerning BANIC, other contradictions had been created on the president’s football field. Alemán had presented a surprise —as much to private bankers as to his allies in the FSLN—: a package of financial laws which he sent to the National Assembly on August 24 for their approval with a note that they were urgent. The laws suppressed the autonomy of the Superintendent of Banks by placing the bank under total control of the presidency. It concentrates more economic-financial power in the person of the President of the Central Bank, Noel Ramirez, and establishes new regulations concerning the private bank and concerning all the financial institutions which presuppose important changes in the current rules of the game as they affect initial capital, the issuance of credits, approval by banks, substitutions for their board members, etc.

The critics of the laws —bankers, businessmen, politicians— spoke of a "financial dictatorship" and of a new wave of "economic terrorism". The Assistant Comptroller for the Republic of Nicaragua, Claudia Frixione, referred to the topic of bank secrets, which would be placed in danger when President Alemán applied the law and turned over the Superintendence to Ramirez, who is a member of the executive board of the government party. "In making the Superintendence of the institution docile and by placing it in the hands of a political party, the President of the Republic could ask for a private report on any citizen who does not share the political views of the government".

If the total loss of autonomy by the Superintendence of Banks already worried private bankers, other provisions of the new laws also make them nervous. Among these, the provision which limits to 10% the number of shares which any associate of the bank may have, and thereby avoid such risky situations as that which brought bankruptcy recently to another financial institution of the country, BANCOSUR. Or the provision which establishes limits on the total amount of credits which the banks must issue to businesses linked by family ties with the members of the bank’s board of directors.

Both provisions seriously affect all of the private banks of Nicaragua which —as with those in the rest of Latin America— respond to the obsolete profile of an oligarchic bank, at the service of family groups which have concentrated economic and political power in their hands for centuries. At least these last two provisions of the new laws are very positive because they seek to democratize financial power. President Alemán, then, had a certain power base when he angrily answered the bankers who were criticizing the laws, which he called "revolutionary". Alemán accused the bankers of having established, during these years, a "privileged monopoly" using national savings to favor his friends with credits, forgetting about the "campesinos" and the poor.

Nevertheless, a few days later, everything that came to light in the BANIC case placed in evidence the demagogy of his arguments. The investigation of the Comptroller’s Office demonstrated that, in order to compete with the "oligarchic privileges", the liberal government had used BANIC to capitalize in a favorable way the high-level functionaries of the presidential circle in a privileged way. And so it is that the allies of Violeta de Chamorro’s government threw a party to share out the booty of the BANADES state bank;, the allies of Alemán’s government did the same with BANIC. Behind the anti-oligarchic presidential discourse and the closed defense "of the middle classes which also have rights" is hidden the concept of the state booty which Alemán shares with the traditional oligarchy.

The bankers of the sector engaging in a pact with the FSLN did not expect financial laws. The government did not expect all that came to light about BANIC. Multilateral organisms such as the World Bank and the International Development Bank —those who design and monitor the march of the Nicaraguan economy— did not expect either of these two crises. The World Bank works to establish solid democracies with market economies in Latin America which favor globalized capital. But in Nicaragua, the World Bank finds a country which hardly knows about democracy and market laws and a government which takes up the democratizing and modernizing discourse of the technocracy, which speaks of globalization and a state of law, but which later applies the old law of the funnel: the wide end for me and the small end for you....

The multilateral organisms are attempting to establish a logic in market economies which is more transparent and democratic. They have also analyzed the financial crisis in the Asian countries —those which have been called "tigers"— and have concluded that the slump is owing to a very lax regulation —null and void— of its financial systems. On the basis of this conclusion, all of the countries of the Southern Cone are insisting on a recipe which is not altogether new. The new factor in all of this is the accent which is being placed upon them today: that it is necessary to tighten the controls on the private bank in all of the countries undergoing development.

The multilateral companies have always considered that Nicaragua has a fragile banking system because it is relatively new —it hardly began in 1991— and because it has a very benign regulatory system, established in such a precise way that so that many new banks can grow with rapidity.

The strategy of the World Bank and the International Development Bank ought to develop in two stages: in the first, it will identify strong national institutions. In the second, it will seek the autonomy of these institutions. From this point of view, to concentrate the functions of the Central Bank and those of the Superintendence —as the new law proposes— it could respond to the design which is to be established. This conceptual context was taken advantage of by the liberal government in order to suppress the provision of the new law concerning the autonomy of the Superintendence of Banks, an institution which was created as an autonomous entity in 1991, even before the private bank was reinstalled in the country, precisely as a guarantee for transparency and control of the process, and precisely as a conditioning factor required by the multilateral organisms for supporting it.

All in all, the new law for the Superintendence did not obtain the support of the World Bank. Even so, the government sent it without that consensus to the national Assembly, causing a conflict which will require a complex conclusion. Just one more sign of the fearless authoritarian style of the current government. Nevertheless, the accumulation of contradictions which Arnoldo Alemán has been generating with all of the economic sectors which are not those of his circle of power will not permit him to pass these laws as they were conceived and they will have to be made more flexible . In fact, on September 2, after a meeting with the bankers, the President agreed to withdraw the urgent classification on the laws, committing himself, moreover, to make some aspects of the laws more flexible. In this "free fire" zone, who will win?

CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. A poll by La Prensa Gráfica-UNIMER, conducted between January and June of this year, revealed that 1,163,000 Salvadorans (35% of the population) have been victims of crime in the last six months. This translates into figures in which 269 persons are affected by criminal acts every hour, or, put another way, every 13 seconds someone suffers an attack of vandalism in El Salvador. The majority of the victims live in cities. For every three affected by criminal acts in the urban areas, one is a victim in the rural areas of the country. Another fact is that half of those affected by criminal activity are young people between the ages of 18 and 29. As to socio-economic level, the victims are people belonging to the lower middle class. The most common crimes are those of theft and assault, according to data presented by the Attorney General of the Republic. Murder also occupies an important place on the list because in the first five months of the year, 708 murders have been reported —that is to say, 11 each day. Moreover, among the most common crimes committed in the country are blackmail and swindling and the resultant damage, wounds and threats. On the other hand, the poll revealed that 12% of the population states that they are armed. Nevertheless, the majority of those polled think that the Law on Arms will not solve the problem of crime in the country (La Prensa Gráfica, September 10, p. 5 and 6).

SILVA. The National Council of the Social Christian Union (USC) proclaimed, on September 12, that Mayor Hector Silva would be their candidate for the capital city in the elections in 2000. Likewise, the accepted the membership of the Mayor of Santa Ana, Moises Macall. The USC is attempting to be the basis for all coalitions which seek re-elections for both functionaries. "The USC is the first party which publishes and formally gives its support [for Silva as candidate]", declared Deputy Abraham Rodriguez, president of that party. The USC does not place and conditions on accepting Silva as a candidate. Moreover, Rodriguez says that, Silva, as well as Macall, will have the freedom to create a government program without interference of the party. For his part, Jorge Villacorta, of the Democratic Convergence, indicated his lack of confidence for the USC's declaring itself as "the first party to show its support". "For God’s sake, don’t make me laugh! The USC is nothing! These attitudes, seen for what they are only opportunism. It is shabby and tiny-minded politics", stated Villcorta. The re-election of Silva is the fruit of an effort by a group named "Citizen’s Initiative" headed by the capital city council, Hector Dada Hirezi. According to this group, the candidature should arise as a result of a consensus of social sectors and political parties (El Diario de Hoy, September 12, p. 4).

FLORES. President Flores stated, on September 10, that he will attempt to get closer to the people. He declared that he will go to the rural areas of the country on a weekly basis in order to learn the opinion of the population on governmental decisions. Moreover, he said that he will have a greater presence in the news media, at the same time as he redefines the functions of the presidential spokesperson, Ricardo Rivas. He completely ruled out, however, the removal of Rivas or of any other functionary in his cabinet because he said he was satisfied with the government team. "We are very content with the government team, that is to say, we feel that it is a team of fresh and active people", stated the president. All of the foregoing was a response to public opinion polls which reflect discontent with the people who are at a distance from Flores. According to the president's statements, he will begin to be the spokesperson of his administration, just as the citizenry requests. Although he declared that he will maintain the system in which each minister is his or her own spokesperson for the various state ministries. "We are giving a turn to our communications in order to deal with the demand for a greater presence by the president in the media and a greater closeness of the president to the people," stated Flores (La Prensa Gráfica, September 11, p. 4).