Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T19:25:42.473Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Another Mexican Earthquake? An Assessment of the 2 July 2000 Elections1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Nikki Craske
Nikki Craske*
Affiliation:
The Institute of Latin American Studies, University of Liverpool
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Date 2 July 2000 Represented A True Watershed In Mexican politics. For the first time in post-revolutionary Mexico an opposition candidate won the presidential elections. Since 1988, opposition parties on the left and right have slowly eroded the stranglehold on electoral politics of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (the PRI), which has been in power since 1929. Vicente Fox Quesada's victory heralds the end of an era; or does it? A dominant theme in analyses of Mexican politics over the past twenty years has been the tension between continuity and change. In this article I argue that Fox's victory is an important, indeed essential, component of Mexico's slow democratization process; but it does not represent democracy in itself. There are three areas where the longer-term outcome of these elections will be measured: first there is the willingness of Fox to carry out further necessary reforms, particularly in the areas of judicial and fiscal reform. To date he has signalled that these will be important policies of his administration but we must wait for the results. Secondly, even where he is willing to deepen democratic reforms, one must ask to what extent will he be able to do so, both in terms of generating enough support within his own party and in overcoming resistance from the PRI, which still controls significant resources and retains a majority in the senate. And thirdly, it must be noted that Fox displayed some worrying tendencies towards populism in his presidential campaign which serve as a sobering reminder that his own democratic practices may be questionable.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , January 2001 , pp. 27 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

The section on the Institutional Context relies on fieldwork carried out when I participated as an observer of pre-electoral conditions in Mexico in May 2000 (I was an IFE recognized ‘foreign visitor’). Many thanks go to Global Exchange and Alianza Cívica for helping to organize the fieldwork and also to the University of Liverpool’s Research and Development Fund for assisting with the costs. I would also like to thank the other members of the team for fruitful discussions regarding the pre-electoral process.

References

2 Grayson, George W, ‘Ruling Party’s Loss in Chiapas Holds Profound Significance for Mexico’, distributed through Foreign Policy Research Institute <> 2000 Google Scholar.

3 The observation team consisted of 26 academics visiting eight states: Chiapas, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Mexico State, Oaxaca, San Luis Potosí and the Yucatán. I went to the rural region of La Huasteca (in both Hidalgo and San Luis). In the teams we interviewed IFE officials at federal and regional level, spoke with members of the main parties and went into communities to speak with voters and local people charged with looking after polling stations. For the full report ‘Pre-electoral Conditions in Mexico 2000’ see <www.globalexchange.org>.

4 See Craig, Ann and Cornelius, Wayne ‘Houses Divided: Parties and Political Reform in Mexico’ in Mainwaring, Scott and Scully, Timothy (eds), Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, Stanford, Cal., Stanford University Press, 1995 Google Scholar.

5 Mexico Election Monitor #3 published by the Washington Office of Latin America <www.wola.org/mexbulletin3.html>.

6 See ‘An Anxious Vigil in Mexico’s Political Trenches’, New York Times, 3 July 2000.

7 See the IFE website www.ife.org.mx which also includes monthly figures.

8 Mexico Election Monitor #3, op. cit., p. 4.

9 ‘Pre-electoral Conditions’, op. cit., pp. 8–9.

10 In Dix, Robert, ‘Democratization and the Institutionalization of Latin American Parties’, Comparative Political Studies, 24:4 (1992), pp. 488–511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 ‘Informe preliminar sobre la calidad de la jornada electoral’, www.alianzacivica.org.mx.

12 Comments at a seminar at UNAM (‘Peligra la gobernabilidad por la lucha priísta: Hernández Navarro’, La Jornada, 2 October 2000). At the same time a group of activists was forging a New Left to relaunch the beleaguered party (‘Nueva Izquierda, corriente para refundar el PRD’, in La Jornada, 2 October 2000).

13 ‘Confidence Hit in Mexico’, Financial Times, 3 October 2000.

14 ‘Asegurar la vida democrática, primera acción de gobierno: Fox’, La Jornada, 10 September 2000

15 ‘Confidence Hit in Mexico’, Financial Times, 3 October 2000.

16 ‘Mexican Leader Soothes Investors’, Financial Times, 11 October 2000.

17 ‘Can Mexico’s New Leader Really Work Wonders?’, New York Times, 29 October 2000.

18 Nikki Craske, Corporatism Revisited: Salinas and the Reform of the Popular Sector, London, Institute of Latin American Studies Research, 37, 1994; Dresser, Denise, ‘Bringing the Poor Back in: National Solidarity as a Strategy of Regime Legitimation’, in Cornelius, Wayne, Craig, Ann and Fox, Jonathan (eds), Transforming State-Society Relations in Mexico: the National Solidarity Strategy, San Diego, Cal., Center for US-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego, 1994 Google Scholar; Juan Molinar Horcasitas and Jeffry Weldon, ‘Electoral Determinants and Consequences of National Solidarity’, in Wayne Cornelius, Ann Craig and Jonathan Fox (eds), Transforming State-Society Relations in Mexico: the National Solidarity Strategy.

19 Nikki Craske, Corporatism Revisited , op. cit.

20 On metaconstitutionality see Garrido, Luis Javier, El Partido de la Revolución Institucionalizada: la formación del nuevo estado (1928–1946), Mexico DF, Siglo XXI, 1995, pp. 422–5Google Scholar. Rubio, Luis argues that Zedillo has dispensed with such practices; ‘Coping with Political Change’, in Purcell, Susan Kaufman and Rubio, Luis (eds), Mexico Under Zedillo, 1998, Boulder, Colo., Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998 Google Scholar.

21 ‘Rechaza Carrasco que se reforme la Constitución’, La Jornada, 8 September 2000.

22 Mercedes Barquet, personal communication.

23 ‘Ruling Party Loses Vote for Chiapas Governorship, Early Results Show’, New York Times, (nd) posted on Global Exchange website <www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/mexico/news/082300.html>.

24 ‘Contradicciones, la constante en el discurso de Fox Quesada’, La Jornada, 24 August 2000.

25 Review of Economic Situation of Mexico, LXXVI: 895, Banamex, October 2000.

26 Adrián Trejo ‘El PAN, con doble “personalidad” ’, El Economista, 6 September 2000.

27 George Grayson, ‘Ruling Party’s Losses’, op. cit.

28 ‘Mi gobierno será el más detestado de la historia si no cumplo compromisos: Fox’, La Jornada, 6 October 2000.

29 Meyer, Lorenzo, ‘Democratization of the PRI: Mission Impossible?’ in Cornelius, Wayne, Gentleman, Judith and Smith, Peter (eds), Mexico’s Alternative Political Futures, San Diego, Cal., Center for US-Mexican Studies, University of California San Diego, 1989 Google Scholar.