Dismantle presidentialism

Our country has always been the government of one man. A president who has been above the other powers. A centralist president who controls the state governors and the government of Mexico City. A president who has been above the institutions manages the federal budget at will and uses it to control national political life.

Starting in 1988, several reforms were carried out to put an end to presidentialism, to put an end to the state party, to advance federalism and a true division of powers.

The first step was an electoral reform to open up the possibility of alternating power, remove control of the electoral bodies from the government, make the elections more competitive and the Congress more plural. A second step was to achieve total autonomy of the Judiciary and advance federalism through the decentralization of functions and resources to the states.

These changes allowed in 1997 an independent Chamber of Deputies that achieved a true balance of powers.

Various autonomous bodies were approved to limit the discretion of the presidential power, which gave transparency and guarantees to the economic sectors. Progress was also made, although at a very slow pace, in the organization and participation of civil society in the government.

It was thought that with these changes it would be impossible to return to presidentialism and the state party, but López Obrador has shown us how wrong we were. During this six-year term we have returned to almost absolute presidential power that controls the Legislative power through an unconditional majority of the State party, the Court so that it cannot annul unconstitutional laws, the governors through spending and investments, the agencies autonomous naming the owners and directors and reducing their budget and above all ignoring organized civil society.

It has been able to do this because we left doors open in the reforms. In the case of the Court, the president has the last word to appoint a new minister if the Senate rejects his shortlist on two occasions. In all the independent organisms the proposal of the holder or of the new advisers comes from the president who with the majority of him in the Congress decides what he proposes. He controls the governors of Morena because he appointed them and the opposition ones through support and works in their states and with promises of embassies. Through social programs he has direct interference in political life and in the elections of the entire Republic. In the case of civil society organizations he simply ignored them and reduced any support for them. Through the Army and the National Guard, he has control of the political life of the entire national territory.

If we want to reverse the political setback that has occurred in this six-year term, we have to carry out reforms to eliminate the powers of the president to propose ministers, counselors or holders of other power or autonomous bodies, decentralize powers, responsibilities and public spending towards the states and municipalities, demilitarize the National Guard and the offices and companies that have been given to them, depoliticize social programs and, above all, citizenize national life by promoting and supporting the organization and participation of civil society in government.

As long as we don’t do this, Mexico will continue to be the country of one man or one woman.