Author: michelle

Last post of the day…

More discussion about allowing mandatory private pension fund administrators (Afores) to invest in the energy sector.

Some argue that pension funds should be investing in Pemex (oil) and CFE (electricity) to help those para-statals (sp?) expand their operations or upgrade their infrastructure. They argue that the pension funds shouldn’t be investing abroad.

While domestic savings and investment might have been one of the goals of the pension privatization in Mexico (see book by Raul Madrid), I’m not convinced that investing those funds in Pemex or CFE would be good for future pensioners. Until those companies demonstrate efficient returns and subsidies are eliminated (did I really just say that?), I doubt pensioners would get good returns on their investment. And their pensions are already going to be dismal, even with funds invested abroad.

Mexican wages is U.S. rising faster than those of professors

According to an article in La Jornada , salaries for Mexicans working in the U.S. rose by 12.4% last year. That’s a lot more than the 1% GATech faculty received in January, which was the first raise since 2002 when our new Governor froze all state employee wages.

The total salaries earned by Mexicans in the U.S. are equivalent to 17.5% of Mexico’s GDP. And a larger percentage of those earnings are returning to Mexico as remittances. Expectations are that remittances will bypass tourism as the second leading contributor to Mexico’s gross income, second only to petroleum.

PAN backs away from anti-immigration bill

The bill that was supposed to be voted on in the Senate yesterday was withdrawn by the PAN who plans to “enrich” the bill before resubmitting it for consideration. They are going to eliminate some vague references to “zones of risk.”

Can AMLO go back to work next Monday?

AMLO has announced plans to go back to work next Monday to demonstrate that though he has lost his immunity, he has not been removed from office. In a bizarre twist, the legislators that removed that immunity agree that he still holds office until the AG’s office formally files charges against him.

The AG and President’s office are taking a harder stance. Both have said that the desafuero not only removed AMLO’s immunity, but also removes him from office.

The President’s spokeperson, probably in response to the comments made by the Secretary of State yesterday, also announced that the President has not considered pardoning AMLO. Granted, Creel’s comments yesterday about a “political arrangement” were vague, but clearly Creel and Fox are not on the same page. (Maybe this is because Creel and Fox’s wife both want to be President in 2006.)

In any event, even those that wanted AMLO’s desafuero do not agree on his current status. And some may even be trying to backtrack from the political fallout that the desafuero has caused.

Meanwhile, AMLO has stated various times over the last few days that he will not seek revenge when he becomes President against those who voted for the desafuero.

“Si la mayoría de los mexicanos me eligen Presidente, no voy a actuar con venganza ni les voy a fabricar delitos a mis adversarios políticos”…

“‘Si hay diferencias, que las hay, en cuanto a concepción de país, en cuanto a proyecto de nación, esas diferencias las tenemos que resolver mediante el método democrático. Es en las elecciones donde el pueblo va a decidir qué candidato, qué partido, qué programa debe prevalecer en nuestro país a partir de las elecciones de 2006”

My interpretation of this? AMLO is trying to tell his political enemies that once he becomes President, he will not try to punish them. Why? It reiterates his confidence that he will be elected. It also provides an incentive for his enemies to soften their stance because they can be assured that the costs of AMLO’s victory will not be too high for them. You can think of it in terms of Dahl’s cost of suppression versus costs of inclusion in a transition to democracy. You’re more willing to allow your enemies to participate if you think the costs of their victory will not be too high.

For all you anti-immigration enthusiasts

Today, in the Mexican Senate, the Senators will vote on a law that will enable the government to arrest would-be migrants before they cross the border into the United States.

But, it leaves me wondering, how will they establish “intent” to cross? And how might authorities manipulate such a law to harrass workers or political opponents?

As I was saying….

The desafuero conflict is likely to be resolved with some sort of negotiated outcome, in part, because all actors fear the economic consequences if foreign investors get too freaked out. I repeated this claim last week, too.

It seems the Mexican Secretary of State (and would be PAN candidate for President in 2006) agrees with me. In a press conference, Santiago Creel said that the government would wait for the decision of the Supreme Court, but that some sort of “political arrangement” was possible. From the story in El Universal :

En conferencia de prensa, Creel Miranda, en nombre del gobierno federal, planteó la posiblidad de un arreglo político, aunque primero esperaría a conocer las resoluciones del Poder Judicial.

De esa manera, “para ver si hay un campo de acción en donde el presidente de la República pueda intervenir desde el punto de vista político, en los márgenes que permitan las resoluciones de los jueces”.

Se buscará una salida política pero sin trastocar el Estado de derecho, precisó.

Primero, insistió, tenemos que esperar a que resuelvan las instancias judiciales que, en su opinión, de ninguna manera han sido rebasadas por este conflicto.

Hmmm….I seem to recall predicting something just like this when I was in Chicago last weekend. I said that they’d negotiate some deal to keep markets calm, and to prevent all hell from breaking loose. I think there was some sort of bet involved, too…..

More desafuero news….

Well, not really. Not much is happening, though the attorney general’s office, the Presidency, and AMLO are taking turns making statements to the press.

The AG and President’s offices are now taking the position that not only did AMLO lose his immunity when the Congress voted, but that he was also immediately removed from his post as Mayor of Mexico City.

For his part, AMLO has said he will be back at work next Monday, after running the city from his home for the last two weeks. This seems to be an attempt to call the AG’s bluff and try to get them to request the arrest warrant and get on with the case.

The Supreme Court is still considering two claims, one by the Mexico City council and another by the Chamber of Deputies.

Something to talk about other than the desafuero in Mexico….

Finally.

First, it seems that legislators are talking about the proposals to reform Mexican labor law again. Proposals have been floating around for the last decade.

“Official” unions, or those affiliated with the PRI, have resisted reforms that might give more space to “unofficial” or “democratic” unions. I put “democratic” in quotes because all unofficial unions are not, by definition, democratic, though most claim to be.

“Unofficial” unions want reforms that will give them more room to organize workers, but fear that a full-fledged reform will reduce protections for workers and unionism, in general.

This is a well-founded fear. Employers have been trying to get formal labor reforms to relax restrictions on lay-offs and restructure union rules.

These differences have led to a stand-off. Everyone wants reform for different reasons, and fears the types of reforms that the other political actors want.

Second, the proposed privatization of public sector pensions is back in the news.

Since the early 1990s, there has been discussion of privatizing public sector worker pensions, but union opposition has blocked reform proposals. (I have a book manuscript that discusses this, if you’re interested….) In any event, the Fox administration has drafted a new proposal and has been shopping it around to the unions, which happen to have their own problems. I believe the ISSSTE reform won’t go anywhere given the distractions of the desafuero and the jockeying that will begin soon for candidacy for the 2006 presidential elections.

Interesting facts mentioned in the article:

The IMSS privatization is costing the federal government 35% more than expected so far, and costs are expected to rise throughout the next decade.

The average replacement rate so far for the private system is about 45%. To receive the minimum pension (which is 1 minimum wage), middle-class workers (making 5 times the minimum wage) will need to have real returns on their accounts of at least 8% for 25 years of contributions. Real returns have been much, much lower so far.

Not a shining example for privatization, I’m afraid.

More music on NPR

This time, on Weekend Edition Sunday. This post is really for Brian, who doesn’t really like singer/songers usually. But, I thought the way this guy used computers to loop violin playing was interesting.

R. Crumb on NPR

Reclusive Crumb is interviewed about his music interests in this Weekend Edition segment. For me, it made him seem less creepy. I’ve seen the documentary and looked at the art, and normally, I find (him and) his work unsettling.

Gutierrez backtracks….

President Gutierrez in Ecuador has rescinded the state of emergency, but still wants the Supreme Court resolved. Read the NYTimes coverage. Or, coverage in the Ecuadorian press.

Trouble in Quito, Ecuador

Last night, the President dismissed the Supreme Court and declared a state of emergency. Street demonstrations were the precipicating factor for the decree, but conflict has been brewing for a while.

Before being elected in 2002, Lucio Gutierrez was best known for leading a coup attempt in 2000 for which he spent 6 months in jail. In 2002, he ran on a populist-ish platform, but claimed he would respect property rights.

The pre-December 2004 Supreme Court apparently opposed many of President Gutierrez’s policies. There was an aborted plan to impeach the President last November.

When the Congress dismissed all but five of the justices last December, Gutierrez had the political backing of former president Abdala Bucaram.

Most recently, the newly appointed Supreme Court has dropped corruption charges against Bucaram, which sparked last week’s street protests.

In response the protests, President Gutierrez appeared on national television last night (with military officers standing directly behind him to demonstrate their support) to announce dissolution of the new Supreme Court and the declaration of a state of emergency. The state of emergency eliminates civil liberty protections.

The Economist chimes in….finally…

….and it doesn’t look good for Fox. The lefist paper, La Jornada, is running a story about the stories in The Economist (sub required) about the desafuero. Of course, it’s La Jornada‘s attempt to emphasize international sentiment against the desafuero. They are also running stories about French socialists against the desafuero and international solidarity behind AMLO in general.

Where I went last night….

La Perla….

Just what Texas needs…

More crazy people with guns. Let me repeat.

[And I say that as a proud Texan.]

More or less free speech…

It seems that demonstrations follow Fox everywhere these days. First, in Acapulco. Now, at a private university in the D.F.

In this case, a 17 year old high school student held up a protest sign (“Se consumó el desafuero, no permitiremos que se consuma la democracia”) and yelled at the President during an event at a local private university. (She attends the high school associated with the university.) Other students told her to shut up. And eventually, she was removed from the event, even after presenting her ID to prove she was a student there.

[Update 4/6/205: The student will not be punished in any way, after school officials met with her, her father, and their lawyers.]

Desafuero in the Supreme Court

The Court will hear both cases brought before it regarding the desafuero. In the meantime, however, the Attorney General’s office can present the case to a judge, and request a warrant for AMLO’s arrest. The AG’s office is expected to request the warrant sometime next week.

While the court considers the case, both side have begun a public relations campaign to convince the public that they will win their case. As you might imagine, this involves overly optimistic interpretations of any small Court announcement by both sides.

Gender bias in academia?

Of course. Though many of my male colleagues are sensitive, warm-fuzzy types (not all, but probably a greater proportion than you’d find in the general population), many still don’t understand the subtle gender biases in academia, some of which they inadvertantly help to perpetuate.

Take for example, the comment made to me by a new colleague on hearing that I had just received my Ph.D. before starting my first tenure-track position: “Congratulations. In my field, it takes a white, male an average of seven years to get his first tenure-track position.” Well, I could have retorted (had I not been so dumbfounded) that his field is also one of very little practical use these days…

The beginning of the rainy season

Bummer. It’s barely 8pm and it’s pitch black outside with rain the size of elephant tears. Lovely. It will now rain every afternoon for months.

Legislators try to resolve differences the old-fashioned way…with a nice brawl in the lower chamber of Congress

According to the coverage in El Universal, some PRDistas came into the Chamber with a large banner in support of the Mayor which they proceeded to hang on the wall near the PANista wing of the Chamber. The PANistas objected because several of the PRDista group did not appear to be legislators.

PRDista Duarte stepped forward to stay that he, indeed, is a legislator (he also chaired the desafuero committee, so he’s not an obscure legislator). PANista Rubén Torres proceed to spit in his face. Torress also apparently spit on another PRDista named Troba. And then the shoving began. See for yourself.

Photos from La Reforma, all subscription content, all the time

Security was called in to separate the legislators.

Shortly thereafter, all parties involved denied any physical altercation had occurred. (Of course, this is typical….)

Good thing. If someone wanted to press charges, they could be desafuero-ed themselves.

This is why I study Latin American politics, in part anyway.