|
THIS WEB PAGE HAS THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS:
Citizens / Government (Ciudadanía / Gobierno)
Regionalism (Regionalismos)
Articles (Artículos)
Biography (Trayectoria)
Recommendations (Recomendaciones)
CITIZENS / GOVERNMENT
Usually Mexican society increases its participation into the public issues when is too late to reduce damages. The
problem is that when difficult and tense moments arrive, society doesn’t have enough understanding and tolerance.
At this moment, society wants immediate results and these are not exactly the best ones to face the current problem.
With these facts and movements challenging the government, it commonly increase its ability to attend them but this
reaction is more reactive than pro-active, and this attitude most of the time generate short term solutions. There is a common
phrase used by officials which says ‘the society is outside and wants answers right now and we have to give it to them’.
This way to think could sentence our future and not solve all the problems.
How can society find the accurate level of participation in public affairs and how could the government attend all
its obligations? To help to find this answer, in this section you will find information resources, links, articles, essays,
reports and local government good practices as well as citizens’ initiatives that could help to get a better government.
If you want to share citizens’ initiatives or governmental good practices with readers of this page, please sent
them to me and I will upload in this section.
Click here to go to CITIZENS / GOVERNMENT SECTION
REGIONALISM
‘When the feeling of patriotism doesn’t find support, it could go
down between citizens and this will produce indifference and if this happens, then everything is lost’.
The Chihuahua’s official newspaper. November 21, 1846.
Traveling throughout Mexico I have heard from cab drivers, businessmen,
academics, social leaders, on more, comments about the Mexico’s
challenges. Most of these comments have implicated a tone of regionalism. My interpretation, maybe frightful, is that the
expression of regionalism is increasing in Mexico.
Some economic, social and political adverse factors influence citizens to look to their regional identity to try to
find the answers that the national government has not been able to provide. These expressions of regionalism not only arise
from national problems but also from a desire for regional identity or to reach a higher standard of life that simply belonging
to a nation can not achieve. About this last case there are some examples like Yucatan in
Mexico, Catalunya and Pais Vasco in Spain
and Quebec and Alberta in Canada.
The regionalism is a very complex topic and there is no doubt that it trequires analysis to visualize the future that
some countries could face if some of their regions become independent. It would be naive if we believed that current borders
will remain as they are. History is always giving us a clue.
In this section you will find links, articles, essays and other informational resources which talk about this reality
and have a close relationship with problems like internal and international immigration, public safety, politics, social problems,
minorities, decentralization, fiscal matters, etc.
Click here to go to REGIONALISM section
Nemex: The Next Republic?
By Jaime Villasana Davila (http://localeando.tripod.com)
This
article appeared on February 6, 2006, in the EL DIARIO DE COAUILA newspaper
As
the 21st Century starts, not only individual countries pushing ahead with socio-economic reforms but individual regions within
countries are knocking on the door of regional devolution and economic independence. Today these regions are looking for solutions
to their problems that central governments seem incapable of providing.
The
Nemex region (in Spanish “Noreste de Mexico – Northeast Mexico) is one of those, incorporating the three states
of Tamaulipas, Nuevo Leon and Coahuila) and it intends to develop solutions to its internal problems within Mexico’s
national Constitution. I highlight this point to show the contrast between Nemex
and other devolved regions, such as Spain’s Basque Country and Canada’s Quebec, which are devolved but have often
strayed from their national Constitutions.
Nemex’s
identity has always been “alive” and, in my opinion, there are two main facts that have promoted its reappearance
in the last few years; the celebration of the horse procession “United By Its Traditions” and the INVITE Program,
developed by the State of Nuevo Leon. But before I explain both facts, let us take a look at Nemex’s history because
this help to define a point of departure and to define a probable point of arrival.
In
the last two centuries, Nemex’s identity has motivated serious conflicts with Mexico’s national government. Texas’
independence in 1836 was the first case. In 1840, politicians, distinguished personalities and Army officers, assigned to
these states (Tamaulipas, Nuevo Leon y Coahuila) tried to form The Republic of Rio Grande. In 1850 “The Cortina War”
was declared when Mexicans living in Texas asked the US Congress to authorize the creation of The Rio Grande State.
In
1851 “The Wolf Plan” was published, which proposed a free trade area, although behind the scenes it was a social
movement with national and liberal purposes. This plan demanded the exit of Mexican troops from the region. In 1915, taking
advantage of the Mexican Revolution, there began a separatist movement named “The San Diego Plan” which proposed
the formation of “The People’s Liberation and Race Army” in the states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California
and Colorado.
Since
then, political and economic life in the Nemex region has been normal but at the end of the 20 Century this evolution reached
a new stage. This time, the new movement would not be based in a military mobilization nor a subversive plan. Today the movement
would be based on economic and trade issues. An initial factor that treated a new, deep link between these states was the
horse procession known as “United By Its Traditions”. This event began in 2000 on the initiative of the former
Governor of Coahuila, Enrique Martinez. The procession starts from a little town located at Coahuila state, crossing Nuevo
Leon, to the city of Nuevo Laredo in Tamaulipas.
However,
the factor that really gave a big push and refocused this political/cultural event was “The INVITE Program”, created
by the state of Nuevo Leon in March 2004. INVITE is exceptional because it clearly puts on paper the political desires of
the state governments, such as strategies and a regional vision that includes Chihuahua state in Mexico and Texas in the U.S..
According to official information, INVITE is a strategic project to promote regional integration, looking for common policies
and actions to benefit the region and to strengthen the development of the Mexican Northeast and Texas.
Since
its creation, the involved states have signed historic agreements. Last July, Nemex opened its own office in Houston. This
is important because it is the first time that a group of Mexican states have opened their own office and there is no sign
that another Mexican region will do the same. This is a clear indication that their integration follows a formal intention.
The last meeting of the governors was on January 15, although it was only attended by the governors of Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas
and Coahuila, the original states involved.
The
Nemex “case” is significant if we contrast it with the general frame that today prevails in the North America
region. Ten years after the implementation of NAFTA, it faces a challenge to become an instrument of political integration.
In addition, the current local situation in Mexico, the U.S. and Canada does not augur for the best and this integration looks
more like a dream than a real possibility.
The
relationship between Mexico and the U.S. has not improved during the Fox and Bush administrations as consequence of Mexico’s
position against the war in Iraq, which poured cold water on a tentative immigration reform in the US. Despite this, the U.S.
and Mexican border states have contributed enormously to build a communication bridge. Here is an example; at the end of 2005
there was a security crisis on the Mexican-U.S. border, specifically located in Chihuahua and New Mexico states. The governors
set up negotiations to improve the situation. Meanwhile national governments exchanged “friendly fire”!.
If
this is not enough, Mexamerica (where Nemex is located) daily defines its borders between both countries. There are some researchers
who have made predictions about this phenomenon. Charles Truxillo, a researcher at the University of New Mexico, has said
that in approximately 80 years The Republic of the North (Mexamerica) will be created. The well known magazine “Military
Review”, has also commented on this topic (September 2002).
Its
important to follow Nemex’s evolution. The region is not just a region. Nemex plus Chihuahua has a 100 billion US dollar
economy, equal to the economy of Chile or Colombia and bigger than Peru, Ecuador or Guatemala. Putting it in an international
rank, it will be among the 50 biggest economies. Nemex’s population is
13.9 million (Paraguay’s population is 5.9 million) and its area is 542,597 square kilometers, bigger than Paraguay
(406,752) and much bigger than Uruguay (176,215).
The
2006 presidential election adds more interest to the phenomenon of Mexican regionalism. With
the south of Mexico supporting a leftist candidate and the north supporting a rightist as well as the regional disputes inside
PRI (the main political party in the country), nobody knows where the Nemex integration will go.
|
 |
|
Bush In Kosovo: Precedent For U.S. Southwest? By Michael Kleen
LOCALEANDO RECOMMENDS YOU…
To
visit MATT (Mexicans & Americans Thinking Together-Foundation, Inc. www.matt.org). MATT is a non-profit organization whose mission is to encourage bicultural Mexicans and Americans
to understand, address and solve the major problems of our two nations to the benefit of both peoples.
EDITORIAL
The Mexican immigration to the USA
March 29, 2006
I can understand the US citizen worries about immigration. I agree in many of the arguments that all those groups say,
except those that have a racist content. Being practical, all those emigrants have broke the US law. This is a reality that
nobody can deny. Also nobody can deny that they are necessary to do certain jobs in US but that is a US problem.
But I think we’re missing a very important angle in this debate; the Mexican political class
(and not only Fox) are doing a bad job to improve the socio-economic conditions in Mexico. They prefer to maintain the current
status quo because under this environment they can keep their benefits. So I hope you mention this strongly. We need a renovated
Mexican political class who ask to the USA and Canada for help (not to subordinate) to improve conditions here and not only
saying that "we're poor because the USA do not allow us to be a strong country".
This is just a stupid argument used frequently among Mexican politicians. We're under this situation
in Mexico because we, as society, have not been enough "citizens" to obligate politicians to change. We need to wake up and
say to politicians "this is enough". It's embarrassing to me, as a Mexican, see that most of immigrants in the USA come from
my country. That means that we're doing things here in a wrong way.
Nemex; The Next Republic?
The Mexican Election in 2006
Mexico, Regionalism Growing?
OTHER DOWNLOADS
The Implications for U.S. of an independent Quebec
Should Quebec Separate from Canada?
Article
THE MEXICAN ELECTIONS IN 2006; A BIG PROOF FOR A YOUNG DEMOCRACY
By Jaime Villasana Davila. February, 2006.
Mexico
is a new player in the democratic world with just six years living with a federal government that differs from previous governments
which were dominated by the PRI, Mexicans feel that the real challenge will be faced next July. The 2000 election brought
hope to Mexico but this one may bring dissatisfaction to most Mexicans due to a polarized ideology; left or right.
According
to a poll taken in January and sponsored by The Reforma Group (one of the biggest media groups in Mexico) the rightist candidate
may be the winner in the North (40%) and the leftist candidate may be the winner in the South (41%). The PRI candidate is
not forecast to win any region although he is not too far behind his opponents. At the national level, the result of current
polls show that the leftist candidate is still leading the presidential campaign with 40%, followed by the rightist candidate
with 30% and the PRI’s candidate with 26%.
Mexico’s
current electoral system was set up in 1993 when all the political forces reached an agreement that established that elections
must be organized by a Citizen Council. Before this, the Federal Government exercised control through the Ministry of Internal
Affairs.
The
autonomy provided in 1993-94 to the Citizen Council (now known as The Federal Institute of Elections) was a key issue for
the young Mexican democracy. In 1997 there was a federal election that paved the way for Fox’s 2000 victory; For the
first time in Mexico’s modern history, the opposition took control of the Federal Congress by winning a majority of
the seats. The financial crisis of 1995, The Zapatista Army, the corruption in
all levels of federal government and a society that wanted a change, were factors that also contributed to his triumph.
Ten
years of major changes in Mexico have ensured that the 2006 election is not an issue about confidence in the electoral authorities
or in the electoral system. Now, Mexico needs a democracy that works and that offer solutions to the huge challenges that
the country faces, such as labor reform, pension system, economic growth, energy reform, poverty and mainly, public security.
The
answers to all these problems can only be offered by a modern political class. Unfortunately, there is no clear sign that
can show which of the three major parties could offer authentic leadership to promote a political agenda focused on the people’s
needs and the country as a whole. The three main parties prefer to keep the status quo because to make reforms requires big
decisions that unavoidably will place them against the old political structure. A price that nobody wants to pay!.
The
2006 election will be followed closely, not only by Mexicans but also by all the leftist supporters in Latin-America. With
triumphs in Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Venezuela, Chile and Uruguay in the last three years, a win in Mexico would be like
the cherry on the cake. Other elections in 2006 will be held in Colombia and Peru but, according with the latest polls, rightist
and moderate candidates, respectfully, would be the winners.
Mexico’s
future doesn’t look peaceful despite good signs in its macroeconomics indicators. The presidential campaigns have just
started and the months ahead will show us who is the candidate with sufficient skills to convince a society that is tired
of listening to promises charged with rhetoric!. Mexican society wants an effective democracy, otherwise there will be a “caudillo”
(a populist, wearing a hero’s suit) ready to promise justice and development and then taking power and eliminating civil
rights. This would be like a return to the old days!.
Article
THE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN MEXICO; KIDNAPPED FOR AN ANCIENT POLITICAL CULTURE
By Jaime
Villasana Davila (January, 2006)
Reforms
in Mexico’s local government have
not been made as deeply as they should be. Since the last constitutional reform was approved in 1987, the local government
is located between the old political culture that privilege centralization and the immobility of the States Congress. There
was a mid-size reform in 1999 when the national constitution was modified to finally recognize that municipal government is
an “order” and not a “level” of government. This modification was important because it gave to the
municipalities some important faculties like make local laws, create local taxes and take decisions about its own organizational
structure.
However,
since then the complexities of social challenges has also been increasing faster than the local governments ability to face
and resolve them. The problem now is not to make again one more reform to the national constitution (although this maybe would
be good to allow reelection in the “magna carta”. The current problems
are various but I want to emphasize two of them; a) to set up a law for the civil service system (or clear rules to build
a professional human resources system) and b) to make more efficient and more representative the municipal councils.
Beginning
with the first problem, we can affirm that there is a Mexican “gold rule” when a local government finishes its
period of three years; all first level officials and most of the mid level must abandon the government structure because the
new ones will arrive, even if the new government comes from the same political party. The order is clear; everybody must abandon
the ship.
The political
parties’ attitude is focused on simulation to deal with this big challenge. They prefer to keep this status quo because
they know that once they reach power, most of their sympathizers will have a
chance to get in and put into practice the “party philosophy”. For political leaders this is the best way to recompense
their supporters and it doesn’t matter that citizens have to deal with the consequences.
Mexico’s
local governments have about half a million of city officials (including city council members) and some researchers says that
one third will change each year, which means they will need training and training is equal to money. What are the options
to change this negative trend? Being pragmatic, the option is to design, by the states Congress, but mainly municipal governments,
the rules to promote the building of a professional human resources management system or civil service system in each municipality,
depending of its structure size.
The other
weak point is the municipal council as a body of government. Nowadays most of the 2,432 municipal councils are composed by
people that don’t have enough qualifications to be there. They were appointed by political parties through a questionable
process and the worst part of this history is that citizens can not do anything to change who enters to municipal councils.
A solution
for this trouble would be to reform the local electoral system which could be done by the state representatives. Unfortunately
the solution for this key points doesn’t look for the short term. Presidential campaign is now running and the political
forces are too polarized to make agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
