The
results of the first round are in, and they represent a major rupture with the
past. While many commentators stressed
that these reflected a rejection of traditional politicians tainted by corruption,
I would suggest that, more importantly, these elections are a cry, or a scream,
for security.
No doubt Brazilian
voters sent many political tenors home, including Dilma Rousseff, a former president,
Eduardo Suplicy, a co-founder of the PT; of nine returning candidates for the
senate who had been under a cloud, only three were reelected. Voters desire to clean up Congress triggered
an historical turnover, with more than 47% new faces coming in.
The door
was also shown to moderate presidential candidates who were not viewed as
corrupt and who had fared well in prior national campaigns: Geraldo Alckmin, a
former governor of Sao Paulo got 4.8% vs. in 41% in 2006; Marina Silva, a
former minister, 1% vs. 19% in 2010.
Voters,
who had remained undecided for the longest time in years (45% vs. 20% to 30% in
the past), or perhaps had not disclosed their preferences, sent a clear
message: we want big change, now, and we don’t think regular politicians are up
to it.
And the
biggest change that Brazilians are clamoring for is security. In a 10/2/18 Datafolha poll, 88% of
respondents declared to feel unsafe; that is a staggering number and was their
No.1 concern. This time around, incoming
military-related congressmen are double the number of those in the current assembly. Bolsonaro is a former military himself and
has made security the focus of his campaign.
Today, Jaques Wagner, a PT grandee, was reported[1] to have advised
Haddad to do likewise ahead of the second round.
Military
and ex-policemen and women are not elected to tackle public budgets. They are elected to reestablish law and
order. Except for G. Alckmin, presidential
candidates spent very little time presenting an economic program. When Paulo Guedes, a free-market Chicago Boy[2] tried to
present a possible future tax reform, he was promptly shut down by his boss, Bolsonaro.
Economists
will lament the lack of a serious discussion of the dire state of the Brazilian
economy. But in truth, there can be no
sustained and vigorous economic development without, first, public security.
Which private
business, small or otherwise, will invest large financial and human resources into
projects that have a three to four year payback period if its owners, managers
and staff feel under constant danger for themselves or their families, and occasionally
think about emigrating in search of a better life?
In the
1980s and 1990s, Colombia lived through similarly difficult times. People in the big cities and the countryside felt
under constant threat from narco-guerillas, gangs and petty thieves. In 2002, incoming President Alvaro Uribe initiated
his key Policy for Democratic Security (PSD).
It was carried out within the framework of a functioning democracy, it
succeeded and the economy soared.
I believe
that both Bolsonaro and Haddad understand that this is their biggest challenge
and what the people want. They must also
understand that the people will give either one a wide berth on other policy
issues as long as security is returned.
