he is a former military officer who attempted a coup against the Venezuela government in 1992. It failed and he was imprisoned, then in 1998 he managed to get elected President of Venezuela, survived a coup against him in 2002 that de-throned him for a while, and in 2007 almost succeeded in getting a referendum passed to do away with presidential term limits so that he could continue to get "re-elected" president. Articles in the London Telegraph in 2007 and the Huffington Post in 2008 described Chavez as wanting to make himself "president for life". The London Times on Line reported on 2/16/09 that Chavez was successful in getting the Venezuelan law changed to eliminate term limits. So, he had cleared the way to keep himself in power.
The Chavez administration lost enough seats in the National Assembly last week to take away the majority it has held since 2005 which let him govern virtually unopposed. An opposition leader said Chavez had turned the election into a plebiscite (direct vote by an electorate on a single issue or proposal) on himself. Our 2008 election seems to me to have been a plebiscite on Obama. Most voters didn't care about the issues or party platforms, they just voted for Obama regardless of what he was or was not going to do. It appears that both men think it's all about them and what they want. Chavez had a "supermajority"; Obama came into office with a Democratic majority left over from the Bush presidency, and that majority was increased even more by the Democratic wins in the 2008 Congressional elections. The Venezuelan election last week is taken as a sign that they don't want an authoritarian, militarized or centralized government. Think about our upcoming election in November and the signal the American people intend to send to the present administration.
The loss of a majority by Chavez and his cronies came as somewhat of a surprise, since most Venezuelans figured that "electoral machinations" would have assured Chavez retained his majority rule. That brings to mind all the voter fraud and "electoral machinations" perpetrated in America's 2008 election by ACORN, et al, on behalf of the Democratic candidates, that insured their win, whether it was accurate or not. And it was most likely not accurate. We have no way of knowing or guaranteeing that our upcoming election will be honest or accurate. The wins by opponents of Hugo Chavez was notable in light of Chavez spending massively on giveaways, ads and public works. Reminds me of the pay-backs and pay-offs here in America since our own 2008 election. In Venezuela, the opposition to Chavez was aided by the defection of members of his own constituency who were disenchanted with his institutional control, his manipulations, and the deterioration of the economy. Brings to mind the Democrats distancing themselves from Obama. A related article today in the London Globe and Mail says that Venezuelans displayed voter discontent over Chavez's handling of the economy, his marathon television speeches, and his clamp down on opposition media. Doesn't that sound familiar?
I can see the similarities continuing in several ways after we have our own election in November. Venezuela's National Assembly still has a lame-duck session where hard-line measure could still be passed, maybe even stripping the legislature of some power. We don't know what the lame-duck Democrats might try to ram thru Congress once the Republicans pick up some more seats in November. The loss of his majority means that Chavez can no long pass laws by decreee, place appointees in his administration or take other actions without the input of the National Assembly. We could only hope that our November election could curtail dictating by Executive Order, appointing Cabinet level "advisors" and "assistants" without Congressional confirmation, and generally rendering Congress irrelevant. We know that won't happen. However, there is still hope. The Venezuelan opposition to Chavez now has to develop policy ideas to deal with the problems facing the country and find a leader who can effectively put forth a vision for a post-Chavez Venezuela; and use them so it will be well-positioned for their 1012 elections. We need the Republican party, once it makes the great strides we are sure it will in November, to develop the ideas it set forth in it's Pledge to America, coalesce on an effective leader, and position itself for victory in 2012 so that we can fulfill a vision for a post-Obama America. Yep, hope and change from this administration is what we need. Venezuela did it. We can do it, too. Yes, we can.
No comments:
Post a Comment