By Allan Wall

The second and final debate between Mexico’s presidential candidates is now history.

All five of the candidates held their own, they made their proposals, and defended their platforms.

There were some concrete proposals made during the Mexican debate, but also a lot of vagueness.

But that’s true of politics in any country. When possible politicians prefer to avoid specific proposals, and instead stick with vague but noble sounding propositions that don’t really amount to much. That gives them more wiggle-room in the future if things don’t work out as promised.

There were also some personal attacks in this debate, especially between frontrunners Felipe Calderon (National Action Party) and the Party of the Democratic Revolution’s Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador – who is known in the press as AMLO. Plus there was some secondary sniping between Calderon and Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) candidate Roberto Madrazo.

Madrazo, still striving to present himself as a safe middle ground between the left and the right, had the best grasp of statistics in the debate. But it doesn’t seem to be helping him at this late date.

Unlike the last debate AMLO showed up this time, and he reiterated the same themes he’s been using in his campaign. No big surprises.

Calderon’s presentations were well planned. His proposals were frequently organized into groups of five proposals for a particular topic.

The micro-party candidates, Patricia Mercado and Roberto Campa, don’t really expect to win. They are fighting for their party registries, the Alternative Social-democrat and Campesina Party and the New Alliance Party respectively, and they’ll probably be successful.

The debate was organized around five general themes. How well did the candidates stay on topic?

Public Security and Fighting Corruption

AMLO, Campa and Mercado focused on economic issues as a supposed root of crime, and they mostly talked about poverty, education, and the family.

Madrazo and Calderon had more specific crime-fighting proposals. And actually their proposals were not all that far apart.

Governance

On this topic, the candidates were all over the map, talking about everything but the subject.

Patricia Mercado talked about social equality, diversity, homosexuals and women in Chiapas who don’t speak Spanish. Madrazo bashed the Vicente Fox administration and made some proposals that weren’t too specific. Calderon trotted out five proposals but they weren’t too specific either. AMLO talked about economic inequality. Campa came the closest to actually discussing the topic, yet he didn’t quite get there either.

Migratory Foreign Policy

On this subject, all of the candidates stayed on topic and offered concrete proposals. No surprise there. After all, Mexican politicians always have firm proposals for U.S. immigration policy. They want open borders and legalization of all Mexicans in the United States.

All the candidates do admit that more jobs should be created here in Mexico. But they still want to keep that northern safety valve open.

The candidates also called for an expansion of the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, and U.S. aid for Mexican development.

Only two candidates mentioned Mexican immigration policy – never a topic among Mexican politicians.

Federalism, Strengthening Municipalities and Regional Development

Mexico has strong regional identities, but it also has a highly centralized society in which almost everything in politics, the economy and culture seems to revolve around Mexico City. So this is an important topic and worthy of serious proposals.

Calderon and AMLO made some proposals but didn’t get to the heart of the matter. Campa, Mercado and Madrazo actually did a better job of dealing with the federalism question because they discussed its financial aspects.

It’s ironic to hear the PRI’s Madrazo complain about centralism when his own party promoted it for years. But it’s another example of how the PRI is striving to reinvent itself.

State Reform

This is a broad topic so the candidates used it to ride their own hobbyhorses.

AMLO proposed making “bienestar” (well-being) a constitutional right, as if by simply decreeing a good thing the government can will it into being. Campa and Patricia Mercado made a number of rather general proposals. Among Madrazo’s proposals was to allow private investment – but no privatization – in the energy sector. Calderon’s proposals here included some real innovations – including the reduction of public funds for political campaigns, and a reduction in the number of plurinominal (proportional representation) senators and congressmen. But his fifth proposal – “a great citizen alliance” – is so vague and general as to be meaningless.

However all politicians say such things, so the informed voter must toss the chaff and find the wheat.

——————————

Allan Wall, a MexiData.info guest columnist, recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq. He currently resides in Mexico, where he has lived since 1991. He can be reached via e-mail at allan39@prodigy.net.mx.