Mexico’s first presidential primary on Sunday performed according to script. Francisco Labastida Ochoa, the ruling party’s favorite son, had little trouble beating his three opponents.
Yet the event may have been more significant than the outcome.
Mexicans have never had a chance to pick a presidential candidate. They haven’t had much of a choice, either, in selecting a president.
The governing Institutional Revolutionary Party has never lost a presidential election in its 70-year history. Lame-duck presidents always get to pick their successor in a process Mexicans call el dedazo, the finger-tap. Until now.
Ernesto Zedillo, Mexico’s reform-minded president, deserves credit for his country’s first-ever primary. The historic vote, however, doesn’t mean Mexico has ironed out all the kinks in this process.
The PRI may have assured Labastida’s victory by throwing its institutional weight behind the front-runner. The primary also was marred by charges of polling station irregularities, and heavy-handed tactics by party bosses. The PRI hasn’t been known for clean elections.
In their response to recent floods, for example, some local PRI officials were accused of conditioning disaster aid on votes for Labastida.
Yet most observers agree Mexico’s ruling party went out of its way to hold a fair election. The party spent more than $3 million on the primary, and staffed polling stations with close to half a million workers and observers.
Despite the ruling party’s heavy-handed reputation, Mexico is making a serious effort at democratic reform. In recent years, the PRI has lost key states and seats in parliament, indicating its willingness to share power and play by the rules. Much of the credit goes to the Zedillo administration, which understands that Mexico cannot improve its economy without adhering to the democratic process.
Mexico’s first primary may not have been perfect, but it is a welcome development in the country’s move toward electoral integrity.
