|
Costa
Rica's Politics of Change
An analysis of Oscar Arias’
presidential victory by COHA
Senior Research Fellow Frank
Kendrick, Ph.D.
After nearly two weeks of
hand-counting over a million and
a half ballots from the February
5 national elections, the Costa
Rican Supreme Electoral Tribunal
finally announced the results of
the presidential vote.
Former President Oscar Arias, of
the National Liberation Party (PLN),
won the presidency by a
surprisingly low 40.9% of the
votes, compared with Ottón Solís,
of the Citizen’s Action Party
(PAC), who ran an equally
surprisingly close race with
38.9%. The margin of victory was
slightly over 18,000 votes, the
lowest in many years.
Five other candidates earned the
remaining votes, 8% to the
Libertarian Movement Party (PML)
and 1% to the Homeland First
Party. Following the last
decade’s trend, the abstention
rate was over 30%, similar to
the 2002 regular elections’ rate
of 31%.
As for the 57-member Legislative
Assembly, PLN won 25 seats, PAC
won 18, PML won 6, the Social
Christian Unity Party (PUSC) won
4, and four small parties won
the remaining 4 seats, making
this assembly the most divided
in the country’s history. Like
the president, deputies are
prohibited from running for
immediate re-election, so there
was a complete turnover of
elected officials.
Elections History
Although democracy is considered
to have been launched in Costa
Rica with the 1899 elections,
the contemporary political
system was established after the
1948 uprising led by Don José
“Pepe” Figueres aimed at
protesting a disputed
presidential election.
While the 44-day civil war, in
which 2,000 people were killed,
was the bloodiest event in 20th
century Costa Rican history, it
led to the establishment of a
more representative government
based on a constitution drafted
in 1949.
In the modern period, Costa Rica
has evolved into being the most
peaceful and progressive state
among the original five Central
American republics. It also
possesses the area’s highest
standard of living and has the
healthiest and most literate
population. So its politics must
be considered within a context
of affluence and stability that
is lacking in much of the
hemisphere.
PLN and Arias
Until 1986, elections were
characterized by contests
between Figueres’ PLN and
various anti-PLN groups. In
1983, PLN’s opponents coalesced
into the PUSC, and after 1986,
PLN and PUSC dominated the
country’s politics, typically
receiving the combined votes of
more than 90% of registered
voters.
In 2002, however, the populist
PAC emerged, and won 14 seats in
the assembly, preventing either
major party from holding a
legislative majority. PAC also
forced a run-off election for
the presidency for the first
time in Costa Rica’s modern
political history.
Of the two original political
parties, PLN traditionally has
presented a left-of-center,
social democratic agenda, which
has contributed to producing a
welfare state with a national
public health system and an
outstanding public education
system. It also became famous
for abolishing the country’s
army in 1949. One of its
outstanding later leaders has
been Oscar Arias who received
the Nobel Peace Prize for his
efforts to end the wars in
Central America.
But in recent years the PLN has
become essentially
middle-of-the-road and
pragmatic. In fact, the 2006
candidate, Arias, has supported
the Central American Free Trade
Agreement - Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR)
which has yet to be ratified by
the legislature.
The party also has been
disgraced by the scandalous
financial activities of its
1994-1998 President José María
Figueres, son of the country’s
revolutionary leader, who is but
one of three recent presidents
to allegedly accept bribes from
foreign cell phone providers.
PUSC’s leader for many years,
was Rafael Calderón Fournier,
son of pre-revolutionary leader
Rafael Angel Calderón Guardia,
who was also accused of
accepting such bribes while he
was president from 1990-1994.
Although PUSC has been
moderately rightwing, and has
tended to represent conservative
members of the business and
professional elites, Calderon’s
problems with alleged bribes
from foreign cell phone
providers, and the recent
similar activities of PUSC
president Miguel Angel Rodríguez,
who followed Figueres in office,
undercut Calderon’s influence in
PUSC and severely damaged the
party’s political future.
The Electoral Process
Because the political agendas of
the PUSC and the PLN have
drifted relatively close to each
other, they have opened
themselves to be challenged by
more populist elements in the
country, a growing trend of the
21st Century.
In 2001, PAC was formed by Ottón
Solís, an ex-PLN deputy and
former minister of planning
during Arias’ first term, in
order to challenge the
“ideological centrism” of the
two parties with a “third force.
” Backed by a number of former
PLN and PUSC leaders, he
presented a plan emphasizing
popular participation in
government, public ethics and
transparency, opposition to
neo-liberal economic reforms,
and governmental guarantees to
ensure social mobility and
poverty reduction. However,
Solís was a candidate ahead of
his time, and he was soundly
defeated in the 2002 elections.
Nevertheless, his new party won
14 seats in the assembly,
thereby undermining PUSC
President Abel Pacheco’s efforts
to enact legislation. Then, in
2006, national politics were
drastically changed when PAC
became the country’s second most
popular party, while PUSC poorly
ranked fourth.
Political issues were more
clearly presented this year than
in previous campaigns. The
commonly heard term “voto útil,”
meaning “useful vote,” was said
to symbolize the voter’s faith
in their role in the electoral
process to stimulate change. In
other words, instead of simply
adhering to one’s old biases or
supporting family traditions,
many voters now voted “with
their heads.”
The leading issue appears to
have been CAFTA-DR, backed by
PLN and its candidate, in
contrast to the PAC and its
candidate calling for a
re-negotiation of the agreement.
Another related issue was the
role of the United States in its
efforts to impose the so-called
“Washington consensus,” with its
structural adjustment policies,
free trade, and emphasis on
exports. Solís called for
changes in these policies,
which, according to many critics
have done little to reduce the
20% poverty rate that is now at
its highest level since 1994.
Furthermore the issue of
corruption associated with the
three past presidents tainted
both leading parties.
Electoral Issues
Candidate Solís conducted an
intense campaign in which he
held a series of face to face
discussion meetings with voters
(23 in January alone). Holding a
doctorate in economics, Solís
was quite at ease with
discussions of economic issues.
Many of his ideas were summed up
in his statement that ”the
middle class is bordering on
poverty and the poor are at the
point of misery….Something bad
is happening in Costa Rica: much
wealth is produced, but few
benefit.”
Candidate Arias ran a more
haughty campaign, and refused to
debate his chief opponent in the
month before the elections. His
campaign platform was based on a
“si se puede” (yes we can)
approach filled with positive
proposals. But he also advocated
increasing both taxes and social
spending, while promising
macroeconomic discipline. He
strongly supported CAFTA-DR and
maintained that by accepting the
agreement, Costa Rica can become
the first “developed” country in
Latin America. He denied that he
was a neoliberal, but said he
wanted to “balance” the populism
of the old PLN with some of the
economic philosophy of the
right.
According to a poll conducted in
April, 2005, the greatest
national problem in Costa Rica
was considered to be the high
cost of living, coupled with
inadequate income to cover basic
necessities. Other problems
included inflation, public
corruption, CAFTA-DR, and the
growing lack of public security.
Political analysts also pointed
to a publicly perceived lack of
direction and decision-making in
the government. These issues and
attitudes were reflected in the
political changes of 2006, and
they will emerge again in the
upcoming years of policy-making
with the new Arias
administration, as well as in
future elections.
This analysis was prepared by
COHA Senior Research Fellow
Frank Kendrick, Ph.D.
|
|

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA)
Founded in 1975, the Council on
Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), a nonprofit, tax-exempt independent
research and information organization, was established to promote
the common interests of the hemisphere, raise the visibility of
regional affairs and increase the importance of the inter-American
relationship, as well as encourage the formulation of rational and
constructive U.S. policies towards Latin America. |
|
|
|
|
|