Open Dennison Final Thesis.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE STRUCTURAL DETERMINANTS OF OPPOSITION PARTY SUPPORT UNDER AN ELECTORAL CAUDILLO Kristen M. Dennison Spring 2011 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees in International Politics and International Studies with honors in Political Science Reviewed and approved* by the following: David J. Myers Associate Professor of Political Science Thesis Supervisor Michael B. Berkman Professor of Political Science Honors Adviser *Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College ABSTRACT An electoral caudillo is a semi-democratic leader who manipulates electoral contests to maintain his hold on executive power. In Latin America, this type of strong central leadership has become increasingly popular as citizens seek alternatives to democratic systems which they view as corrupt and inefficient. However, authoritarian qualities of electoral caudillo rule can prevent democratic consolidation and national development. This paper examines the structural characteristics of electoral caudillismo, specifically noting factors which may lead to increased opposition party support. Those factors are tested using a unique municipio-level dataset, which suggests that low levels of government funding, high quality of life, and weak clientelistic networks of the previous party system are associated with higher levels of opposition support. The data also underscore the importance of political contention which adheres to the minimum standards of democratic conduct. i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. II LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... IV INTRODUCTION 1 THE ELECTORAL CAUDILLO AS IDEAL TYPE 3 Reforms that Reverse Structural Differentiation 4 Elections and the Ability of the Electoral Caudillo to Dominate 6 COORDINATING IN OPPOSITION 9 Importance of Electoral Competition 11 EXPLAINING OPPOSITION SURVIVAL UNDER THE ELECTORAL CAUDILLO 13 Results and Interpretation 17 CONCLUSION 21 APPENDIX A: VARIABLE SPECIFICATION AND CODING PROCEDURES ..................... 24 APPENDIX B: STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 32 Model 1 32 Model 2.1 33 Model 2.2 33 Model 2.3 34 APPENDIX C: MUNICPIOS, PARROQUIAS, AND CAPITALS ............................................ 35 WORKS CITED ....................................................................................................................... 49 ii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: DETERMINANTS OF OPPOSITION STRENGTH ................................................... 18 TABLE A1: RESULTS OF BIVARIATE REGRESSIONS USING MISIONES DATA AND 2006 OPPOSITION TOTALS ............................................................................................................ 26 TABLE A2: MUNICIPIO-LEVEL RESULTS FOR 1989 MAYORAL ELECTIONS (%) ............ 27 TABLE A3: SUMMARY OF MUNICIPIO CHANGES BETWEEN 1989 AND 1998 .................. 30 TABLE B1: CORRELATION MATRIX OF ALL VARIABLES ................................................... 32 TABLE B2: POST-ESTIMATION TESTS FOR MODEL 1 ........................................................ 33 TABLE B3: POST-ESTIMATION TESTS FOR MODEL 2.1 ..................................................... 33 TABLE B4: POST-ESTIMATION TESTS FOR MODEL 2.2 ..................................................... 34 TABLE B5: POST-ESTIMATION TESTS FOR MODEL 2.3 ..................................................... 34 TABLE C1: MÉRIDA .............................................................................................................. 35 TABLE C2: TÁCHIRA ............................................................................................................. 38 TABLE C4: TRUJILLO ............................................................................................................ 41 TABLE C4: ZULIA .................................................................................................................. 45 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank David J. Myers his input and guidance in this project. Over the past three years, his patience and confidence in my work has encouraged me to pursue an academic career which—while it has veered slightly off the beaten path—has allowed me to pursue all of my interests. I would also like to thank Michael Berkman for his five years of support and good advice as my honors academic advisor. I am also grateful to Gretchen Casper and Donna Bahry, who served on my M.A. defense committee and provided valuable input for my project. I am especially indebted to the 2008-2009 researchers at the Centro de Investigaciones de Política Comparada (CIPCOM) at the Universidad de los Andes: Alfredo Ramos Jiménez, José Antonio Rivas Leone, Luís Edgardo Madueño Carrero, Nistor Uribe, Francesco R. García Samaniego, and Filipp Rodriguez Loginova. I will never understand why they let la gringa into their office, but I am eternally grateful for everything they showed me about Venezuelan politics and society. I also appreciate the contributions of the Schreyer Honors College for funding my travel to Venezuela, and the Department of Political Science printing my poster for the 2010 Undergraduate Research Exhibition. Last but not least, this project would not have been possible without the love and support of my friends and family, both here and in Venezuela. iv INTRODUCTION The 1998 Venezuelan presidential elections which first brought Hugo Chávez Frías into power marked a critical juncture for democracy in Venezuela. After rewriting the constitution in 1999 with the approval of an electoral majority, Chávez began his assault on the limited democratic institutions of his predecessors, exchanging them for a political model which he named ―Twenty-First Century Socialism‖ (Monaldi et al. 2006, 18; Corrales and Penfold 2007, 100-101). The political system of modern-day Venezuela — characterized by a centralized executive power, a subservient judiciary, and a weak legislature — falls far short of the liberal democratic ideal. Hugo Chávez exemplifies the electoral caudillo: a semi-democratic ruler who mixes shallow democratic institutions with authoritarian ambitions of longevity in office. Once in power, he dismantles the constraints necessary for liberal forms of democracy, including all institutional checks and balances which would impede the power of the executive (Coppedge 2005, 292). He is thus free to manipulate the political order to his advantage. At the same time, the electoral caudillo maintains democratic legitimacy both domestically and internationally through free and fair elections, directing all social policies towards his electoral majority as the sole benefactor. In Latin America, poor governmental performance over the past two decades has led to widespread disillusionment with democracy, especially for those who became marginalized under their political and economic system (UNDP 2010, 198-199; Mainwaring and Pérez-Liñan 2005, 52; Monaldi et al. 2006, 62; Morgan 2007; Landi 1995, 205). Widespread popular resentment fuels the campaign of the electoral caudillo, who casts himself as a democratic outsider untainted by the failures of the contemporary political 1 elite (Hellinger 2006, 5-6). He attracts votes by promising economic redistribution and societal inclusion to citizens who failed to integrate successfully in the democratic system. Despite structural changes which undermine liberal democracy, Close argues that once the electoral caudillo is removed from office, a future government could reopen the system without radical, extra-constitutional actions (2004, 3). For this change to occur, opposition forces must be able to preserve enough societal support to facilitate an opening towards liberal democracy, despite the characteristics of electoral caudillismo which overwhelmingly favor the power of the incumbent (Diamond 2002, 24). History has demonstrated successful democratic transitions from electoral caudillismo.1 However, current research fails to provide a systematic explanation of why opposition support emerges in some areas, but not in others. Political opening is not the only future path available for an electoral caudillo — there is also a chance that he will turn to more autocratic measures rather than opening his system to fairer electoral competition (Levitsky and Way 2002, 52; Diamond 1996, 31). Thus, every advance towards a more liberalized system is important, ―both for the prospect of a transition to democracy and for the quality of political life as it is daily experienced by abused and aggrieved citizens‖ (Diamond 2002, 33). This project seeks to contribute to this literature by answering the following question: What factors enable opposition forces to conserve significant electoral strength under a regime of electoral caudillismo? Elections serve as the sole constraint on executive power under the caudillo. Thus, the ability of domestic forces to set their country on a path towards liberal democracy relies upon the ability of viable alternatives to attract societal support. This work fills an important scholarly gap by highlighting specific factors which favor the relative strength of opposition forces