A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of ’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

A PRE-ASSEMBLY REPORT OF THE CSIS AMERICAS PROGRAM, MEXICO PROJECT

George W. Grayson

November 2001

Policy Paper on the Americas

A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

A PRE-ASSEMBLY REPORT OF THE CSIS AMERICAS PROGRAM, MEXICO PROJECT

George W. Grayson

Policy Papers on the Americas Volume XII, Study 6

November 2001

CSIS Americas Program

About CSIS

For four decades, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has been dedicated to providing world leaders with strategic insights on— and policy solutions to—current and emerging global issues.

CSIS is led by John J. Hamre, formerly deputy secretary of defense, who became president and CEO in April 2000. It is guided by a board of trustees chaired by former senator Sam Nunn and consisting of prominent individuals from both the public and private sectors.

The CSIS staff of 190 researchers and support staff focus primarily on three subject areas. First, CSIS addresses the full spectrum of new challenges to national and international security. Second, it maintains resident experts on all of the world’s major geographical regions. Third, it is committed to helping to develop new methods of governance for the global age; to this end, CSIS has programs on technology and public policy, international trade and finance, and energy.

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., CSIS is private, bipartisan, and tax- exempt. CSIS does not take specific policy positions; accordingly, all views expressed herein should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

© 2001 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

The CSIS Press Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel: (202) 887-3119 Fax: (202) 775-3199 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.csis.org/

CSIS Mexico Project Leadership Sidney Weintraub, Acting Director, Americas Program Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, Director, Mexico Project M. Delal Baer, Chairman, Mexico Project Meghan Bishop, Research Assistant, Mexico Project

© 2001 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. This report was prepared under the aegis of the CSIS Western Hemisphere Election Study series. Comments are welcome and should be directed to:

CSIS Americas Program 1800 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Telephone: (202) 775-3299 Fax: (202) 466-4739 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.csis.org

George W. Grayson

Contents

List of Tables ...... 2

Acknowledgments...... 3

Section One: Introduction ...... 4

Section Two: Key Players...... 8

Section Three: Evolution of the Revolutionary Party...... 10

Section Four: Hot Issues and Hot Committees...... 12

Section Five: Possible Significance of the PRI’s 18th National Assembly...... 20

About the Authors ...... 24

1 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

List of Tables

Table 1. Chronology of Assembly Activities ...... 7 Table 2. State-by-State Breakdown of PRI Vote on July 2, 2000 ...... 15 Table 3. PRI Performance in State and Local Elections...... 16 Table 4. Governors, November 2001...... 18 Table 5. PRI Presidents and Secretaries-General, 1936–2001...... 18

2 George W. Grayson

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Tess Owens, secretary in the Government Department of the College of William & Mary, for spending countless hours expertly typing and retyping this manuscript. Stacey Cooprider, another wonderful human being, deserves recognition for her tremendous contribution to the preparation of the text, as does Valerie Trovato, who expertly and gracefully manages William & Mary’s Government Department. Student assistant Amanda Potts did a yeoman’s job in revising various tables, and graduate student Andy Mack proved a superb proofreader. Mexico’s superb Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) provided incomparable help in obtaining the statistical information that helps to fill these pages. In particular, I am indebted to Jacqueline Peschard, Elecotoral Advisor, Lic. Manuel Carrillo Poblano, IFE’s first-rate chief of staff for international affairs, and to Carlos Navarro, Director of Electoral Studies and Political Agreements. Also assisting hugely in finding electoral and biographical data were Lic. Miguel Medina Hernández, director of the library of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, and the simpática staff member of the National Action Party’s social communications office-María Feliciana Alvarez. No matter how often I called, Ms. Alvarez immediately responded: “How can I assist you?-and she meant it! She is truly a jewel in her party’s crown and I trust that National Actions leadership will reward her with a huge private office in the party’s new headquarters. Lic. Heriberto Sánchez, a staff member in the PAN’s Electoral Action Section, provided hard-to- find results for state and local elections held on October 7. Long meals with Lic. Guillermo Máynez Gil and Professor Oscar Aguilar Asencio, two of Mexico’s most astute political observers, provided culinary and intellectual stimulation. They are both gold mines of knowledge and played a crucial role in helping me revise my roughly hewn early drafts. At a time when it’s fashionable to bash bureaucrats, I must say “muchas gracias” to all of the Mexican and U.S. public servants who held off-the-record conversations with me. Their observations were invaluable. This Guide would not have seen the light of day without the hard work, thorough commitment, and unparalleled professionalism of the Mexico Project’s Meghan Bishop, one of the most talented young professionals in Washington, D.C. At CSIS, I would also like to thank Amy Cougenour-Betancourt, Deputy Director of the Americas Program and the Publications Department for their editorial suggestions. With such bountiful assistance, the author must bear full responsibility for any errors that may have crept into these pages.

George W. Grayson

3 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Section One: An Introduction to the National Assembly

Why did PRI leaders decide to hold the party’s 18th National Assembly on November 17–20? Above all, the inauguration of Quesada, candidate of the National Action Party (PAN), on December 1, 2000, converted the PRI into a rudderless boat, making eccentric circles on Mexico’s political waters. Since 1929, the revolutionary party had depended on the nation’s chief executive—who often transmitted his wishes through the secretary of government (Gobernación)—for its ideology, legislative agenda, leadership, dispute resolution, and general orientation. Suddenly, PRI officials faced a political foe in the Los Pinos presidential palace. Without the country’s president to function as its North Star, the party found itself adrift. The lack of direction sparked vicious infighting: Who was responsible for the loss of the presidency? Who was best suited to assume the party’s helm? What should be the PRI’s relationship with the Fox administration? What procedures should the PRI follow in reaching key decisions in the new environment? As if in denial because of losing the presidency, many party bigshots cast about for scapegoats. Some heaped scorn on their defeated standard-bearer, Ochoa, and on his ally, party president Dulce María Sauri Riancho. Others lambasted former president (1994–2000) for championing neoliberal policies deemed responsible for the erosion of the PRI’s grassroots support.

Fox’s Political Difficulties Fortunately for priístas, Fox has encountered a series of political setbacks—some his doing, some not—that make one wonder whether a reverse Midas touch has affected him. First, after devoting his first four months to indigenous issues, he satisfied neither the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) nor opponents of autonomy and expanded opportunities for Indian communities. Second, the prominence given to Fox’s suggested extension of the unpopular value-added tax (IVA) to food, medicine, and books supplied detractors with an excuse to attack and attenuate his tax reform. This will postpone final action on both compromise legislation and the 2002 budget. Third, although a skilled vote winner, Fox has encountered difficulty in negotiating and bargaining with legislators to build consensus in the 500-member Chamber of Deputies and the 128-seat Senate. Fourth, Fox has faced criticism for his extensive international travel instead of, as some people feel, focusing on domestic priorities. In contrast to his predecessors Fox will have made an unprecedented 13 trips abroad, visiting upward of 25 countries during his first year at Los Pinos. Fifth, despite the progress Fox made toward a guest-worker scheme and broad amnesty for living illegally in the United States, the September 11 tragedy has shifted U.S. priorities for now.

4 George W. Grayson

Sixth, The PRI could conceivably benefit from the fact that the economy is at 0 percent growth, a drastic contrast to the 7 percent originally projected during the campaign. The potential gain will depend on the extent to which the Mexican people perceive it to be beyond Fox’s control as opposed to directly attributable to Fox’s economic policies. Seventh, the international media pounced on the October 19 murder of lawyer and human rights’ champion Digna Ochoa as evidence of Fox’s inability to curb blatant lawlessness that is often directed against activists who challenge powerful interest groups. Finally, the pluralistic way Fox chose his cabinet and the perception that he cannot keep the ministers in check and working together as a team has hampered him. Although Fox has maintained relatively high public approval and the PRI has failed to offer alternatives to his proposals, the absence of promised changes amid a recession could work to the advantage of the PRI. In fact recent PRI electoral victories at the state and local level may suggest that Fox’s inability to deliver on campaign promises is negatively affecting the PAN. The August 5, 2001, victory in the gubernatorial contest lifted the spirits of PRI president Sauri and her colleagues. On the same day, the PRI ran strongly in , capturing 24 of 25 directly elected seats in the state legislature. Yet the big surprise came in PAN-dominated, middle-class Aguascalientes, where the PRI regained control of the legislature, while boosting its number of the 11 municipal presidencies from 6 to 9. One month later, the revolutionary party also did well in local elections in , Oaxaca, and . In the most recent gubernatorial election in Michoacán, the PRI’s bid for the seat fell short with PRD candidate, Lázaro Cárdenas Batel, proving that the state remained a PRD bastion. Nevertheless, as shown in Table Three, in the elections held between July 2, 2000, and October 7, 2001, National Action witnessed its portion of the vote decline from the 42.5 percent that Fox garnered with his PAN-Green “Alliance for Change” to 34.3 percent, while the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) endured repeated setbacks. Meanwhile, the PRI mounted a comeback, capturing an average of 42.4 percent of the ballots cast in these post-presidential contests, almost 6 points higher than the 36.7 percent captured by Labastida. These gains encouraged the PRI to recognize that it possessed other political assets—namely, 208 federal deputies, 60 senators, 17 governors, the control of 23 state legislatures, and a lion’s share of the nation’s mayors, although the opposition occupied the city halls of most of the 20 biggest municipalities. The electoral successes stanched defections from the revolutionary party, sharpened competition for the party’s leadership, and reinforced the call by the party’s National Political Council (CPN) to convene a National Assembly, the party’s highest deliberative mechanism. Thanks to the establishment of the autonomous Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), Mexico now has widely accepted rules for federal elections. Internally, the PRI lacks agreed-on, clearly stated principles for conducting its party affairs. The assembly can rectify this situation by hammering out compromises on the party’s internal procedures, candidate qualifications, and the party platform that had fallen within the purview of the nation’s chief executive.

5 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

The divisions within the PRI become evident as the National Assembly fast approaches. Oaxaca governor José Murat Casab, Sen. Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, and other backers of former Tabasco governor Pintado regarded party president Sauri as no more than a puppet of Labastida and urged that the National Assembly delegates be allowed to elect a new PRI head. Although vowing that she would step down before her term ended in December 2003, Sauri urged that the assembly devote itself to revising procedures and policies, rather than embark upon the divisive project of choosing new leaders. Because the PRI will not be electing its leadership until a few months after the assembly, the PRI will have sufficient time for the election to be subject to the revised procedures borne out of the assembly process. In keeping with Mexican electoral law (COFIPE) the scope of the assembly had to be stipulated in advance. Because the PRI initially failed to specify that it would elect party leaders, legally it will be unable to do so during the assembly period. However, Madrazo and Labastida, who allegedly have agreed to finesse the leadership issue, negotiated the decision to wait until February or March. Laying aside this matter did nothing to calm PRI officials in Hidalgo and who had other axes to grind. They were furious at the federal government’s choice of Texcoco in Mexico state as the site for the country’s new international airport. PRI peasant organizations joined in charges of favoritism, and threats of lawsuits filled the air on the eve of the National Assembly. The possibility of effervescence giving rise to disruptions indicates why the organizers decided against inaugurating the assembly with a plenary session. Instead, 23 committees will address key topics in five difference cities, and closed-circuit television will link them all for the concluding session. The November 2001 convention will differ from earlier conclaves in several important ways:

· the first to be held without a priísta in Los Pinos; · discouragement of participation of previous chief executives; · a record 11,700 delegates taking part in the four-day event; · 23 committees (tribunas) charged with debating key questions; · grassroots assemblies to select the biggest number of these participants (although many delegates were handpicked); · media spots to encourage citizens to take part in the assembly process; · 50 percent representation for women and a focus on youth—with one-third of the delegates required to be under age 30; and · holding the event—except for the closing session—in five cities, all of which are located in PRI-governed states.

6 George W. Grayson

Table One: Chronology of Activities Surrounding the PRI’s 18 th National Assembly

Date(s) Time Activity Period (days) Feb. 16–18 (2001) 3 Decision by the PRI’s National Political Council (CPN) to hold a national assembly June 1–15 15 Creation of state and national organizing committees June 1–30 30 National publicity campaign concerning the assembly June 1–July 31 61 Preparation and holding of workshops, meetings, and forums Aug. 1–31 31 District and municipal assemblies Sept. 1–15 15 Receipt and organization of proposals from municipalities Sept. 1–15 15 Workshops for municipal delegates selected for state assemblies Sept. 15–30 15 State assemblies Oct. 1–31 31 Workshops for assembly delegates Oct. 1–15 46 Preparations for the national assembly Nov. 8 Party president Sauri announced that she would leave her post on March 4, 2002 Nov. 17–20 4 National assembly By Nov. 30 10 Transmission of changes in procedures and regulations to the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) Dec. 21–30 30 Public dissemination of new procedures and regulations, including the qualifications of and the process for electing the next party president. Mid to late Feb. (2002) N/A Election of party president March 4, 2002 1 Installation of party president

Source: PRI, Convocatoria y Reglamento: XVIII Asamblea General de Delegados (Mexico City: PRI, May 2001); and Arturo Zarate, “Anunciara Sauri retiro del cargo el 8 de noviembre,” El Universal, November 1, 2001, p.14.

7 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Section Two: Key Players at the National Assembly

A. Dulce María Sauri Riancho, PRI president: born Aug. 14, 1951, Mérida, Yucatán; degree in sociology (Iberoamerican Univ.); professor of anthropology, Autonomous University of Yucatán; numerous party posts, including Yucatán state president (1983–1987), national finance secretary (1988–1990), and secretary general (1999); various governmental positions in Ministries of planning and budget and government; elective positions: federal deputy (1988–1990, 1994–1996), senator (1991–1997), and governor of Yucatán (1991–1994).

B. Rodolfo Echeverría Ruiz Jr., PRI secretary general: born June 19, 1946, D.F.; law degree (UNAM), postgraduate work in politics and economics (London); professor, Superior War College; numerous PRI posts, including director of the National Youth Sector (1965) and oficial mayor (1970–1976); various governmental positions in Ministries of Government and Labor, as well as in the D.F. and Pemex; ambassador to Cuba (1982–1985); elective positions: federal deputy (1973–1976, 2000–2003).

C. Francisco Labastida Ochoa, 2000 PRI presidential nominee: born Aug. 14, 1942, Los Mochis, ; economics degree (UNAM/1964); postgraduate studies (CEPAL); professor (UNAM); numerous party posts; various governmental positions in Ministries of Treasury, Public Education, the Presidency, and Planning and Budget; secretary of energy (1982–1986), secretary of agriculture (1992–1997); and secretary of government (1997– 1999); elective position: (1986–1992).

D. Roberto Madrazo Pintado, declared candidate for PRI presidency: born July 30, 1952, D.F.; law degree (UNAM/1974); advanced studies in urban affairs (UCLA/1980-81); numerous party posts, including secretary general of the National Revolutionary Youth Movement (1977–1978), adjunct secretary of the National Executive Committee (1987–1988), and Tabasco party president (1988); elective positions: federal deputy (1976-79, 1991–1994), senator (1988–1991), (1994–1999); finished second in the 1999 PRI presidential primary.

E. Heladio Ramírez López, secretary general of Peasant Sector (CNC): born May 11, 1939, Huajuapam de León, Oaxaca; law degree (UNAM/1964); teacher and professor; numerous party posts, including youth director in the D.F. and president of the Oaxaca regional committee; elective positions: federal deputy (1976–1979), senator (1982–1986), and (1986– 1992).

F. Leonardo Rodríguez Alcaine, secretary general of the Mexican Confederation of Workers (CTM): born May 1, 1919, Texcoco, México state; rose through the ranks to become secretary general of the Electrical Workers’ Union (SUTERM); succeeded Fidel Velázquez as head of the CTM in 1997.

8 George W. Grayson

G. Carlos Flores Rico, secretary general of the Territorial Movement, which was founded in February 1993: born in Cd. Victoria, Tamaulipas; degree in sociology (UNAM); joined PRI in 1973 and has held numerous party posts— deputy secretary of organization for the CNC, advisor to the secretary of the organization in the D.F., state coordinator for the 1988 presidential election (Chiapas, Campeche, , and Quintana Roo), and secretary of operations and organization for the Territorial Movement; experience in municipal, state, and federal bureaucracies.

H. , leader of the Chamber of Deputies and possible candidate for PRI presidency: born Aug. 18, 1953, Tizatlán, ; sociology degree (UNAM); numerous party posts, including secretary general of CNC; elective positions: state deputy (1974–1977), federal deputy (1979– 1982, 1985–1988, 2000–2003), (1986–1992).

I. Elba Esther Gordilla Morales, secretary general of the party’s popular sector (CNOP): born Feb. 6, 1945, Comitán, Chiapas; education degree (Federal Institute of Teacher Education), primary- and secondary-school teacher and history professor at the PRI’s Institute of Political Education; active in the National Educational Workers’ Union (SNTE)—the biggest in Latin America—rising from local leader to secretary general (1989–1994); numerous party posts, including national presidential campaign coordinator (1975), coordinator of PRI senatorial campaign in San Luis Potosí (1975), subsecretary of organization (1984); elective positions: federal deputy (l979– 1982, 1985–1988).

J. Jesús Murillo Karam, National Assembly organizer: born March 2, 1948, Real del Monte, Hidalgo; law degree (U. of Hidalgo); university professor and administrator; active in the state and federal bureaucracy; numerous party posts, including state president, national subsecretary of organization, and secretary of organization; elective positions: federal deputy (1979–1982, 1985–1988), senator (1991–1993), governor of Hidalgo (1993–1999); former deputy secretary of public safety.

K. Díaz, senator and longtime party leader: born February 23, 1936, Puebla, Puebla; law degree (UNAM) and graduate work in France and the United Kingdom; number of party posts, including secretary general; government positions: secretary of Gobernación and education; (1993-1999).

L. Jaime Aguilar Alvárez, secretary general of the assembly: born August 4, 1938, D.F.; degree in architecture (UNAM); number of party posts, including delegate to state parties; elective position: federal deputy.

M. Eugenio Imaz Gispert, coordinator of advisers for the president of the assembly: born July 24, 1957, D.F.; degree in anthropology (UNAM); governmental positions include secretary of economy (Hidalgo State); first secretary, Mexican Embassy in Canada; and president of PRI in Hidalgo.

9 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

N. Emilio Chaufett Chemor: born October 3, 1951, D.F.; law degree (UNAM); joined PRI in 1969 and has held numerous party posts; active in state and federal bureaucracy—secretary of government for Mexico state (1987), director general of the Federal Electoral Institute (1991), and secretary of government in the Zedillo administration (1995-97).

O. Enrique Jackson Ramírez: born December 24, 1945, Sinaloa; degree in public administration (UNAM); joined PRI in 1970 and has held numerous party posts and elective offices; president of Fundación Colosio and secretary of Electoral Action; currently president of the PRI faction in the Senate.

P. Manuel Aguilera Gómez, born July 27, 1936, D.F.; degree in economics (UNAM); university professor and administrator; joined PRI in 1956 and has held numerous party posts—including party presidency (1992); active in state and federal bureaucracy—has worked for the governments of San Luis Potosi, Guanajuato and D.F.; elective positions: federal senator (1991–1997).

Q. Several governors are expected to play major roles, including: Miguel Alemán Velasco (Veracruz), Patricio Martínez García (Chihuahua), Juan S. Millán Lizárraga (Sinaloa), Rojas (México state), Melquiades Morales Flores (Puebla), Manuel Angel Nuñez Soto (Hidalgo), Fernando Silva Nieto (San Luis Potosí), and Tómas Yarrington Ruvalcaba (Tamaulipas).

R. Among the technocrats who will participate in the National Assembly are Deputy Enrique de la Madrid, Deputy Jorge Chávez Presa, former undersecretary of foreign relations Juán Rebolledo, and Mario Luis Fuentes.

Section Three: Evolution of the Revolutionary Party

A. March 4, 1929: President Plutarco Elías Calles announced the establishment of the National Revolutionary Party (PNR). Calles called key heads of small parties, powerful generals, and other local power brokers to Querétaro to found this confederal organization—with him serving as primum entre pares—to prevent political fragmentation and violence following the assassination of President-elect Alvaro Obregón in mid-1928.

B. March 30, 1938: President Lázaro Cárdenas converted the PNR into the Party of the Mexican Revolution (PRM), whose corporatist structure embraced labor, peasant, middle-class, and military sectors. The military sector was dissolved at the beginning of the administration of Cárdenas’ successor, Manuel Avila Camacho (1940–1946), who also reorganized the middle-class sector into the National Confederation of Popular Organizations (CNOP). Meanwhile, the National Confederation of Campesinos (CNC) and the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) emerged as the dominant forces in the peasant and labor sectors, respectively.

10 George W. Grayson

C. January 18, 1946: The name of the PRM was changed to the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), as it is known today.

D. March 10, 1987: The PRI expelled Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas Solorzano, leader of the “Democratic Current,” who had excoriated the “antidemocratic excesses and intransigence” of party elites. Porfirio Muñoz Ledo, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, and other Cárdenas allies also left the PRI, because of the growing influence of technocrats and neoliberal policies within the party.

E. July 6, 1988: As the nominee of the five-party National Democratic Front, Cárdenas ran for the presidency against the PRI’s Carlos Salinas de Gortari. Although Cárdenas lost this disputed contest, his strength revealed the inability of PRI stalwarts to deliver votes as they once had. Cárdenas and other leaders of the Democratic Current joined with communists, socialists, Trotskyites, and ex-guerrillas to form the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) in 1989.

F. February 13–15, 1993: The PRI complemented its corporatist sectors with a National Territorial Movement established to broaden the party’s base by attracting professionals, environmentalists, and other groups.

G. March 23, 1994: PRI presidential standard-bearer Luis Donaldo Colosio Murieta is assassinated. This event leads President Salinas to select a technocrat, Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León, as the party’s candidate.

H. September 20–22, 1996: In a move against technocrats, the PRI’s 17th National Assembly placed candados (padlocks) on prospective nominees for major offices. Thus, a party member must have held a major elective or party post as a prerequisite for become a candidate for president, governor, or senator.

I. July 6, 1997: The PRI loses its majority in the Chamber of Deputies for the first time.

J. November 7, 1999: In lieu of the incumbent PRI chief executive handpicking the party’s presidential nominee via the dedazo (pointing his finger), the party held a primary in which Francisco Labastida Ochoa defeated Roberto Madrazo Pintado and two other aspirants.

K. July 2, 2000: An opposition candidate, Vicente Fox Quesada, defeated Labastida for the presidency, marking the first time that the revolutionary party has lost this position since the PNR’s founding in 1929. The PRI also lost its absolute majority in the Senate.

L. November 17–20, 2001: 18th National Assembly.

11 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Section Four: Hot Issues and Hot Committees

Twenty-three committees or tribunas will undertake the heavy lifting at the National Assembly. As indicated below, these committees are grouped according to five themes, with an experienced PRI leader at the head of each cluster.

I. Principles and Values: Declaration of Principles and Values Chair: Chemor, 68, ex-secretary of government and former governor of Mexico state; meeting place: San Luis Potosi, S.L.P. a. Declaration of Principles b. Code of Ethics c. Struggle for the Popular, Worker, and Peasant Goals

II. Nation Project: Action Program Chair: Rogelio Montemayor Seguy, 54, ex- director-general of Pemex and ex-governor of ; meeting place: , México state.

a. Sovereignty, Politics, and Governability b. Economy and Sustained Growth c. Social Development, Equal Opportunity, and the Fight against Poverty d. Health, Employment, and Social Security e. Education, Science and Technology, Culture and Recreation f. Ecology, Resources, and Quality of Life g. Rural Development h. Indigenous Causes i. Justice, Security, and Human Rights j. International Politics

III. Party Project: Statutes Chair: Manuel Aguilera Gómez, 65, ex-D.F. mayor and ex-senator; meeting place: Veracruz, Veracruz. a. Revision of Statutes b. Rules for the Election of [Party] Leaders c. Rules for the Nomination of Candidates

IV. Political Strategies: Chair: Beatriz Paredes Rangel, 48, president of the Chamber of Deputies; meeting place: Pachuca, Hidalgo. a. Relationship with Governmental Bodies b. Relationship with Other Political Parties c. Relationship with Social Movements and Organizations d. Struggle for the Demands of Women, Young People, and Socially Disadvantaged Groups

Vision for the Future: Chair: Enrique Jackson Ramírez, 55; head of PRI in the Senate; meeting place: Taxco, Guerrero.

12 George W. Grayson

a. Vision of the Future b. Political Declaration c. Political Commitment to Gender Equality

Before November 17, political activists combined and submitted their proposals in a single document to each committee. The elected delegates may accept, discard, or modify these suggestions. The committee’s recommendations will then be presented to the National Elected Committee for Resolutions (CNER), which will check the recommendations it receives from each committee against those of the other 22 tribunas. The CNER can either resolve conflicts itself or return the item in dispute to the committee or committees of origin. The 11,700 delegates to the National Assembly will consider their 23 committee reports at the one and only plenary session, which will be held in Toluca, México state, on November 20. Although differences abound, a consensus prevails on certain matters:

• Preserving the name, colors, and slogan of the Institutional Revolutionary Party;

• Professionalizing the selection of top leaders, rather than employing ad hoc procedures for each election;

• Creating a body to resolve disputes arising from internal elections;

• Sharing IFE resources provided to the party’s National Executive Committee with state committees;

• Reducing the size of the party’s national bureaucracy—with greater reliance on volunteers;

• Electing more members of the National Political Council;

• Welcoming ex-priístas like Alejandro Rojas Díaz-Durán, an erstwhile ally of former D.F. Mayor Manuel Camacho Solís, who have asked to be readmitted to the party;

• Broadening opportunities for women, young people, and other groups among whom Fox ran strongly;

• Breaking the PRI’s dependency on Los Pinos if and when the party regains the presidency; and

• Discouraging the participation of former chief executives (Zedillo, Salinas, De la Madrid, and Echeverría).

13 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Below is a list of key committees, as well as a sampling of anticipated controversial questions that they will consider:

Committee 1: Declaration of Principles (Declaración de Principios) ; chaired by , 68, ex-secretary of government.

Hot Issue:

Craft a party platform that includes a stated preference for NAFTA-type neoliberal reforms or a return to greater economic statism and protectionism.

Committee 5: Economy and Sustained Growth (Economía y Sustentabilidad) ; chaired by José Luis Medina A.

Hot Issue: Establishing the party’s position on Fox’s proposals to reform the nation’s tax system and electricity sector.

Committee 14: Revision of Party Statutes ( Revisión Estatutaria ); chaired by Héctor Hugo Olivares Ventura, 57, ex-deputy, ex-senator, and unsuccessful candidate for governor of Aguascalientes.

Hot Issues: How should the party rewrite its statutes to reflect the absence of a guiding force in Los Pinos? Should the party infuse greater collegiality into stances vis-à-vis the federal government, rather than give the party president a relative freedom of action? Should a body that can fairly judge alleged violators of party rules replace the Honor Commission (Comisión de Honor y Justicia)?

Committee 15: Rules for the Election of [Party] Leaders ( Normatividad y Elección de Dirigentes ; chaired by Marco Antonio Bernal Gutiérrez, 47, a former senator and unsuccessful contender for the PRI gubernatorial nomination in Tamaulipas.

Hot Issues: Should a Political Coordinating Body (Unidad de Coordinacíon Política/UCP)—with greater links between the national party and state parties, governors, and legislators—replace the National Political Council? Should the rank-and-file elect top party officials? Should 60 percent or more of UCP and/or CNP members (as well as their state counterparts) be elected?

Committee 16: Rules for the Election of Candidates ( Normatividad y elección de candidates ); chaired by Lorena Martínez Rodríguez, 37, federal deputy.

Hot Issues: Will the party continue to require its candidates for the presidency and governorships to have held previous public or party elective positions (an

14 George W. Grayson

antitechnocrat qualification or candado imposed in 1996 by the 17th National Assembly)? Might the party add other candados? What nominating process will be party favor—primaries, conventions, or other mechanisms?

Committee 17: Relations with Governmental Entities ( Relación con Organos de Gobierno ); chaired by Laura Alicia Garza Galindo, 54, senator.

Hot Issues: Should the early October National Political Accord, composed of a wish list of objectives endorsed by most political parties be broadened into an alliance or situational alliances with the Fox administration?

Table Two: State-by-State Breakdown of PRI Vote in the July 2, 2000, Presidential Election State No. of No. of Votes Cast for percent of Municipalities Registered the PRI PRI’s Voters National Vote Aguascalientes 11 562,390 127,184 0.9 5 1,498,939 319,428 2.4 Baja California 5 250,155 56,234 0.4 Sur Campeche 11 384,547 106,347 0.8 Coahuila 38 1,392,564 311,278 2.3 Colima 10 331,661 81,001 0.6 Chiapas 118 2,087,585 469,580 3.5 Chihuahua 67 1,938,388 460,767 3.4 39 868,791 222,784 1.6 Guanajuato 46 2,784,508 517,794 3.8 Guerrero 76 1,740,426 401,941 3.0 Hidalgo 84 1,322,845 355,398 2.6 124 3,846,656 941,834 6.9 México 122 7,547,729 1,637,625 12.1

15 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Table Three: PRI Performance in State and Local Elections, Aug. 20, 2000 Oct. 7, 2001

Election PRI PAN PRD Minor Null Total State Parties Votes Votes and Non- Registered Cand- idates

Tamaulipas State 485,524 337,182 71,016 37,582 24,011 955,315 (Oct. 7, Legislature 50.82 35.30 7.43 3.93 2.51 2001) Municipal 472,788 347,111 79,020 34,965 24,383 958,267 49.34 36.22 8.24 3.65 2.54 11,026 Oaxaca Municipal 270,264 126,989 153,036 102,319 663,634 1.66 (Oct. 7, 40.72 19.14 23.06 15.42 2001)

Chiapas State 393,943 196,283 274,379 209,328 55,153 1,129,086 (Oct. 7, Legislature 34.89 17.38 24.30 18.54 4.88 2001) Municipal 383,451 207,821 232,634 264,465 45,428 1,133,799 33.82 18.33 20.52 23.33 4.01

Oaxaca State 300,836 117,942 116,760 45,466 25,993 606,997 (Aug. 5, Legislature 49.56 19.43 19.24 7.49 4.28 2001)

Tabasco Governor 364,688 14,949 330,721 1,672 7,717 719,747 (Aug. 5, 50.67 2.77 45.95 0.23 1.07 2001)

Aguas- State 95,648 108,140 21,872 41,281 6,754 273,695 calientes Legislature 34.95 39.51 7.99 15.08 2.47 (Aug. 5, Municipal 98,852 113,561 20,010 35,584 6,709 274,716 2001) 35.98 41.34 7.28 12.95 2.44

Zacatecas State 136,485 89,251 146,023 62,692 12,974 447,425 (July 1, Legislature 30.50 19.95 32.64 14.01 2.90 2001) Municipal 131,844 91,432 152,140 59,120 12,479 447,015 29.49 20.45 34.03 13.23 2.79

Durango State 176,094 124,978 13,664 60,224 10,330 385,290 (July 1, Legislature 45.70 32.44 3.55 15.63 2.68 2001) Municipal 180,854 124,555 11,700 64,111 9,725 390,945 46.26 31.86 2.99 16.40 2.49

16 George W. Grayson

Chihuahua State 357,035 324,456 40,557 40,957 16,776 779,781 (July 1, Legislature 45.80 41.60 5.20 5.25 2.20 2001)

Baja Governor 200,363 266,1751 22,676 44,557 12,921 546,692 California 36.65 48.69 4.15 8.15 2.36 (July 8, 2001) State 179,492 231,3551 34,216 49,409 14,159 508,631 Legislature 35.29 45.49 6.74 9.71 2.78

Municipal 184,180 234,3411 37,776 37,891 12,665 506,853 36.34 46.23 7.45 7.48 2.50

Yucatán Governor 302,340 355,2802 6,660 14,900 679,180 (May 27, 44.52 52.31 0.98 2.19 2001) State 301,412 305,023 30,478 24,933 17,313 679,159 Legislature 44.38 44.91 4.49 3.67 2.55

Jalisco Governor 936,657 983,502 112,743 94,241 34,736 2,161,879 (Nov. 12, 43.33 45.49 5.22 4.36 1.61 2000) State 858,412 1,020,377 170,311 155,346 39,870 2,244,316 Legislature 38.25 45.46 7.59 6.92 1.78

Municipal 852,058 983,990 178,783 202,036 2,480 2,219,347 38.39 44.34 8.56 9.10 0.11

Tabasco State 284,213 81,798 265,836 23,299 15,476 670,622 (Oct. 15, Legislature 42.38 12.20 39.64 3.47 2.31 2000) Municipal 304,343 76,979 253,348 17,538 17,525 669,733 45.44 11.49 37.82 2.62 2.62

Chiapas Governor 475,267 535,8603 5,682 23,598 1,040,407 (Aug. 20, 45.68 51.50 0.55 2.27 2000)

TOTAL 8,727,04 7,399,330 2,769,699 1,721,358 475,101 21,092,531 3 35.08 13.13 8.16 2.25 41.38

1. PAN-PVEM Coalition 2. Coalition composed of the PAN, PRD, PT, and PVEM. 3. A Multiparty “Alliance for Chiapas” comprising the PRD, the PAN, and six minor parties.

17 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Table Four: PRI Governors 2001

State Name Year

Campeche José Antonio González Cun 1997 Chihuahua Patricio Martínez García 1998 Coahuila Enrique Martínez y Martínez 1999 Colima Fernando Moreno Peña 1997 Durango Angel Sergio Guerrero Mier 1998 Guerrero René Juárez Cisñeros 1999 Hidalgo Manuel Angel Nuñez Soto 1999 México Arturo Montiel Rojas 1999 Michoacán Víctor Manuel Tinoco Rubí 1995 Oaxaca José Nelson Murat Casab 1998 Puebla Melquiades Morales Flores 1998 Quintana Roo Joaquín Ernesto Hendricks 1999 Díaz San Luis Potosí Fernando Silva Nieto 1997 Sinaloa Juan S. Millán Lizárraga 1998 Sonora Armando López Nogales 1997 Tabasco Manuel Andrade Díaz 2000 Tamaulipas Tómas Jesús Yarrington 1998 Ruvalcaba Veracruz Miguel Alemán Velasco 1998

Table Five: Revolutionary Party Presidents and Secretaries General

Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI)

Time Period President Secretary General 1999 (November) Dulce María Sauri Rodolfo Echeverría Ortiz Riancho Sergio García Ramírez Barragán 1999 (March) José Antonio González F. Dulce María Sauri Riancho 1997 (September) Carlos Rojas Gutíerrez 1996 (December) Humberto Roque Villanueva

18 George W. Grayson

1995 (August) Santiago Oñate Laborde Juan S. Millán Lizárraga 1994 (December) María de los Angeles M. Pedro Joaquín Caldwell 1994 Ignacio Pichardo Pagaza José Francisco Ruiz Massieu 1993 (May) Fernando Ortiz Arana Ignacio Pichardo Pagaza 1992 (May) Genero Borrego Estrada Beatriz Paredes Rangel 1990 (December) Luis Donaldo Colosio M. Rafael Rodríguez Barrera 1988 (December) Luis Donaldo Colosio M. Rafael Rodríguez Barrera 1986 (October) Jorge de la V. Domínguez Irma Cué de Duarte 1982 (December) Adolfo Lugo Verduzco Mario Vargas Saldaña 1981 (October) Pedro Ojeda Paullada Manuel Bartlett Díaz 1981 Javier García Paniaga Guillermo Cosío Villegas 1979 (October) Gustavo Carvajal Moreno José de las Fuentes R. 1978 (July) Carlos Sansores Pérez Gustavo Carvajal Moreno 1976 (December) Carlos Sansores Pérez Juan Sabines Gutiérrez 1976 (April) Porfirio Muñoz Ledo Miguel Angel Barberena 1975 (April) Jesús Reyes Heroles Miguel Angel Barberena 1973 (March) Jesús Reyes Heroles Enrique González Pedrero 1972 (February) Jesús Reyes Heroles Enrique González Pedrero 1970 (December) Manuel Sánchez Vite Vicente Fuentes Díaz 1968 (February) Alfonso Martínez D. Enrique Olivares Santana 1966 (July) Lauro Ortega Martínez Fernando Díaz Durán 1965 (November) Lauro Ortega Martínez Fernando Díaz Durán 1965 (April) Carlos A. Madrazo Lauro Ortega Martínez 1964 (December) Carlos A. Madrazo Lauro Ortega Martínez 1964 (January) Alfonso Corona del Rosal Manuel M. Moreno 1962 (n.a.) Alfonso Corona del Rosal Juan Fernández Albarrán 1958 (December) Alfonso Corona del Rosal Juan Fernández Albarrán 1956 (May) Augustín Olachea Avilés Gilberto García Navarro 1956 (April) Augustín Olachea Avilés Rafael Corrales Ayala 1953 (April) Gabriel Leyva Velázquez Gilberto García Navarro 1953 (January) Gabriel Leyva Velázquez José Gómez Esparza 1952 (December) Gabriel Leyva Velázquez Gilberto García Navarro 1952 (July) Rodolfo Sánchez Taboada José Gómez Esparza 1952 (June) Gabriel Leyva Velázquez Adolfo López Mateos 1951 (July) Rodolfo Sánchez Taboada José López Bermúdez 1949 (March) Rodolfo Sánchez Taboada José López Bermúdez 1946 (December) Rodolfo Sánchez Taboada Teófilo R. Borunda 1946 (January) Rafael P. Gamboa Ernesto P. Uruchurtu

Partido Revolucionario Mexicano (PRM)

Time Period President Secretary General 1943 (n.a.) Antonio I. Villalobos Florencio Padilla 1940 (December) Antonio I. Villalobos Gustavo Cárdenas Huerta

19 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

1939 (June) Heriberto Jara Gustavo Cárdenas Huerta 1938 (April) Luis I. Rodríguez Estéban García de Alba

Partido Nacional Revolucionario (PNR)

Time Period President Secretary General 1937 (n.a.) Silvano Barba González Gilberto Flores Muñoz 1936 (August) Silvano Barba González Estéban García de Alba 1937 (June) Emilio Portes Gil Ignacio García Téllez

Source: For the period 1935 to 1993, see Roderic Ai Camp, Mexican Political Biographies, 1935–1993 (3rd ed.; Austin, TX: University of Texas, 1995), pp. 958– 990.

Section Five: Possible Significance of National Assembly Although the 11,700 delegates will debate scores of issues, two interrelated questions will hang over the conclave: Can the priístas select a strong party president? Will the next PRI leader enjoy sufficient legitimacy to prevent the party’s fragmentation?

Can the priístas select a strong party president? Former Tabasco governor Roberto Madrazo Pintado remains the odds-on favorite to succeed outgoing President Sauri. Before the August 5 gubernatorial election in his home state, Madrazo’s future looked uncertain. His party had lost every gubernatorial election since Fox’s mid-2000 triumph—with the exception of a narrow win in Tabasco in mid-October 2000 that the courts subsequently invalidated. Although most public opinion surveys showed that the party’s standard-bearer Manuel Andrade Díaz, a protégé of Madrazo, would win the Tabasco gubernatorial contest, many observers believed the outcome would be messy. A second disputed contest would be the political kiss of death for Madrazo, who gained international attention for allegedly spending upward of $70 million to capture Tabasco’s statehouse in 1994. Not only did PRI nominee Andrade run first in Tabasco, but his 4.5 percent margin proved a godsend for Madrazo: large enough to obviate a successful post-election challenge, but not so big as to indicate that gift-giving and vote-buying had determined the results. Now Madrazo is the man to beat for the PRI’s top spot. Other undeclared aspirants are Chamber of Deputies president, Beatriz Paredes Rangel, 48; party secretary general, Rodolfo Echeverría Ruiz, 55; Zacatecas senator and head of the reformist “Renaissance Group,” Genaro Borrego Estrada, 52; peasant sector chief, Heladio Ramírez López, 62; Puebla senator Manuel Bartlett Diaz, 65; and Senate leader Enrique Jackson Ramírez, 50, to name a few. Observers recognize Paredes as the party’s most distinguished devotee. However, she shows little interest in seeking the PRI presidency in 2002, an action that would spark infighting with Madrazo’s loyalists. She is expected to complete her legislative responsibilities before taking on new challenges. The prospect of a serious challenge to Madrazo diminished on the heels of the Tabasco voting, when

20 George W. Grayson

Veracruz’s Alemán and Hidalgo’s Nuñez Soto threw their weight behind the ex- governor. In addition, Oaxaca’s state executive José Murat Casab endorsed Madrazo, a longtime ally. Still, PRI-watchers alleged that defeated losing presidential candidate, Labastida, who has crossed swords with Madrazo, was attempting to thwart the Tabascan’s quest for the party’s number one spot. Allegedly, Labastida’s moves include (1) spreading the word that Madrazo would campaign actively for the PRI’s lackluster candidate in the November 11 gubernatorial contest in Michoacán, (2) supporting his friend, ex-Tamaulipas governor , for a pivotal position in the PRI’s “popular” middle-class sector, CNOP, (3) backing his former campaign coordinator Guillermo Ruiz de Teresa as “adjunct secretary” of the PRI’s National Political Council, and (4) endorsing Paredes Rangel for the presidency of the Chamber of Deputies. Labastida attempted to lay these rumors to rest in late October, when—after a four-hour meeting with Madrazo—he allegedly pledged not to interfere with the ex-governor’s quest for the PRI presidency. For his part, Madrazo—who doubtless realized the power that labastidianos would exercise at the assembly agreed not to raise the issue of selecting the party leader. Madrazo’s backers are still wary of Labastida’s motives. The wily Madrazo becoming party president could have several consequences:

• Rejuvenating the PRI’s grassroots elements, which resonate to the ex- Tabasco governor;

• Appealing to younger priístas, who feel neglected by the party’s nomenklatura;

• Marginalizing old-line leaders who cannot adapt to opposition status;

• Spurring defections by many of the party’s technocrats, some Labastida allies, and priístas associated with the Renaissance Group;

• Providing the PRI with a convincing spokesman as it recruits candidates and wages the 2003 congressional campaign;

• Serving as an interlocutor with whom Fox could negotiate, secure in the knowledge that the PRI legislators would honor any deal reached.

Madrazo’s emergence as president would represent a mixed blessing for Fox. On the one hand, he would have a “go-to person” in the PRI. On the other hand, Madrazo has vehemently criticized Fox’s tax and energy reforms, which are essential for the nation’s sustained growth. At the same time, he has raised questions about Mexico’s coziness with the United States, including the “blank check” bestowed on Bush for his international war against terrorism. Madrazo would urge Fox to slow down neoliberal initiatives and to allocate more resources to traditional social programs spawned by the PRI.

21 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

Madrazo’s political rebirth will force moderate, progressive governors—an important center of power in the party—to decide whether to support him in the name of unity or to field their own candidate. If united, these state executives represent the only force that could derail Madrazo’s bid for the party’s top spot. They include Tomás Yarrington Ruvalcaba (Tamaulipas), Juan S. Millán (Sinaloa), Manuel Angel Nuñez Soto (Hidalgo), Melquiades Morales Flores (Puebla), Patricio Martínez García (Chihuahua), Miguel Alemán Velasco (Veracruz), Fernando Silva Nieto (San Luis Potosí), and Enrique Martínez y Martínez (Coahuila). Meanwhile, should Madrazo fail to grab the brass ring, he may bolt the PRI to form his own political party. Although the recent death of legendary billionaire Carlos Hank González deprived him of a powerful ally, Madrazo still brandishes close ties to important politicians like Murat, ex-governor Manuel Gurría Ordóñez (Tabasco), Senators Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (Oaxaca) and Georgina Trujillo Zentella (Tabasco), as well as to Deputies Benjamín Ayala Velázquez (Coahuila), Gustavo Carvajal Moreno (Veracruz), Jesús de la Rosa Godoy (Coahuila), Efrén Leyva Acevedo (Guerrero), Gustavo Lugo Espinosa (Durango), Irma Piñeyra Arias (Oaxaca), Rafael Rodríguez Barrera (Campeche), and Nahum Zorilla Cuevas (Oaxaca). Madrazo toured the country before the PRI’s assembly, and campaigned for his party’s state and local candidates. While stepping up his criticism of Fox’s regime, he sought to project the image of a master conciliator, who could prevent schisms in his own party. He has intimated, for example, that as party president he might recruit a secretary general who could broaden his base—individuals like Enrique Jackson, Murillo Karam, or Nuñez Soto. It is likely, though, that the PRI assembly will collapse the positions of party president and secretary general into a single post. Rumors abound that he might back Labastida for the Chamber of Deputies, where the ex-presidential candidate could head the PRI’s congressional faction. While such rhetoric may mitigate internal divisions, Labastida is considered by some to be damaged goods and is unlikely to ascend to another key post. Moreover, Madrazo might want the legislative position for himself inasmuch as the PRI’s 2006 presidential nominee is likely to come from (1) the party’s presidency (2) the ranks of PRI governors, or (3) the Chamber of Deputies. At the same time, Madrazo has signaled a readiness to fling open the party’s doors to young people, women, and elements of the middle class who are disaffected with Fox.

Will the next PRI leader enjoy sufficient legitimacy to prevent the party’s fragmentation? Given the current state of affairs within the Mexican political party system, the time to defect would be now. However, will the PRI have irreconcilable differences that outweigh the financial benefit of remaining a unified party? The PRI will receive close to U.S.$69 million of IFE disbursed funds for the year 2002. This amount represents a nonelection year disbursement that will double for election year 2003. The only viable option for a potential PRI defector would be a newly created party. All newly created political parties will receive a mere U.S.$1.9 million of IFE disbursed federal funds in 2002. That translates into a difference of U.S.$67.1 million dollars for 2002 and for an election year, a difference of

22 George W. Grayson

U.S.$134.2 million. The campaign disadvantage for a newly created party would be astounding, although the overhead expenditures for a small, newly minted party would be considerably less than the expansive network of the PRI. Only if differences are irreconcilable would a faction be willing to forego that amount of money. Prospective PRI defectors therefore would have to assume the opportunity cost of joining a new party. The risk could be minimized only through a bloc defection to one particular party. The defection would have to be carefully crafted, consisting of individuals who are high profile, and who have grassroots level support in various key electoral states. This would position that particular party to make significant electoral gains in the 2003 mid-term elections, retaining its political party registration and becoming eligible for a larger disbursement of federal funds. A bloc defection, therefore, only makes sense with an eye toward the 2006 presidential election.

23 A Guide to the 18th National Assembly of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI)

About the Author

George W. Grayson , the Class of 1938 Professor of Government at the College of William & Mary, has made fifty research trips to Mexico since 1976, and lectures regularly at the National Defense University and the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. Department of State. He is an adjunct fellow at CSIS and an associate scholar of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is also senior adviser on Mexican affairs for the Washington, D.C.-based Capital Insights Group. His recent works include: Mexico: The Changing of the Guard (Foreign Policy Association, 2001), A Guide to the 2000 Mexican Presidential Election, (CSIS, 2000), Strange Bedfellows: NATO Marches East (University Press of America, 1999), Mexico Armed Forces: Factbook (CSIS, 1999), Mexico: From Corporatism to Pluralism? (Harcourt- Brace, 1998), A Guide to the 1998 Mexican State Elections (CSIS, 1998); The North American Free Trade Agreement (University Press of America, 1995), The North American Free Trade Agreement (Foreign Policy Association, 1993), The Church in Contemporary Mexico (CSIS, 1992), and Oil and Mexican Foreign Policy (University of Pittsburgh Press, 1988). Professor Grayson earned his Ph.D. at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of The Johns Hopkins University and his J.D. at the College of William & Mary. He served as a member of the Virginia State Legislature for 27 years. He belongs to Phi Beta Kappa.

24