No one likes corruption. If there was one topic every voter, no matter the political ideology, could agree upon it would be their disdain for corruption. So, why is it still around in countries like Mexico where the existence of corruption is no recent incident. The inability of countries to rein in on corruption, especially when it is overt, is a telltale sign of democratic erosion or the lack of democratic consolidation in the case of continual corruption. The corruption that has plagued Mexico for years will only continue to hold it back from truly becoming a more democratic country.
Mexico is no stranger to corruption. In a country that saw a one-party rule for 71 years, corruption became rampant and an everyday thing to citizens. The spread of it has reached all levels of government and society. It has become so entrenched in society that for the first time in the 2018 election, exit polls showed that the majority of voters said that corruption was more important than crime or the economy. With it being so widespread, the federal government has taken steps in recent years to build domestic institutions to combat the spread of corruption. In 2014, constitutional amendments were made to change the more federal Procuraduría General de la República into the Fiscalía General de la República (FGR). This in large part was so that prosecutors could have more independence when working and seeking litigation. In 2016, the Mexican Legislature created the Sistema Nacional Anticorrupción (SNA) as an organization with citizen oversight to prevent and investigate acts of corruption on both the federal, state, and local level. This organization was meant to be one that saw both the citizenry and the federal and local governments coming together to combat corruption. While both steps has good intentions, their mandates have not truly been met.
In Nara Pavão’s 2018 article, she claims that voters are often skeptical of politicians who claim to be able to handle corruption. Such is why corrupt politicians are often elected into office, because an anti-corruption candidate is not trusted by the electorate or all candidates are corrupt. However, when a candidate is trusted to tackle corruption, they are often voted in. Such an instance occurred in Mexico during the 2018 elections. Andrés Manuel López Obrador, more commonly referred to as AMLO, became the champion of the anti-corruption cause. So much so that he won by a landslide, winning above 50% of the vote and 30% away from his nearest challenger. After winning, AMLO claimed that tackling corruption would be one of his top priorities.
Despite receiving such a resounding mandate to tackle corruption, little has actually been done two years after taking office. In fact, some could argue that it has only gotten worse. Since coming to office, AMLO has railed against the bureaucracy of the government about how it stands in his way. While not too much cause for concern, paired with other comments it becomes alarming. For the 2020 fiscal year, both the SNA and FGR faced budget cuts which is odd for an administration that wants to combat corruption. Perhaps even as a result of budget cuts, the FGR was reported to be sitting on around 500 complaints of corruption without a single action having taken place. Furthermore, local SNA branches have been unable to hire and work efficiently due to local and state governments withholding funds. With all this in mind, in July of this year AMLO criticized the utility of the SNA, one of the largest organizations to fight corruption in the country. Perhaps most alarming, in his weekly press conferences it has been observed that AMLO uses the term corrupt to bring down his political opponents and shore up support before the next election. According to Ilan Semo, a professor at Iberoamerican University in Mexico City, “What AMLO does is media lynchings. He uses accusations of corruption to destroy political opponents.” This all leads to the conclusion that corruption is being weaponized in Mexican society. Government officials at the highest levels, most overtly AMLO, are using the fight against corruption to fend off controversies and political opponents. Such is what Lindsay Mayka and Amy Erica Smith state in their article about how corruption cases can actually undermine democracy. Even though AMLO was ushered into office to fight corruption, he is actually using it to shore up support politically and to push away all those who would go against him. Ironically, the candidate who wished to fight corruption is actually using that fight to undermine democracy. After believing in an anti-corruption candidate, voters may become even more pessimistic of anti-corruption causes in the ballot box in future elections. If nothing changes with the AMLO administration, much of what Pavão states will occur in Mexico.
Despite the unfortunate turn of events lately, there is still a path forward for the fight against corruption. The United States recently arrested and extradited former Gen. Salvador Cienfuegos, who was the country’s former Minister of Defense. The primary charge was aiding the H-2 Cartel. With Cienfuegos in Mexican custody, the country and administration stand at a crossroads in terms of fighting corruption. While Mexico is no stranger to corrupt politicians facing prosecution in the past, the current administration is at a prime standing point to both prosecute Cienfuegos and tackle corruption even further. While there is a path forward for the country, no substantive stances may be taken anytime soon. As of right now, AMLO looks posed to repeat what he has been doing for the past two years – rail against the establishment while offering no solutions. Even though it got him elected president, the lack of results have begun to harm AMLO’s once high polling numbers. The country will be waiting to see how this administration handles itself in the months to come.
I have read about Brazil’s Operation Car Wash, but it was very nice to learn more about corruption in our southern neighbor from an educational standpoint rather than xenophobic charged statements from U.S. politicians. My first thought reading your post was that it is hard to eliminate corruption because it often benefits those in power with the ability to properly challenge it. In addition, corruption can create an uneven playing field for candidates that are genuinely willing to combat it. Chenoweth and Stephan determine widespread political protests to be unsuccessful in bringing about policy change in Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, however, I see it to be very challenging to combat corruption in this case without it.
As you stated, AMLO has done a complete 180 from his campaign promises to current actions. I am curious as to whether he genuinely cared about ending corruption when campaigning and became disillusioned, never cared and it was yet another empty campaign promise or fell victim to a sort of “if you cant beat them, join them.” Either way, your assessment of the danger of the electorate losing even more faith in anti-corruption candidates is spot on. It appears that he is also utilizing stealth authoritarianism, in terms of intentionally sabotaging Mexican institutions to allow corruption and anti-democratic practices to continue. Charging Cienfuegos may be an opportunity for Mexico to tackle corruption, however, it may also be the perfect opportunity for AMLO to posture and fain genuine care for the issue, while maintaining the system at hand.
I agree with your argument that corruption is horribly painful to democracy. A similar story happened in Venezuela, where the two main parties (AD and COPEI) were regarded as totally rotten, only to then be replaced by voters with the populist Hugo Chavez. On that note, I wonder how much Mexican politics is dominated by populism? If so, then are any viable alternatives available to populism? Or if not, how has Mexico avoided being dominated by populism, which is already inherently antidemocratic? I also wonder if AMLO has himself stoked populist sentiment, and what could be done to fight that off by other actors in Mexican society.
Logan,
I sincerely enjoyed reading your post! I have heard over the years about the corruption in Mexico, and, for me, it has hit close to home given that I have a lot of friends and family members who are first-generation Mexican immigrants to the United States. It is sad that, as you said, despite a candidate like AMLO advocating for anti-corruption, there is still so much corruption continuing. I like that you referenced the exit poll, which stated that corruption was a more important issue that crime or the economy. I think this may be because, first, it is a wide-spread issue in Mexico and has been for some time, and second, it impacts the daily lives of Mexican citizens. After all, if one cannot trust their own government to help and protect them, who can one trust?
Another point you raise that interested me was the fact that people will be skeptical of politicians who claim they will crack down on corruption. I totally agree with this statement. I think that after corruption has been around for so long people simply become accustomed to it, or they give up on any hope for a non-corrupt elected official.
I have a couple of questions about which I would love to hear your ideas. First, how has COVID-19 changed things for the Mexican government? Is it causing more or less corruption? My initial thoughts are that the pandemic could be serving as a distraction for the people while the government continues on with more corruption. Also, given that Mexico and the United States have had recent tensions about immigration, how do you think the well-known and widespread corruption in the Mexican government impact its relations with the United States? I would think that it would increase the tension in the already tense relationship between the two countries.
All in all, this was an enjoyable read! Great job!
Logan, I really thought your article was interesting, especially when it’s about a controversial figure such as AMLO. After having lived in Mexico City for 5 years under the Government of Enrique Peña Nieto, AMLO’s overwhelming victory in 2018 was something premeditated. As you mentioned with the article about the extradition of General Cienfuegos, he is just one of the many accused political figures of the PRI (Revolutionary institutional party – allied to Pena Nieto) which were involved in money laundering and corruption. I also agree with your point that the Mexican people seem to have trust issues when voting for someone that has stated to fight corruption. For this reason, (AMLO has tried 3 times to become President but wasn’t successful in the past) the majority of the Mexican Population knew him as the political outsider who’s accusations against the PRI were accurate. Now after being elected President, his isolationist policies and the ignoring of other big national problems have shown that he is exactly like any other candidate before him.
Although his support in the polls may be declinig, the Mexican people especially those in the lower classes have a very high level of support towards his government. Unfortunately, the representation of the lower classes and the populist agenda that triumphed in Latin America in the early 2000s, has finally caught up to Mexico. Like every other left-wing government that has won power within the last decade, AMLO is not the exception, even more so with the support of Venezuela’s Maduro, Nicaragua’s Ortegas and Cuba’s Castro. It wouldn’t be too surprising to see a trend with corruption and the high amount of resources that was witnessed in other countries occur in Mexico at this point.
Overall, I do fear that the Mexican Democracy could be in a state of erosion, even moreso with the claims by AMLO that the constitution must be modified in order to abolish term limits and create recall referendums for elected officials, which is something that was witnessed in Venezuela. As of now, I fear the incidents of using corruption in his favor are clear signals of long term democratic erosion if they are not called out in time.
Logan,
I really enjoyed reading your article about the corruption in Mexico. All of your points were super interesting but the one that caught my attention the most was the point you made about voters being skeptical about politicians who claim to be able to handle corruption because there is this norm in Mexico where all politicians are corrupt. We talked about this in my Erosion in Democracy class, we used Brazil as in example of why corrupt officials kept getting elected in power and I thought it was interesting that the explanation of what is going on in Brazil was the same explanation you gave for what is going on in Mexico. It was also interesting that the Mexican citizens stated that the corruption in Mexico is a bigger problem than crime or the economy. I think corruption almost goes hand and hand with the economy and mostly crime. Like stated in your article, past presidents have a history of money laundering which I believe has helped the cartels in Mexico obtain a lot of power. My question would now be, do you believe the cartels Mexico have gotten too powerful which can prevent an actual anti-corrupt candidate from obtaining office? How does the norm of all officials being corrupt get broken when corruption runs so deep in the country’s history?