Numerous street demonstrations calling for the overthrow or resignation of presidents have become common sights around the world in recent years. Not to mention the debate about the paralysis of governments in the face of political crises. In this context, proposals for changing the mandate, banning the re-election of the president, and coordinating the dates for the election of the Congress and the Executive body are on the agenda, both in France and Brazil.
Numerous street demonstrations calling for the overthrow or resignation of presidents have become common sights around the world in recent years. Not to mention the debate about the paralysis of governments in the face of political crises. In this context, proposals for changing the mandate, banning the re-election of the president, and coordinating the dates for the election of the Congress and the Executive body are on the agenda, both in France and Brazil.
President Emmanuel Macron (LREM), re-elected in France, advocates extending the mandate from five to seven years. The rule would not apply to his government if passed, but would give future heads of state more time to implement their policies.
- Watch Election Radar, a new video feed featuring behind-the-scenes information, nomination analysis, and voting intent polls
In Brazil, President Jair Bolsonaro (PL) has promised to present a proposal to end presidential re-election in 2018. But at the end of his term, he submitted his candidacy and is campaigning to stay in office.
At present, in Brasília, discussions are ongoing in the House of Representatives regarding changes in the form of powers and type of government. In 2021, a proposal to extend the government’s mandate to eight years was presented in popular consultations every two years by a researcher from Impa at Casa.
Given this, what would be the ideal time for a presidential government?
France proposes to remove electoral logic from government
Re-elected in April, Macron presented during his campaign a proposal to increase the presidency in France from five to seven years. According to Macron’s project, a longer presidential term will be accompanied by a change in the National Assembly deputies in the middle of the government, as in the United States. According to him, the change would bring “a good rhythm for the presidential election” and “a respite from the legislative elections”.
While its first term was engulfed by two major crises, the yellow vests and the Covid-19 pandemic, the French proposal would extend the government’s time to allow long-term reforms to be discussed.
Seven to five, five to seven
The proposed change would be a counter-reform compared to what happened in France in the early 2000s, when it was decided by a referendum by then-president Jacques Chirac to reduce the presidential term from seven to five years. As the legislature and in the same year, he put two elections.
However, two decades later, critics believe that the short-term hinders medium- and long-term political discussions and instills an electoral calculation logic in the government. This may be one of the reasons why the unpopular debate on pension reform, which has been debated for years in France, is interrupted by each new election approach.
The five-year term has also been criticized for “empowering the President,” as constitutionalist Didier Maus explained on a television channel. France 2.
The legislative election takes place shortly after the presidential election, and lawmakers present themselves with alliances that indicate whether they will be part of the government’s support base. “Deputies on behalf of the elected president will be elected in six weeks,” says Maus.
With the estimation of new MPs to be elected mid-term, Macron’s proposal would be a response to criticism about the close relationship between the legislative election and the outcome of the presidential election in the country, remembering what happened today. in the United States.
Three re-elections in two decades
Re-election in Brazil, approved in a controversial vote on constitutional amendment in 1997, has become almost the norm in presidential terms in recent years. Fernando Henrique Cardoso (PSDB), Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) and Dilma Rousseff (PT) managed to stay in power with more or less tight elections.
However, Dilma’s accusation in 2016 put the efficiency of this tool at the center of the discussion again. Research in local governments in the country shows that because re-election is possible, mayors adopt more responsible policies with the public budget in their first term, for further voting.
“Re-election can result in the director-general working hard to be well-received and thus rewarded with re-election,” explains political scientist Lara Mesquita, professor at the FGV-SP (Fundação Getulio Vargas).
But the election expert says there is still no evidence that this will happen for the post of president in Brazil, given the small number of years since the change.
Former president FHC has already declared that confirming re-election was a mistake. The current Chief Executive, Bolsonaro, has promised to end this mechanism when he is nominated.
But re-election is not a problematic tool for Mesquita. “The re-election will be almost a plebiscite for the continuity or absence of the CEO. And this pattern is being repeated in many countries,” he explains, especially in the shorter term.
“The idea of democracy is the idea of competition for power. So someone who stays too long without voter approval may be at risk of imitation as well. [do poder] as well as changing the context so that the population is no longer satisfied with that ruler and there is no possibility to replace him.”
Popular queries to verify government
The prospect of holding public consultations every two years while in office, as economics professor Luciano Castro from Impa presented at a symposium in the House of Representatives, attempts to respond to the crisis of popular representation with a less traumatic option than impeachment. of a monarch by accusation. The idea, detailed in an article, extends the term to eight years, with the possibility of plebiscites being dismissed every two years.
“In this way, the electorate will be able to limit the damage caused by an incompetent or corrupt ruler, and at the same time benefit from a longer-term effective government,” Castro said in the text.
The model is already used in countries like Mexico and Venezuela, notes Mesquita, who says the popular consultation model does not guarantee greater control by the public.
“The Mexican experience shows people that it is possible to use this instrument in a populist way. The public consultation we saw in Mexico was very small turnout, so small it wasn’t enough for it to have legal value, and even so, the president was able to legislate using the result that was very favorable to him. trying to put pressure on your organ,” he quotes.
“All these discussions are important, but no tool is perfect or a guarantee of a truly better system that guarantees greater stability or confidence in the population,” the political scientist underlines.
source: Noticias
