Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Mexico
2. why/what is the intended purpose
3. Has it stuck to intended purpose
4. What is its effect on policy outcome Post PRI (1997-Present) Felipe Calderon Characteristics Maintain status quo, not change it "Reactive Player" Decrees Weak Coalitions in legislature Basic Powers Appointing positions (attorney general, cabinet
members, etc.) Power over military, declare war & peace Issuing decrees nominating supreme court justices Veto powers Introduce bills to congress Case Studies President Zedillo and his
87.5% success rate in congress 2004 supreme court ruling
of presidential decree over congress Policy Making Process Policy Making in Mexico Presidencialismo 1950's to 1990's
Single Party, hegemonic rule The Intitutional Revolutinay Rule (PRI) Never lost an election had a place for everyone.
Three periods of the PRI era
- Stable devolopment
between 1950 and 1970
-A populist period from 1970
-A period of crisis,
adjustment, and structural
reforms between 1982 and 1997
Lost majority in chamber of deputies thus leading to todays current divided government. Judicial System: Presidencialismo Manipulation of Supreme Court The executive branch manipulated the Supreme Court through: Appointment Tenure Presidents were allowed to appoint
justices with a simple senate majority,
which was generally automatic.
Between 1933 and 1995, all justices were
only appointed if they held a political position
beforehand. This created the decision making
of justices to be biased, depending on what party
they were affiliated with. Changed 2 times: Lifetime 6 years Presidents also had power to renew at least 40% of members why? Effect on Policymaking? Smooth Policy making process
ONLY in a sense that there were no
roadblocks to the executive's total control
over policy making, whether lawful or not. BUT Creates democratic instability by:
taking away an independent judicial sytem.
This ultimately takes away a major check on policy making.
manipulating the court.
The 6 year term for justices causes them to make biased
decisions in order to sustain their position. Divided Government Pre 1997 Congress Not very powerful Most legislation was drafted
in executive department. why? Ban on consecutive reelection Powerful executive The President changed the lifetime tenure to 6
years in order to create polarization of power towards
Later, the legislature changed the tenure back to lifetime,
to try and restore checks and balances. Limited Judicial Power Amparo Suit
The court's most powerful means of reviewing
the constitutionality of norms and laws.
This gave the court some power, but prevented
the court from ruling on religious freedom, education,
voting rights and the implementation of electoral rules, and the right to challenge presidential desicions on the expropriation of land. Amparo, which means protection, gave protection only to the president.
The rarely defied the PRI in politically sensitive
During the 1960s, amparos were invoked on the crime of
"social dissolution" this is basically a broad category the penalized the
actions of political dissent. These cases were almost immediately dismissed.
The court also refused to hear an case that touched upon matters of
voting rights. By limiting the ability of supreme court judges to
rule on matters that impinge on human rights, and
impacting the ability to partake in checks and balances,
you therefore weaken the judicial system by taking away
independence. why? therefore... Effect on Policymaking? Policies were biased
Power was polarized
even more to the president.
Judiciary was unable to
fill their fundamental role of
balancing power and ensuring
justice. Change to divided government Because of the polarization of power
toward the executive, decisions were only
made in the interest of corporatist sectors.
This eventually caused dissatisfaction with
the system, as well as recurrent economic and
Political protest and economic reform led to
the development of a multiparty system. Economy During PRI Rule (1950-1997) 1950-1981- economic growth rate averaged 6.1 % during this time Inflation was very low 1982-1988- very little growth
in economy during this time frame
(.1%). Characterized by high rates
of inlation and unstable policy Characteristics 1989-1997- Growth
stabilized to 2.6%, Inflation
low, public spending increasing Inflation was caused by
spending to service
mounting foreign debts worlwide growth Mexico's War On Drugs Polices to Fight Drug Cartel 2007- Extraditions of Criminals
2007- Eradication fo Drug Operations
Policies to combine security forces (PFP and AFI)
2008- Calderon proposes a package of security reforms
2008- Judicial Reforms
2009- Security tightened at US border
2010- Calderon announces plan for new policy addressing social issues Calderon's Efforts Despite the growing war against drugs, key cities such as ciudad juarez have increasing violence.
Public response to Calderon's visits are unwelcoming.
Calderon and other authorities are forced to question effectiveness of policies. The casulties, currently at 10, 031, are growing at a steady rate. Felipe Calderon's claims that he is attacking social issues along with increasing military presence to fight the war, but the public doesn't see an imporvement in drug crimes. The progress from Calderon's policies is hard to see. As a result, Obama questions his results.
In Cuidad Juarez, calderon's plan to decrease drug crimes by increasing military presence backfires. Ineffective Policies Does your section follow this framwork? Economy After PRI
(1997-Present) Economy Stababized NAFTA Passed Rural Poor still Ignored Social redistribution
Splinter group of the PRI
Created in 1988 Ended the 70 year rule of the PRI
More open polictical system
Vicente Fox elected Authoritarian System
Dominant party (1929-2000)
Public policy was stable
Rigid and private policies Politicial Parties in Mexico
Industrial Revolutionary Party ( PRI)
National Action Party (PAN)
Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) Many others as well between the rest of the world Since NAFTA more exports of goods have occured
Rural poor still empoverished and seeking residensy in America Drug Trade has escalated and it can be argued that NATA has made it much easier for smugglers.
Limited to no growth in actual Jobs for Mexicans due
to massive loss of agricultural jobs. The results... Judicial System: Post-Presidencialismo 1917-1993 1994-present Divided Government PRI PRD PAN Double click anywhere & add an idea Basic Information Simple majority Appoints and Dismisses Members of Executive Branch Governors on the local level Next President No Vice President Single-term limits 70 year stronghold Executive in Legislation Always secured congressional approval of bills The president consulted with corporatist leaders before sending legislation to congress President was cheif legislator Limited Powers Checked by PRI and corporatists Stability in policies Technically constitutionally weak Narrowness Secrecy Corruption Pre-1997 Electoral fraud, voter suppression and violence used Petroleum revenues surged; PRI benefitted Conclusion Executive Pre-1997 How did this effect policy making Legislation could be passed more quickly President has more power Legislative branch does not effectively check the
president Important political experience Post PRI 1997-Current 1997 Legislation majority shift CAUSE: PRI lost midterm elections EFFECT: Executive initiated bills fell from an
average of 83 bills passed a year to 32. Presidents role as Chief Legislator vanished Which... Less centralization More key players New Organic Law of Congress Enacted to eliminate standing committees Gave parliamentary factions the power to
remove committee members at any time without
consultation to the plenary thereby undermining the
independence of standing committees Only allowed to serve 1 term Gather information
Assess policy alternatives
Oversee the implementation of law change Weaknesses and Restrictions More oppositional Parties Overall: More oppisition bills and Parties Less executive-initiated bills Lack of ability and
long term orientation ***The Judicial System's Fight to Regain Independence*** How did they attain this goal? 1994 Constitutional Reform enabled the Supreme Court to take on a more active role
factors contributing to the emergence of a more independent Judicial System are: Judicial Reform Law Act of Unconstitutionality Constitutional Controversies Adjudication of Electoral Disputes Judicial Reform Law Purpose: provided a means for competitive examination in selecting/appointing
Supreme Court judges
lower federal court judges (i.e. District, Appellate) Outcome: lessened the politicization of the Judicial System •Began in 1997
•Crises free for the first time in 24 years
•Supportive of low inflation and a stable exchange rate
•Public policy has become more public
•Budget remains balanced
•Focuses on education, agriculture, and health care for low-income groups Conclusion (things you should probably write down if you havent already) Up until 1997, the president was the strongest person in the government, only having to answer to the corporatist leaders, but none of the other branches of government. Executive Pre Executive Post The president is relatively weak when it comes to policy making but still holds some key powers such as decree and veto. Judicial Pre Judicial Post Political instability because of the absence of an independent judiciary Great time for reformation for the Judicial System in trying to restore autonomy.
Restablized checks and balances making the Judicial Branch impartial and effective arbitrator once again. Legislative Pre President had more power leaving the legislative unable to check the president. Legislative Post Act of Unconstitutionality
Purpose: gave the Supreme Court the authority to strike down a
law or administrative act as unconstitutional ONLY
when 1/3 of the Congress, 1/3 of the State Congress,
or the Attorney General asked that the
constitutionality of the law be examined.
Re-equilibrated the Judicial System's power with that of the other two branches of government
Placed a "check" on the Judicial Branch to ensure that it could not declare a law as unconstitutional on its own Constitutional Controversies
Definition: Conflicts between the federal
branches of government (i.e.
executive/legislative political deadlock)
Solution: Supreme Court justices with life-terms
should (theoretically) be insulated from
the "political machine", and thus, can
serve as impartial arbitraters in
constitutional disputes Judicial Dilemma Life term vs. 6-year term At the federal level, judges hold life-term seats
Outcome: - interpretive stability
- enforcement of "checks & balances"
In the lower-level courts, judges have term-limits that run parallel with that of the executive
Outcome: - judicial branch destabilization
- susceptibility to political influence
- impartial interpretation of the law
becomes compromised Judicial Outcome following Change Case Study Anaylses Case studies conducted from 1994 to 2003 conclude that the percentage of the Supreme Court's rulings in favor of the PRI fell from 85% to 34%
After 2000, when the PRI lost the presidency, this number dropped to 31%
These rulings can be interpreted as:
- reputation-building strategy
- attempt at judicial independence Conclusion The Judicial System is trying to shift its strategy from just being a veto player
The Supreme Court has the potential to become an impartial and effective constitutional enforcer Mexico now 11th largest economy End to the PRI majority in the legislative gave more power to opposition parties. But because of the inability to serve consecutive terms, policymaking is still rigid. What it is ...
A Free Trade agreement between
Mexico, the USA, and Canada.
Allows for free trade between these countries
where no taxes and terrifs can be enforced
by any governments on produts. 1994 crysis led to a fixed exchange rate
improved economic fundementals of the country
stabalized exchange rate policies Remittances; money sent home
account for second largest sourse of forign income after crude oil exports.
more than doubled since 1997 Conclusion: More needs to be done.