Political Reform From 1977 To 2000

Political reforms from 1977 to 2000
From the forming of the Mexican revolutionary constitution of 1917 to the 1960s the PRI reigned supreme under the guise of political pluralism. However, a number of events during the 60s and 70s, including most notably the Tlatelolco student demonstrations of 1968 and questions of electoral fraud in the elections that followed brought the rule of the PRI into question. The party therefore attempted to maintain legitimacy through a process of reform which looked appeared to strengthen political pluralism, however, in reality, PRI rule was generally maintained. In 1977, a number of changes to the constitution and the creation of the LFOPPE began a long and slow process of political reform in Mexico.The constitutional

The election of Salinas in 1998 is considered by many to have been fraudulent, Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, son of Lázaro Cárdenas and leader of the PRD is believed to have received more votes (Olvera, 2010). In 1990 the IFE was finally established as a “separate organisation with its own budget and staff” by Salinas, perhaps after receiving a final push due to these fraud allegations (Middlebrook, 2004, p. 7). Throughout the 1990s NGOs, civil society organisations and opposition parties all continued to work to liberalize elections (Middlebrook, 2004). At the same time PRI support was dwindling with different groups for a number of reasons, the change from import substitution to competition with outside markets combined with economic stagnation drove down wages losing favour with workers who found unions separate from the PRI like the STRM more capable of defending them against “employers and the government” (Middlebrook, 2004, p.35). The PRI also lost a large percentage of the green vote due to constitutional and legislative reforms which privatised ejidal land (Middlebrook, 2004). During the 1994 elections the Civic Alliance (AC) was formed by hundreds of civic organisations and NGOs in an attempt to insure

Numerous issues continue to call into question the extent of Mexico’s democracy including the continuation of clientelistic practices, the stronghold of the PRI over other sectors of government, continual and growing inequality and poverty, questions surrounding the rights of indigenous people and Mexican emigrants, media bias and the continuation of government and cartel links. The clientelistic practices of the PRI have begun to be adopted by other parties. The “PAN and PRD lacked the capacity to develop their own networks in most regions of the country. They had no option but to receive former PRI cadres, but this practice meant the reproduction of clientelism, electoral manipulation, and pacts with the local de facto powers, precisely the political illnesses the democratic opposition was supposed to cure” (Olvera, 2010 p.88). The PRI also retained control “over constitutional amendments and the control of multiple authoritarian enclaves that populated both society and politics. The PRI still held the majority of state and municipal governments, as well as control over union and peasant corporations and influence over the rank-and-file bureaucracy” (Olvera, 2010, p87.). This meant a continuation of the authoritarian regime with the face of a changed