Rudy goes to Lima

19/05/2011

By now it’s a pretty tired narrative: Sherriff Giuliani rolls into town and uses the strong arm of the law to straighten out all that’s gone crooked. He did it in New York. Then he took the road show to Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia. And now he’s in Lima advising Keiko Fujimori, suddenly the frontrunner in the Peruvian presidential election run-off.

The timing couldn’t be better for the aspirant. Because though the former New York mayor is there in a “consulting” role, it’d take a healthy amount of audacity to deny his presence is anything but an endorsement. And that’s pretty important when your father’s legacy strikes fear in the hearts of the most moderate libertarians.

But that really depends on whom you talk to, because for Peruvians, Alberto Fujimori is either the man who saved the country from the terrorists or a sociopath whose would-be public safety agenda did a poor job of concealing his fangs.

Yes, Giuliani has shown where he stands.

You needn’t look further than the photos of him and Keiko smiling together… like some crime-fighting super couple.

Of course some will argue it’s just business; it doesn’t mean Rudy condones El Chino’s authoritarian regime, because even Keiko has said she has no plans to commute her father’s sentence or pardon him.

It’s just that she has this habit of mollifying any criticism with praise for his economic policies…

So is it really that much of stretch to conceive of her reneging on her word? To dare to suggest that the apple might not have fallen too far from the tree—that the daughter he once made First Lady at the age of 19 might show some gratitude?

Because the Shining Path and Túpac Amaru no longer terrorize the country—and that’s all that matters, right?

Kind of like how it’s safe to hang around Times Square these days…

But every city is different.

“Before making recommendations, it’s necessary to meet the city’s people, because there’s no single method that can serve all cities,” he said in Lima.

Interesting.

It makes you wonder if they’ve discussed that clever alternate theory about Rudy’s successful war on crime in New York—the one that Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner suggested back in their fun little 2005 book Freakanomics: Maybe it wasn’t the strong arm of the law that cleaned up the Big Apple. Maybe it was legal access to abortion.

Since she stated her position on that during the first leg of the campaign back in January (“I’m not in favor of legalizing abortion, I’m a woman, the mother of a family."), she probably wouldn’t take too kindly to Mr. Giuliani suddenly reconsidering his success.

So for the “violent crime, including carjacking, assault, sexual assault, and armed robbery” that—if you need a reliable source—the American State Department describes as “common in Lima”—you can expect a more conventional, piecemeal approach.

Reducing the crime rate doesn’t happen “in two or three months” Giuliani told the Peruvian media—it took years in New York.

Now show him where the squeegee kids are, Keiko.

Another presidential kick at the illegal immigration can

13/05/2011

Still basking in the approval of his presidential decision to take out the most badass jihadist of them all, President Obama got his groove back and used that political capital to again ruffle some Republican feathers on illegal immigration.

Er, kind of.

Delivering his speech this week in El Paso, Texas—for obvious reasons—the President spoke euphemistically of the estimated 11 million “undocumented immigrants” who are “just trying to earn a living and provide for their families”.

Then he joked about what’s been done to appease the nativists, “Now they're going to say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol. Or they'll want a higher fence. Maybe they'll need a moat. Maybe they want alligators in the moat. They'll never be satisfied. And I understand that. That's politics.”

So what’s his solution, his panacea?

Well, first and foremost he’s a politician who needs to get reelected, so anything truly innovative had to be somewhat counterbalanced by big, juicy carrots like promises to maintain border security and continue expelling “undocumented criminals”.

The latter he boasted having done—thus far— to the tune of 70%—which, while a-ok for U.S.A., is much less so for the poor resource-starved Latin American countries required to welcome those delinquents back home.

But again, as the President said, “That’s politics.” And in order to really fix “the broken immigration system,” the fat kid can’t get on the policy teeter-totter till the skinny one finds a friend. They usually call this ‘compromise’; I call it confusing.

Especially the third pillar of Obama’s proposed “reform”:

“Third, those who are here illegally, they have a responsibility as well. So they broke the law, and that means they've got to pay their taxes, they've got to pay a fine, they've got to learn English. And they've got to undergo background checks and a lengthy process before they get in line for legalization. That's not too much to ask.”

So how will this work for José the Guatemalan dishwasher?

He’s gruelingly worked various menial jobs over the course of his undocumented decade chez Uncle Sam, but suddenly he’s given the gift of “reform”…

¡Qué bien! He thinks.

Or does he?

Ok, let’s think about what the president is saying…

José broke the law and has to pay taxes.

Does that mean retroactively?

All ten years?

How would the IRS go about determining what he owes?

Anyway, whenever that’s sorted out—he has to pay a fine.

Well, what kind of fine?

How much?

You remember he came to the United States because there was no work at home, to make a measly wage and scrape by on the money he didn’t remit.

Can he afford this reform?

Then he has to go learn English. But wait—if he’s made it this far without speaking any—isn’t that just a little bit ingenuous on his part?

The icing on the cake, though, is that once he’s complied with all those requirements, he has to undergo a background check and a “lengthy process” before he gets in line for legalization.

A background check? By the letter of the law, isn’t he a criminal?

And as far as waiting in line for this “lengthy process” with 10,999,999 others: he didn't or couldn't wait the first time, so why would he wait now?

Evo the Unpopular

20/04/2011

Alexander the Great; Ivan the Terrible; William the Conqueror; it’s easy enough to pigeonhole historical leaders with flattering and unflattering sobriquets (nicknames if you feel like being less pretentious…or French), but it gets a little harder with modern day heads of state.

To suggest something flattering would sound like a pathetic attempt on the part of the obsequious party faithful; to suggest something unflattering would sound like a pathetic attempt on the part of the opposition.

Nonetheless, here’s a contemporary suggestion: Evo the Unpopular...

Things haven’t been going too well for the Bolivian President lately.

In a country where protests are the norm, and where the President rose to power after leading protests against the nationalization of the country’s resources, setting the record for “expressions of discontent” during his presidency has to be a perverse irony.

But that’s the dubious distinction the Bolivian NGO CERES (the Cochabama Centre for Economic and Social Reality) bestowed on Morales last week with the release of their study on protests in the country over the last 41 years.

The study counted 811 “expressions of discontent” in 2010, which they defined as “strikes, street protests, road closures, and prison rebellions.”

That makes for about 67 a month. And it’s only getting worse—according to the study, anyway.

There have been 240 conflicts registered so far in 2011—up from 207 for the same period in 2010.

But…

There was an agreement reached yesterday between Morales’ MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) government and the COB (the Bolivian Workers Center)—the biggest trade union in the country.

The government is heralding it as a MASSIVE breakthrough.

But is it?

The agreement, which the Communications Minister called the result of massive “efforts and sacrifices”, is little more than a 1% salary increase for teachers and healthcare workers. And though that’s 1% on top of the 10% raise they got in April, it’s still far below the 15% for which the COB was asking.

Ok, let’s be reasonable—a 15% raise? Who asks for a 15% raise?

Well, people living with 11% inflation (18% when it comes to basic foodstuffs).

The poorest and most malnourished population in South America isn’t looking for luxuries; their salaries just aren’t paying them enough to feed themselves.

The proximate cause of this particular inflationary crisis was a government decision in December to end gas and diesel subsidies. The gasolinazo, as it was known, led to price increases of 80%.

Apparently MAS didn’t see the food cost corollary...

But while in February the vice-president confessed to making mistakes and asked for forgiveness, yesterday the Communications Minister was much less conciliatory.

He accused certain leaders of using the protests as a pretext.

They’re using the conflict to “damage and affect the process of change, democracy, and the government,” he said.

Morales went further and said the protests were a precursor to a coup d’état.

Was it just fear mongering?

I thought Morales’ days were numbered last August when the MAS governor in Potosí went on a hunger strike with his fellow Potosians over a lack of investment in the department. But that ignored the context in which the protest was occurring, because with the perspective the CERES study provides, it was nothing more than a blip—a minor disruption amongst hundreds of others.

This time it’s on a national scale, though. And when your people can’t afford to eat, the stakes are a little higher.