The deadline for political parties to make official the slates with which they will compete for the municipal elections this year. Once this formality is completed, a new deadline begins for candidates for mayors and city councils of the 5,570 Brazilian municipalities to register their candidacies with the Electoral Court. Only after August 16, the date set for the start of the campaign in the electoral calendar, will the dispute for voter preference officially begin.
officially. This adverb makes all the difference. The campaign for municipal positions will “officially” begin in two weeks, but, in practice, it has already been on the streets since January 1, 2021. It is explained: in the democratic tradition, electoral campaigns are the moments in which candidates for public office approach voters to convince them that their proposals are better than those of their opponents. Those who are most effective in this work win the elections and the right to govern.
In the Brazil, the opposite happens. Politicians govern to win elections. Just as the Samba Schools begin to prepare for the next carnival on Ash Wednesday, it is possible to say that Brazilian politicians do not even bother to get off the podium. They start thinking about the next election as soon as the Electoral Court proclaims the result of the election that has just taken place. Those elected already take office thinking about the next election. And, in the name of this purpose, the greatest absurdities are committed. Everything is allowed, even to do, in the exercise of the mandate, exactly the opposite of what was promised to the voter during the campaign.
It has been like this since the possibility of reelection led politicians to be all the time with their eyes focused exclusively on the electoral benefits that their decisions can yield. In the name of this principle, even though they were elected with the promise, for example, to avoid unnecessary spending of public money and to treat the taxpayer with respect, politicians are the first to put their foot on the accelerator and not make savings when they take office. As evident as the need for austerity measures is, there are few who have the courage and willingness to take any decision that could harm the interests of the most powerful and noisy corporations that live at the expense of the state.
POLITICAL PYRAMID — This, of course, is a generalization — and, like every rule, this one has its exceptions. Another point to note: this is not exclusive to the municipality of Rio de Janeiro. This is how things happen in Brasilia, in all 27 units of the Federation and in the vast majority of municipalities in the country. Be that as it may, the fact is that in Rio, as in any other municipality in the state and in the country, the campaign for the municipal elections began long before it was formally authorized by the Electoral Court.
Only those who live in the world of the moon do not know that Mayor Eduardo Paes (PSD) is running for reelection and leads the polls, while deputy and professor Tarcísio Motta (PSOL) will be one of his opponents. It is also public and evident that the former director of the Brazilian Information Agency (ABIN), Alexandre Ramagem (PL) will measure strength with them at the polls.
Other names are already defined and no person who follows politics with a minimum of attention has the right to claim that they do not know who will run for the mayor’s office of Rio for the next four years. But there is another point, as important as this, which is not always mentioned when talking about the upcoming elections. It is the municipal Legislature.
That’s right. The vacancies of councilors will also be up for grabs and this position, although it is seen by many as the base of the Brazilian political pyramid, gives its occupant considerable influence in the decision-making process. Whoever notices correctly, will notice that the councilman has more power than he seems. And it has a much more effective possibility of interfering in the lives of the population than that of a state deputy or a federal deputy.
It is good to make it clear: no one is saying that a councilman is more important than a deputy. What is being said is that, especially in a city like Rio, the position of councilor provides its holder with a considerable possibility to work for society. Their duties include the power to make decisions that lead to the improvement or worsening of public transportation. And that can have repercussions on the quality of street lighting services, on the quality of paving, on the improvement of urban postures, on the improvement of solid waste collection and street cleaning services and on a lot of other tasks that are the responsibility of the municipal administration and directly interfere with the quality of life of the population.
No change in these policies happens without going through the City Council. For this reason, the vote given to the candidate for councilor is as important as the vote for mayor. This would already be a sufficient reason for the parties to assume the obligation to act with much more discretion than they normally do when choosing the names they offer to the voter’s choice.
WEIGHT AND COMPLEXITY — The truth, however, is that criteria are something that does not seem to exist at this time and the choice of the names that compete is made much more based on the ability to attract votes than on the competence to formulate policies that produce improvements for the population. To make it very clear what is intended: when forming a slate, communicators or digital influencers have preference over people who are better prepared to deal with public policies under the responsibility of the position.
Proof that the criteria for choosing candidates are extremely flexible is the enormous number of names vying for the position of councilor. The impression one has is that there are too many candidates for the available vacancies. In the last elections, in 2020, 1788 candidates competed for the 51 seats in the plenary of the Pedro Ernesto Palace — which houses the Legislative Branch of the municipality of Rio de Janeiro. The forecast is that the number this year will be even higher.
Here it is good to draw attention to an important point: the Chamber reflects the weight and complexity of the municipality and, starting with the number of vacancies it offers, the one in Rio is one of the most outstanding in Brazil. To get an idea of its prominence, only six of the 27 Legislative Assemblies in the country have more seats than the 51 that are filled every four years in the municipal legislature of Rio de Janeiro. They are São Paulo (with 94 state deputies), Minas Gerais (77), the state of Rio (70), Bahia (63), Rio Grande do Sul (55) and Paraná (54). All the other 20 states plus the Federal District have fewer representatives in their Legislative Assemblies than the Rio City Council.
The parties, therefore, should assume the obligation to facilitate the work of the voter, offering them a slate formed by pre-selected candidates and in a position to face the challenges of the position they seek. If this happened, the names chosen by the voter would be better able to dialogue with the next mayor – be it Paes, Motta, Ramagem or anyone else – with a view to implementing the public policies proposed during the campaign. To the same extent, the mayor will be more charged and inspected more rigorously if he moves away from the interests of society.
ACCOUNTABILITY — This is the point that matters. As naïve as any idea may seem to improve the quality of Brazilian politicians, it is mandatory to recognize that everything should start with the careful selection, by the parties, of the names to be taken to the voter’s choice. This is a point that, by the way, has already been defended in this space once again.
It is always important to return to this point: for Brazilian parties to begin to be taken seriously by the voter, they need to adopt stricter principles of relationship with their affiliates. Financed, as they are, by the people’s money, they have no right to continue acting as if they had no accounts to render to anyone.
As with the financial system, where banks are responsible for the conduct of customers and are subject to punishment if it is proven that the money from the deposits they receive comes from illicit activities, the parties should answer for any misconduct of the affiliates who, on their behalf, address the voter in search of votes.
Everyone would win if the electoral legislation forced the party to search the lives of candidates interested in running in an election for their party and make sure that no discrediting conduct weighs against them. In addition, these organizations should be the first to make a detailed accountability, which would not allow a shadow of doubt regarding the correct use of the billions of reais they receive to spend on their electoral campaigns.
As John Lennon would say, “you may say I’m a dreamer”.Or, you can say I’m a dreamer. But I will always insist on demanding from political parties the principle that applied to Caesar’s wife: it is not enough for them to be honest; they have to appear honest. The reality, however, has been the opposite of this.
Last week, this column dedicated all its space to criticizing the amnesty that the Chamber of Deputies granted to political parties that were fined for non-compliance with the electoral law with regard to the allocation of a part of the electoral fund to the campaigns of women and black people. In the Constitutional Amendment Proposal that granted the pardon, two aspects drew attention.
The first was the shamelessness with which the deputies took, for their own benefit, a measure that does not have any support outside the political world and that distances them even more from the society that they, by historical definition, represent. The second is the breadth of the “ideological spectrum” (to use an expression so much to the liking of politicians) of the deputies who took the measure. Practically all parties with representatives in the house participated in the party. People who disagree for any reason and are never on the same side in the votes, came together to get rid of an account that, according to a calculation that was not denied either by the Electoral Court or by the associations themselves, exceeds R$ 20 billion.
PARTY CHIEFS — It is good not to forget this at this time when the parties are about to launch a new campaign. The PEC approved by the Chamber and sent to the Senate (where, certainly, it will be welcomed with all affection by Their Excellencies), contrary to what the voter would like to happen, proposes even looser rules for the application of resources destined to the campaigns of black people. The obligation to allocate at least 30% of the Electoral Fund to the campaigns of candidates who meet this requirement remains in place. But the expenditure will now be made, as the text of the law says, “in the circumstances that best meet the interests and strategies of the party”.
You don’t need to be an expert in law to know that this provision was only included in the PEC to allow party chiefs to continue spending the billions they take from the taxpayer to finance themselves in the way they deem most convenient — without having to be accountable to anyone, not even to the Electoral Court. At a time when tricks like this further tarnish the reputation of the parties in society, it would be very good if the period of party conventions was used to try to improve their image with the voter.
The least that the parties should do now, at the start of the 2024 electoral process, would be to make a commitment to follow to the letter what the electoral legislation says and spend the resources they receive from the taxpayer according to the division criterion that stems from the quota system that they themselves proposed years ago. It would be even better if all sides involved in the dispute committed, once elected, to guide their mandates according to the commitments they will make in their campaigns.
Finally, it is necessary that the candidates do not forget that the positions in dispute at the moment are the mayor and councilor – and that it is not appropriate to bring to the debate issues that are not directly related to the problems that Rio or any other municipality in the country has to solve. That’s right. “Nationalizing” the municipal campaign, as defended by the sectors interested in the continuation of the polarization between President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and former President Jair Bolsonaro, does not make the slightest sense. This only postpones the solution of the problems that have affected the life of the carioca for decades.
