Distant Neighbors

After spending more than 20 years in Mexico as an English teacher, I returned to the States and started reflecting on the enormous difference in cultures, way of life, daily habits, religion, politics, and, above all, public perception toward government, whether local or national. Mexico was, of course, settled by Spaniards who gave the country its language, but not its culture. The resulting mix of European and Indian blood, known in Mexico as mestizos, comprises more than 90% of today's population. The Catholic Church established the main religion for most Mexicans who revere the Virgin Mary as its beloved protector. Even drug traffickers, ironically, invoke her help to carry out their sinister trade.

To understand  Mexican cynicism toward government, one must remember that this proud country has been unable to find true democracy except for very short periods of time. Invaded by the French and by Americans, plagued by dictatorships from Porfirio Diaz to the political monopoly during 70 years under the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI), citizens of the Aztec country are naturally very skeptical as to their rulers' claims of democracy. Vast fortunes were made by corrupt politicians who acted with impunity and sacked state and national treasuries. No checks and balances existed to limit political excesses, no judicial system (controlled by cronies) dared interfere or ask for public accounting. The media, with rare exceptions soon quelled, reflected the government's point of view with nary an independent opinion.
Vicente Fox, First non-PRI President

Things changed on December 1, 2000, when Vicente Fox was sworn in as the first non-PRI President of Mexico. The nation exhaled with relief; now things would change. Democracy, finally, was taking over in Mexico! Alas, old habits die hard. The governing machine remained the same with firmly entrenched bureaucrats who still saw their poorly paid positions as an opportunity to supplement their salary through the famous mordida (bribe). Trying to open a business in Mexico is a via crucis that may take as much as 2 years, unless you know who to talk to. Intermediaries quickly saw their opportunity to fatten their purses by "negotiating" a deal with government officials. Popular Mexican wisdom says that there is no such thing as a poor politician, only a dumb one.

Because the people has suffered so much during more than two centuries since Mexico's independence in 1810, they regard any foreigner with suspicion and sometimes with outright hostility. Poverty is still rampant, especially in major cities. Public services are deficient and very expensive. Gasolines (all types) are sold at international prices to people who make less than half of what similar positions make in the U.S. Natural gas is abundant in the northern part of the country so most homes use it to cook and heat their homes. Unfortunately, it is in the hands of a Spanish company which won the bidding when Mexican politicians decided to privatize the business. The price of gas is simply too high for the majority of middle-class inhabitants and, of course, for the poor. The cost of electricity is also based in dollars, making it prohibitive for the ordinary family. So, many homes simply "steal" power through ingenious shenanigans, such as hiding the cables which bypass the meter.


Justice is severely biased in Mexico; if you are incarcerated, you have to prove your innocence or pay a mordida to get out of jail; judges can often be bought (they make very little money), and the police is not known for its humane treatment of prisoners. An accused person may spend years in prison before they appear in court and nobody is in a hurry to pass sentence. There is no jury; it's all up to the judge. Or course, people with high-placed compadres can often obtain their early release. A simple phone call to the court will take care of business. Favors are paid with favors.

Nowadays, the only institution Mexican citizens trust (more or less) is the army which has engaged the drug traffickers in a frontal assault. Thousands of local police and low level functionaries have been arrested and accused of collusion with cartels.Thousands of Mexican citizens have fled the country and settled in our country: the very rich and the very poor. The former because of fear, the latter because of hunger.

It is difficult to conceive how two neighboring countries can be so dissimilar. Even France and Germany, to cite an example of different neighboring cultures, have achieved a decent level of prosperity for their peoples. Mexican people often say:"So close to the U.S. and so far from God," to show their dissatisfaction with the present state of affairs. We send our retirees to the cheaper life in Mexico, while they send their poor and hungry. They send us their illicit drugs and we return the favor by sending back millions of dollars.

Some American hotheads have suggested invading Mexico to pursue and destroy the cartels: that would be the most foolish thing to do. It would unite all Mexicans against us; they still remember the Mexican-American war in which they lost half their territory. No, the solution is in the hands of Mexico itself; if they can establish firm democratic institutions and an honest judicial system to punish corruption, they have a chance to grow into the prosperous nation that every Mexican citizen aspires to see one day.

A Mexican Tragedy

The attack on a casino in Monterrey, Mexico caused close to 60 deaths, a tragedy that could have been averted if the inspectors of that building hadn't been bribed; nobody could leave the second floor because the emergency doors were sealed, against common sense and against the law. For Mexican citizens, this is nothing new; lower level authorities can be bribed easily, a custom called "mordida" or bite. Custom agents, traffic cops, official government clerks, inspectors of all types, and even trash collectors, are easily persuaded to accept a sizable token of appreciation (read cash) in return for a service or for not writing a ticket or for smuggling some goods from the U.S. The mordida becomes a national tragedy when lives are lost.

In June 2009, more than 40 toddlers were killed by a fire in a daycare institution in Hermosillo, Sonora, a state located in the northwest in Mexico, and parents and society alike blamed the government for sloppy (read for taking bribes) oversight of the kinder. The building was old, the electrical installation was deficient, and no provisions were made in case of an emergency. Even so, the daycare received permission to operate. To this day, the "official" investigation has failed to bring anybody to justice, a very common occurrence in Mexico where many higher functionaries try to hide their shenanigans by letting inquiries disappear into the sunset.

I have lived for many years in the beautiful Aztec country, even marrying one of its most attractive citizens. Mexicans are extremely hospitable to foreigners, yes, even to Gringos. I have personally enjoyed the carne asada (barbecued meat) prepared by rich and poor hosts. I have rested on gorgeous beaches in Acapulco and Cancun among other idyllic resorts. I have gorged on tacos, tequila, chile, cerveza, mole (a chocolate-based sauce with chicken), mango, papaya, the list of wondrous foods is endless. Before the environment became poisoned by drug traffickers and violent gangs, Mexico was a paradise for foreigners who flocked by the millions to enjoy its beauty and historical sites. Alas! No more. The failed governance, federal and local, has made the land of Moctezuma a dangerous place to live and travel.

Corruption is of course endemic in every country; here on the border with Mexico, several law enforcement officials have been and will be indicted for turning a blind eye to human smuggling and to drug trafficking. Money will convince those with shaky values. American policemen and border agents cannot, however, claim that their low pay scale prevent them from feeding their families or paying for their retirement. While not extravagant, their salaries and benefits are amply sufficient to lead a decent life and support their families.

Mexican law enforcement, on the other hand, can justly clamor that their financial compensation and benefits are insufficient to make a decent living. An ordinary policeman patrolling his or her beat can earn between five and ten thousand pesos, approximately between $400 and $900 of our currency. That's equivalent to the poverty level or below here in the States ($10,800 for one person and $26,000 for a family of 4). These Mexican public workers often earn less than half of what American counterparts earn and even taking into account purchasing power, they can barely make ends meet by moonlighting at 2 or 3 jobs. Is it surprising therefore that a generous tip will often be accepted in exchange for a "small" favor?

The assailants in Monterrey were apparently not trying to kill people, as they shouted orders to vacate the premises at the casino. Many fled into the street, but tragically many others retreated to the second floor and to restrooms. The attackers probably did not think that the fire would trap so many, mostly older women belonging to the affluent middle-class trying their luck at gambling. Intentional or not, this crime should awaken the indignation of all Mexican citizens; it is time to put an end to cowardly attitudes, "I don't want trouble, I didn't see anything." If every able-bodied adult decided to do something about the rampant crime and violence in the Aztec country, things would change very quickly.

How about allowing ordinary citizens to carry firearms? Just a thought!

EXCHANGING FAVORS

When the first government was created in the first nation formed on earth - probably in today's China, a new political tradition also appeared: the exchange of favors between members of the ruling class and their supporters. The bigger the favor, read the bigger the contribution to the politician's favorite causes, the bigger the payoff, pardon, the quid pro quo. And now that the Supreme Court has opened the floodgates of financial contributions to candidates who seek a public position, so will the rewards increase for the generous donors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission.



Naming ambassadors has almost always been a political plum given to "friends", ie, largest contributors. That nefarious practice has had negative consequences as many of the favored candidates had absolutely no diplomatic skills. Another way to reward supporters has been the last minute pardon given by the sitting president on his last day in office. President Clinton famously or rather infamously pardoned fugitive financier Marc Rich whose only merits were his financial donations to Clinton's war chest. No explanation was ever given by the White House.

Now that we have several governors or ex-governors seeking their party's nomination in the presidential campaign, a magnifying glass is and will be applied to their quid pro quo gestures for big political supporters. The first one to hit the national media is none other than the NY Times which features a series of accusations toward Governor Rick Perry of Texas: "The exchange of campaign contributions for government contracts, favors or positions is all too common in Washington and around the country." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/opinion/gov-rick-perrys-cash-machine.html

Why select Perry in particular who denies the allegations that he was returning favors? "Mr. Perry has long maintained there is no connection between his appointments and their contributions, but the evidence is clear on board after board." Let's be realistic; 99.9% of Congress has engaged in this practice, including the President and his cabinet. The infamous "pork" added to proposed bills has been a mainstay of senators and representatives alike who engaged in the hallowed ritual of planting the seeds of reelection. The NY Times has obviously published this article to target a candidate who has a real chance to end up in the White House. And so the battle begins with broadsides being fired on both sides.

While I feel there is something morally and ethically wrong with the quid pro quo policy, there is nothing illegal about it unless of course it results in harm to the country and its citizens. Creating an agency for the sole purpose of rewarding a friend is clearly an example of this, as the millions involved come from our taxes and the times are difficult enough without creating additional waste. There is a fine line between corruption and rewarding cronies. Political contributions are not bribes as they are perfectly within the law; their aim is to help the candidate defray his or her expenses during a campaign. Humans being human, they will fall prey to the understandable desire to say "thank you" to their friends and supporters in a tangible way.

Somebody said once that lobbying is organized corruption; I beg to differ: Influencing the decisions of politicians is quite legitimate. It has always been that way. I can send emails to my senators and representatives to express my opinion. Whether they pay heed or not is another matter. The political system will not and cannot change, simply because they (the politicians) would have to approve it. The only change they approve regularly is to increase their own salaries. I wish I could do the same!