Chile Constitutional Referendum, October 25th 2020

[seb_pard]

Can someone walk me through the specific ways in which the Pinochet-penned constitution was deficient? I 100% believe people that it was, but I don't know the details. Is it less democratic than it appears on the surface? Does it somehow encode Chicago Boys neoliberalism or adopt a "negative rights only" approach? Both?

I'm not a lawyer nor expert at all but from what I know most of the issues are related to Article 19 (which encompasses part of constitutional duties and rights). At first sight it seems a normal article that assure rights to the people, but when you start to go deeper, then you understand that the article is pretty ideological. The article is pretty strict in terms of the right to choose. The most important thing in education, healthcare, etc, is the right to choose (and right to supply) and not the right to have. So this has been translated in parts of our daily lives (like education) to be in hands of the market with a weak state because is mandated to. In conclusion, this article is strongly influenced by the "neoliberal' way of thinking of having a subsidiary state.

[BigSerg]

Good week for the Latin American left.

Indeed. This is excellent news, even if not particularly surprising. Time to wipe out Pinochet's legacy once and for all.

Of course, the key will be electing a left-wing majority to the constituent assembly. What are the chances of that at the moment? And for that matter, what electoral system will be used to elect it? I'd hope it's a more genuinely proportional one than the one Chile uses to elect its regular parliament.

Fortunately it's not likely

[CumbrianLefty]

Apparently Antarctica voted 21-10 for Reject? What’s going on down there?

Its very cold, normally?

[Velasco]

Congratulations, Chile 🇨🇱

Can someone walk me through the specific ways in which the Pinochet-penned constitution was deficient? I 100% believe people that it was, but I don't know the details. Is it less democratic than it appears on the surface? Does it somehow encode Chicago Boys neoliberalism or adopt a "negative rights only" approach? Both?

I'm not a lawyer nor expert at all but from what I know most of the issues are related to Article 19 (which encompasses part of constitutional duties and rights). At first sight it seems a normal article that assure rights to the people, but when you start to go deeper, then you understand that the article is pretty ideological. The article is pretty strict in terms of the right to choose. The most important thing in education, healthcare, etc, is the right to choose (and right to supply) and not the right to have. So this has been translated in parts of our daily lives (like education) to be in hands of the market with a weak state because is mandated to. In conclusion, this article is strongly influenced by the "neoliberal' way of thinking of having a subsidiary state.

The Article 19 is quite long and I need to read it carefully, but you notice immediately that the Chilean constitution is pro-life and anti-abortion

https://www.senado.cl/capitulo-iii-de-los-derechos-y-deberes-constitucionales/senado/2012-01-16/093413.html

Artículo 19

La Constitución asegura a todas las personas:
1º.- El derecho a la vida y a la integridad física y psíquica de la persona.
La ley protege la vida del que está por nacer.
La pena de muerte sólo podrá establecerse por delito contemplado en ley aprobada con quórum calificado.
Se prohíbe la aplicación de todo apremio ilegítimo;  

I get that abortion must be criminalized in Chile. Death penalty for a given offence can be implemented by a qualified majority. I ignore the meaning of "apremio ilegitimo"

[seb_pard]

Congratulations, Chile 🇨🇱

Can someone walk me through the specific ways in which the Pinochet-penned constitution was deficient? I 100% believe people that it was, but I don't know the details. Is it less democratic than it appears on the surface? Does it somehow encode Chicago Boys neoliberalism or adopt a "negative rights only" approach? Both?

I'm not a lawyer nor expert at all but from what I know most of the issues are related to Article 19 (which encompasses part of constitutional duties and rights). At first sight it seems a normal article that assure rights to the people, but when you start to go deeper, then you understand that the article is pretty ideological. The article is pretty strict in terms of the right to choose. The most important thing in education, healthcare, etc, is the right to choose (and right to supply) and not the right to have. So this has been translated in parts of our daily lives (like education) to be in hands of the market with a weak state because is mandated to. In conclusion, this article is strongly influenced by the "neoliberal' way of thinking of having a subsidiary state.

The Article 19 is quite long and I need to read it carefully, but you notice immediately that the Chilean is pro-life and anti-abortion

https://www.senado.cl/capitulo-iii-de-los-derechos-y-deberes-constitucionales/senado/2012-01-16/093413.html

Artículo 19

La Constitución asegura a todas las personas:
1º.- El derecho a la vida y a la integridad física y psíquica de la persona.
La ley protege la vida del que está por nacer.
La pena de muerte sólo podrá establecerse por delito contemplado en ley aprobada con quórum calificado.
Se prohíbe la aplicación de todo apremio ilegítimo;  

I get that abortion must be criminalized in Chile. Death penalty for a given offence can be implemented by a qualified majority. I ignore the meaning of "apremio ilegitimo"

It was between 1989 and 2017, but now is legal in 3 cases: when the life of the mother is at risk, when the fetus will not survive and in the case of rape (first 12 weeks). If you are interested, there are some articles that analyze why the project was ratified by the Tribunal Constitutional (TC) despite that strong statement. Nevertheless, the TC added the Conscientious objection concept to the law.

[Red Velvet]

Can someone walk me through the specific ways in which the Pinochet-penned constitution was deficient? I 100% believe people that it was, but I don't know the details. Is it less democratic than it appears on the surface? Does it somehow encode Chicago Boys neoliberalism or adopt a "negative rights only" approach? Both?

It’s the encoded neoliberal capitalism in it, like seb_pard says. Chile has been the most capitalist country of the region and the some of effects people are angry about is that you have to pay for everything there, even basic stuff like health and education. I remember Social security was another thing some people were complaining about because of its private aspect, which led some elderly to their own luck and caused a rise on suicide rates, that could be another thing that can be addressed in a new constitution in order to change.

That’s why I imagine they will follow Argentina and Brazil but 30 years later, since the focus seems to be about ensuring people have significantly more rights and that the state has the responsibility to be much stronger in order to provide them. The right to have Healthcare, to have Education, to spend your last years on earth living in dignity... It all is related to human rights.

Chile has been the laboratory guinea pig for these Chicago Boys and their savage radical capitalism theories for far too long and it all started due to fascism and innocent blood spilled.

[seb_pard]

Another fact: Approve won in the US with 62.9%. The only part reject victory was in Miami (it reached 64.6% there). By any means I want to extrapolate but I have a theory that Latinos living in Miami (not only Cubans) are different from the rest. They are more upper class and invest a lot in real estate. Those people are more attracted to Trump and that is why I believe there is a strong possibility of Trump winning Florida despite a national swing to Biden (and a Biden EC victory).

[Red Velvet]

Another fact: Approve won in the US with 62.9%. The only part reject victory was in Miami (it reached 64.6% there). By any means I want to extrapolate but I have a theory that Latinos living in Miami (not only Cubans) are different from the rest. They are more upper class and invest a lot in real estate. Those people are more attracted to Trump and that is why I believe there is a strong possibility of Trump winning Florida despite a national swing to Biden (and a Biden EC victory).

That would be correct. Miami/Florida is known here too as the place where all the wealthy most strongly conservative Brazilians goes when they think about moving to the exterior. They also like Orlando a lot too because of Disney, so we tend to think of Florida as a whole as the natural habitat for these people since they may be spread in the state. But Miami is definitely where they are concentrated at the strongest.

Because of all the money they have, they acquired significant amounts of power in the place and don’t suffer the discrimination that poorer immigrants from mostly Central America nearer the border with Mexico go through. I mean, they’ve been embraced by republicans. There’s nothing more awful than those fascist Latinos in Florida who are disgusted by lower classes and act like the epitome of success only because they had more privileges overall in life.

[Velasco]

Here are the paragraphs concerning to healthcare and education

Healthcare: the state protects the free and egalitarian access to the "actions" of promotion, protection and recovery of health. It's a strange wording, but in any case the philosophy is clear. The main role of the state is not providing healthcare to all citizens, but guaranteeing "the implementation of the actions of healthcare" through public or private institutions. Freedom of choice is consecrated over the universal right to healthcare

 
9º.- El derecho a la protección de la salud.
El Estado protege el libre e igualitario acceso a las acciones de promoción, protección y recuperación de la salud y de rehabilitación del individuo.
Le corresponderá, asimismo, la coordinación y control de las acciones relacionadas con la salud.
Es deber preferente del Estado garantizar la ejecución de las acciones de salud, sea que se presten a través de instituciones públicas o privadas, en la forma y condiciones que determine la ley, la que podrá establecer cotizaciones obligatorias.
Cada persona tendrá el derecho a elegir el sistema de salud al que desee acogerse, sea éste estatal o privado;  

Education: the text says that parents have the preferential right and the duty to educate their offspring. The state will promote nursery education. Primary and secondary education are mandatory and the state will finance free education at these levels, but there's not a single world about the access to university (either free or through a scolarship scheme)

10º.- El derecho a la educación.
La educación tiene por objeto el pleno desarrollo de la persona en las distintas etapas de su vida.
Los padres tienen el derecho preferente y el deber de educar a sus hijos. Corresponderá al Estado otorgar especial protección al ejercicio de este derecho.
Para el Estado es obligatorio promover la educación parvularia, para lo que financiará un sistema gratuito a partir del nivel medio menor, destinado a asegurar el acceso a éste y sus niveles superiores. El segundo nivel de transición es obligatorio, siendo requisito para el ingreso a la educación básica.
La educación básica y la educación media son obligatorias, debiendo el Estado financiar un sistema gratuito con tal objeto, destinado a asegurar el acceso a ellas de toda la población. En el caso de la educación media este sistema, en conformidad a la ley, se extenderá hasta cumplir los 21 años de edad.
Corresponderá al Estado, asimismo, fomentar el desarrollo de la educación en todos sus niveles; estimular la investigación científica y tecnológica, la creación artística y la protección e incremento del patrimonio cultural de la Nación.
Es deber de la comunidad contribuir al desarrollo y perfeccionamiento de la educación;  

[kaoras]

An easier way to see the problem with the Constitution is looking at all the laws that, after being approved by Congress, were ruled "unconstitutional" by the Constitutional Tribunal.

Among them:

-Labor reform that strengthened unions. https://www.latercera.com/noticia/tc-declara-inconstitucional-la-titularidad-sindical-en-reforma-laboral/#:~:text=El%20Tribunal%20Constitucional%20acogi%C3%B3%20en,por%20seis%20votos%20contra%20cuatro.
-Reform that gave more powers to the National Consumer Service against business abuses. https://radio.uchile.cl/2017/12/12/tc-declara-inconstitucional-reformas-al-sernac/
-Reform that prohibited Universities to have as owners for-profit businesses and institutions.https://www.latercera.com/nacional/noticia/tc-declara-inconstitucional-articulo-prohibe-universidades-incluir-sostenedores-fines-lucro/113929/

And that's only on the top of my mind. There are dozens of similar cases. The Constitution has the subsidiary ethos all over it and the Constitutional Tribunal is constantly reminding us about it with their rulings.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Good week for the Latin American left.

Indeed. This is excellent news, even if not particularly surprising. Time to wipe out Pinochet's legacy once and for all.

Of course, the key will be electing a left-wing majority to the constituent assembly. What are the chances of that at the moment? And for that matter, what electoral system will be used to elect it? I'd hope it's a more genuinely proportional one than the one Chile uses to elect its regular parliament.

I'm not a Spanish speaker, but my cursory reading of the constituent assembly election page on the Spanish Wikipedia indicates that the electoral system will be the same as the one used to elect the Chamber of Deputies, Chile's lower house of parliament:

De acuerdo al proyecto presentado por la mesa técnica el 6 de diciembre de 2019, y ratificado mediante la reforma constitucional publicada en el Diario Oficial el 24 de diciembre, en el caso de que triunfe la opción "Apruebo" en el plebiscito de octubre de 2020 y la opción ganadora en la segunda papeleta es la opción de la "Convención Constitucional" (con la totalidad de sus miembros elegidos para esta ocasión), en las elecciones de convencionales constituyentes de octubre se elegirán 155 miembros bajo las mismas reglas, distritos y cantidad de escaños que en las elecciones para la Cámara de Diputados. En el caso de que la opción triunfadora hubiese sido la de la "Convención Mixta Constitucional" (compuesta por parlamentarios en ejercicio y ciudadanos elegidos en octubre), y que resultó derrotada, esta iba a estar compuesta por 172 miembros: 86 parlamentarios elegidos por el Congreso Pleno, y 86 ciudadanos elegidos mediante las elecciones que se realizarían, con modificaciones en la cantidad de escaños asignados para cada distrito.

ughhh great

Because it makes perfect sense to elect an assembly tasked to fix a broken system using than same broken system.

[H. Ross Peron]

How does the Pinochet-era Chilean Constitution compare to the one that was in effect before that?

[seb_pard]

Another fact: Approve won in the US with 62.9%. The only part reject victory was in Miami (it reached 64.6% there). By any means I want to extrapolate but I have a theory that Latinos living in Miami (not only Cubans) are different from the rest. They are more upper class and invest a lot in real estate. Those people are more attracted to Trump and that is why I believe there is a strong possibility of Trump winning Florida despite a national swing to Biden (and a Biden EC victory).

Source? That's hilarious and believable.

http://www.servelelecciones.cl
Click "En el extranjero", then USA and then you can separate by consulate

[Red Velvet]

The % of Chilean immigrants who voted “Apruebo” by country in the Americas is so telling:

Venezuela - 47,58% (only country where rechazo won, considering a big sample)
————————
Paraguay - 50,32%
Bolivia - 51,37%
Peru - 52,50%
Colombia - 56,15%
Dominican Republic - 56,41%
Ecuador - 60,30%
USA - 62,87%
Brazil - 74,03%
Uruguay - 82,88%
Mexico - 84,71%
Argentina - 86,48%
Canada - 89,26%
Cuba - 96,15%

[kaoras]

One should be very careful with the reading of this referendum as some sort of vindication of the Chilean left. They remain in a very pathetic state and totally unable to capitalize on the popular discontent. Chileans are in a very anti-elite and populist mood and that anger includes the leftist parties.

The only saving grace is that the Left knows somewhat how to read the room and seems relatively open to including non-politicians and social activists in their lists. For the constituent elections, it will be key to manage just 2 big alliances at most (just one is simply impossible, let's be real). The most likely combination will be the current Constituent Unity (+ maybe the liberal party) and the Broad Front (FA) +Communist Party (and hopefully former FA parties). That way, even with the inevitable deluge of small hopeless ultra-leftist lists one of the coalition will emerge as the biggest nationwide force.

They say that they want to get 66% of the seats. If the lower requirements for independents lists go through congress that definitely won't happen but they could keep the right under 1/3. This is fairly possible because Chile Vamos and the government continue to have 0 grasps on reality and are talking about running ministers of this extremely popular government (they are considering 1/5 of the entire current cabinet!) and many sons and cousins of current politicians. In that scenario, I can totally see the vote share for Chile Vamos+Kast dropping to the twenties.

I think the constituent elections will have a LOT of votes for independents and outsiders. Succes for the left will depend if they manage to integrate independent, capable, and credible people in their list. If they just run the second tier wanna be politicians (very likely to be a problem for Constituent Unity), well, they have it coming.

Just to prove my point, Cadem polled the constituent elections: You are going to vote for a candidate...
-From an independent list: 34%
-From a coalition of DC-PS-PPD-PR: 11%
-From Chile Vamos: 11%
-From Kast's Republican Party: 6%
-From the Communist Party: 4%
-From the Broad Front: 4% (lmao)
-Another: 6%
-D/K: 24%

Source: https://plazapublica.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Track-PP-354-Octubre-S4-VF.pdf

[seb_pard]

As a citizen registered abroad, I can't vote for convention members unless there is a modification to add representatives from abroad (very unlikely)

[seb_pard]

Now the game begins, EMOL published an article with people that have announced their interest in running for the April election or under parties' radar.

https://www.emol.com/noticias/Nacional/2020/10/25/1001647/Candidatos-Convencion-Plebiscito.html

High-profile/interesting names by Party:

PPD: Nicolas Eyzaguirre (former Finance and Education minister) and Carlos Ominami (former Minister and Senator, adoptive father of Marco Enriquez-Ominami)
RN: Magdalena Piñera (Sebastian's daughter) and Paulina Núñez (current congresswoman)
Comunes: Carlos Ruiz (Broad Front's ideological father), Doris Gonzalez (housing activist, leader of Ukamau) and Constanza Valdes (trans activist)
DC: Juan Enrique Pi (Iguales' leader, a LGBT NGO), Patricio Zapata (constitutional lawyer), Carmen Frei (former senator and Eduardo Frei Montalva's daughter)
UDI: Pablo Longueira (former party president), Lucas Palacios (Economy minister) and Lucia Santa Cruz (historian, member of Libertad y Desarrollo)
RD: Alejandra Toledo (trans activist), Amaya Alvez (law professor focused on water rights and Mapuche activist)
PR: Emilio Oñate (law professor and member of the new constitution technical commission)
Evopoli: Gloria Hutt (Transportation minister)
Convergencia Social: Constanza Schonhaut (former Broad Front's spokeswoman) and Ignacio Achurra (actor)
PRI: Juan Jose Santa Cruz (businessman, part of Andres Velasco's presidential campaign)
Liberal Party: Patricio Fernandez (founder of The Clinic, our own Charlie Hebdo)
FRVS: Gonzalo Bacigalupe (psychology researcher, professor at UM-Boston) and Adriana Barrientos (celebrity, about 10 years ago she was our Kim Kardashian or something like that)
PRO: Ruth Olate (domestic workers' leader)

Parties with no name at the moment:

PS, PC, PH and Republicans

People that have shown interest (no party at the moment):

Jorge Baradit (popular writer focused on chilean history), Agustin Squella (constitutional law professor), Maria Olivia Monckeberg (investigative journalist), Patricia Politzer (journalist), Cristobal Bellolio (political scientist) and Enrique Opazo (priest)

[kaoras]

Here's another comprehensive list: https://www.t13.cl/noticia/plebiscito-2020/politica/convencion-constitucional-candidatos-eleccion-plebiscito-27-10-2020 (Just ran Google Translate if you are interested).

Among the highlights not included by se_pard's post, there are: Mapuche writer and activist Pedro Cayuqueo for PS, Mariana Aylwin (ex-DC, daughter of former president Patricio Aylwin) who said that she is close to EVOPOLI!!, and famous rap singer Anita Tijoux (she is talking with Convergencia Social apparently).  

Also, I would be shocked if constitutional lawyer Fernando Atria (ex-PS, now in the Broad Front) doesn't run with his new movement.

[xelas81]

So the election for the constitutional convention and local government will be held on April 2021, election for the president and congress will be held on November 2021 and referendum on the new constitution will be on 2022?

[warandwar]

Damn, Anita Tijoux!! Big get.

[seb_pard]

So the election for the constitutional convention and local government will be held on April 2021, election for the president and congress will be held on November 2021 and referendum on the new constitution will be on 2022?

Yep, this is the calendar:
-April 11th, 2021: Constitutional Convention, regional and municipal elections.
-July 3th, 2021: Presidential primaries
-November 21st, 2021: Presidential (first round), CORE (regional counselors) and legislative elections
-December 19th, 2021: Presiential (run-off)
-2022 (unknown exact date): Last constitutional referendum

[seb_pard]

Some interesting maps:

Approve/Reject map from Santiago by municipality:





Overcrowding levels in Santiago





Socieconomic groups in Santiago

[seb_pard]

And another great map I just found it (although a bit confusing at first)

Turnout change by municipality in Santiago (I guess relative to 2017)

[Estrella]

What do they put in water in Colchane, Tarapacá? It has literally the highest poverty rate in the country... but it also voted 74% for Reject?! All I can find is a rather ironic article about the mayor complaining about racism and classism against his municipality's Indigenous people in the aftermath of the vote.

[kaoras]

Colchane has always voted like that. I'm honestly more surprised that Camiña didn't vote reject too. I think is the first time that those two don't vote the same.

Don't take this as the gospel as I'm mostly piecing together random pieces of information that I know. But Colchane (and Camiña) are majority Aymara. The Aymara in the 20 century received intense evangelical influence from the Pentecostal church, and those missionaries pushed hard for them to abandon their old religious customs and changed their cosmovision. My guess is that they vote basically as a community and the Pentecostal influence has made them profoundly conservative.