Chile Constitutional Referendum, September 4th 2022

[kaoras]

Also, runoff of the DC internal elections were today.

Delpín (more Pro-Boric), narrowly won with 51,82% over the more conservative Johana Perez. This is a good result for Boric obviously since, unlike Perez, Delpín has clearly stated that he doesn't want to be opposition to the government and wants to be in the center-left camp. The problem is that the rest of the left has made it clear that it doesn't want the DC and can barely tolerate them, so I think that the relationship will be as problematic as always.

[kaoras]

Also, runoff of the DC internal elections were today.

Delpín (more Pro-Boric), narrowly won with 51,82% over the more conservative Johana Perez. This is a good result for Boric obviously since, unlike Perez, Delpín has clearly stated that he doesn't want to be opposition to the government and wants to be in the center-left camp. The problem is that the rest of the left has made it clear that it doesn't want the DC and can barely tolerate them, so I think that the relationship will be as problematic as always.

Ah, Joanna Perez list isn't recognizing the results and is going to contest the results of some precincts. Funny.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

María Elisa Quinteros has said that convention will request the extra three months. I personally think it’s a good thing overall - always good to have more time to deliberate, especially since they’ve been on a truly brutal work schedule for the past few months of deliberation and voting - but do you think this might feed into its image among certain sectors as a bit of a clown car, kaoras?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Oh, also Boric has gotten into a dispute over the presence of former Archbishops of Santiago Francisco Javier Errázuriz and cardinal Ricardo Ezzati at an ecumenical mass offering prayers for the new government, since both have been accused of covering up child sex abuse in the Church (a scandal which led to the mass resignation of the country’s bishops several years ago after several emblematic cases came to light). Doesn’t seem like anything major, though.

[kaoras]

Also, RN is very pissed at the senate deal that gave Elizalde (PS) the presidency. RN wanted Ossandón to preside the chamber and feel betrayed by UDI-EVOPOLI which brokered the deal with the left.

Mario Desbordes said that Chile Vamos is dead, the party declared itself in "reflexion" and RN senators left the Chile Vamos whatsapp group (yes, this is the level at which politics is conducted in Chile). UDI and EVOPOLI said that there was no trust in Ossandon, with Felipe Kast (EVOPOLI) saying that Ossandón was so desperate to be president of the senate that he offered Giorgio Jackson 4 Chile Vamos votes without consulting them (For context, Jackson was negotiating on behalf of the government and wanted Ossandon for president, in the end he failed, which is another tale I couldn't be bothered to read about=

It would be very amusing if they truly split over this, though if it does happen (As I mentioned before, I'm not knowledgeable about the right internal politics), I think that they will split in the same sense that PS-PPD-PR and the DC split in 2018, as in, they'll likely end up together again out of necessity by the next elections.

Also, while looking info about this, I stumbled upon this tour RN is doing to "Listen to the people"
https://twitter.com/chahuan/status/1502673410215743488?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7C...

I think the joke writes itself.

[kaoras]

María Elisa Quinteros has said that convention will request the extra three months. I personally think it’s a good thing overall - always good to have more time to deliberate, especially since they’ve been on a truly brutal work schedule for the past few months of deliberation and voting - but do you think this might feed into its image among certain sectors as a bit of a clown car, kaoras?

It was always a given that the convention would ask for the 3 extra months contemplated in the original constitutional accord. Their current schedule is based on those extra months. There has been some discussion on extending the deadline beyond that, but the Right says that if they do that, they must be open to revisit all of the accord, like changing the wording of the question (Changing the Approve/Reject to something else because they don't like campaigning for Reject or something)

[kaoras]

Political and convention updates:

RN will do a "party convention" on May 1st to define whether to keep its alliance with UDI and EVOPOLI.

Boric did a meeting with all the congressmen of the 2 coalitions that support his government, Apruebo Dignidad and Socialismo Democrático, to "order" the house and define legislative priorities. There was some talk afterwards about merging AD and SD with most agreeing but saying that it would take time.

After a very tortuous process and negotiation, the Politic System committee on the Constitutional Convention reached an accord. This accord includes all of the left, from the ex-lista del pueblo to the socialists, with the exception of the non-PS ex concertación (Colectivo del Apruebo), whose representative, DC Fuad Chaín, said that the convention was putting the democracy in danger because of Venezuela or something and left the table, which made the conversation go much more smoothly afterwards. The right was present in the negotiations but didn't sign the accord and says it will only vote for the aspects it likes. For what is worth, Marcela Cubillos said that overall, the deal was terrible because it is covert parliamentarism or something (it really isn't).

Main points:
-Presidential system, without VP or Minister of Goverment, just the president.
-Presidential period of 4 years, with a single reelection.
-Asymmetrical bicameralism: A lower house, Congreso de Diputadas y Diputados which will have preeminence to approve and propose laws and composed by at least 155 members. An upper house, Cámara de las Regiones with attributions on the budget, territorial issues, and core constitutional reforms.
-Compulsory voting, and voluntary for those aged 16 and 17.

Electoral system is unspecified, but it must be proportional and opens the door for a nationwide 3% threshold. In general, it incorpores a lot of things about the Conventional Convention elections, like parity and reserved seats for indigenous peoples and afro descendants (whose list got 10% in the conventional elections in the Arica district but didn't get elected).

It also gives more power to Congress and is slightly more balanced that the current hiper-presidential system, but I'm not exactly in love with keeping the presidential system. Full acord here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uNPcPy70J4_CGenx0cvZwk0RVPxgnT0D/view

[Antonio the Sixth]

Political and convention updates:

RN will do a "party convention" on May 1st to define whether to keep its alliance with UDI and EVOPOLI.

Boric did a meeting with all the congressmen of the 2 coalitions that support his government, Apruebo Dignidad and Socialismo Democrático, to "order" the house and define legislative priorities. There was some talk afterwards about merging AD and SD with most agreeing but saying that it would take time.

After a very tortuous process and negotiation, the Politic System committee on the Constitutional Convention reached an accord. This accord includes all of the left, from the ex-lista del pueblo to the socialists, with the exception of the non-PS ex concertación (Colectivo del Apruebo), whose representative, DC Fuad Chaín, said that the convention was putting the democracy in danger because of Venezuela or something and left the table, which made the conversation go much more smoothly afterwards. The right was present in the negotiations but didn't sign the accord and says it will only vote for the aspects it likes. For what is worth, Marcela Cubillos said that overall, the deal was terrible because it is covert parliamentarism or something (it really isn't).

Main points:
-Presidential system, without VP or Minister of Goverment, just the president.
-Presidential period of 4 years, with a single reelection.
-Asymmetrical bicameralism: A lower house, Congreso de Diputadas y Diputados which will have preeminence to approve and propose laws and composed by at least 155 members. An upper house, Cámara de las Regiones with attributions on the budget, territorial issues, and core constitutional reforms.
-Compulsory voting, and voluntary for those aged 16 and 17.

Electoral system is unspecified, but it must be proportional and opens the door for a nationwide 3% threshold. In general, it incorpores a lot of things about the Conventional Convention elections, like parity and reserved seats for indigenous peoples and afro descendants (whose list got 10% in the conventional elections in the Arica district but didn't get elected).

It also gives more power to Congress and is slightly more balanced that the current hiper-presidential system, but I'm not exactly in love with keeping the presidential system. Full acord here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uNPcPy70J4_CGenx0cvZwk0RVPxgnT0D/view

These all look like positive changes, though they don't know as far as we might have liked.

Two questions. First, do we know anything about the voting system for the House of Regions? Hopefully it's more proportional than the current Senate.

Also, maybe this goes without saying, but I assume all the supermajority requirements enshrined in the Pinochet constitutions are gone?

[Former President tack50]

Unrelated to everything, but I find it hilarious that the Chilean slang word for "far-rightist/dictatorship sympathicer" is facho; just like here where we use facha for that

[kaoras]

Political and convention updates:

RN will do a "party convention" on May 1st to define whether to keep its alliance with UDI and EVOPOLI.

Boric did a meeting with all the congressmen of the 2 coalitions that support his government, Apruebo Dignidad and Socialismo Democrático, to "order" the house and define legislative priorities. There was some talk afterwards about merging AD and SD with most agreeing but saying that it would take time.

After a very tortuous process and negotiation, the Politic System committee on the Constitutional Convention reached an accord. This accord includes all of the left, from the ex-lista del pueblo to the socialists, with the exception of the non-PS ex concertación (Colectivo del Apruebo), whose representative, DC Fuad Chaín, said that the convention was putting the democracy in danger because of Venezuela or something and left the table, which made the conversation go much more smoothly afterwards. The right was present in the negotiations but didn't sign the accord and says it will only vote for the aspects it likes. For what is worth, Marcela Cubillos said that overall, the deal was terrible because it is covert parliamentarism or something (it really isn't).

Main points:
-Presidential system, without VP or Minister of Goverment, just the president.
-Presidential period of 4 years, with a single reelection.
-Asymmetrical bicameralism: A lower house, Congreso de Diputadas y Diputados which will have preeminence to approve and propose laws and composed by at least 155 members. An upper house, Cámara de las Regiones with attributions on the budget, territorial issues, and core constitutional reforms.
-Compulsory voting, and voluntary for those aged 16 and 17.

Electoral system is unspecified, but it must be proportional and opens the door for a nationwide 3% threshold. In general, it incorpores a lot of things about the Conventional Convention elections, like parity and reserved seats for indigenous peoples and afro descendants (whose list got 10% in the conventional elections in the Arica district but didn't get elected).

It also gives more power to Congress and is slightly more balanced that the current hiper-presidential system, but I'm not exactly in love with keeping the presidential system. Full acord here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uNPcPy70J4_CGenx0cvZwk0RVPxgnT0D/view

These all look like positive changes, though they don't know as far as we might have liked.

Two questions. First, do we know anything about the voting system for the House of Regions? Hopefully it's more proportional than the current Senate.

Also, maybe this goes without saying, but I assume all the supermajority requirements enshrined in the Pinochet constitutions are gone?

Yes, the only quorum established is that the lower house can pass a law with 4/7 even if the Chamber of Regions is opposed. Possible constitutional reform quorums are still being discussed.

[kaoras]

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

[kaoras]

The plebiscite now has an offical date: September 4th, which is symbolically the same date as the triumph of Allende in 1970 and literally every single presidential election between 1946 and 1970. However, there have been several polls that show Reject ahead or even with Approve for the exit plebiscite, caused by particularly rough weeks at the convention.

I'm not too worried yet, approve will likely rebound when the final text is redacted, but it should make some members of the convention think about their behavior and things proposed in the commissions (From the independents I'm not exactly surprised, but PC and especially FA have insisted way too much in some of their pet issues). There's also the fact that the right and the non-PS ex concertación have not acted in good faith with anything that involves non-cosmetic changes, with their mouthpieces vilifying any changes.

But as I said months ago, the exit plebiscite is not something already won, the campaign will very ugly and the constitution will be divisive, which is a regrettable development. In my leftist opinion (and I emphasize that), this is the result of overreaching among the leftists independents and indigenous and because the right isn't really open to any meaningful change, and while they say that they are still undecided about the exit plebiscite, everyone knows that they will go with reject. Their media and pundits have trashed every proposal of the convention in the exact same way they trashed Bachelet reforms, and I don't need to tell you how that ended for them and for the country. And while is an historic error for this process to not be able to create a new broad social pact going forward, if the other side (a very tiny minority on the convention) isn't willing to compromise, then what else are you going to do?

[kaoras]

Also, Interior Minister Izkia Siches has been affected by several controversies and gaffes, the latest one claiming before a parliamentary committee that a plane with expulsed Venezuelan immigrants didn't actually expel anyone and came back with the immigrants. That was a fake news and she had to quickly apologize. Some people like PDG are claiming for her head already, and while Boric reprimanded her he said that Siches still had his full confidence.

Boric also isn't having much of a honeymoon, with his approval failing fairly quickly. This is because the government hasn't made many announcements so far and the agenda has focused on the violence in Araucanía (where government attempts at dialogue have fallen flat) and inflation, plus another attempt at a withdrawal of pension funds. Boric today did some announcements such as a freeze on public transport fares and upping the minimum wage, but the problem IMO is that he is combining the economic orthodoxy of the Concertación with the wokeism /ñuñoismo of FA and that is a toxic combination long term.

Personally, as long as the new constitution is approved, Boric can run away on a helicopter for all I care, but the plebiscite is going to be a bitter battle that needs a not so unpopular government.

[Lumine]

Also, Interior Minister Izkia Siches has been affected by several controversies and gaffes, the latest one claiming before a parliamentary committee that a plane with expulsed Venezuelan immigrants didn't actually expel anyone and came back with the immigrants. That was a fake news and she had to quickly apologize. Some people like PDG are claiming for her head already, and while Boric reprimanded her he said that Siches still had his full confidence.

Boric also isn't having much of a honeymoon, with his approval failing fairly quickly. This is because the government hasn't made many announcements so far and the agenda has focused on the violence in Araucanía (where government attempts at dialogue have fallen flat) and inflation, plus another attempt at a withdrawal of pension funds. Boric today did some announcements such as a freeze on public transport fares and upping the minimum wage, but the problem IMO is that he is combining the economic orthodoxy of the Concertación with the wokeism /ñuñoismo of FA and that is a toxic combination long term.

Personally, as long as the new constitution is approved, Boric can run away on a helicopter for all I care, but the plebiscite is going to be a bitter battle that needs a not so unpopular government.

I have to confess that while the gaffes and trouble installing the government could be expected (inexperience and having to handle so many coalition parties), what has surprised me is that they've surrendered the initiative for an entire month. I imagined they would have a battery of announcements for the first few weeks - even symbolic ones -, and the lack of that I think has been a serious mistake.

Also, I maintain that Siches allowed her ambition to get the best of her. Should never have taken Interior, it's just going to burn her out and even sooner than people imagined.

[Oryxslayer]

However, there have been several polls that show Reject ahead or even with Approve for the exit plebiscite, caused by particularly rough weeks at the convention.

I'm not too worried yet, approve will likely rebound when the final text is redacted, but it should make some members of the convention think about their behavior and things proposed in the commissions (From the independents I'm not exactly surprised, but PC and especially FA have insisted way too much in some of their pet issues).

Boric also isn't having much of a honeymoon, with his approval failing fairly quickly. This is because the government hasn't made many announcements so far and the agenda has focused on the violence in Araucanía (where government attempts at dialogue have fallen flat) and inflation, plus another attempt at a withdrawal of pension funds. Boric today did some announcements such as a freeze on public transport fares and upping the minimum wage, but the problem IMO is that he is combining the economic orthodoxy of the Concertación with the wokeism /ñuñoismo of FA and that is a toxic combination long term.

Personally, as long as the new constitution is approved, Boric can run away on a helicopter for all I care, but the plebiscite is going to be a bitter battle that needs a not so unpopular government.

I can't quite remember if I mentioned it in my posts here during the presidential campaign, but I certainly had the worry that the constitution was in danger no matter which of the runoff candidates succeeded. Kast would obviously strongarm the convention as best he could, and then probably do something authoritarian and prevent any of its good changes. Boric on the other hand, would suffer as the approval referendum is transformed into a referendum on him and his government, something that he would eventually lose via a fickle electorate. Essentially similar to many polls in many other countries -  the ones that immediately come to mind is the FARC deal in Colombia and Renzi's attempted reforms in Italy. In may ways, the first referendums here were just a poll on Pinera's failed approach to the protest and his generally low approvals.

If this does happen, the progressive civic reformers will be victims of their own success, like how so many other fellow travelers in many other counties win a large mandate from the people, proceed to gradually lose support of various factions that originally backed their more nebulous and attractive vision as the majority starts looking at specifics, and eventually loses enough support that the opposing side freely have their way electorally or militarily - if an authoritarian regime.

[kaoras]

I have to confess that while the gaffes and trouble installing the government could be expected (inexperience and having to handle so many coalition parties), what has surprised me is that they've surrendered the initiative for an entire month. I imagined they would have a battery of announcements for the first few weeks - even symbolic ones -, and the lack of that I think has been a serious mistake.

Also, I maintain that Siches allowed her ambition to get the best of her. Should never have taken Interior, it's just going to burn her out and even sooner than people imagined.

Fully agree, especially regarding Siches. If she really wanted to be on the frontlines, she should have been the government spokeswoman. Her style is better at dealing with the other side bullsh_t. She seems out of depth on Interior.

I can't quite remember if I mentioned it in my posts here during the presidential campaign, but I certainly had the worry that the constitution was in danger no matter which of the runoff candidates succeeded. Kast would obviously strongarm the convention as best he could, and then probably do something authoritarian and prevent any of its good changes. Boric on the other hand, would suffer as the approval referendum is transformed into a referendum on him and his government, something that he would eventually lose vi a fickle electorate. Essentially similar to many polls in many other countries -  the ones that immediately come to min is the FARC deal in Colombia and Renzi's attempted reforms in Italy. In may ways, the first referendums here were just a poll on Pinera's failed approach to the protest and his generally low approvals.

If this does happen, the progressive civic reformers will be victims of their own success, like how so many other fellow travelers in many other counties win a large mandate from the people, proceed to gradually lose support of various factions that originally backed their more nebulous and attractive vision as the majority starts looking at specifics, and eventually loses enough support that the opposing side freely have their way electorally or militarily - if an authoritarian regime.

This was always my worry as well, that everyone could pick something that they didn't like and reject it. We will have to see how the compulsory voting with affect the result, but the one thing that Approve has at its favor is that is a binary choice between it and Pinochet constitution. They can still pull a coalition of leftist + anti-establishment voters, but the campaign will be decisive.

[Mike88]

Things don't look good for Boric and the success of this new constitution hangs on the wire, especially in a period of a bad economy worldwide.

Kaoras, what do think Boric would do if the NO in fact prevails?

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

[kaoras]

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

Oh dear god, you really are going to make me read a Patricio Navia column? That's a masochistic exercise I've not done in years.

The first part is just complaining about the members elected on change platforms wanting to do significant changes. Elections have consequences, shocking.

The convention is also trying to give more power to Chile’s 16 regions (a number that could increase to 20 if proposals to create new regions gain support). Defying all evidence from countries that have tried fiscal decentralization, the constitutional convention has already included text that will give regions the power to issue bonds, levy taxes and run their own finances.

The bond and taxes thing were rejected. In any case, I seriously doubt you understand the comical extent at which everything is centralized in Chile. I seriously don't have any sympathy whatsoever to these Santiago elites crying about not being able to decide the public transit routes of cities one thousand kilometers away from Santiago. (Well, Navia lives in NYC...)

hile. Some provisions already sent to the floor for a full vote call for the nationalization of the mining sector. Others make eminent domain so broad that citizens would have no protection against a government that wants to nationalize the entire economy. Those provisions would still need to be approved by the floor

Yes, that was the problem I was talking about with the commission. The next few paragraphs are him crying about things that were rejected by the floor. Including the Central Bank thing where he literally admits that he is complaining about what he just thinks is going to happen (spoiler, it didn't happened)

For example, ambitious provisions for the rights of nature, expressed repeatedly in different articles already voted by the floor and many others approved at the committee level, will create huge hurdles for mining activities

Oh, the horror of regulating big mining.

I don't really understand his point about the indigenous representation since there has not been any fixed quota approved by the convention (nor any of the political system details yet) so he is pulling the malappoirtment thing out of thin air.

Then he complains about gender parity and social rights and blablabla. Regarding your point about property rights, I guess you are referring to the changes to the expropriations clauses. The 1980 constitution had expropriation procedures detailed at a level unseen in literally any other constitution in the world (you can check any comparative law paper written about it), the new Private Property right and expropriation clause is just in line with what most European countries have.

This opinion column perfectly encapsulates the attitude of the right in the convention. Absolute intransigence combined with disingenuous attacks on things that don't even exist.
 

[kaoras]

Things don't look good for Boric and the success of this new constitution hangs on the wire, especially in a period of a bad economy worldwide.

Kaoras, what do think Boric would do if the NO in fact prevails?

If Reject wins, Boric would probably change most of his cabinet (since the government is going to campaign hardcore for Approve) and then the left would try to do a new constitutional convention election since they would claim that people still want to change the Constitution of 1980 based on the 2020 plebiscite results.

Those new elections could happen since part of the right has already proposed that (though is more of a disingenuous tactic to deflate the Approve vote with a third option in the current plebiscite). Those new elections would see the right clearing 1/3 with ease, which would lead to tremendous gridlock since the left would also have 1/3.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

Oh dear god, you really are going to make me read a Patricio Navia column? That's a masochistic exercise I've not done in years.

The first part is just complaining about the members elected on change platforms wanting to do significant changes. Elections have consequences, shocking.

The convention is also trying to give more power to Chile’s 16 regions (a number that could increase to 20 if proposals to create new regions gain support). Defying all evidence from countries that have tried fiscal decentralization, the constitutional convention has already included text that will give regions the power to issue bonds, levy taxes and run their own finances.

The bond and taxes thing were rejected. In any case, I seriously doubt you understand the comical extent at which everything is centralized in Chile. I seriously don't have any sympathy whatsoever to these Santiago elites crying about not being able to decide the public transit routes of cities one thousand kilometers away from Santiago. (Well, Navia lives in NYC...)
 

I didn't mention this for a reason. I support decentralization (federalism in the US) and believe that giving more power to states and local governments is a good thing that checks the power of a single government to engage in tyranny.

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

Oh dear god, you really are going to make me read a Patricio Navia column? That's a masochistic exercise I've not done in years.

The first part is just complaining about the members elected on change platforms wanting to do significant changes. Elections have consequences, shocking.

The convention is also trying to give more power to Chile’s 16 regions (a number that could increase to 20 if proposals to create new regions gain support). Defying all evidence from countries that have tried fiscal decentralization, the constitutional convention has already included text that will give regions the power to issue bonds, levy taxes and run their own finances.

The bond and taxes thing were rejected. In any case, I seriously doubt you understand the comical extent at which everything is centralized in Chile. I seriously don't have any sympathy whatsoever to these Santiago elites crying about not being able to decide the public transit routes of cities one thousand kilometers away from Santiago. (Well, Navia lives in NYC...)

hile. Some provisions already sent to the floor for a full vote call for the nationalization of the mining sector. Others make eminent domain so broad that citizens would have no protection against a government that wants to nationalize the entire economy. Those provisions would still need to be approved by the floor

Yes, that was the problem I was talking about with the commission. The next few paragraphs are him crying about things that were rejected by the floor. Including the Central Bank thing where he literally admits that he is complaining about what he just thinks is going to happen (spoiler, it didn't happened)

Again, I didn't mention the Central Bank thing. I did mention the virtual removal of property protections, but the new constitution is extremely weak in that regard, so I think that's fair.

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

Oh dear god, you really are going to make me read a Patricio Navia column? That's a masochistic exercise I've not done in years.

The first part is just complaining about the members elected on change platforms wanting to do significant changes. Elections have consequences, shocking.

The convention is also trying to give more power to Chile’s 16 regions (a number that could increase to 20 if proposals to create new regions gain support). Defying all evidence from countries that have tried fiscal decentralization, the constitutional convention has already included text that will give regions the power to issue bonds, levy taxes and run their own finances.

The bond and taxes thing were rejected. In any case, I seriously doubt you understand the comical extent at which everything is centralized in Chile. I seriously don't have any sympathy whatsoever to these Santiago elites crying about not being able to decide the public transit routes of cities one thousand kilometers away from Santiago. (Well, Navia lives in NYC...)

hile. Some provisions already sent to the floor for a full vote call for the nationalization of the mining sector. Others make eminent domain so broad that citizens would have no protection against a government that wants to nationalize the entire economy. Those provisions would still need to be approved by the floor

Yes, that was the problem I was talking about with the commission. The next few paragraphs are him crying about things that were rejected by the floor. Including the Central Bank thing where he literally admits that he is complaining about what he just thinks is going to happen (spoiler, it didn't happened)

For example, ambitious provisions for the rights of nature, expressed repeatedly in different articles already voted by the floor and many others approved at the committee level, will create huge hurdles for mining activities

Oh, the horror of regulating big mining.

I don't really understand his point about the indigenous representation since there has not been any fixed quota approved by the convention (nor any of the political system details yet) so he is pulling the malappoirtment thing out of thin air.
 

I mean, we can debate "regulating big mining," but it's a pretty standard right-wing belief to oppose overregulation, and especially overregulation of valuable industry.

Re: the indigenous thing if there's going to be special seats for the indigenous that can violate one man one vote if the indigenous have the right to vote in both regular elections and indigenous elections. Think of New Zealand, for instance (before MMP, at least, not sure how it works with MMP): if the Maori are allotted seats according to their total population, but some Maori vote in the regular elections rather than the special Maori seats, than the Maori votes are worth more than others.

Also, there's been a lot of debate in the last few days about introducing a "third option" in the plebiscite, because many people like Amarillos por Chile* and the punditariat don't like how the new constitution is shaping up to be, but fear that it will be approved anyway because of the binary option between Approve and Reject (reject meaning keeping the Pinochet constitution). This third option would be doing new conventional elections, that congress has to pass a new constitution or even approving Bachelet's project.

The left and the convention oppose that so is not going to happen.

*Amarillos por Chile had been particularly disgusting of late, with dogwhistles about the autonomy of the indigenous people would somehow violate the principle of 1 person 1 vote. Their barely hidden racism when they talk about anything indigenous related is repulsive and a foreshadowing of how the reject campaign will work.

How is it a dogwhistle to criticize the special seats? Even Americas Quarterly said that:

"Provisions already approved ensuring popular representation in the legislature for each of Chile’s 11 groups of native peoples are far more expansive than existing representation mechanisms for indigenous minorities elsewhere in the world – and will enshrine malapportionment rules that will distort the principle of one person, one vote."

Among many other issues with the constitution, including a virtual removal of property protections.

https://americasquarterly.org/article/the-dangerous-hubris-of-chiles-constitutional-convention/

Oh dear god, you really are going to make me read a Patricio Navia column? That's a masochistic exercise I've not done in years.

The first part is just complaining about the members elected on change platforms wanting to do significant changes. Elections have consequences, shocking.

The convention is also trying to give more power to Chile’s 16 regions (a number that could increase to 20 if proposals to create new regions gain support). Defying all evidence from countries that have tried fiscal decentralization, the constitutional convention has already included text that will give regions the power to issue bonds, levy taxes and run their own finances.

The bond and taxes thing were rejected. In any case, I seriously doubt you understand the comical extent at which everything is centralized in Chile. I seriously don't have any sympathy whatsoever to these Santiago elites crying about not being able to decide the public transit routes of cities one thousand kilometers away from Santiago. (Well, Navia lives in NYC...)

hile. Some provisions already sent to the floor for a full vote call for the nationalization of the mining sector. Others make eminent domain so broad that citizens would have no protection against a government that wants to nationalize the entire economy. Those provisions would still need to be approved by the floor

Yes, that was the problem I was talking about with the commission. The next few paragraphs are him crying about things that were rejected by the floor. Including the Central Bank thing where he literally admits that he is complaining about what he just thinks is going to happen (spoiler, it didn't happened)

For example, ambitious provisions for the rights of nature, expressed repeatedly in different articles already voted by the floor and many others approved at the committee level, will create huge hurdles for mining activities

Oh, the horror of regulating big mining.

I don't really understand his point about the indigenous representation since there has not been any fixed quota approved by the convention (nor any of the political system details yet) so he is pulling the malappoirtment thing out of thin air.

Then he complains about gender parity and social rights and blablabla. Regarding your point about property rights, I guess you are referring to the changes to the expropriations clauses. The 1980 constitution had expropriation procedures detailed at a level unseen in literally any other constitution in the world (you can check any comparative law paper written about it), the new Private Property right and expropriation clause is just in line with what most European countries have.
 

1. Most European countries probably should have more property protections. That European countries have overly weak constitutions is a common phenomenon, but that doesn't mean it should be repeated elsewhere.

2. Most European countries don't have candidates regularly calling for the expropriation of property. Weaker protections for property may be fine in a European country where property rights aren't at risk, but in Chile where property rights are stronger rights are necessary.

3. This isn't true. The new Chilean Constitution says that no person can be deprived of property, except by virtue of a law that authorizes expropriation for public utility or general interest declared by the legislator -- basically removing guarantees of rights by allowing for expropriation so long as Congress declares it to be "in the general interest" (a vague term in the best of times, made worthless by allowing Congress to decide what it is). By contrast, the Polish Constitution guarantees "ownership and the right of succession" and say that all citizens "shall receive legal protection regarding ownership, other property rights and the right of succession."

[kaoras]

Snips snips

The problem with industry and mining in Chile is that the places where they operate ends up becoming "zonas de sacrificio". Ports like Puchuncaví or Quinteros regularly have to cancel classes because of toxic emissions from the nearby industries. It's fair to oppose regulations from a right wing perspective, but Chilean business have an abysmal track record regulating themselves.

Indigenous can't vote on both elections but I get your point about their seats being worth more. That is actually one of the things I think they were overreaching, but in the more recent accords so far they have signaled that the number of reserved seats must be decided by law, so is not something that bothers me too much. Besides, there are historical and geographical reasons for some degree of malappoirtment (you can't give Aysén half a deputy or make them share one with Magallanes). I understand you won't have much sympathy for historical or compensatory rationale but I think is a necessary step to address their issues.

On property rights, the Chilean Constitution on its art. 19 not only says what you are saying, but also regulates how to determinate the compensation, how it must be paid (in cash ready form) and all the procedures on the court. All the convention did was moving the administrative and judicial procedures to where it belongs, law.

Generally speaking, I understand this new constitution is not something appealing to right wingers, but their critics here in Chile do not engage in good faith as you have done, but instead do what Navia does, which is to attack ghosts and criticize every alteration to the status quo, without trying to compromise.

[jaichind]

(Bloomberg) --President Gabriel Boric had approval rating of 27.8% in first half of April, a drop of 6.2 pp compared to the second half of March, according to a survey by Santiago-based pollster Activa published on Sunday.
Disapproval rose 10.5 pp to 56.6%
Regarding the ongoing drafting of Chile’s new constitution, 36.8% of people polled said they would vote to reject it, while 32.2% would vote to approve it and 31% were undecided

[kaoras]

(Bloomberg) --President Gabriel Boric had approval rating of 27.8% in first half of April, a drop of 6.2 pp compared to the second half of March, according to a survey by Santiago-based pollster Activa published on Sunday.
Disapproval rose 10.5 pp to 56.6%
Regarding the ongoing drafting of Chile’s new constitution, 36.8% of people polled said they would vote to reject it, while 32.2% would vote to approve it and 31% were undecided

Yeah, Boric is crashing at astonishing speed. Activa always has the lowest support for every president because of the way their panel work, but in Cadem Boric is 40% approval and 50% dissaproval already. (They also have Reject 45 - Approve 38)

I never really had much faith in Boric but I'm still surprised at how stingy they have been. They have not throw a single bone to #Populists. As I said, mixing Concertación economic orthodoxy with FA identity politics is a recipe for absolute disaster.

Approve will rebound when the campaign starts... will it be enough? I don't know, but the dynamic so far has been so frustrating because is exactly the same thing that happened with Bachelet reforms. They propose something and all the right wing "experts" (and in this case along with centre left senators that don't want to lose their jobs) posing as impartial voices tore their proposal appart in the press, (which is mostly rightwing and controlled by the bussiness elite). Rinse and repeat.

[jaichind]

https://elpais.com/internacional/2022-04-26/la-popularidad-de-grabriel-boric-en-chile-cae-del-50-al-36-en-menos-de-dos-meses-de-mandato.html

Cadem poll now has it as 36/53 for approval/disapproval for Boric