opinion

Predictable math and a
scurrilous campaign
by Eric Jackson

Dichter & Neira has it Herrera 34.3 percent, Martinelli 28 percent, Varela 16 percent, Endara 1.5 percent. IPSOS has it Martinelli 36, Herrera 32, Varela 13 and Endara 1. Unimer also has Martinelli ahead of Herrera by 36 to 32.

We can talk about which pollster is more prestigious, what methods were used, who was polled and so on. Because the pollsters didn't go into the indigenous comarcas or onto the islands, where many locals are furious with the PRD over land grabs, I suspect a little skew in Herrera's favor. And are young voters the wild card? Both Herrera and Martinelli have been paying special attention to that sector.

These are snapshots in time, and right at the moment the PRD is reeling from a succession of scandals and Balbina Herrera is the target of four separate criminal investigations. Next May it's entirely possible that clouds will have dissipated and enough Panamanians will look at economic issues, decide that they are better off than under previous governments, and tip the balance toward retaining the PRD. It's also possible that people will be much more fearful and unhappy about the economic situation then, and still choose Balbina over the rabiblanco alternatives. A lot of things can happen.

However, let me suggest that these are the things that are going on:

• Herrera has the support of the Torrijista hard core base of about one-third of the electorate and almost nobody else;

• Add Varela plus Endara and the sum still adds up to an erosion of the traditional Arnulfista base;

• Panamanian politics are, as usual, driven by negatives --- this time it seems that more people are fed up with the traditional parties than are fed up with the white minority oligarchy;

• Varela is running an inept campaign and Endara is running on empty;

• Most undecideds --- especially the older ones who remember the dictatorship and people who fear that they might lose government jobs or contracts were it known they oppose the ruling party --- are against the PRD; and

• Unless there's a major shakeup in the standings, we can expect that as Election Day approaches there will be more defections from the Varela and Endara camps in Martinelli's favor.
  

But what might shake things up?

Lots of things could. Martinelli's negative campaigning, for example, might blow up in his face.

I don't think that he'll be hurt so much as a result of people concluding that he's a nasty guy, but there is the possibility that people will think that he doesn't know what he's talking about, and another possibility that people will examine the philosophical assumptions underlying his attacks on his opponents and decide that they disagree on fundamentals.

Martinelli's dismissal of Varela as a lightweight and his studious ignoring of Endara as a has been aren't likely to offend too many voters.

However, the constant attacks on Herrera (and not by Martinelli alone) for supposedly being backed by Hugo Chávez or otherwise being a dangerous leftist might lead a segment of the electorate to turn against Martinelli because they'll see him as a zealot for extreme right-wing economic policies that have been rejected across much of Latin America and now by the US electorate. Economic developments in Panama or political events elsewhere could amplify this perception.

Notice as well that so far the oft-repeated allegations of Balbina getting money from Venezuela have not only remained unproven and denied, their source is found in extreme rightist Venezuelan and Cuban exile circles, mainly in Miami. We've been hearing these people for decades now, and quite frankly they're a notoriously unreliable source. If a lot of people decide that the Chávez baiting is not just strident but false, it would hurt Martinelli. But then Balbina has always supported campaign finance secrecy and under that circumstance a lot of people are going to decide that she doesn't deserve the benefit of any doubts that she herself has sown over a long political career.

And is Balbina a dangerous leftist?

Let's split that question up.

Dangerous?

Well, she does represent the continuation of an administration that has brought all sorts of foreign hoodlums to our shores. She does represent the continuation of an administration dedicated to shooting labor activists. Back in Noriega times, she was a leader of the Dignity Battalions goon squad and as mayor of San Miguelito did threaten Civilistas with death, and in fact the San Miguelito dingbats did kill people. Her campaign manager Héctor Alemán does have a Colombian business partner who made death threats against union workers in the pages of La Prensa. Many people are concerned with the militarization of our law enforcement institutions and the flagrantly partisan behavior of those whose job it is to guarantee fair elections. I'd say "dangerous" is a widely held perception that has nearly everyone except for the PRD faithful lined up against her.

Leftist?

One can be sure of one thing about Balbina Herrera's economic policies: she's deeply committed to the economic welfare of Balbina Herrera. Whether it was getting a house on a former US military base outside of the ordinary bidding process, or those close to her getting a concession on docks about to be privatized and special compensation for it, Balbina has always taken care of Balbina. She's become rich in public office and when Martinelli baits her about this she has no good response.

But beyond a commitment to herself, Balbina's a chameleon. She broke all sorts of laws to favor developers when she was Housing Minister, and if you add that to the PRD's blood feud with labor militants her economic record of late is anything but leftist. Viewed over the decades in various roles, however, she has shifted with the prevailing winds. True believers in the neoliberal doctrine of privatization and the rich trickling on the poor can't be sure that she'd continue to support those ideas, even if she has done so in recent years. So fear that she might turn to the left of, say, Sarah Palin, isn't a totally ridiculous argument for Martinelli to make.

Martinelli sat with the Palin family at last September's Republican National Convention, and one fault that he shares with Sarah Palin and Balbina Herrera is the inability to separate private interests from a public trust. When, as part of Mireya Moscoso's governing coalition, his Cambio Democratico party got the IDAAN water and sewer utility as a fiefdom, they ran an illegal party dues paycheck deduction scheme in that public entity. Another plum Martinelli received in those times was the location of a government post office in one of his supermarkets.

Given that record, the usually competent Herrera curiously blundered by accusing Martinelli of improperly receiving the benefit of a no-bid sugar mill privatization deal back in the 90s, when he served in PRD President Ernesto Pérez Balladares's administration. It turns out that even if there was funny stuff going on with that deal, Martinelli only bought into the Central Azucarera La Victoria after all of that had happened. Now it's Martinelli scorning Balbina for baseless attacks.

So what certainty can the voters have?

Well, we can rest assured that this has been and will continue to be an ugly contest.