The July 2, 2000, elections marked the first time since the 1910-17 Mexican Revolution that the opposition defeated the party in government. Vicente Fox won the election with 43% of the vote, followed by PRI candidate Francisco Labastida with 36%, and Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) with 17%. Despite some isolated incidents of irregularities and problems, there was no evidence of systematic attempts to manipulate the elections or their results, and critics concluded that the irregularities that occurred did not alter the outcome of the presidential vote. Civic organizations fielded more than 80,000 trained electoral observers, foreigners were invited to witness the process, and numerous independent "quick count" operations and exit polls validated the official vote tabulation.
Numerous electoral reforms implemented since 1989 aided in the opening of the Mexican political system, and opposition parties have made historic gains in elections at all levels. Many of the current electoral concerns have shifted from outright fraud to campaign fairness issues. During 1995-96 the political parties negotiated constitutional amendments to address these issues. Implementing legislation included major points of consensus that had been worked out with the opposition parties. The thrust of the new laws has public financing predominate over private contributions to political parties, tightens procedures for auditing the political parties, and strengthens the authority and independence of electoral institutions. The court system also was given greatly expanded authority to hear civil rights cases on electoral matters brought by individuals or groups. In short, the extensive reform efforts have "leveled the playing field" for the parties.
Even before the new electoral law was passed, opposition parties had obtained an increasing voice in Mexico's political system. A substantial number of candidates from opposition parties had won election to the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. As a result of the 2000 elections, the Congress is more diverse than ever. In the Chamber, 209 seats belong to the PRI, 207 to the PAN, 52 to the PRD, 16 for the Green Party, and the remaining 16 are split among four smaller parties and two independents. In the 128-seat Senate, the upper house of Congress, the PRI still holds the most seats at 60, but the PAN holds 46, the PRD 15, the Greens 5, and two smaller parties each have one seat. Senators serve 6 years in office and Deputies 3 years; neither can be elected to consecutive terms.
Although the PRI no longer controls the Presidency, it remains a significant force in Mexican politics. In general, in state congressional and mayoral contests since July 2000, the PRI has fared better than the PAN. In the 2003 midterm elections, the PRI was practically wiped off the map in the Federal District – only one borough mayor (jefe delegacional) out of 16, and no first-past-the-post members of the city assembly – but it was able to recoup some significant losses in the provinces (most notably, the governorship of PAN-stronghold Nuevo León). It also remains the largest single party in both chambers of Congress.
The 2003 midterm elections also signaled a defeat for Fox and the PAN. Fox had pledged to bring Democracy and led the way towards prosperity, but the polls showed a lack of support. The PAN lost control of the Chamber of Deputies; perhaps more significantly, the fact that 59% percent of the electorate chose not to bother to cast their votes in the mid-terms indicates a growing disenchantment with what some believe is business-as-usual in Mexican politics.
Presidential candidates are gearing up for the 2006 election. The reform programs the candidates will need to address include recognition of human and labor rights, adequate support of public education, and improving public health and social security. Federal District Head of Government Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a possible PRD candidate, is the marked favorite in the polls to win the election over candidates proposed by the PAN and PRI.
Other reforms
Constitutional and legal changes have been adopted in recent years to improve the performance and accountability of the Supreme Court and the Office of the Attorney General and the administration of federal courts. The Supreme Court, relieved of administrative duties for lower courts, was given responsibilities for judicial review of certain categories of law and legislation. A variety of laws also was passed in 1995-96 to help control organized crime.
Failed Reforms
Fox has failed to keep promises with workers, labor unions and indigenous groups. The "20 commitments" he had endorsed during his campaign have fallen by the wayside. The program of labor reform instead supported the old Congress of Labor and Confederation of Mexican Workers, which many believe are corrupt. Another campaign promise was to fight for immigration reforms with the United States, but no progress has been made. The promise to deliver prosperity has also fallen short with Mexico's heavy integration with the United States, which has been suffering from a recession and an alleged jobless recovery. Businesses seeking still lower wages have begun to export jobs from Mexico to Vietnam and China, further adding to workers frustration and hardships. Even Fox's attempts to pass laws aimed at improving the lives of the indigenous population have failed. What laws were passed failed to gain support from the Zapatistas and other indigenous groups.
A major obstacle to reform is the pervasiveness of corruption throughout Mexico's government, society, and economy. Some analysts estimate that the illegal economic sector may make up about 25% of Mexico's GDP. Efforts to combat crime have been met by huge protests demanding that the government provide decent-paying legitimate jobs first. In 2004, some legitimate businesses (that is, the ones that had not fled) began to form self-help associations like the Alliance for a Legal Mexico.
Chiapas
An unresolved sociopolitical conflict still exists in the southernmost state of Chiapas. In January 1994, Zapatistas in the state of Chiapas briefly took arms against the government, protesting alleged oppression and governmental indifference to poverty. After 12 days of fighting, a cease-fire was negotiated that remains in effect. Since 1994 sporadic clashes have continued to occur between armed civilian groups, usually over disputed land claims.
As a presidential candidate, Fox promised to renew dialogue with the EZLN and address unresolved problems in the state. Following his inauguration, he ordered many troops out of Chiapas, dismantled roadblocks, closed military bases, and submitted revised peace accords to Congress. Nonetheless, Chiapas has the largest military presence of any other state of the country. In August 2001, the peace accords became law, after having been passed by Congress and ratified by more than half of the state legislatures. The EZLN however has denounced the laws passed, as they failed to address certain points of principle. This position is seen by some analysts as merely an attempt to prevent the EZLN's political presence and influence from being diluted. The dialog with the government comissionary has ceased, and no official contacts between the EZLN and the Government have occurred to date (early 2005). However, Fox legitimacy and other affairs have pushed the Chiapas situation far from the spotlight.
Numerous legal challenges to the accords have been filed, and the Fox Administration has on more than one occasion suggested that modifications may be necessary.
