Mexican Residents In The United States: Fulfilling The Potential For A Demographic Democratic Bonus6/25/2018 By Duncan Wood and Rachel Schmidtke Roughly 88 million Mexican voters are registered to vote in their country’s elections on July 1st. A significantly smaller population of voters has already begun to cast their ballots—Mexicans who live abroad. Mexican emigrants make up 12.2% of the total Mexican population, 97.33% of whom live in the United States. U.S. based Mexicans have been registering to vote in record numbers, but the overall number of registered voters abroad is unlikely to play a pivotal role in this election. Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) is so far ahead in the polls that absentee ballots will not be decisive this time around.
But the growing number of Mexicans registered to vote in the U.S. and other countries holds enormous potential for the future of Mexican democracy. Including millions of Mexicans should be of interest not only to political parties and their candidates who would love to benefit from their support, but also to those who wish to see a more inclusive democratic system. Absentee Ballot Registration Increase 2018 is the first election year in which Mexico has allowed its citizens abroad to register to vote without returning to the country. Mexican nationals who have a registered voting card can go to the National Electoral Institute (INE) website and solicit a voting kit containing information and voting cards. Mexicans who did not have their voting card were able to make appointments through a Mexican consulate to obtain one to register. Mexican nationals can apply for a voter ID card regardless of their immigration status. The INE has also made efforts reach out to U.S.-based voters by increasing their absentee ballot funding and launching social media campaigns urging voters abroad to register through the online portal. Lifting restrictions and greater promotion of absentee voting has facilitated the increase in registered voters outside of Mexico. As of May 2018, 181,256 Mexican nationals abroad had registered to vote, nearly triple the number from 2012. Potentially, the vote abroad could even play a determining role in a close election. Notably, in 2006, the presidency was decided by a little over 250,000 votes. The latest count shows that 4,235 voting packets have already been received in Mexico. Although Mexican law prohibits candidates from officially campaigning outside of Mexico, pre-campaign events held across the United States indicated a desire from the Mexican diasporic population to be included in their origin country’s politics. Voting Process Too Difficult Although 2018 looked promising for bringing in more absentee votes, the voting process is not without its challenges. The small number of ballots received to date reflects the difficulties that many potential voters have faced. Unlike migrants from many other countries in Latin America, Mexicans abroad cannot vote in consulates. Instead they must mail in their votes, which often leaves room for human errors like forgotten signatures. Other difficulties stem from larger institutional problems. Despite the increase in mail-in votes, there is only one warehouse for storage, preemptively creating difficulties if a high voter mail-in rate occur. Consulates in places like Texas and California have been overrun with people seeking appointments to obtain a voter ID card. There were too many voting applicants in Dallas to process in time for the 2018 presidential election. For those who did manage to obtain their credentials in time, delays of nearly two months were reported before their kits arrived. When they received their kits, voters reported difficulties in activation. Some kits even included the incorrect mailing address. The challenges in the voting process erode some of the progress gained in allowing Mexican nationals abroad to vote without returning to Mexico. Future of Democracy in Mexico and Bilateral Relations But what if these problems could be resolved in future elections to fully harness the potential of the migrant vote? While the percentage of Mexicans abroad is small, it is not insignificant. The Mexican population living abroad in 2017 was at 12,027,320, with over 11 million in the United States. If every Mexican abroad exercised their right to vote, they could substantially impact election outcomes. Yet, in 2012, only around 30,000 Mexicans in the United States voted. Although 2018 will likely have greater abroad voter turnout, the total number of registered migrant voters is only slightly higher than 1.5% of the total migrant population. The barriers to vote create a major disincentive to participate in the democratic process. Nonetheless, the untapped potential of this group is considerable. This voting demographic could and should be a resource that Mexico uses as the country continues to transition to a full and mature democracy. More can be done to include absentee voters, such as growing the appointment capacity at Mexican consulates, improving the delivery process for voting packets, increasing transparency of vote counts, and communicating more effectively to voters abroad that their votes matter. It is also probably time to modify Mexican campaign laws to allow candidates to campaign in the United States as a way of attracting greater interest and participation. An even better solution would be to permit voting in consulates. Mexico has 50 consulates in the U.S., the largest of any country abroad. These consulates have been crucial in protecting Mexican migrant rights in the U.S., and have been leaders in issuing recognized I.D.s so that Mexicans have a form of official credential. Consulates should now become centers not only for migrant rights in the U.S., but also for advancing the cause of democratic inclusion. Imagine a future where more than 10 million Mexicans in the United States vote. This is not only important for election results. Mexicans abroad would be more closely tied to the political (and economic) future of their country of origin. Greater inclusion for Mexican migrants could be an important force for bilateral relations. Mexican governments would pay more attention to their citizens overseas and, in return, would likely see a stronger support network among their citizens within the United States, many of whom are also becoming American citizens. Increased migrant voting could end up being a force not just for greater democratic inclusion but also for a more positive U.S.-Mexico partnership. This article was originally published on the Mexico Institute's blog on Forbes.com.
0 Comments
By Veronica Ortiz O.
by Luis Rubio
by Luis Rubio
By Victor Remigio Martínez Cantú and Erik Lee (Also posted on the North American Research Partnership)
By Veronica Ortiz O.
By Michael A. Paarlberg
Source: National Electoral Institute, District Voting by Mexican Citizens Residing Abroad The PAN’s advantage among Mexico’s diaspora voters is a reflection of diaspora political dynamics generally, in particular the tendency of diasporas to vote against the incumbent party at the time of migration. As the vote totals show, the partisan skew of Mexico’s diaspora voters is not so much pro-PAN as it is anti-PRI: the PRI, being in power for seven decades, produced seven decades of emigrants who associate that party with the reasons why they left.
Yet one cannot say that the Mexican diaspora as a whole supports any party: it is impossible to tell because turnout rates are so low. Among countries which grant voting rights to citizens residing abroad – today, the majority of countries – Mexico has long been famous for having one of the most restrictive overseas voting systems in the world. Until 2016, Mexicans who wished to vote from abroad had to return to Mexico to obtain documents to register. The process typically took two to three weeks, and thus even those migrants who were able to travel back home, typically for the holidays, were mostly unable to take the necessary time off. Registration required producing identification which many migrants – especially those with irregular immigration status, did not have, such as a passport or birth certificate. The 2005 diaspora enfranchisement law – the same law which prohibited politicians from campaigning outside of Mexico, which they do anyway – was a careful compromise between the PAN, which controlled the presidency, and the PRI, which controlled the Chamber of Deputies where the bill originated, and which had blocked 19 previous attempts to extend voting rights abroad. The resulting law was thus highly circumscribed and reflected a traditional suspicion by previous Mexican governments of Mexican emigrants as being “too Americanized.” The fact that the diaspora electorate is perceived to skew so strongly against one party created a natural veto player for the extension of voting rights. The compromise thus limited the electoral fallout for the PRI, while reinforcing the perception of a diaspora that favors the PAN, as the few who were able to navigate the registration process were relatively elite. A restrictive registration process has predictably produced extremely low voter turnout in the two elections in which Mexicans could vote from abroad: in the 2012 presidential election, just over 40,000 voted, by mail, from abroad.[5] This 1% turnout rate reinforces views in Mexico that Mexicans living abroad are uninterested in politics at home. Mexican media outlets routinely lambast the public expense of voting from abroad: a typical headline analyzing the diaspora vote in the 2012 presidential election was “Each vote from abroad cost close to 5,000 pesos” (US$375 at the time).[6] This year, the Mexican diaspora vote can be predicted to broaden and diversify, thanks to electoral reforms that now permit Mexicans to register at consulates rather than having to travel back home, though the required documentation, such as birth certificates or passports, remains difficult for many to obtain. Diaspora voters can also now vote for senators and governors in their home states, a right that had already been extended by ten states starting with Michoacán in 2007. Following the closing of the registration window in April, 181,256 Mexicans living abroad had both registered and activated their voter ID cards allowing them to vote in July’s federal election. This number represents a threefold increase in diaspora voter registration from 2012.[7] Nevertheless, out of an estimated 4.2 million voting-age Mexican citizens residing abroad, this would be a turnout rate of less than 5%. And relative to a total nationwide electorate of 85 million, the diaspora will remain a relatively tiny constituency. Nevertheless, small vote differences can swing elections. Nobody remembers this better than López Obrador, who disputed his loss in 2006 by a margin of just 244,000 votes. This would explain why the perennial candidate, who refused to visit the U.S. for that election, has now embraced the diaspora with enthusiasm. Having campaigned as a defender of the dignity of the Mexican nation at home and abroad, López Obrador has enjoyed a windfall of political dividends nearly every time President Trump opens his mouth. And while the PAN has historically been the primary beneficiary of the diaspora vote, this year’s larger and more economically diverse diaspora voter pool will be advantageous for the populist candidate. Yet as the Mexican press often points out, the amount of money spent on the diaspora vote, both by the government and by candidates making expensive visits to the U.S., makes little sense from a cost-benefit perspective, if one measures the payoff in terms of votes. But politicians do not. Mexican politicians and party officials I interviewed had no illusions about the miniscule number of votes they expected to receive from the diaspora. When asked why they bother, all of them repeated two words: remittances and influence. Mexicans in the U.S. send an enormous amount of money to relatives back home, totaling $28.7 billion in 2017. That money, politicians believe, buys them influence over relatives back home, a belief that is shared by politicians in other migrant-sending countries. “Families vote in blocs, and the head of the household influences the rest,” one Dominican party official told me. “If we get one Salvadoran in Washington to support us, that gives us five votes in El Salvador,” said a Salvadoran campaign strategist. It turns out this isn’t really true: models I built based on polling data show that migrants in the U.S. don’t have an impact on the voting behavior of their relatives at home, though they do impact their behavior in other ways: their willingness to join political organizations, to proselytize for candidates they already support, and be active in politics generally. And remittances turn out to have an insignificant impact on their own, understandably given that they are a poor enforcement mechanism: remittance-senders have not been known to deny money to their loved ones on the suspicion that they voted the wrong way. Ultimately, it is family communication, not money, that influences voter behavior, and such communication is more likely to reinforce existing partisan sympathies shared among family members than to flip votes.[8] Whether or not the diaspora vote turns out to be decisive this election – and it almost certainly will not – the Mexican diaspora will continue to flex its political muscles. Candidates at every level of government seek the favor of powerful hometown associations representing large local constituencies across the U.S.: federations of Zacatecanos in California, Michoacanos in Illinois, Poblanos in New York. Immigrants demand, and receive, services from Mexican consulates which take on responsibilities akin to those of governors in Mexico: the Mexican government has earmarked money for consulates to provide legal services to immigrants and help them acquire documentation for DACA. And while their remittances may not buy them clout with their relatives, they do buy migrants clout with the government, whose rhetoric towards the diaspora has changed completely, from once denigrating them as traitors and pochos to today’s “heroes of the homeland,” as Anaya called his audience in Los Angeles.[9] Even the PRI, historically the least popular party for migrants, has evolved in both rhetoric and policy toward the diaspora. The most recent reforms to the registration process were made by the Peña Nieto government, a concession to a constituency previous PRI administrations had kept at arm’s length. These reforms are a credit to forward-thinking officials, within Mexico’s parties and its sprawling bureaucracy, notably the National Elections Institute. Most credit, however, goes to the Mexican diaspora itself, which for years organized and ultimately extracted political rights from a government which had long been reluctant to grant them a voice. The views expressed here are solely those of the author. [1] “La Villita grita Viva México!” Los Angeles Times 11 September 2009. [2] Cordero, Víctor. “Anaya se reúne con migrantes mexicanos en Los Ángeles.” Excelsior 3 March 2018. [3] Vergara, Rosalía. “Confirma AMLO en Chicago que demandará a Trump cnte ONU y CIDH.” Proceso 20 February 2017. [4] Aguirre, Alberto. “La batalla por el voto de los ausentes.” La Jornada 21 May 2000. [5] Mexican National Election Institute, District Voting by Mexican Citizens Residing Abroad, 2012. [6] Vargas, Miguel Angel. “Cada voto desde el extranjero costó cerca de 5,000 pesos.” ADN Político 11 July 2012. [7] Corchado, Alfredo and Dianne Solis. “Number of Mexicans voting abroad falls way short of expectations – again.” Dallas News 10 May 2018. [8] Paarlberg, Michael A. 2017. "Transnational Militancy: Diaspora Influence over Electoral Activity in Latin America." Comparative Politics 49 (4), 541-559. [9] Arellano, Silvia and Selene Flores. “México no se pondrá de tapete de EU: Anaya a migrantes.” Milenio 3 March 2018. By Verónica Ortiz O
By Luis Rubio
By Verónica Ortiz
|
Archives
November 2018
CATEGORIES
All
|