Constitutions

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Your Monday Briefing: Sri Lanka in Turmoil

      by

      Plus Shinzo Abe’s allies win a supermajority in Japan’s parliament and Russia bombards Donetsk.Good morning. We’re covering the resignation of Sri Lanka’s president, election results in Japan and Russia’s bombardment of Donetsk, Ukraine.Sri Lanka’s economy has been foundering for months, leading to widespread protests.Dinuka Liyanawatte/ReutersSri Lanka’s president to resignAn official said President Gotabaya Rajapaksa had agreed to resign as the leader of Sri Lanka after protesters took over his house on Saturday. Rajapaksa hasn’t been seen since.Rajapaksa himself has not yet addressed the reports that he plans to resign later this week, and it’s unclear who is in charge. Ranil Wickremesinghe, who replaced Rajapaksa’s brother as prime minister in May, also agreed to resign on Saturday after his home was set on fire.It’s unclear what the next government will look like and what it can do immediately to address shortages of food, medicine, fuel and other essentials. Without fuel, Sri Lanka’s economy is grinding to a halt. The country needs billions of dollars to stabilize its economy.Details: Local media reported that Rajapaksa had ordered cooking fuel to be distributed, his first statement since the takeover. The statement could not be immediately verified.Background: The takeover was the culmination of months of public discontent with the Rajapaksa family, a political dynasty that has been accused of destroying the economy and violating human rights.Details: Protesters swam in Rajapaksa’s pool, lounged on canopied beds and watched cricket on wide-screen televisions when they stormed his residence this weekend. “It still feels unreal,” one man told The Times.Shinzo Abe’s death appeared to have increased voter turnout to over 52 percent, up from about 49 percent in 2019.Kimimasa Mayama/EPA, via ShutterstockAbe’s allies win a supermajorityThe Liberal Democrats and their partners gained enough seats yesterday to form a two-thirds supermajority in Japan’s Parliament, two days after the party’s former leader, Shinzo Abe, was assassinated.The mandate will give the lawmakers a new chance to pursue Abe’s long-held ambition of revising a clause that renounces war in the country’s pacifist Constitution.Better Understand the Russia-Ukraine WarHistory: Here’s what to know about Russia and Ukraine’s relationship and the causes of the conflict.On the Ground: Russian and Ukrainian forces are using a bevy of weapons as a deadly war of attrition grinds on in eastern Ukraine.Outside Pressures: Governments, sports organizations and businesses are taking steps to punish Russia. Here is a list of companies that have pulled out of the country.Updates: To receive the latest updates in your inbox, sign up here. The Times has also launched a Telegram channel to make its journalism more accessible around the world.The election results were also a clear sign that Abe, Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, remained a guiding political force, even though he resigned in 2020. But without him, the will to push revisions through a difficult parliamentary process could wane.Context: The plan to amend the Constitution has long been unpopular with the public. With inflation pressures mounting, the yen weakening, the war in Ukraine heightening fears of energy shortages and coronavirus infections rising, it could be a harder sell than ever.Assassination: Here is what we know so far. The police have released little information about the suspect and his motives, but acknowledged that Abe’s security was flawed.Russia’s attacks often seem random. Taken as a whole, they make clear that Moscow aims to capture more of Donetsk.Mauricio Lima for The New York TimesRussia bombards DonetskRussia has aggressively moved to take the entire Donbas region of Ukraine after seizing the Luhansk province last week. Over the weekend, it bombarded the five main towns and cities in neighboring Donetsk, the other province in the region.At least 15 people were killed in Donetsk when a Russian missile hit an apartment complex in the village of Chasiv Yar. Rescue crews said that up to 20 people could still be trapped, including a 9-year-old boy. Here are live updates.In the northeast, Russian forces also conducted attacks on the Kharkiv region. Last week, Russia established a civilian administration and unveiled a new flag in border areas under its control — a sign, analysts said, that Moscow plans to annex the territory.Ukrainian officials estimate that Russia already occupies about 30 percent of the Kharkiv region.Soldiers: Russia, desperate for recruits, has turned to cash incentives to bring in new fighters — often from impoverished minority groups.Gas prices: President Biden is seeking a global price cap on Russian oil, a full European ban on which could raise U.S. gas prices to $7 a gallon.Analysis: The war is becoming a contest of global stamina between Russia and the West.THE LATEST NEWSThe G20 meetingThe U.S. secretary of state, Antony Blinken, with Wang Yi, China’s foreign minister.Pool photo by Stefani ReynoldsAt a meeting in Indonesia, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the top U.S. diplomat, pressed Wang Yi, China’s foreign minister, to further isolate Russia. Wang responded sharply, noting a “growing ‘China phobia’” in the U.S.China warned Australia to stop treating it as an opponent and instead view Beijing as a partner, Reuters reports.Several Western nations shunned Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, who still met with diplomats from China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Turkey and Argentina.Asia PacificFlash floods in Kashmir killed at least 16 people during a Hindu pilgrimage, Reuters reports.Intense flooding also killed dozens of people in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Reuters reports.An outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease disrupted Eid al-Adha celebrations in Indonesia, The Associated Press reports.Maria Ressa, the Nobel Prize laureate, lost her appeal against a cyberlibel conviction and could face a lengthy prison sentence, The Guardian reports. The development comes after authorities in the Philippines ordered her news website, Rappler, to shut down.The toll of Australia’s recurring natural disasters is starting to show among the residents of New South Wales.World NewsElon Musk filed to back out of his deal to buy Twitter on Friday. Now, the issue is moving to the courts.Steve Bannon, a former adviser to Donald Trump who faces up to two years in jail and large fines, agreed to testify before the Jan. 6 panel, just days before his criminal trial for contempt of Congress is set to begin.At least 21 people were killed when gunmen opened fire on three taverns in South Africa this weekend. WimbledonNovak Djokovic beat the Australian upstart Nick Kyrgios in four sets, winning his 21st Grand Slam singles title.Elena Rybakina, a 23-year-old Russia native who competed for Kazakhstan, won her first Grand Slam title.A Morning ReadA tombstone in South Korea commemorating the final days of Internet Explorer. “He was a good tool to download other browsers,” it reads.Chang W. Lee/The New York TimesSouth Korea is known for its blazing broadband and innovative devices. But the country remains tethered to a buggy and insecure piece of software that was introduced 27 years ago and has since been abandoned by most of the world: Internet Explorer.ARTS AND IDEASLuca Tong behind the wheel of his “hot dog” bus in Hong Kong last month.Louise Delmotte for The New York TimesA ‘hot dog bus’ returnsDouble-decker “hot dog buses,” nicknamed for their lack of air-conditioning, were once a daily feature of life in Hong Kong. But they’ve been out of commission for more than a decade.Now, at least one has returned to the city’s streets, thanks to two pilots who pooled their savings to buy and restore the relic. When the pandemic cut their flight hours, they spent months scouring the internet for antique parts, watching old video clips to determine the correct font and placement of stickers and decals, and documenting the process on Instagram.For onlookers, the bus is a trip of nostalgia, a portal to the 1980s and ’90s. When the pilots, Luca Tong and Kobee Ko, park it at a terminal by the harbor front, enthusiasts come aboard to marvel at it. “All my memories came back,” said one woman who used to ride hot dog buses in high school and who brought her 4-year-old son for the experience.But the bus is also a memento of a happier time in the city, before pandemic restrictions and a sweeping political crackdown.“Back then, there was freedom, money and a whole lot of warmth,” Tong, 35, said. “The bus has the feeling of Hong Kong at that time, but that feeling is disappearing from Hong Kong.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookChris Simpson for The New York Times. Food stylist: Maggie Ruggiero. Prop stylist: Sophia Pappas.Bryan Washington weaves his childhood and his travels into this recipe for kimchi Cheddar biscuits. Chill your butter for best results.TravelA flight attendant gives advice for avoiding summer chaos. And here are tips to avoid lost luggage.What to Read“Son of Elsewhere” is a funny, frank memoir about the writer’s experiences emigrating from Sudan to Canada as a child.Now Time to PlayPlay today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Word with milk, note or number (five letters).Here are today’s Wordle and Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. The veteran financial reporter Joe Rennison is joining The Times to cover markets and trading.The latest episode of “The Daily” is on Boris Johnson’s resignation.You can reach Amelia and the team at briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      As Japan Votes, Abe’s Party Hopes His Legacy Is on the Ballot

      by

      Many of Shinzo Abe’s goals are central to the Liberal Democrats’ platform, and party members hoped the slain ex-leader’s memory would inspire sympathy votes on Sunday.TOKYO — When Shinzo Abe was gunned down at a campaign stop on Friday, he was no longer the leader of Japan, nor of its governing party. But as Japanese voters went to the polls on Sunday, Mr. Abe, the country’s longest-serving prime minister, was still a guiding political force, shaping their choices at the ballot box and his party’s vision for the future.“I have the responsibility to take over the ideas of former Prime Minister Abe,” the current prime minister, Fumio Kishida, told a crowd west of Tokyo on Saturday, the day after Mr. Abe’s killing, as he campaigned for their party’s candidates for the Upper House of Parliament.Many of Mr. Abe’s goals, like bolstering military spending and revising Japan’s pacifist Constitution, are still central to the Liberal Democratic Party’s platform. And party leaders hoped that drawing on his memory would give them more power to enact those ideas.Even before the assassination, the Liberal Democrats, along with Komeito, their longtime partner in the governing coalition, had been expected to win a majority of the seats up for grabs in the Upper House on Sunday. If Mr. Abe’s death results in the additional sympathy votes that some analysts expect, the coalition could gain a two-thirds supermajority in Parliament.Technically, at least, that would give it the power to achieve Mr. Abe’s most cherished goal: amending the clause in the Constitution imposed by postwar American occupiers that renounces war, and thus opening the door for Japan to become a military power capable of global leadership.Hours after former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was fatally shot in Nara, Japan, people left flowers at the site of the attack.Philip Fong/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMuch stands in the way of that goal — not least that it has long been unpopular with the Japanese public. And with inflation pressures mounting, the yen weakening and coronavirus infections again on the rise, changing the Constitution could be a harder sell than ever.“I’m interested in prices, wages, daily life, medical services and child care,” said Risako Sakaguchi, 29, who cast her votes for Liberal Democratic candidates at a polling station in Saitama, a suburb of Tokyo.Given such fundamental concerns, “constitutional revision is a kind of luxury good,” said Tobias Harris, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who oversees work on Asia.“It’s the kind of thing where if there’s nothing else going on, maybe you can focus on this,” Mr. Harris said. “But given that attention being spent on constitutional revision is attention not being paid to other stuff, there is going to be a penalty for it, especially when people are so concerned about household issues.”More on the Assassination of Shinzo AbeAn Influential Figure: Shinzo Abe, Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, was one of the most transformational politicians in the country’s post-World War II history.Japan’s Gun Laws: Mr. Abe’s assassination may look like a rebuke of the country’s stringent gun laws. But a closer look at what happened actually demonstrates their effectiveness. Reactions: People in Japan, where violent crime is rare, were rattled by the assassination. Mr. Abe’s death also prompted an outpouring of mournful statements from world leaders.Mr. Abe, who was in office for nearly eight years (in addition to a brief, earlier stint as prime minister), left a legacy that went well beyond his hopes of revising the Constitution.Even after Japan fell behind China in world economic rankings, he helped extend its influence by holding a multinational trade agreement together after President Donald J. Trump pulled the United States out of it. At home, he helped bring the economy back from years of doldrums. Even if his economic policies never delivered as much as he promised, he gained international recognition for the program he called “Abenomics.”After he left office, Mr. Abe’s public statements resonated well beyond those of most former prime ministers. When he suggested that it was time for Japan to establish a nuclear sharing agreement with the United States, media outlets assumed the Liberal Democrats were considering a break with the longtime taboo against even discussing the possibility of a Japanese nuclear arsenal.For Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the sudden loss of Mr. Abe may present opportunities as well as perils. Pool photo by Yoshikazu TsunoWithin the party, he was a kingmaker, often referred to as a “shadow shogun.” Mr. Kishida owes his position to Mr. Abe, who directed his supporters to throw their weight behind him after Mr. Abe’s first choice, Sanae Takaichi, lost a first-round ballot in the party leadership contest.Campaigning for Liberal Democrats over the last two weeks, Mr. Abe’s enduring influence was on display, drawing crowds as far north as Hokkaido and as far south as Fukuoka. His fatal visit to Nara, Japan’s old capital, was his second in support of Kei Sato, 43, a junior member of the party.For Mr. Kishida, the sudden loss of Mr. Abe may present opportunities as well as perils. He could consolidate power after the election, as he is not legally required to call another one for three years. Politicians in Japan often refer to this interval as the “golden period.”But history suggests the odds may be against him. Since the end of World War II, powerful prime ministers have typically been followed by a revolving door of forgettable faces, said Carol Gluck, a professor of history and specialist in modern Japan at Columbia University. Mr. Kishida is the second person to hold the job since Mr. Abe resigned in 2020; his predecessor, Yoshihide Suga, lasted just a year.“There’s a whole lot of prime ministers, if you add them up between 1945 and now, who did not make a mark,” Professor Gluck said.Privately, Mr. Kishida may feel some relief that he will no longer have to answer to Mr. Abe. But others in the party are sure to maneuver to fill the power vacuum.Mr. Abe, center, campaigning in Yokohama for a Liberal Democratic candidate on Wednesday.Yoshikazu Tsuno/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMr. Abe led the largest, and most right-leaning, party faction, and he had not anointed a successor. Infighting could unsettle the party and make it more difficult for Mr. Kishida to get policies enacted.“It would have been much more predictable if Abe was still a big influence,” said Koichi Nakano, a professor of politics at Sophia University.Party power squabbles aside, the bigger question may be whether Mr. Kishida ultimately has his own vision.He once cast himself as a liberal-leaning, dovish member of the party. But driven by the war in Ukraine and increasing threats from North Korea and China, Mr. Kishida has followed Mr. Abe in calling for increased military spending and weapons that can strike missile launch sites in enemy territory.Without Mr. Abe as a driving force, though, some analysts wonder if Mr. Kishida will be able to deliver on that national security agenda.“I think Japan will lose our momentum to strengthen our defense,” said Lully Miura, a political scientist and head of the Yamaneko Research Institute in Tokyo. “We need a visible figure who can support the strong security and appeal to the public.”At the peak of his power, Mr. Abe himself was unable to push through the constitutional revisions he so badly wanted. In 2016, he presided over a Parliament in which his governing coalition had the required two-thirds supermajority. But tensions within the coalition, along with concern that the public — which must ultimately ratify any constitutional amendment — would not go along, thwarted his hopes. Changing the Constitution could be even further out of reach now, given multiple crises around the world and at home.Campaign posters outside a Tokyo polling station on Sunday. Kimimasa Mayama/EPA, via ShutterstockThe war in Ukraine has worsened supply chain problems and driven up the prices of oil and other commodities, raising fears of energy shortages in Japan. Coronavirus infections, until recently under control, have started rising again. And in the longer term, an aging population and falling birthrate raise the prospect of labor shortages and problems with caregiving.Mr. Kishida has offered no all-encompassing program to address such challenges. When running for the party leadership, he spoke of a “new capitalism,” but never spelt out what that meant, other than vague rhetoric about reducing inequality.“Kishida could get things done if there are things that he wants to get done,” said Nick Kapur, a historian of modern Japan at Rutgers University. “He has some popularity and he’s going to have a majority, but as we know, there are so many economic headwinds for everyone in the world — dealing with inflation and an emerging markets debt crisis and the war in Ukraine — and maybe that would damage any leader at some point.”Interest in politics has long been low in Japan, where the Liberal Democrats have been in power for virtually all of the postwar period — largely because of ineffective opposition parties, many analysts say. Early indications on Sunday were that turnout would be low, despite the party’s hopes for a surge in sympathy votes.Ayumi Sekizawa, 31, who works for a real estate company in Tokyo, said he had voted for the Liberal Democrats in part to show his support after Mr. Abe’s death. But he said he usually voted for them because there were “no other good parties.”He said that given the aggressive behavior of Russia, China and North Korea, he agreed that Japan needed to improve its defense capabilities.But his main concerns were closer to home. “I’m interested in the economy,” he said. “Wages should be raised, otherwise, virtually, our living standard is declining.”Makiko Inoue More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Next Time Trump Tries to Steal an Election, He Won’t Need a Mob

      by

      Last week, the Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in Moore v. Harper, a challenge to North Carolina’s new congressional map.The long and short of the case is that North Carolina Republicans proposed a gerrymander so egregious that the state Supreme Court ruled that it violated the state’s Constitution. Republicans sought to restore the legislative map, citing the “independent state legislature doctrine,” which asserts that state legislatures have almost absolute power to set their own rules for federal elections. Once passed into law, then, those rules cannot be overturned — or even reviewed — by state courts.A Republican victory at the Supreme Court would, according to the election law expert Rick Hasen, “radically alter the power of state courts to rein in state legislatures that violate voting rights in federal elections. It could essentially neuter the ability of state courts to protect voters under provisions of state constitutions against infringement of their rights.”This radical interpretation of the Elections Clause of the Constitution also extends to the Presidential Electors Clause, such that during a presidential election year, state legislatures could allocate Electoral College votes in any way they see fit, at any point in the process. As I argued earlier this year, we could see Republican-led states pass laws that would allow them to send alternative slates of electors, overruling the will of the voters and doing legally what Donald Trump and his conspirators pressured Republicans in Arizona and Georgia to do illegally. Under the independent state legislature doctrine, the next time Trump tries to overturn the results of an election he lost, he won’t need a mob.There are many problems with this doctrine beyond the outcomes it was engineered to produce. Some are logical — the theory seems to suggest that state legislatures are somehow separate and apart from state constitutions — and some are historical. And among the historical problems is the fact that Americans have never really wanted to entrust their state legislatures with the kind of sweeping electoral powers that this theory would confer.For most of the first 50 years of presidential elections, there was no uniform method for the allocation of electors. In the first truly competitive race for president, the election of 1800, two states used a winner-take-all system where voters cast ballots to pick their electors directly, three states used a system where electors were chosen on a district-by-district basis, 10 states used a system where the legislature simply chose the electors, and one state, Tennessee, used a combination of methods.Methods changed from election to election depending on partisan advantage. Virginia moved from the district system in 1796 to the winner-take-all “general ticket” in 1800 to ensure total support for Thomas Jefferson in his contest against John Adams. In retaliation, Adams’s home state of Massachusetts abandoned district elections for legislative selection, to ensure that he would get all of its electors.This kind of manipulation continued until the mid-1830s, when every state save South Carolina adopted the “general ticket.” (South Carolina would not allow voters to directly choose electors until after the Civil War.)Beginning in 1812, however, you can start to see the public and its elected officials turn against this use of state legislative power.Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party was still in power. James Madison, his longtime friend and political ally, was president. But he, and the war he was now fighting, were unpopular.Most members of Congress had backed Madison’s call for war with Great Britain. But it was a partisan vote with most Republicans in favor and every Federalist opposed.The reasons for war were straightforward. The “conduct of her government,” said Madison in his message to Congress requesting a declaration of war, “presents a series of acts hostile to the United States as an independent and neutral nation.” Among those acts were impressment of American seaman (“thousands of American citizens, under the safeguard of public law and of their national flag, have been torn from their country”) and attacks on American commerce (“British cruisers have been in the practice also of violating the rights and the peace of our coasts.”).In fighting Britain, the administration and its allies hoped to pressure the crown into a more favorable settlement on these maritime issues. They also hoped to conquer Canada and shatter British influence in the parts of North America where it allied with Native tribes to harass American settlers and stymie American expansion.Those hopes crashed into reality, however, as an untrained and inexperienced American militia flailed against British regulars. And as the summer wore on, bringing him closer and closer to the next presidential election, Madison faced defeat abroad and division at home. In New England especially, his Federalist opponents used their hold on local and state offices to obstruct the war effort.“In Hartford,” writes the historian Donald Hickey in “The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict,” “Federalists sought to end loud demonstrations by army recruiters by adopting a pair of city ordinances that restricted public music and parades.” In Boston, “the Massachusetts legislature threatened to sequester federal tax money if militia arms due to the state under an 1808 law were not delivered.”Fearing defeat in the presidential race as a result of this anger and discontent over the war, Republicans did everything they could to secure Madison’s victory. The historian Alexander Keyssar details these shenanigans in the book “Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College?” He notes that,In North Carolina, which had utilized a district system since 1796, the legislature announced that it would choose electors by itself: its majority feared that Madison might lose the state to DeWitt Clinton, who ran with the support of both Federalists and dissident Republicans.On the other side, “the Federalist legislature in New Jersey announced, just days before the election, that it was canceling the scheduled balloting and appointing electors of its own.” And in Massachusetts, the Republican-led senate and Federalist-led lower house could not agree on a method for choosing electors. “In the end,” notes Keyssar, “an extra legislative session had to be convened to save the state from losing its electoral votes altogether.”Madison was re-elected, but according to Keyssar, the attempt on both sides to manipulate the outcome “ignited firestorms of protest and recrimination.” A number of lawmakers would try, in the immediate aftermath and the years that followed, to amend the Constitution to end legislative selection of electors and mandate district-based elections for the Electoral College.District elections, according to one supportive congressman, were best because they fit the “maxim that all legitimate power is derived from the people” and because they would reduce the chance that “a man may be elected to the first office of the nation by a minority of votes of the people.”This concern for democracy (or “popular government”) was a big part of the case for reform. For Senator Mahlon Dickerson of New Jersey, allowing legislators to choose electors without giving voters a say was “the worst possible system” as it “usurped” power from the people and departed from “the spirit if not from the letter of the Constitution.”Even at this early juncture in our nation’s history, many Americans believed in democratic participation and sought to make the institutions of the Republic more receptive to the voice of the people. One supporter of district elections, Representative James Strudwick Smith of North Carolina, put it simply: “You will bring the election near to the people, and, consequently you will make them place more value on the elective franchise, which is all-important in a republican form of Government.”There is a somewhat common view that the counter-majoritarianism of the American system is acceptable because the United States is a “Republic, not a democracy.” That notion lurks behind the idea of the “independent state legislature,” which would empower partisans to limit the right of the people to choose their leaders in a direct and democratic manner.But from the start, Americans have rejected the idea that their system is somehow opposed to more and greater democracy. When institutions seemed to subvert democratic practice, the voters and their representatives pushed back, demanding a government more responsive to their interests, desires and republican aspirations. It is not for nothing that the men who claimed Jefferson as their political and ideological forefather labeled their party “The Democracy.”As Americans recognized then, and as they should recognize now, the Constitution is not a charter for states or state legislatures, it is a charter for people, for our rights and for our right to self-government.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      New York Fights Back on Guns and Abortion After Supreme Court Rulings

      by

      Lawmakers passed measures that would prohibit concealed weapons in many public places, as well as an amendment that would initiate the process of enshrining the right to abortion in the state constitution.A week after the Supreme Court issued monumental rulings loosening restrictions on carrying guns and overturning the constitutional right to abortion, New York enacted sweeping measures designed to blunt the decisions’ effects.In an extraordinary session convened by Gov. Kathy Hochul that began Thursday and carried late into Friday evening, the State Legislature adopted a new law placing significant restrictions on the carrying of handguns and passed an amendment that would initiate the process of enshrining the right to abortion in the state constitution.The new legislation illustrates the growing distance between a conservative-led court that has reasserted its influence in American political life and blue states such as New York — one of the most left-leaning in the nation, where all three branches of government are controlled by Democrats and President Biden easily triumphed over Donald J. Trump in 2020.As Republican-led states race rightward, the New York Legislature’s moves this week provided a preview of an intensifying clash between the court and Democratic states that will likely play out for years to come.“We’re not going backwards,” Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, said at a news conference in Albany on Friday and who later that evening signed the gun bill into law. “They may think they can change our lives with the stroke of a pen, but we have pens, too.”She made remarks on the coming July 4 holiday, asking New Yorkers to remember what was being commemorated: “the founding of a great country that cherished the rights of individuals, freedoms and liberty for all.”“I am standing here to protect freedom and liberty here in the state of New York,” she added.During a special session of the New York State Legislature, lawmakers passed a new bill restricting concealed weapons.Cindy Schultz for The New York TimesThe state’s new gun law bars the carrying of handguns in many public settings such as subways and buses, parks, hospitals, stadiums and day cares. Guns will be off-limits on private property unless the property owner indicates that he or she expressly allows them. At the last minute, lawmakers added Times Square to the list of restricted sites.The law also requires permit applicants to undergo 16 hours of training on the handling of guns and two hours of firing range training, as well as an in-person interview and a written exam. Applicants will also be subject to the scrutiny of local officials, who will retain some discretion in the permitting process.Enshrining the right to abortion in the state’s constitution will be more onerous. Amending the State Constitution is a yearslong process, which starts with passage by the Legislature. Then, after a general election, another session of the Legislature must pass the amendment before it is presented to voters in a ballot referendum.Key Results in New York’s 2022 Primary ElectionsOn June 28, New York held several primaries for statewide office, including for governor and lieutenant governor. Some State Assembly districts also had primaries.Kathy Hochul: With her win in the Democratic, the governor of New York took a crucial step toward winning a full term, fending off a pair of spirited challengers.Antonio Delgado: Ms. Hochul’s second in command and running mate also scored a convincing victory over his nearest Democratic challenger, Ana María Archila.Lee Zeldin: The congressman from Long Island won the Republican primary for governor, advancing to what it’s expected to be a grueling general election.N.Y. State Assembly: Long-tenured incumbents were largely successful in fending off a slate of left-leaning insurgents in the Democratic primary.But lawmakers took a first step on Friday when the legislature passed the Equal Rights Amendment, which along with guaranteeing rights to abortion and access to contraception, prohibited the government from discriminating against anyone based on a list of qualifications including race, ethnicity, national origin, disability or sex — specifically noting sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and pregnancy on the list of protected conditions.Some of the protected classes in the language of the measure appeared to anticipate future rulings from the court, which also indicated last week that it might overturn cases that established the right to same-sex marriage, same-sex consensual relations and contraception.“We’re playing legislative Whac-a-Mole with the Supreme Court,” said Senator Brad Hoylman, a Manhattan Democrat. “Any time they come up with a bad idea we’ll counter it with legislation at the state level.”“Civil liberties are hanging in the balance,” he added.New York Republicans, who have little sway in either legislative chamber, split over the Equal Rights Amendment, with seven voting in favor and 13 against. But they were united in opposition against the concealed carry bill, saying Democrats had tipped the balance much too heavily in favor of restrictions.“Instead of addressing the root of the problem and holding violent criminals accountable, Albany politicians are preventing law-abiding New Yorkers, who have undergone permit classes, background checks and a licensing process from exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” said Robert Ortt, the Republican leader in the Senate, who is from Western New York.The session in Albany took place just a week after the Supreme Court — now fully in the control of right-leaning justices, three of whom were appointed by Mr. Trump — moved forward on a pair of issues that have long animated conservatives.Last Thursday, it struck down New York’s century-old law that was among the strictest in the nation in regulating the public carrying of guns. The decision found that the law, which required that applicants demonstrate that they had a heightened need to carry a firearm in public, was too restrictive and allowed local officials too much discretion. The court invited states to update their laws.The following day, the court overturned Roe v. Wade, stripping Americans of the constitutional right to abortion nearly 50 years after it was first granted.New York will be the first of six states directly affected by the gun ruling to pass a new law restricting the carrying of guns. Similar legislation has been proposed in New Jersey, where a top legislative leader said this week it was possible lawmakers could be called back into session this summer to respond.Officials there have coordinated directly with their counterparts in New York, and the two laws are expected to share many features.Lawmakers in Hawaii have also said that they are working on new firearm legislation, while officials in California, Maryland and Massachusetts are discussing how the court’s decision should be addressed in their states.In an interview, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the Senate majority leader in New York, said that Democratic leaders were adamant that New York “model what state legislatures all over this nation can do to reaffirm the rights of their residents.”The State Senate majority leader, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, center, holds a news conference on Friday during the second day of the special legislative session in Albany.Cindy Schultz for The New York TimesShe defended the new concealed carry restrictions as a common-sense safety measure that balanced Second Amendment interests laid out by the Supreme Court with concerns about legally carrying weapons into sensitive or crowded places, particularly in dense urban areas like New York City already facing a scourge of gun violence.“We didn’t want an open season,” Ms. Stewart-Cousins said. “In the environment that we are in, it is important to make sure that we are creating a process that respects what the Supreme Court has said but allows us to keep New Yorkers as safe as possible.”Republicans disagreed.“If you look at the sensitive areas, it’s the entire state, it’s everywhere,” said State Senator Andrew Lanza, a member of Republican leadership from Staten Island. “So much of New York is now considered a sensitive area for the purpose of this law that there is no such thing as a concealed permit anymore.”Andrew Lanza, center, the deputy minority leader, spoke against the New York State Senate’s gun safety legislation on Friday, saying, “There is no such thing as a concealed permit anymore.”Cindy Schultz for The New York TimesTwo other states, California and Vermont, have also moved closer to placing abortion protections in their constitutions. This week, lawmakers in California advanced a constitutional amendment enshrining the right, and in November, residents of both states will vote on whether to make the amendments law.Republican-led states are charging hard in the other direction. So far, seven have banned abortion since the justices’ decision last week. Another half dozen, including Texas and Tennessee, are expected to quickly follow suit. And voters in states like Kentucky and Kansas will soon decide whether to ban the practice via referendum.By pushing so quickly in New York to respond to both rulings, Ms. Hochul and Democratic legislative leaders have kept the state on a path set by her predecessor, Andrew M. Cuomo, during Mr. Trump’s presidency. Before allegations of sexual misconduct from a number of women led to his resignation, Mr. Cuomo was explicit in juxtaposing his agenda with the priorities of the Republican president, saying in late 2018 that he was declaring New York’s independence.State Senator Michael Gianaris of Queens, the deputy majority leader, said New Yorkers should expect more of the same in the coming years.“The Supreme Court seems intent on destroying this country one decision at a time,” he said in an interview. “Today, we made clear that New York will stand up against this rollback of rights that we’ve come to expect in the United States. You can expect we will continue doing this as the court keeps issuing horrible decisions.”Luis Ferré-Sadurní More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      The Unsettling Warning in France’s Election

      by

      A record number of abstentions, and a strictly binary choice for voters — many of whom said they were picking the lesser of two evils — are trouble signs even within a mature democracy.You should know at least two crucial facts about the French presidential election, whose final round was held last Sunday.The first is that Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate known for her warm relationship with Vladimir Putin and her hostility toward the European Union and immigrants, lost the election — but with the best showing that her party has ever had, carrying 41.5 percent of the second-round vote.The second is that Emmanuel Macron, the incumbent president from the center-right En Marche party, won the election — but with the lowest share of registered voters of any candidate since 1969, because of historically low turnout and high numbers of votes that were cast blank or spoiled in a show of protest.Of those two facts, the first has garnered the most attention. But the second may be more important.Vote, or hostage negotiation?In the first round of the presidential election, Macron came in first, but with nowhere close to a majority. He got barely more than a quarter of the total votes, with 27.85 percent. Le Pen came next with 23.15 percent, and the leftist candidate, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, got 21.95 percent. The rest of the votes were divided between smaller parties.That’s actually pretty common: Today, in many mature democracies, it’s uncommon for any party or ideological faction to get more than about a third of the votes. In the German federal election last year, the center-left party came first, but with only 25.7 percent of the vote — strikingly similar to the numbers for Macron in the first round. In multiparty parliamentary systems, that results in coalition governments in which two or more parties work together — take Germany, again, where a three-party coalition now governs.Ms. Le Pen had a strong showing in both rounds of the 2022 French presidential election.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesBut in direct presidential systems, the winner takes all. And for many voters, that means that elections are less a matter of who they want to support than of who they most want to oppose.So when Le Pen made the second round runoff of the French election, the contest took on the tenor of a hostage negotiation. Macron argued that Le Pen was an existential threat to France, and called for all other candidates’ supporters to unite behind him in order to prevent her from winning the presidency. Mélenchon, the leftist candidate, made a similar plea to his supporters. “We know who we will never vote for,” he said on April 10. “We must not give a single vote for Madame Le Pen.”In the end, enough voters aligned behind Macron to keep the far right out of the presidency. And it seems that many heeded the calls to hold their noses and vote for Macron, despite their aversion to him, in order to protect the country from the far right: According to one poll, about 45 percent of those who voted for him did so only to oppose Le Pen.But the same poll found that the opposite was also true: About 45 percent of Le Pen voters were more interested in opposing Macron than in supporting the far right. Other data bears that out: The overseas French territories Martinique and Guadeloupe supported Mélenchon in the first round, but then gave a majority to Le Pen in the second.Others withdrew entirely. Abstentions and blank ballots hit record highs in this election — a notable development in France, where turnout has historically been around 80 percent.A warning from historyExperts who study France’s history of revolutions and democratic collapse see signs of danger in a system that pushes a wide spectrum of voters into a binary choice between what some see as the lesser of two evils.So how do you tell the difference between normal political anger that can work itself out through a series of elections without leading to serious instability, and something dangerous enough to require structural change to the system itself?A woman voting at a polling station in Saint Denis, in the suburbs of Paris. The election saw a high level of voter abstentions.Andrea Mantovani for The New York Times“That’s the question of French history, right?” Terrence Peterson, a political historian at Florida International University, told me. “Historians have been asking that question about France for a long time, given its history of repeated revolutions.”He saw particular cause for concern in the rising levels of abstentions. “When voters express that they feel disenfranchised, if a majority of them do, then that’s a clear sign” of serious trouble, he said.Some in France have begun to call for an overhaul of the Constitution to make the system more representative. Mélenchon has called for a new Constitution to be drafted via a people’s constituent assembly. In an editorial last week in the French newspaper Le Monde, Frederic Sawicki, a political scientist at Pantheon-Sorbonne University, argued that the lack of proportional representation had brought the far right “to the gates of power” in France.Camille Robcis, a Columbia University historian who studies 20th-century French politics and institutions, said that she was not surprised to hear such calls. “You have a kind of disconnect between the representatives and the popular vote, the electorate,” she said. “The result is that these disenchanted, disenfranchised voters are moving to the extremes.”How am I doing?I’d love your feedback on this newsletter. Please email thoughts and suggestions to interpreter@nytimes.com. You can also follow me on Twitter.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Chile President-Elect Gabriel Boric Faces Challenge on Constitution

      by

      “Today, hope triumphed over fear,” declared Chile’s new president-elect, Gabriel Boric, a leftist lawmaker and former student activist, in a speech Sunday celebrating his victory over far-right rival José Antonio Kast.The refrain took on a life of its own, and all week Chileans, on social media and on the streets, repeated it, if only to serve as a reminder that fear-mongering and polarization should have no place in electoral politics.But hope alone will only get Mr. Boric so far. The 35-year-old leader immediately faces the challenge of helping those struggling in a Covid economy, including older Chileans crushed by meager or no pension benefits. But the biggest test of his presidency, the one that will not only cement his place in Chilean history but define society in a post-dictatorship nation, will be his leadership ahead of a referendum next year on a new Constitution that would enshrine rights and values for a more equal, inclusive nation and break with the charter birthed under Augusto Pinochet.In 2020, Chileans voted overwhelmingly to leave the old text behind, and less than a year later, they selected 155 drafters to write the new one. But weariness from the pandemic, funding controversies, and frictions over procedure and substance inside the constitutional convention — the body tasked with drafting the charter — could easily erode its public support. And if those are the challenges now, there’s no telling what challenges lie ahead once the framers approve the text of the new Constitution and it is up to the citizenry to debate and ratify it. A torrent of fake news around the constitutional process shows that bad actors are hard at work seeking to delegitimize it.Any misstep in the process could undermine the credibility of a new Constitution — and provide fodder for supporters of the old order, including figures like Mr. Kast, to rally around rejecting it.This is do-or-die for Mr. Boric.With history as a guide, Mr. Boric starts off with reason to hope that Chilean society, at a pivotal moment for its democratic project, will choose wisely. Mr. Boric was only 2 years old when Chileans, in a historic plebiscite in 1988, rejected the military rule of Mr. Pinochet, setting Chile on a path to democracy and self-determination. Then, nearly 56 percent of voters said no to the dictator’s brutal regime, opening the door to a modern era of democracy and institutional growing pains.More than 30 years later, by a similar margin, Mr. Boric’s message of hope and change prevailed over Mr. Kast’s dire warnings that Chile was on the precipice of abandoning this political and economic model, and descending into Communism. Fifty-six percent of the Chilean electorate rejected that message and voted for Mr. Boric, making him the youngest president to reach La Moneda, Chile’s presidential palace, and the candidate to receive the highest number of votes in a presidential contest in the nation’s history. Turnout likewise shattered records. Mr. Boric’s mandate is clear.Yet the president-elect, for all his youthful energy and commitment to dignity, equality and the internment of neoliberalism, is keenly aware he’ll need more than just rhetoric to govern and make a reality the social promises that propelled him to power. In his same acceptance speech on Sunday, Mr. Boric was candid in his assessment that the future of his campaign promises — among them access to quality health care for all and overhauling Chile’s privatized pension system — will require consensus, meeting others in the middle, and taking “short but steady steps” in the face of a closely divided national Congress.This is not the discourse of a onetime student leader who cut his teeth organizing marches for better public education and, in the process, found himself in the cross hairs of President Sebastián Piñera’s first administration nearly a decade ago. Mr. Boric’s newfound pragmatism is a promising early sign for the constitutional process, as the approach holds appeal for those voters who are neither highly progressive like him nor far-right sympathizers like Mr. Kast. But as he juggles forming a cabinet and leading a government on one hand, he will also need to blend intellectual rigor, communications skills, and a solemn urgency about future milestones in the constitutional process on the other. Nothing can be left to chance — and every person in his team, no matter their role, must make the new Constitution their true north in everything they do.Mr. Boric has no room for error in this constitutional moment. After the social protests that rocked and nearly broke Chile in October 2019, he was a key signatory to the document that set in motion the process toward Chile’s new founding charter. Mr. Boric broke from his own party, and risked his own political future, when he took that visionary step.In the presidential seat, Mr. Boric will have to walk the fine line of championing the new Constitution — which could inevitably circumscribe his own power — and not alienating that part of the electorate that doesn’t share the progressive values of the drafting committee members who themselves are still debating key provisions. These include the enumeration of fundamental rights, the role of government in protecting them, and the state’s responsibilities to Indigenous peoples, political minorities and the environment.All of these issues can be highly divisive. And they explain why Mr. Boric, during his victory speech, urged all Chileans to guard the constitutional process. The new Constitution, he said, must be one of encuentro — a meeting place where all Chileans agree on fundamental values and agree to disagree on everything else.Setting this constitutional project on a firm foundation — or to a “safe harbor,” as he put it on Tuesday — is the key to Mr. Boric’s political legacy. His greatest challenge, beyond making it past his honeymoon with voters and responding to specific demands, will be to show that he’s the president of not just the here and now, but also of Chile’s imminent next founding — the first chief executive who’ll chart the nation’s future course based on the first charter ever written by Chileans themselves.Cristian Farias (@cristianafarias) is a Chilean-American journalist who writes about law, justice, and politics.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Gabriel Boric será el presidente más joven de Chile

      by

      Los milénials jugarán un papel importante para ayudar a dar forma a un nuevo marco legal para una nación sacudida por la agitación social.SANTIAGO — Los chilenos eligieron el domingo a Gabriel Boric como su próximo presidente, y confiaron en el joven diputado de izquierda para que ayude a definir el futuro de una nación que ha sido sacudida por protestas y en este momento se encuentra en proceso de escribir una nueva Constitución.Con 35 años, Boric será el líder más joven de la nación y, con mucho, el político más progresista desde que llegó al poder el presidente Salvador Allende, quien se suicidó durante el golpe militar de 1973 que marcó el comienzo de una brutal dictadura que se prolongó por 17 años.Asumirá el cargo en la etapa final de una asamblea para redactar una nueva Constitución, un esfuerzo que debe durar un año y que probablemente genere cambios legales y políticos profundos en temas que incluyen la igualdad de género, los derechos de las comunidades indígenas y la protección del medioambiente.Boric aprovechó el descontento generalizado con las facciones políticas que se han alternado el poder en las últimas décadas y obtuvo el apoyo de los votantes al prometer reducir la desigualdad y aumentar los impuestos a los ricos para financiar una expansión sustancial de la red de seguridad social, pensiones más generosas y una economía más limpia.El presidente electo derrotó a José Antonio Kast, un exdiputado de extrema derecha que buscaba retratar a Boric como un comunista radical que destrozaría una de las economías más sólidas de la región. La coalición de Boric incluye al Partido Comunista.Kast concedió la derrota al anunciar que había llamado a Boric para felicitarlo.“Desde hoy es el presidente electo de Chile y merece todo nuestro respeto y colaboración constructiva”, Kast escribió en Twitter.Con más del 98 por ciento de los votos contados, Boric había ganado más del 55 por ciento de los votos y Kast tenía el 44 por ciento. El margen sorprendió a los analistas políticos porque encuestas recientes sugirieron que la contienda estaba más reñida.“Voy a dar lo mejor de mí para estar a la altura de este tremendo desafío”, dijo Boric durante una videollamada televisada con el presidente saliente, Sebastián Piñera, quien siguió la tradición en la política chilena.Boric también dijo que esperaba unir a la nación después de una elección muy disputada. “Voy a ser el presidente de todos los chilenos y chilenas”.Piñera dijo que estaba contento de que “la democracia cumplió y los chilenos han dado un nuevo ejemplo de democracia, usted fue parte de eso”.Los jubilosos partidarios de Boric salieron a las calles el domingo por la noche en varias ciudades de Chile. Muchos agitaron la bandera nacional y corearon eslóganes de campaña mientras se pasaban botellas de champán.Dirigiéndose a sus partidarios desde un escenario en una plaza abarrotada de Santiago a última hora de la noche, Boric dijo que pretendía unir a la nación y poner en marcha cambios estructurales para hacer que Chile fuera más igualitario. “Hoy día la esperanza le ganó al miedo”, dijo.Una celebración de partidarios de Gabriel Boric tras las elecciones presidenciales en Santiago el domingo.Rodrigo Garrido/ReutersFue la contienda más polarizada y enconada en la historia reciente y planteaba a los chilenos visiones marcadamente diferentes sobre temas que incluyen el papel del Estado en la economía, los derechos de comunidades históricamente marginadas y la seguridad pública.Y lo que estaba en juego era más sensible que en otras elecciones presidenciales: el presidente entrante apoya encaminar profundamente el esfuerzo por reemplazar la Constitución de Chile, impuesta en 1980, cuando el país estaba bajo un régimen militar. El año pasado, los chilenos votaron de manera abrumadora a favor de redactar una nueva carta magna.Boric, líder de la coalición de izquierda Frente Amplio, ha sido un firme partidario del impulso para actualizar el documento, una petición que ganó arrastre después de una ola de protestas a fines de 2019 originada por la desigualdad, el alto costo de vida y la economía de libre mercado del país.En cambio, Kast lanzó una campaña vigorosa contra la creación de una convención constitucional, cuyos integrantes fueron elegidos en mayo. El organismo está redactando una nueva constitución que los ciudadanos aprobarán o rechazarán en una votación directa en septiembre.Los constituyentes de la convención consideraron el ascenso de Kast una amenaza existencial para sus esfuerzos, y temían que pudiera reunir los recursos y la tribuna presidencial para convencer a los votantes de rechazar una nueva constitución.“Son muchas las cosas en juego”, dijo Patricia Politzer, constituyente de la convención por Santiago. “El poder de un presidente es grande y tiene todo el poder del Estado para hacer campaña contra la nueva Constitución”.Kast y Boric se enfrentaron con fuerza durante los últimos días de la carrera presidencial, y ambos presentaron la posibilidad de su derrota como una catástrofe para la nación sudamericana de 19 millones de personas.Boric se llegó a referir a su contrincante como un fascista y atacó varios de sus proyectos, que incluían ampliar el sistema penitenciario y empoderar a las fuerzas de seguridad para tomar medidas enérgicas contra los desafíos indígenas a los derechos territoriales en el sur del país.Kast planteó a los votantes que una presidencia de Boric destruiría los cimientos de la economía de Chile y probablemente pondría a la nación en el camino de convertirse en un Estado fallido como Venezuela.José Antonio Kast había prometido tomar medidas enérgicas contra el crimen y los disturbios civiles. Se opuso a la iniciativa de reescribir la Constitución de Chile.Mauro Pimentel/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“Esta ha sido una campaña como nunca antes enfocada en el miedo”, dijo Claudia Heiss, profesora de ciencias políticas en la Universidad de Chile. “Eso puede ser un daño a largo plazo porque deteriora el clima político”.Boric y Kast tuvieron tracción entre los votantes que se habían cansado de las facciones políticas de centroizquierda y centroderecha que han llegado el poder en Chile en las últimas décadas. En los últimos dos años, el presidente saliente, el conservador Sebastián Piñera, ha caído en los índices de aprobación hasta llegar por debajo del 20 por ciento.Boric se inició en la política como un organizador destacado de las grandes manifestaciones estudiantiles de 2011 que convencieron al gobierno de garantizar la educación gratuita a los estudiantes de bajos ingresos. Fue elegido a la Cámara de Diputados por primera vez en 2014.Nacido en Punta Arenas, la provincia más austral de Chile, una de las principales promesas de la campaña de Boric fue tomar medidas audaces para frenar el calentamiento global. Esto incluyó una propuesta políticamente arriesgada: aumentar los impuestos sobre el combustible.Boric, quien tiene tatuajes y no le gusta usar corbatas, se aparta del molde tradicional de los candidatos presidenciales. También ha hablado de manera pública sobre haber sido diagnosticado con trastorno obsesivo-compulsivo, una condición por la que estuvo hospitalizado brevemente en 2018.A raíz de las protestas callejeras, que en ocasiones fueron violentas, y la agitación política provocada por un aumento en las tarifas del metro en octubre de 2019, prometió convertir una letanía de quejas que se habían ido acumulando durante generaciones en un examen de las políticas públicas. Boric dijo que era necesario aumentar los impuestos a las corporaciones y a los ultrarricos para ensanchar la red de seguridad social y crear una sociedad más igualitaria.“Hoy, hay muchas personas mayores que están trabajando hasta la muerte después de haberse descrestado el lomo durante toda su vida”, dijo durante el debate final de la carrera, prometiendo crear un sistema de pensiones más generoso. “Eso es injusto”.Partidarios de Boric se reunieron en la capital el 16 de diciembre.Marcelo Hernandez/Getty ImagesKast, hijo de inmigrantes alemanes, fue diputado federal de 2002 a 2018. Padre de nueve hijos, se ha opuesto abiertamente al aborto y al matrimonio igualitario. Su perfil nacional se elevó durante las elecciones presidenciales de 2017, cuando obtuvo casi el 8 por ciento de los votos.Kast dijo que la propuesta de expansión del gasto de su contrincante era imprudente y aseguró que lo que Chile necesitaba era un Estado mucho más reducido y eficiente. También advirtió que elegir a su rival profundizaría los disturbios y avivaría la violencia.Kast planteó una advertencia sobre la “pobreza que ha arrastrado a Venezuela, Nicaragua y Cuba”. “Las personas huyen de ahí, porque esa narcodictadura solo trae pobreza y miseria”, dijo.Antonia Vera, una estudiante recién graduada de la secundaria que hizo campaña a favor de Boric, dijo que consideraba que elegirlo era el único medio para convertir en realidad un movimiento de base a favor de una nación más justa y próspera.“Cuando habla de esperanza, habla sobre el futuro a largo plazo y tiene que ver con un movimiento que se empezó a gestar hace muchos años y que explotó en 2019”, dijo.El nuevo presidente tendrá dificultades para llevar a cabo cambios radicales a corto plazo, dijo Claudio Fuentes, profesor de ciencias políticas en la Universidad Diego Portales en Santiago, y señaló que el Congreso entrante está dividido en partes iguales.“Se trata de un escenario donde será más difícil avanzar reformas”, dijo.Ernesto Londoño es el jefe del buró de Brasil, con sede en Río de Janeiro. Anteriormente fue parte del Consejo Editorial del Times y, antes de unirse al diario en 2014, trabajó para The Washington Post. @londonoe • FacebookPascale Bonnefoy More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Voting for President, Chile Faces Stark Choice, With Constitution at Stake

      by

      The presidential race is being contested by a millennial leftist who would be the nation’s youngest leader and a far-right politician who has promised to restore order and security.SANTIAGO, Chile — Chileans faced a stark choice between left and right on Sunday as they began voting in a presidential election that has the potential to make or break the effort to draft a new constitution.The race was the nation’s most polarizing and acrimonious in recent history, presenting Chileans with sharply different visions on a range of issues, including the role of the state in the economy, pension reform, the rights of historically marginalized groups and public safety.José Antonio Kast, 55, a far-right former lawmaker who has promised to crack down on crime and civil unrest, faces Gabriel Boric, 35, a leftist legislator who proposes raising taxes to combat entrenched inequality.The stakes are higher than in most recent presidential contests because Chile is at a critical political crossroads. The incoming president stands to profoundly shape the effort to replace Chile’s Constitution, imposed in 1980 when the country was under military rule. Chileans voted overwhelmingly last year to draft a new one.Mr. Boric, leader of the leftist coalition Frente Amplio, has been a staunch supporter of the push to update the charter, which was set in motion by a wave of protests in late 2019 over inequality, the cost of living and Chile’s free market economy.Gabriel Boric has promised to take bold steps to combat global warming, including the politically risky proposal to raise taxes on fuel.Martin Bernetti/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIn contrast, Mr. Kast campaigned vigorously against establishing a constitutional convention, whose members Chileans elected in May. The body is tasked with drafting a new charter that voters will approve or reject in a direct vote next September.Members of the convention see Mr. Kast’s rise as an existential threat to their work, fearing he could marshal the resources and the bully pulpit of the presidency to persuade voters to reject the revised constitution.“There’s so much at stake,” said Patricia Politzer, a member of the convention from Santiago. “The president has enormous power and he could use the full backing of the state to campaign against the new constitution.”Mr. Kast and Mr. Boric clashed forcefully during the final days of the race, each presenting the prospect of his loss as a catastrophe foretold for the South American nation of 19 million people. Recent polls have suggested Mr. Boric has a slight edge, although Mr. Kast won the most votes during the first round of voting last month.Mr. Boric has referred to his rival as a fascist and has assailed several of his plans, which include expanding the prison system and empowering the security forces to more forcefully crack down on Indigenous challenges to land rights in the south of the country.Mr. Kast has told voters a Boric presidency would destroy the foundation that has made Chile’s economy one of the best performing in the region and would likely put the nation on a path toward becoming a failed state like Venezuela.Antonio Kast has vowed to crack down on crime and civil unrest. He opposed the initiative to rewrite the constitution.Mauro Pimentel/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“This has been a campaign dominated by fear, to a degree we’ve never seen before,” said Claudia Heiss, a political science professor at the University of Chile. “That can do damage in the long run because it deteriorates the political climate.”Mr. Boric and Mr. Kast each found traction with voters who had become fed up with the center-left and center-right political factions that have traded power in Chile in recent decades. The conservative incumbent, Sebastián Piñera, has seen his approval ratings plummet below 20 percent over the past two years.Mr. Boric got his start in politics as a prominent organizer of the large student demonstrations in 2011 that persuaded the government to grant low-income students tuition-free education. He was first elected to congress in 2014.A native of Punta Arenas, Chile’s southernmost province, Mr. Boric made taking bold steps to curb global warming a core promise of his campaign. This included a politically risky proposal to raise taxes on fuel.Mr. Boric, who has tattoos and dislikes wearing ties, has spoken publicly about being diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder, a condition for which he was briefly hospitalized in 2018.In the wake of the sometimes violent street protests and political turmoil set off by a hike in subway fares in October 2019, he vowed to turn a litany of grievances that had been building over generations into an overhaul of public policy. Mr. Boric said it was necessary to raise taxes on corporations and the ultrarich in order to expand the social safety net and create a more egalitarian society.“Today, many older people are working themselves to death after backbreaking labor all their lives,” he said during the race’s final debate, promising to create a system of more generous pensions. “That is unfair.”Supporters of Mr. Boric in Santiago, Chile, on Thursday.Marcelo Hernandez/Getty ImagesMr. Kast, the son of German immigrants, served as a federal lawmaker from 2002 to 2018. A father of nine, he has been a vocal opponent of abortion and same-sex marriage. His national profile rose during the 2017 presidential race, when he won nearly 8 percent of the vote.Mr. Kast has called his rival’s proposed expansion of spending reckless, saying what Chile needs is a far leaner, more efficient state rather than an expanded support system. During his campaign’s closing speech on Thursday, Mr. Kast warned that electing his rival would deepen unrest and stoke violence.Mr. Kast invoked the “poverty that has dragged down Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba” as a cautionary tale. “People flee from there because dictatorship, narco-dictatorship, only brings poverty and misery,” he said.That message, a throwback to Cold War language, has found resonance among voters like Claudio Bruce, 55, who lost his job during the pandemic.“In Chile we can’t afford to fall into those types of political regimes because it would be very difficult to bounce back from that,” he said. “We’re at a very dangerous crossroads for our children, for our future.”Supporters of Mr. Kast in Santiago on Thursday at his closing campaign rally.Mauro Pimentel/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAntonia Vera, a recent high school graduate who has been campaigning for Mr. Boric, said she saw electing him as the only means to turn a grass-roots movement for a fairer, more prosperous nation into reality.“When he speaks about hope, he’s speaking about the long-term future, a movement that started brewing many years ago and exploded in 2019,” she said.The new president will struggle to carry out sweeping changes any time soon, said Claudio Fuentes, a political science professor at Diego Portales University in Santiago, noting the evenly divided incoming congress.“The probability of making good on their campaign plans is low,” he said. “It’s a scenario in which it will be hard to push reforms through.”Pascale Bonnefoy More