Referendums

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Kansas Votes to Preserve Abortion Rights Protections in Its Constitution

      by

      OVERLAND PARK, Kan. — Kansas voters resoundingly decided against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution, according to The Associated Press, a major victory for the abortion rights movement in one of America’s reliably conservative states.The defeat of the ballot referendum was the most tangible demonstration yet of a political backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that had protected abortion rights throughout the country. The decisive margin came as a surprise, and after frenzied campaigns with both sides pouring millions into advertising and knocking on doors throughout a sweltering final campaign stretch.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” said Rachel Sweet, the campaign manager for Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, which led the effort to defeat the amendment.told supporters that a willingness to work across partisan lines and ideological differences helped their side win.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” Ms. Sweet said.At a campaign watch party in suburban Overland Park, abortion rights supporters yelled with joy when MSNBC showed their side with a commanding lead.“We’re watching the votes come in, we’re seeing the changes of some of the counties where Donald Trump had a huge percentage of the vote, and we’re seeing that just decimated,” said Jo Dee Adelung, 63, a Democrat from Merriam, Kan., who knocked on doors and called voters in recent weeks.She said she hoped the result sent a message that voters are “really taking a look at all of the issues and doing what’s right for Kansas and not just going down party lines.”The vote in Kansas, three months before the midterm elections, was the first time American voters weighed in directly on the issue of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade this summer. The referendum, watched closely by national figures on both sides of the abortion debate, took on added importance because of Kansas’ location, abutting states where abortion is already banned in nearly all cases. More than $12 million has been spent on advertising, split about evenly between the two camps. The amendment, had it passed, would have removed abortion protections from the State Constitution and paved the way for legislators to ban or restrict abortions.“We’ve been saying that after a decision is made in Washington, that the spotlight would shift to Kansas,” said David Langford, a retired engineer from Leawood, Kan., who wants the amendment to pass, and who reached out to Protestant pastors to rally support.The push for an amendment was rooted in a 2019 ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that struck down some abortion restrictions and found that the right to an abortion was guaranteed by the State Constitution. That decision infuriated Republicans, who had spent years passing abortion restrictions and campaigning on the issue. They used their supermajorities in the Legislature last year to place the issue on the 2022 ballot.That state-level fight over abortion limits took on far greater meaning after the nation’s top court overturned Roe, opening the door in June for states to go beyond restrictions and outlaw abortions entirely. The Roman Catholic Church and other religious and conservative groups spent heavily to back the amendment, while national supporters of abortion rights poured millions of dollars into the race to oppose it.Canvassers supporting Amendment 2 left literature at a resident’s door last week in Olathe, Kan.Chase Castor for The New York TimesSupporters of the amendment have said repeatedly that the amendment itself would not ban abortion, and Republican lawmakers have been careful to avoid telegraphing what their legislative plans would be if it passed.“Voting yes doesn’t mean that abortion won’t be allowed, it means we’re going to allow our legislators to determine the scope of abortion,” said Mary Jane Muchow of Overland Park, Kan., who supported the amendment. “I think abortion should be legal, but I think there should be limitations on it.”If the amendment had passed, though, the question was not whether Republicans would try to wield their commanding legislative majorities to pass new restrictions, but how far they would go in doing so. Many Kansans who support abortion rights said they feared that a total or near-total abortion ban would be passed within monthsAbortion is now legal in Kansas up to 22 weeks of pregnancy.“I don’t want to become another state that bans all abortion for any reason,” said Barbara Grigar of Overland Park, Kan., who identified herself as a moderate and said she was voting against the amendment. “Choice is every woman’s choice, and not the government’s.”A Pew Research Center survey published last month found that a majority of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and that more than half of adults disapproved of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe.Kansas has been a focal point of the national abortion debate at least since 1991, when protesters from across the country gathered in Wichita and blocked access to clinics during weeks of heated demonstrations that they called the Summer of Mercy.At times, the state has seen violence over the issue. In 1986, a Wichita abortion clinic was attacked with a pipe bomb. In 1993, a woman who opposed abortion shot and injured Dr. George Tiller, one of only a few American physicians who performed late-term abortions. In 2009, another anti-abortion activist shot and killed Dr. Tiller at his Wichita church.In recent years, and especially in the weeks since Roe fell, Kansas has become a haven of abortion access in a region where that is increasingly rare.Even before the Supreme Court’s action, nearly half of the abortions performed in Kansas involved out-of-state residents. Now Oklahoma and Missouri have banned the procedure in almost all cases, Nebraska may further restrict abortion in the next few months, and women from Arkansas and Texas, where new bans are in place, are traveling well beyond their states’ borders.Kansas is reliably Republican in presidential elections, and its voters are generally conservative on many issues, but polling before the referendum suggested a close race and nuanced public opinions on abortion. The state is not a political monolith: Besides its Democratic governor, a majority of Kansas Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democrats, and Representative Sharice Davids, a Democrat, represents the Kansas City suburbs in Congress.Representative Sharice Davids speaks at an election watch party hosted by Kansans for Constitutional Freedom in Overland Park, Kansas.Arin Yoon for The New York TimesMs. Davids’s district was once a moderate Republican stronghold, but it has been trending toward Democrats in recent years. Her re-election contest in November in a redrawn district may be one of the most competitive House races in the country, and party strategists expect the abortion debate to play an important role in districts like hers that include swaths of upscale suburbs.Political strategists have been particularly attuned to turnout in the Kansas City suburbs, and are seeking to gauge how galvanizing abortion is, especially for swing voters and Democrats in a post-Roe environment.“They’re going to see how to advise their candidates to talk about the issue, they’re going to be looking at every political handicap,” said James Carville, the veteran Democratic strategist. “Every campaign consultant, everybody is watching this thing like it’s the Super Bowl.”As the election approached, and especially since the Supreme Court decision, rhetoric on the issue became more heated. Campaign signs on both sides have been vandalized, police officials and activists have said. In the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, vandals targeted a Catholic church, defacing a building and a statue of Mary with red paint.Before the vote on Tuesday, which coincided with primary elections, Scott Schwab, the Republican secretary of state, predicted that around 36 percent of Kansas voters would participate, up slightly from the primary in 2020, a presidential election year. His office said that the constitutional amendment “has increased voter interest in the election,” a sentiment that was palpable on the ground.“I like the women’s rights,” said Norma Hamilton, a 90-year-old Republican from Lenexa, Kan. Despite her party registration, she said, she voted no. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How the Kremlin Is Forcing Ukrainians to Adopt Russian Life

      by

      In Russian-occupied regions in Ukraine, local leaders are forcing civilians to accept Russian rule. Next come sham elections that would formalize Vladimir V. Putin’s claim that they are Russian territories.They have handed out Russian passports, cellphone numbers and set-top boxes for watching Russian television. They have replaced Ukrainian currency with the ruble, rerouted the internet through Russian servers and arrested hundreds who have resisted assimilation.In ways big and small, the occupying authorities on territory seized by Moscow’s forces are using fear and indoctrination to compel Ukrainians to adopt a Russian way of life. “We are one people,” blue-white-and-red billboards say. “We are with Russia.”Now comes the next act in President Vladimir V. Putin’s 21st-century version of a war of conquest: the grass-roots “referendum.”Russia-appointed administrators in towns, villages and cities like Kherson in Ukraine’s south are setting the stage for a vote as early as September that the Kremlin will present as a popular desire in the region to become part of Russia. They are recruiting pro-Russia locals for new “election commissions” and promoting to Ukrainian civilians the putative benefits of joining their country; they are even reportedly printing the ballots already.Any referendum would be totally illegitimate, Ukrainian and Western officials say, but it would carry ominous consequences. Analysts both in Moscow and Ukraine expect that it would serve as a prelude to Mr. Putin’s officially declaring the conquered area to be Russian territory, protected by Russian nuclear weapons — making future attempts by Kyiv to drive out Russian forces potentially much more costly.Annexation would also represent Europe’s biggest territorial expansion by force since World War II, affecting an area several times larger than Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula that Mr. Putin took over in 2014.In a photograph taken during a visit organized by the Russian military, a woman applied for Russian citizenship and a Russian passport in July in Melitopol, Ukraine.Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA, via ShutterstockThe prospect of another annexation has affected the military timetable as well, putting pressure on Kyiv to try a risky counteroffensive sooner, rather than waiting for more long-range Western weapons to arrive that would raise the chances of success.“Carrying out a referendum is not hard at all,” Vladimir Konstantinov, the speaker of the Russian-imposed Crimean Parliament, said in a phone interview this week. “They will ask: ‘Take us under your guardianship, under your development, under your security.’”Mr. Konstantinov, a longtime pro-Russia politician in Crimea, sat next to Mr. Putin at the Kremlin when the Russian president signed the document annexing the peninsula to Russia. He also helped organize the Crimean “referendum” in which 97 percent voted in favor of joining Russia — a result widely rejected by the international community as a sham.Our Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine WarGrain Blockade: A breakthrough deal aims to lift a Russian blockade on Ukrainian grain shipments. But Ukrainian farmers who have been living under the risk of missile attacks are skeptical the agreement will hold.In the South: As Ukraine lays the groundwork for a counteroffensive to retake Kherson, Russia is racing to bolster its troops in the region.Economic Havoc: As food, energy and commodity prices continue to climb around the world, few countries are feeling the bite as much as Ukraine.Explosion at a Prison: A blast at a Russian-held prison in eastern Ukraine killed at least 50 captured Ukrainian fighters. With no clarity on what happened, each country is blaming the other.Now, Mr. Konstantinov said, he is in constant touch with the Russian-imposed occupying authorities in the neighboring Kherson region, which Russian troops captured early in the war. He said that the authorities had told him a few days ago that they had started printing ballots, with the aim of holding a vote in September.Kherson is one of four regions in which officials are signaling planned referendums, along with Zaporizhzhia in the south and Luhansk and Donetsk in the east. While the Kremlin claims it will be up to the area’s residents to “determine their own future,” Mr. Putin last month hinted he expected to annex the regions outright: he compared the war in Ukraine with Peter the Great’s wars of conquest in the 18th century and said that, like the Russian czar, “it has also fallen to us to return” lost Russian territory.At the same time, the Kremlin appears to be keeping its options open by offering few specifics. Aleksei Chesnakov, a Moscow political consultant who has advised the Kremlin on Ukraine policy, said Moscow viewed referendums on joining Russia as its “base scenario” — though preparations for a potential vote were not yet complete. He declined to say whether he was involved in the process himself.Ukrainian troops fired on a Russian target last month in the Donetsk region.Tyler Hicks/The New York Times“The referendum scenario looks to be realistic and the priority in the absence of signals from Kyiv about readiness for negotiations on a settlement,” Mr. Chesnakov said in a written response to questions. “The legal and political vacuum, of course, needs to be filled.”As a result, a scramble to mobilize the residents of Russian-occupied territories for a referendum is increasingly visible on the ground — portrayed as the initiative of local leaders.The Russian-appointed authorities of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, for instance, announced this week that they were forming “election commissions” to prepare for referendums, which one official said could happen on Sept. 11 — a day when local and regional elections are scheduled to be held across Russia.The announcement invited residents to apply to join the election commission by submitting a passport copy, education records and two I.D.-size photographs.Officials are accompanying preparations for a vote with an intensified propaganda campaign — priming both the area’s residents as well as the domestic audience in Russia for a looming annexation. A new pro-Russian newspaper in the Zaporizhzhia region titled its second issue last week with the headline: “The referendum will be!” On the marquee weekly news show on Russian state television last Sunday, a report promised that “everything is being done to ensure that Kherson returns to its historical homeland as soon as possible.”“Russia is beginning to roll out a version of what you could call an annexation playbook,” John Kirby, the spokesman for the U.S. National Security Council, said this month, comparing the referendum preparations with the Kremlin’s moves in 2014 to try to justify its annexation of Crimea. “Annexation by force will be a gross violation of the U.N. Charter and we will not allow it to go unchallenged or unpunished.”In Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, officials say any referendum on merging with Russia or forming a Russian client state in occupied areas would be illegal, riddled with fraud and do nothing to legitimize land seizures.“Together With Russia,” a billboard proclaimed in Crimea before a 2014 referendum on joining the Russian Federation, which was widely rejected by the West as a sham.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesFor Ukrainian civilians, the occupation has been accompanied by myriad hardships, including shortages of cash and medicine — a situation the Russians try to exploit to win allegiance from locals by distributing “humanitarian aid.”Those seeking a sense of normalcy are being incentivized to apply for a Russian passport, which is now required for things like registering a motor vehicle or certain types of businesses; newborns and orphans are automatically registered as Russian citizens.“There’s no money in Kherson, there’s no work in Kherson,” said Andrei, 33, who worked in the service department of a car dealership in the city before the war. He left his home in the city with his wife and small child in early July and moved to western Ukraine.“Kherson has returned to the 1990s when only vodka, beer and cigarettes were for sale,” he said.After taking control in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, Russian forces sought out pro-Kremlin Ukrainian officials and installed them in government positions.At the same time, they engaged in a continuing campaign to stifle dissent that included abducting, torturing and executing political and cultural leaders who were deemed a threat, according to witnesses interviewed by The New York Times, Western and Ukrainian officials, and independent humanitarian groups like Human Rights Watch.Russian occupiers cut off access to Ukrainian cellular service, and limited the availability of YouTube and a popular messaging app, Viber. They introduced the ruble and started changing the school curriculum to the Russian one — which increasingly seeks to indoctrinate children with Mr. Putin’s worldview.A top priority appears to have been to get locals watching Russian television: Russian state broadcasting employees in Crimea were deployed to Kherson to start a news show called “Kherson and Zaporizhzhia 24,” and set-top boxes giving access to the Russian airwaves were distributed for free — or even delivered to residents not able to pick them up in person.Ihor Kolykhaiev, the mayor of Kherson, at his office in April 2021.Brendan Hoffman for The New York TimesIn an interview late last month, Ihor Kolykhaiev, the mayor of the city of Kherson since 2020, said the Russian propaganda, coupled with the feeling of being abandoned by the government in Kyiv, was slowly succeeding in changing the perceptions of some residents who have stayed behind — mainly pensioners and people with low incomes.“I think that something is changing in relationships, probably in people’s habits,” he said, estimating that 5 to 10 percent of his constituents had changed their mind because of the propaganda.“This is an irreversible process that will happen in the future,” he added. “And that’s what I’m really worried about. Then it will be almost impossible to restore it.”Mr. Kolykhaiev spoke in a video interview from a makeshift office in Kherson. Days later, his assistant announced he had been abducted by pro-Russian occupying forces. As of Friday, he had not been heard from.Mr. Putin has referred to Kherson and other parts of Ukraine’s southeast as Novorossiya, or New Russia — the region’s name after it was conquered by Catherine the Great in the 18th century and became part of the Russian Empire. In recent years, nostalgia in the region for the Soviet past and skepticism of the pro-Western government in Kyiv still lingered among older generations, even as the region was forging a new Ukrainian identity.Ukrainian flags and a banner that reads, “Kherson is Ukraine,” during a rally in March against Russian occupation in Kherson.Olexandr Chornyi/Associated PressEarly in the occupation this spring, residents of Kherson gathered repeatedly for large, boisterous protests to challenge Russian troops even if they provoked gunfire in response. This open confrontation has largely ended, according to a 30-year-old lifelong Kherson resident, Ivan, who remains in the city and asked that his last name be withheld because of the risks of speaking out publicly.“As soon as there is a large gathering of people, soldiers appear immediately,” he said by phone. “It’s really life-threatening at this point.”But signs of resistance are evident, residents said.“Our people go out at night and paint Ukrainian flags,” said another man, Andrei. “In yellow and blue letters they paint, ‘We believe in the Ukrainian Armed Forces.’”Andrew E. Kramer More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      How South Dakota Voters Won a Power Struggle With G.O.P. Legislators

      by

      Coming on the same night that voters in San Francisco ousted their lightning rod of a district attorney, Chesa Boudin — in what was widely interpreted as a setback for progressive ideas on criminal justice — it would have been easy to overlook what happened on Tuesday in South Dakota.But the results there are no less consequential for national politics. Voters in South Dakota sent a resounding message of their own to the state’s conservative power structure: We’re in charge here, not you.The immediate issue was a constitutional amendment requiring that certain voter-initiated referendums must pass by 60 percent, rather than a simple majority. The measure was defeated decisively, with more than two-thirds of voters rejecting the proposed new threshold.But this wasn’t just a political process story. It was the latest round in a national fight between voters and state legislatures, who have been battling for primacy on issues like marijuana legalization, gerrymandering and health care. Last year, my colleagues Reid Epstein and Nick Corasaniti took a broad look at Republican-led efforts to limit ballot initiatives, which have grown only more intense in the last 12 months.In South Dakota, the ballot question was pushed by Republican state lawmakers who are hoping to defeat a November referendum on expanding access to Medicaid. To David Daley, the author of several recent books on grass-roots democracy, it was a classic example of the power struggle playing out in state capitols across the country.“Whenever citizens effectively use the ballot initiative to make policy changes the legislature opposes, lawmakers bite back, and they bite back hard,” Daley said.Raising the threshold for ballot drives is an increasingly common tool. A new report by RepresentUs, a nonpartisan group that promotes ballot initiatives, found that since 2017, at least four states have passed laws that impose supermajority requirements and put them in front of voters as a ballot question, out of at least 64 bills proposed.And it’s not always Republican lawmakers pitted against progressive voters.“We’ve seen legislators attempt to threaten and limit the ballot-measure process in red, blue and purple states,” said Anh-Linh Kearney, a research analyst for RepresentUs, pointing to Democratic-controlled Colorado, which raised the requirement for passing ballot measures to 55 percent in 2016.Not-so-subtle tactics to target referendumsChris Melody Fields Figueredo, the executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, described a “growing trend of tactical ways to make the process harder,” pointing to her group’s tally of 108 laws introduced this year in 26 states that would make technical tweaks to the rules surrounding ballot initiatives.Understand the June 7 Primary ElectionBy showing little enthusiasm for progressive and Trumpian candidates alike, voters in seven states showed the limits of the ideologies of both parties.Takeaways: For all the talk of sweeping away the old order, the primaries on June 7 largely saw the establishment striking back. Here’s what else we learned.Winners and Losers: Here is a rundown of some of the most notable wins and losses.California Races: The recall of a progressive prosecutor showed the shifting winds on criminal justice. In Los Angeles, Rick Caruso and Representative Karen Bass are heading to a runoff mayoral election.New Mexico’s Governor Race: Mark Ronchetti, a former television meteorologist, has won New Mexico’s Republican nomination for governor.Since 2017, Fields Figueredo said, the center had counted a fivefold increase in bills introduced and enacted that would make it more difficult to pass ballot measures.Sometimes those tweaks take Kafkaesque forms.In Arkansas, for instance, a drive to establish a nonpartisan redistricting commission ran into a deviously written 2015 law requiring that canvassers for the ballot initiative pass a federal background check conducted by the State Police.But there was a catch. The State Police could not do federal background checks. So the group behind the ballot drive, Arkansas Voters First, pulled what information it could from publicly available records and submitted thousands more signatures than required. The secretary of state rejected those background checks on the grounds that the canvassers had not “passed,” and threw out more than 10,000 signatures.Litigation followed. In a 2020 decision, the Arkansas Supreme Court sided with the secretary of state, ruling that the statute had mandated the background checks, whether or not the task was impossible. In a dissent, Justice Josephine Linker Hart pointed out the absurdity of the statute, noting that “the State Police do not ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ the subject of a background check” — they merely share the information from the relevant databases.“It was wild,” said Bonnie Miller, who led the Arkansas Voters First petition drive. “I’m still not over it.”A court later threw out the background-check requirement, but the cat-and-mouse game goes on: The Arkansas General Assembly passed a new law that lengthened the list of offenses that disqualify paid canvassers. And a measure similar to the one South Dakota voters just rejected, raising the threshold for successful ballot initiatives to 60 percent, is now on the ballot.Miller feels as if she’s battling for the very principle behind voter-led referendums. “This threshold, it’s just death to direct democracy in our state,” she said.‘People want the ability to make decisions for themselves’Opponents of the South Dakota amendment had a couple of factors working in their favor.There’s the state’s long history with ballot initiatives: Father Robert Haire, a radical Catholic priest, helped pioneer the concept as an activist with the Populist Party in the 1880s.Then there’s the fact that Medicaid is popular. Voter-led petitions have already powered Medicaid expansion in Idaho, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah. The Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit group that tracks information and trends about the country’s health care system, has found that three-quarters of Americans hold a favorable opinion of the program — including 76 percent of independents and 65 percent of Republicans.At this point, only 12 states have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, despite its popularity. As you can see from this interactive map, also put together by Kaiser, these states are concentrated in the Deep South, along with Kansas, South Dakota, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming. But when Kaiser asked people in those states whether they wanted to expand Medicaid’s coverage, 61 percent said yes.And finally, Fields Figueredo said, voters have a deep-seated aversion to having their choices limited by politicians — setting up inevitable clashes with lawmakers who “don’t like being told what to do.”“People want the ability to make decisions for themselves,” she said.What to read“We’re bleeding out, and you’re not there”: Families of the Uvalde, Texas, massacre pleaded with Congress today to enact new gun control laws.Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas said this week that the state would investigate fake accounts on Twitter — an issue that Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has pointed to as he appears to waver on a blockbuster deal to buy the platform. What’s in it for Paxton and Texas? David McCabe and J. David Goodman explain.The Supreme Court is expected to release some enormously important rulings in the coming weeks. David Leonhardt previews the five biggest ones.Rick Caruso will face Representative Karen Bass in the general election for Los Angeles mayor.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesAbout last night’s election results …Last night, we wrote about four candidates we were watching in Tuesday’s primaries, and 24 hours later, we have some results — but as expected, we’re still waiting for more.In one of the three Republican primary challenges we were monitoring, the incumbent is safe. In the other two, it’s too soon to say.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      México va a las urnas en la primera revocación de mandato

      by

      La votación tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país. Pero hay quienes temen que no sea más que un instrumento de propaganda.CIUDAD DE MÉXICO — Al pasear por la capital de México en estos días, sería fácil asumir que el presidente del país está en riesgo inminente de perder su trabajo.Las calles de la ciudad están llenas de carteles, volantes y vallas publicitarias que instan a los mexicanos a votar para saber si deben sacar del poder al presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador en una elección revocatoria este domingo.Solo que no es la oposición la que le dice a la gente que vaya a las urnas. Son los leales al presidente.“Apoya al presidente López Obrador,” dice un volante. “Si NO participas, los corrupto$ nos quitarán las becas, los apoyos y las pensiones que hoy recibimos”.Durante la mayor parte de un siglo, los presidentes mexicanos han cumplido sus mandatos de seis años sin falta, hayan sido o no elegidos limpiamente, o hayan llegado a ser despreciados por gran parte de la población. La elección revocatoria, propuesta por López Obrador y la primera de este tipo en México, tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país, al dar a los ciudadanos una herramienta nueva y poderosa para hacer que sus líderes rindan cuentas.El domingo se pedirá a los votantes que digan si quieren que a López Obrador “se le revoque el mandato por pérdida de la confianza” o “siga en la presidencia de la república hasta que termine su periodo”. Para que sea vinculante, debe participar el 40 por ciento del electorado.Lo llamativo es que el promotor más entusiasta de la votación —y la persona más interesada en poner a prueba la consolidada popularidad del mandatario— ha sido el propio presidente. Los líderes de la oposición han pedido a sus seguidores que boicoteen el ejercicio, y los analistas creen que la participación podría ser demasiado baja para que los resultados cuenten.Un simpatizante del presidente en Ciudad de México da información sobre dónde y cuándo votar en el referendo revocatorio.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesAsí que, aunque López Obrador ha calificado la revocatoria de mandato como “un ensayo democrático del primer orden”, muchos temen que se convierta en algo mucho menos significativo: una herramienta publicitaria destinada principalmente a reforzar la afirmación de poder del presidente.“Se supone que es un mecanismo de control cívico del poder, pero se ha convertido en un instrumento de propaganda política”, dijo Carlos Bravo Regidor, analista político y crítico del gobierno. El partido en el poder, dijo Bravo Regidor, “quiere que esto sea una demostración de fuerza, de músculo y capacidad para sacar a la gente a las calles y hacer explícito su apoyo a López Obrador”.En un cálido lunes en Ciudad de México, los voluntarios de la campaña del presidente se desplegaron por un barrio residencial armados con volantes y amplias sonrisas, anunciando alegremente los centros de votación cercanos y diciendo a cualquiera dispuesto a escuchar que fuera a votar en la revocación de mandato.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes del grupo, dijo que esperaba que el ejercicio sentara “un precedente” para que los futuros líderes pudieran ser expulsados si fuera necesario. Esta vez, sin embargo, solo quiere que el presidente sepa que se le quiere.“Es para demostrar que Andrés Manuel tiene el fuerte apoyo del pueblo”, dijo Pozos. “Andrés muchas veces se siente solo, porque tiene que ir contra todo un sistema y no tiene apoyo”.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes de los voluntarios que hacen campaña por el presidente en Ciudad de México.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesTal muestra de apoyo no podría llegar en un mejor momento para el presidente, que ha completado la mitad de su mandato mientras enfrenta dificultades para cumplir con las promesas clave de la campaña que lo llevó al cargo en una victoria arrolladora en 2018. Prometió una “transformación” del país que iba a reducir la pobreza, poner en marcha la economía y atajar la violencia endémica de raíz.Pero después de una pandemia y una recesión mundial, las tasas de pobreza siguen siendo persistentemente altas, el crecimiento económico es anémico y los homicidios siguen rondando niveles récord.Sin embargo, López Obrador sigue siendo muy popular, ya que más de la mitad de los mexicanos aprueban su gestión, según las encuestas. Su gobierno ha tratado de mejorar la situación de los pobres, al aumentar el salario mínimo cuatro veces e incrementar el gasto en bienestar social.López Obrador también ha ganado puntos con gestos simbólicos, como convertir la residencia presidencial en un museo abierto al público, y volar en avión comercial, incluso al visitar Estados Unidos.Un cartel de apoyo a López Obrador en un autobús.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesSu alta estima entre los votantes es también un tributo, según coinciden partidarios y críticos, a su implacable difusión de una narrativa oficial en la que se presenta como un guerrero solitario del pueblo, que se enfrenta a los grupos corruptos del poder tradicional.“Los resultados han estado por debajo de las expectativas del propio gobierno”, dijo Jorge Zepeda Patterson, un destacado columnista mexicano que ha apoyado al presidente, refiriéndose a los logros de López Obrador durante su mandato.“La polarización es muy rentable políticamente, sobre todo si no tienes resultados”, dijo Zepeda Patterson, y agregó: “Al menos puedes construir la narrativa de que estás luchando”.El principal riesgo de la revocatoria para el presidente es la posibilidad de que grandes sectores del país simplemente ignoren el ejercicio por completo, especialmente porque tiene lugar el Domingo de Ramos. Por ley, para que el voto se convierta en vinculante, al menos 37 millones de mexicanos necesitan participar, significativamente más que el número de personas que votaron por López Obrador en las elecciones de 2018 y que lo llevaron a la presidencia en una victoria contundente.Una manifestación en apoyo a López Obrador, en la capital mexicana el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesPero López Obrador ya ha identificado un chivo expiatorio en caso de baja participación: el organismo de control electoral del país.Durante meses, el presidente ha atacado al Instituto Nacional Electoral porque considera que ha fracasado al no dedicar suficientes recursos a la publicidad y la gestión del proceso.“Desde el principio debieron promover la consulta, no actuar de manera tramposa, guardando silencio, no difundiendo la consulta para que la gente no se enterara, instalando casillas en lo más apartado”, dijo el presidente en una reciente conferencia de prensa, refiriéndose al instituto electoral. “Pura trampa y luego abiertamente en contra de nosotros, en contra mía”.El instituto pidió al gobierno federal más dinero para supervisar la contienda, con pocos resultados. Con solo aproximadamente la mitad del presupuesto que dijo necesitar, el organismo electoral instaló aproximadamente un tercio de las mesas que colocaría en una elección normal.Partidarios de López Obrador en la manifestación el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesLorenzo Córdova, el presidente del instituto electoral, conocido por su acrónimo INE, dice que le están tendiendo una trampa para que fracase.“No es solo el presidente”, señaló Córdova, “hay una campaña sistemática y bien organizada para descalificar al INE”. El objetivo, dijo, es “lesionar al árbitro y eventualmente propiciar su captura política”.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación ha dicho que los partidos políticos no pueden hacer publicidad de la revocatoria, y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Córdova dice que el instituto electoral no ha determinado quién paga por todos los anuncios, pero dijo que hay al menos el doble de ellos en los estados donde el partido del presidente competirá en las elecciones para gobernador en junio.“Hay que sospechar que hay una intencionalidad política”, detrás de la campaña de mercadotecnia, dijo Córdova.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación dijo que los partidos políticos no pueden anunciar la revocación y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesHay, por supuesto, beneficios estratégicos que podrían provenir de pedir al país que opine sobre si les gusta o no el presidente en este momento particular. López Obrador fundó su partido político y tiene un interés obvio en hacer todo lo posible para asegurar la victoria en las elecciones generales para reemplazarlo en 2024.Los patrones de votación en la revocatoria de mandato le indicarán al presidente dónde están los puntos débiles de su lado, y cuál de los posibles candidatos a la presidencia es capaz de lograr que la gente acuda a las urnas.“Es una especie de experimento, un ensayo”, dijo Blanca Heredia, profesora del CIDE, un centro de investigación de Ciudad de México. “De cara al 24, para ir midiendo qué capacidad tienen sus operadores para movilizar el voto”.Pase lo que pase el domingo, para muchos en México es difícil ver cómo la primera revocatoria presidencial de la historia del país perjudicará seriamente a este presidente.“Andrés Manuel tiene esa cosa de que hasta cuando pierde, gana”, dijo Heredia. “Siempre tiene una manera de volver la derrota un triunfo”.Oscar Lopez More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Is Mexico’s Recall Election “Democracy of the Highest Order”?

      by

      The vote has the potential to upend the country’s political system. But many fear it will amount to nothing more than a tool for propaganda.MEXICO CITY — Strolling through Mexico’s capital these days, it would be easy to assume the country’s president is at imminent risk of losing his job.City streets are littered with signs, fliers and billboards urging Mexicans to vote on whether to remove President Andrés Manuel López Obrador from office in a recall election this Sunday.Only it isn’t the opposition telling people to rush to the polls. It’s the president’s loyalists.“Support President López Obrador,” reads one flier. “If you don’t participate, the corrupt ones will take away the scholarships, assistance, and pensions that we receive today.”For the better part of a century, Mexican presidents have served out six-year terms without fail, whether or not they were fairly elected — or came to be despised by much of the population. The recall election, proposed by Mr. López Obrador and the first of its kind in Mexico, has the potential to upend the country’s political system, by giving citizens a powerful new avenue to hold their leaders accountable.On Sunday, voters will be asked to decide whether Mr. López Obrador “should have his mandate revoked due to loss of confidence,” or “continue in the presidency of the Republic until his term ends.” To become binding, 40 percent of the electorate must participate.The one wrinkle is that the vote’s most enthusiastic promoter — and the person most keen on putting the president’s well-established popularity to the test — has been the president himself. Opposition leaders have told their followers to boycott the exercise, and analysts believe turnout could be too low for the results to even count.A supporter of the president in Mexico City, giving out information on where and when to vote in the referendum.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesSo, while Mr. López Obrador has called the recall “an exercise in democracy of the highest order,” many fear it could amount to something far less significant: a marketing tool aimed mainly at bolstering the president’s claim to power.“This is supposed to be a mechanism for civic control of power, but it has become instead an instrument of political propaganda,” said Carlos Bravo Regidor, a political analyst and critic of the administration. The governing party, Mr. Bravo Regidor said, “wants this to be a show of force, of muscle, and capacity to bring people into the streets and make explicit their support for López Obrador.”On a balmy Monday in Mexico City, volunteers in the president’s camp fanned out across a residential neighborhood armed with fliers and wide grins, cheerfully advertising nearby polling stations and telling anyone who would listen to go vote in the recall.Allan Pozos, one of the group’s leaders, said he hoped the exercise would “set a precedent” so future leaders could be kicked out if needed. This time, though, he just wants the president to know he’s loved.“It’s to show Andrés Manuel that he has the strong backing of the people,” said Mr. Pozos. “Andrés often feels alone, because he has to go against an entire system and doesn’t have support.”Allan Pozo, a leader of volunteers campaigning for the president in Mexico City.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesSuch a show of support could not come at a better time for the president, who has passed the midpoint of his term while struggling to deliver on key campaign promises that swept him into office in a landslide victory in 2018. He vowed a “transformation” of the country that would drive down poverty, jump start the economy and tackle endemic violence at its roots.But after a pandemic and a global recession, poverty rates remain stubbornly high, economic growth is anemic and homicides are still hovering near record levels.But Mr. López Obrador has remained very popular, with more than half of Mexicans approving of his performance, polls show. His government has sought to improve the lot of the poor, raising the minimum wage four times and boosting welfare spending.Mr. López Obrador has also won points with symbolic gestures, like turning the presidential mansion into a museum open to the public, and flying commercial, even when visiting the United States.A sign supporting Mr. López Obrador on the side of a bus.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesHis high favor with voters is also a tribute, supporters and critics agree, to his relentless broadcasting of an official narrative in which he portrays himself as a lone warrior for the people, going up against a corrupt establishment.“The results have been below the expectations of the government itself,” Jorge Zepeda Patterson, a prominent Mexican columnist who has supported the president, said, referring to Mr. López Obrador’s achievements during his tenure.“Polarization is very profitable politically, especially if you don’t have results,” said Mr. Zepeda Patterson, adding, “at least you can build the narrative that you are fighting.”The main risk of the recall for the president is the possibility that large swaths of the country just ignore the exercise altogether, especially as it takes place on Palm Sunday. By law, for the vote to become binding, at least 37 million Mexicans need to participate in it — significantly more than the number of people who voted for the president in the 2018 elections that swept him into office in a landslide.A demonstration in support of Mr. López Obrador, in Mexico City on Wednesday. Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesBut Mr. López Obrador has already identified a scapegoat in case of low turnout: the country’s electoral watchdog.For months, he has been attacking the National Electoral Institute over what he sees as a failure to dedicate enough resources to advertising and administering the recall vote.“They should have promoted the referendum from the start, not acted dishonestly, keeping silent, not promoting the vote so that people wouldn’t know about it, putting polling booths as far away as possible,” the president said at a recent news conference, referring to the electoral institute. “They’re openly against us, against me.”The institute asked the federal government for more money to oversee the contest, to little avail. With only about half the budget it said it needed, the watchdog installed about a third of the polling stations it would in a normal election.Supporters of Mr. López Obrador at a rally on Wednesday.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesLorenzo Córdova, the leader of the electoral institute, known by its Spanish acronym I.N.E., says he’s being set up to fail.“It’s not just the president,” Mr. Córdova said, “there is an orchestrated, systematic and well designed campaign to discredit the I.N.E.” The point, he said, is to “damage the referee, and eventually pave the way for its political capture.”The nation’s Supreme Court has said political parties cannot advertise the recall, and yet, Mr. López Obrador’s face has cropped up on signs around the country.Mr. Córdova says the electoral institute has not determined who is paying for all of the ads, but said there are at least twice as many of them in states where the president’s party will compete in elections for governor in June.“It makes you suspect there’s political intentionality,” behind the marketing campaign, Mr. Córdova said.The nation’s Supreme Court has said political parties cannot advertise the recall, and yet, Mr. López Obrador’s face has cropped up on signs around the country.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesThere are, of course, strategic benefits that could come from asking the country to weigh in on whether or not they like the president at this particular moment. Mr. López Obrador founded his political party and has an obvious interest in doing everything possible to ensure its victory in general elections to replace him in 2024.The voting patterns in the recall will tell the president where his side’s weaknesses are — and which of the potential candidates for president can get people to the polls.“It’s a kind of experiment, a rehearsal,” said Blanca Heredia, a professor at CIDE, a Mexico City research institution. “Looking ahead to 2024, he can measure the capacity of his operators to mobilize the vote.”Whatever happens on Sunday, for many in Mexico, it’s hard to see how the country’s first-ever presidential recall will seriously damage this president.“Andrés Manuel has this thing where even when he loses, he wins,” said Ms. Heredia. “He always has a way of turning a defeat into a triumph.”The recall election, the first of its kind in Mexico, has the potential to upend the country’s political system by giving citizens a powerful new avenue to hold their leaders accountable.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesOscar Lopez 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

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      New Caledonia Says ‘Non’ to Independence

      by

      The vote on the Pacific island territory comes as France’s president has prioritized shoring up the country’s international profile, seeing its military as a bulwark against China.NOUMÉA, New Caledonia — New Caledonia, a tiny scattering of islands in the South Pacific, will not mark the new year by becoming the world’s newest country.In a referendum held on Sunday, voters rejected independence overwhelmingly, with 96 percent electing to stay part of France, according to provisional results released on Sunday evening by the French High Commission in New Caledonia.But while the referendum failed, prompting those who voted “non” to fly the French tricolor in the capital, Nouméa, the result does not signal an end to dreams of New Caledonian sovereignty.“We are pursuing our path of emancipation,” Louis Mapou, New Caledonia’s president, said in an interview, brushing aside any results of the referendum. “That is what is essential.”Mr. Mapou is the first pro-independence leader to hold the official title of president in New Caledonia and the first from the Indigenous Kanak community which makes up about 40 percent of the population. He refers to the territory as a country. (He is also the kind of president who chauffeurs himself in a Subaru Forester.)Volunteers handing out a pro-independence newsletter called for people to boycott the referendum.Adam Dean for The New York TimesResidents at a meeting this month calling for a “non” vote.Adam Dean for The New York TimesA large portion of the Kanak pro-independence bloc boycotted Sunday’s vote after its plea for a postponement was rebuffed, leading to worries that the referendum’s legitimacy was undermined by nonparticipation. President Emmanuel Macron of France, who has made shoring up the country’s international profile a cornerstone of his campaign for re-election in April, refused a delay.“France is more beautiful because New Caledonia chose to stay,” Mr. Macron said in a televised statement on Sunday.With its far-flung island outposts — such as French Polynesia and Wallis and Futuna in the Pacific Ocean, as well as Mayotte and Réunion in the Indian Ocean — France boasts one of the world’s largest maritime profiles. But the recent collapse of a French submarine deal with Australia, a result of the United States and Britain swooping in instead, embarrassed Paris. Mr. Macron had positioned France as a bulwark against China, which is expanding its clout in the Indo-Pacific.“Woe to the small, woe to the isolated, woe to those who will be influenced and attacked by hegemonic powers who will come to seek their fish, their technology, their economic resources,” he said in a speech in July in French Polynesia.Although the “hegemonic power” remained unnamed, the meaning was clear: China.A ceremony in Nouméa last week honored those killed in Algeria, a former French colony. Adam Dean for The New York Times“We are pursuing our path of emancipation,” President Louis Mapou of New Caledonia said in an interview.Adam Dean for The New York TimesSunday’s vote was the third of three independence referendums promised by Paris after years of conflict in New Caledonia in the 1980s, an uprising known simply as “the Events.” In the second vote last year, 47 percent chose independence, up from 43 percent in the first referendum in 2018.By 5 p.m. on Sunday, voter participation had fallen to 42 percent, down from 79 percent during the 2020 referendum. While lines of voters snaked out of polling stations in French loyalist areas of Nouméa and its environs on Sunday morning, they were virtually empty in pro-independence strongholds.Kanak leaders had urged the French government to reschedule Sunday’s referendum for next year because a late-breaking coronavirus wave had disproportionately affected their people. Lengthy Kanak mourning traditions, they argued, made political campaigning impossible.“The French state is disrespecting the relationship between the Kanak living and dead,” said Daniel Goa, the head of a pro-independence political party. “The decolonization process is going ahead without respecting the people who must be decolonized.”A traditional Kanak wedding. Concerns over losing Indigenous customs have played a role in the independence movement.Adam Dean for The New York TimesAn intensive care unit for coronavirus patients in Nouméa. For some residents, the pandemic has highlighted the benefits of remaining a part of France.Adam Dean for The New York TimesThe history of empire is one of centuries of subjugation, but there are few places left in the world where colonization endures. After annexing New Caledonia in 1853 and establishing a penal colony, the French forced the Kanaks off their fertile tribal lands and onto reservations. The French brutally crushed Kanak efforts to repel them.With the discovery of nickel, the French administration brought in laborers from Asia and other parts of the Pacific to work the mines, which remain the territory’s biggest economic driver. Conflict and foreign diseases exacted a deadly toll on the Kanaks, whose population plunged by about half within three-quarters of a century. Today, with an influx of French crowding Nouméa — civil servants can earn salaries double that of back in France — the Kanaks are a minority in their homeland.A nickel mine in Goro, New Caledonia.Adam Dean for The New York TimesA wealthy neighborhood popular with recent arrivals from France and tourists in Nouméa.Adam Dean for The New York TimesTo prepare for the referendum on Sunday, thousands of French security forces descended on the territory of 270,000 people. The aftermath of the last referendum devolved into violence, with Kanak youths setting fire to nickel mine facilities and blockading major thoroughfares.“Half the country is for independence and half is against it,” Charles Wea, a presidential adviser, said before the votes were counted. “We have to rebuild a new social contract. Otherwise, we will always be divided.”New Caledonia is the only place in Melanesia, an arc of islands that stretches from Papua New Guinea to Fiji, that remains under colonial control. Neighboring Vanuatu gained independence in 1980, the Solomon Islands two years before that. French loyalists argue that New Caledonia’s privileged economic position — its per capita G.D.P. would rank it among the top 20 richest countries if it were considered a country — is afforded by its status as a French territory. Subsidies from Paris fill New Caledonia’s coffers, and the territory’s wealth doubled over the past three decades.To prepare for the referendum on Sunday, thousands of French security forces descended on the territory of 270,000 people.Adam Dean for The New York TimesVoters rejected independence overwhelmingly, with 96 percent electing to stay part of France, according to provisional results released on Sunday.Adam Dean for The New York TimesShould New Caledonia eventually become independent, the territory would trade France’s geopolitical influence for that of China, which has extended its reach over Melanesia, French loyalists say. Last month, fatal riots shook the Solomon Islands, with the prime minister blaming the violence on the switch of diplomatic allegiance to China from Taiwan, the self-governing democracy that is Beijing’s political rival.“When you look at France and China, it is totally different when it comes to human rights,” said Christopher Gygès, an anti-independence politician who also serves as New Caledonia’s minister for the economy, foreign trade and energy. “France’s presence will protect us from China’s appetite and efforts to take control of the region.”Mr. Mapou, the president, has held open the possibility that an independent New Caledonia would entrust its defense to France, allowing Paris to maintain a regional stronghold.“We can balance,” he said. “We can be in the Pacific, defend our interests, and maintain a link with France and Europe because of history and culture.”Drawn by New Caledonia’s climate and comfortable living, the population of Métros, as recent arrivals from France are known, has increased sharply in a generation. The center of Nouméa is largely a white town of baguettes and leisurely games of pétanque. New Caledonia’s wealth is concentrated in the Southern Province, where Nouméa is. Even the New Caledonian government gets its office space from the province, which is governed by a white leader.A young adult smoking cannabis outside a subsidized housing unit in Magenta, a neighborhood in Nouméa.Adam Dean for The New York TimesA couple unpacking a donation of food, which included products close to their expiration dates.Adam Dean for The New York TimesDespite New Caledonia’s prosperity, income disparities yawn wide. Kanaks make up the vast majority of the territory’s impoverished, unemployed and imprisoned. Despite government efforts to help Kanaks pursue higher education in France, there are few Kanak doctors, lawyers and engineers.In a sprawl of dilapidated subsidized housing in Magenta, a neighborhood in Nouméa, Jeremy Hnalep, 25, said he drew little hope from politics. The buildings’ lobbies reeked of urine; clumps of young people passed around cannabis, which is illegal in New Caledonia.“The only choice is to live outside the system because the system will not change even if there is independence,” Mr. Hnalep said.Kanak politicians estimate that unemployment among Kanak youth exceeds 40 percent.In villages outside Nouméa, the colorful flag of Kanaky, as Kanaks call the land, flutters from market stalls and fishing boats. It flies over funerals and weddings, Catholic feast days and labor strikes. The French flag is rarely seen.Yet on the eve of the vote, even as she acknowledged the colonial burden on the Kanaks, Anne-Marie Kourévi, the 81-year-old wife of a Kanak tribal chief in southern New Caledonia, said she would vote “oui.”“I am French,” she said, “and I have been for more than 80 years.”Kanak families gathering for a Sunday picnic at a beachside park in Nouméa.Adam Dean for The New York TimesAurelien Breeden contributed reporting from Paris. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      The Fate of the Minneapolis Police Is in Voters’ Hands

      by

      In the city where the “defund the police” movement took off, voters will decide next week whether to replace their Police Department with a new public safety agency.MINNEAPOLIS — Days after a police officer murdered George Floyd, protesters gathered outside Mayor Jacob Frey’s home demanding that the Minneapolis Police Department be abolished. The mayor said no. The crowd responded with jeers of “Shame!”On Tuesday, nearly a year and a half since Mr. Floyd’s death thrust Minneapolis into the center of a fervent debate over how to prevent police abuse, voters in the city will have a choice: Should the Minneapolis Police Department be replaced with a Department of Public Safety? And should Mr. Frey, who led the city when Mr. Floyd was killed and parts of Minneapolis burned, keep his job?Minneapolis became a symbol of all that was wrong with American policing, and voters now have the option to move further than any other large city in rethinking what law enforcement should look like. But in a place still reeling from the murder of Mr. Floyd and the unrest that followed, residents are deeply divided over what to do next, revealing just how hard it is to change policing even when most everyone agrees there is a problem.“We’re now known worldwide as the city that murdered George Floyd and then followed that up by tear-gassing folks who were mourning,” said Sheila Nezhad, who decided to run for mayor after working as a street medic during the demonstrations, and who supports the proposal to replace the Police Department. “The message of passing the amendment is this isn’t about just good cops or bad cops. This is about creating safety by changing the entire system.”Sheila Nezhad decided to run for mayor after working as a street medic during the demonstrations after George Floyd was murdered by the police.Caroline Yang for The New York TimesMany residents have a dim view of the Minneapolis Police Department, which before Mr. Floyd’s death had made national headlines for the 2015 killing of Jamar Clark and the 2017 killing of Justine Ruszczyk. In recent weeks, a Minneapolis officer was charged with manslaughter after a deadly high-speed chase and, in a separate case, body camera video emerged showing officers making racist remarks and seeming to celebrate hitting protesters with nonlethal rounds. A poll by local media outlets last month found that 33 percent of residents had favorable opinions of the police while 53 percent had unfavorable views.Despite those misgivings, the overwhelmingly Democratic city is split over how to move forward. Many progressive Democrats and activists are pushing to reinvent the government’s entire approach to safety, while moderate Democrats and Republicans who are worried about increases in crime say they want to invest in policing and improve the current system. In the same poll last month, 49 percent of residents favored the ballot measure, which would replace the Police Department with a Department of Public Safety, while about 41 percent did not.The divisions extend to the top of the Democratic power structure in Minnesota. Representative Ilhan Omar and Keith Ellison, the state attorney general, support replacing the Police Department. Their fellow Democrats in the Senate, Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, oppose it, as does Mayor Frey.Police officers along Lake Street in Minneapolis during protests last year.Victor J. Blue for The New York Times“I know to my core that we have problems,” said Mr. Frey, who said his message of improving but not defunding the police had resonated with many Black voters, but not with white activists. “I also know to my core that we need police officers.”Since Mr. Floyd’s killing, many large cities, Minneapolis included, have invested more money in mental health services and experimented with dispatching social workers instead of armed officers to some emergency calls. Some departments scaled back minor traffic stops and arrests. And several cities cut police budgets amid the national call to defund, though some have since restored funding in response to rising gun violence and shifting politics.In the days after Mr. Floyd’s death, as protests erupted across the country, Minneapolis became the center of a push among progressive activists to defund or abolish the police. A veto-proof majority of the City Council quickly pledged to disband the Police Department. But that initial effort to get rid of the police force sputtered, and “defund the police” became a political attack line for Republicans.If the ballot measure passes next week, there would soon be no Minneapolis Police Department. The agency that would replace it would focus on a public health response to safety, with more City Council oversight and a new reporting structure. And though almost everyone expects the city would continue employing armed police officers, there would no longer be a required minimum staffing level. The ballot language says the new Department of Public Safety “could include licensed peace officers (police officers), if necessary.”Supporters of the measure, which would amend the City Charter, have largely steered away from the “defund” language, and there is little agreement on what the amendment might mean in practice. Some see it is a first step toward the eventual abolition of the police, or a way to shrink the role of armed officers to a small subset of emergencies.But other supporters of the amendment, including Kate Knuth, a mayoral candidate, say they would actually add more officers to a new Public Safety Department to make up for large numbers who have resigned or gone on leave since Mr. Floyd’s murder.Kate Knuth, a mayoral candidate and former state lawmaker, supports the amendment and says the number of officers would go up if it passes.Jenn Ackerman for The New York Times“It’s clear people want to trust that we have enough officers to do the work we need them to do,” Ms. Knuth, a former state lawmaker, said. “But the goal is public safety. Not a specific number of police.”Concerns about police misconduct persist in Minneapolis: This year, the city has fielded more than 200 complaints.But worries about crime also are shaping much of the conversation, and even as Minneapolis voters weigh replacing the department, city officials have proposed increasing the police budget by $27.6 million, or 17 percent, essentially restoring earlier cuts. At least 78 people have been killed in the city this year, and 83 people were killed last year, the most since the 1990s.“Minneapolis is in a war zone — this is a war going on where your kids are not safe,” said Sharrie Jennings, whose 10-year-old grandson was shot and severely wounded in April while being dropped off at a family member’s house. “We need more police.”For his part, the police chief, Medaria Arradondo, has urged voters to reject the amendment, saying it fails to provide a clear sense of what public safety would really look like if the Police Department were to vanish.“I was not expecting some sort of robust, detailed, word-for-word plan,” Chief Arradondo said in a news conference this week. “But at this point quite frankly I would take a drawing on a napkin.”Some Black leaders have cast the amendment as the work of well-intentioned but misguided progressive white residents whose views are shaped by the relatively safe neighborhoods where they live. About 60 percent of Minneapolis residents are white.AJ Awed, a mayoral candidate, said he resented seeing white residents angered by the death of Mr. Floyd rushing to get rid of the Police Department.Caroline Yang for The New York TimesAJ Awed, another of Mr. Frey’s challengers, said he agreed that policing in Minneapolis needed to be overhauled and that the current system was prejudiced against Black residents. But he said he resented seeing white residents angered by the death of Mr. Floyd rushing to get rid of the Police Department, describing that as “cover because you feel guilty because of what you saw.”“We are very much sensitive to the delegitimization of our security apparatus,” said Mr. Awed, who is part of the city’s large Somali American community, and whose family sought refuge in the United States after a breakdown of public safety. “Policing is a fundamental structure in society.”Not everyone sees it that way.Minneapolis remains deeply shaken by what happened over the past 18 months: The video of Officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on Mr. Floyd’s neck. The looting and arson and police crackdown that followed. The months of boarded windows and helicopters flying overhead. Then the trial this year of Mr. Chauvin, who was convicted of murder.For some, trust in law enforcement has been frayed beyond repair.Demetria Jones, 18, a student at North Community High School, said she planned to vote for the amendment and had become more wary of officers since Mr. Floyd’s death.“I didn’t realize how much they didn’t care about us and didn’t care about our lives until I watched that video,” Ms. Jones said.Among Black residents, who make up about 19 percent of the population, the amendment fight has laid bare a generational divide. Many older leaders, some veterans of the civil rights era, are opposed, while younger activists were largely responsible for the campaign that collected signatures to put the amendment to a vote.Nekima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights lawyer and the former head of the Minneapolis chapter of the N.A.A.C.P., opposes the amendment, saying the language is too vague.The police station for the Third Precinct was burned during unrest.Aaron Nesheim for The New York Times“When you think about the history of policing in the city of Minneapolis and how hard so many of us have fought over the years to bring awareness, to push for policy changes,” Ms. Levy Armstrong said, “it doesn’t make sense to me at this point that there is not a written plan.”One evening last week, Matthew Thompson, 33, stood holding his baby in Farwell Park in North Minneapolis. He had been an early supporter of proposals to defund the police and had fully expected to vote for the amendment. But when he recently dropped his young son at day care, he learned that the car windows of one of the employees had been shattered by a stray bullet, and he had been hearing more gunshots at night, he said.All of it left him uncertain about how he will vote on Tuesday. “I’m still really conflicted on this,” he said. More