Electoral Commission’s Mistakes Undermine Credibility of Mexico's Election
For Immediate Release: July 5, 2006
Contact: Mark Weisbrot, 202-746-7264
Washington, DC: The credibility of Mexico's
electoral process was thrown into question on Tuesday morning when the
head of Mexico's Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), Luis Carlos Ugalde,
acknowledged that as many as 4 million votes had not been counted in
the preliminary vote count that began after the polls closed on Sunday.
Mr. Ugalde said some 2.6 million votes were set
aside "because the poll reports were illegible or had other
inconsistencies," and another estimated 600,000 ballots "might not have
reached his offices to be included in the preliminary count" (New York Times, "Vote-by-Vote Recount Is Demanded in Mexico," July 5, 2006). According to the IFE's preliminary results, 827,317 votes - another 2 percent of votes cast - were nullified [ http://prep.terra.com.mx/ ].
The total number of votes not counted is thus,
according to the IFE, more than 4 million, or nearly 10 percent of all
votes cast. This would be equivalent to more than 12 million votes not
counted in the U.S. presidential election of 2004.
"Calderon's lead in the preliminary vote count appears to be statistically meaningless*,
since the excluded votes are more than 10 times as large as his margin
over Lopez Obrador," said economist Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of the
Center for Economic and Policy Research.
The preliminary vote count of the IFE showed Felipe
Calderon of the conservative National Action Party (PAN) leading left
challenger Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the Democratic Revolutionary
Party (PRD) by one percentage point.
Weisbrot questioned why the Federal Electoral
Institute did not inform the public about the more than 3 million votes
not included in the preliminary vote count, until about a day and a
half had passed, and only after the PRD has raised the issue of "3
million missing votes." (The 827,317 nullified votes were listed with
the preliminary count on the IFE's web site).
Until Ugalde revealed the missing votes in a
television interview on Tuesday morning, most people, including
journalists reporting on the election, understood the preliminary vote
count to have encompassed about 98.5 percent of the total, thus making
Calderon's one percent lead look nearly insurmountable.
The withholding of this important information
allowed the Calderon campaign and its allies to create a widespread
impression that their candidate was the likely winner - an impression
that persists in the media today, despite the fact that the preliminary
count was nowhere near complete and therefore could not provide
evidence of a winner. All of this is important because it influences
the political context in which further decisions about the elections
and vote tallying will be made.
"The withholding of information about ballots not
counted calls into question the impartiality of Mexico's Federal
Electoral Institute," said Weisbrot. "At this point, given the long
history of electoral fraud in Mexico, the extreme closeness of the
vote, and widespread distrust of the process, a full and carefully
monitored recount may be necessary to restore public confidence in the
result."
*The
preliminary count would be statistically significant if the votes not
counted were a random sample of the total; however, there is no reason
to believe that it is a random sample, and a number of indications that
it is systematically biased toward PRD voters. For example, the PRD
campaign has alleged that in some of the southern states where their
support is strongest, there were more votes for congress than for
president, an unprecedented and unlikely event, indicating that many of
Lopez Obrador's votes in those areas have not yet been counted.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research is an independent,
nonpartisan think tank that promotes democratic debate on the most
important economic and social issues affecting people's lives. CEPR's
Advisory Board of Economists includes Nobel Laureate economists Robert
Solow and Joseph Stiglitz; Richard Freeman, Professor of Economics at
Harvard University; and Eileen Appelbaum, Professor and Director of the
Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University.
|