Morena’s landslide win threatens to take Mexico down a dangerous path

Mexicans know the dangers of one-party rule. In 2000 the country emerged from seven decades under the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which were defined by corruption, inequality and political repression. Yet in elections on June 2nd they voted to hand the ruling party, Morena, a degree of power not seen since the PRI’s fall. Morena and its coalition allies are less disciplined and monolithic than the PRI was, but they still pose a grave threat to Mexico. Much now turns on the political courage of the country’s next president, Claudia Sheinbaum, the first woman to hold the post.

The fact that Ms Sheinbaum won the presidency was not a surprise. She had enjoyed a 20-point lead in the polls for months, buoyed up by the valuable support of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the outgoing president. But few expected Morena to be so dominant. The ruling coalition is likely to control between 346 and 380 of the 500 seats in the lower house, a supermajority that enables it to amend the constitution. In the upper house it has at least 82 of 128 seats, three shy of a supermajority (which it will probably gain thanks to a few “grasshoppers”, as Mexicans call lawmakers who switch parties). Morena’s coalition also now runs 24 of 32 governorships and has supermajorities in at least 22 of the 32 state congresses.

Investors reacted to Morena’s landslide by selling off the peso, which fell by 4% against the dollar, and stocks, which lost 6%. They fear that the government will use its supermajorities to bring about constitutional changes that will make it harder to operate in Mexico and which will undermine democracy.

Their fear is well founded. Immediately after the vote, Mr López Obrador talked of using the supermajority to enact an agenda he introduced in February. Supreme Court judges and the heads of the electoral authority would be appointed by popular vote; many independent bodies would be dismantled; the army would take control of the national police force; supposedly independent energy regulators would answer to ministers. Fracking, opencast mining and imports of genetically modified corn would all be banned. Generous retirement benefits would be further increased, though money is short.

This constitutional overhaul would only aggravate Mexico’s problems. The country already struggles to attract foreign investment; a populist judiciary and regulatory system would drive capital away. Mr López Obrador’s six years in office have been the bloodiest in the country’s history in part because of the militarisation of the police. Mexico’s energy policy, which favours its state-owned producers, threatens the country’s vital free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada. A claim brought by them is already pending.

Mr López Obrador will have a chance to get Congress to pass some of these bills himself in September, because legislators take their seats one month before Ms Sheinbaum replaces him, on October 1st. But he will struggle to get them all through. It will be for her to enact the rest.

Ms Sheinbaum should resist. For her to stand up to the man who eased her path to power may seem unlikely. The slender hope is her own record. As mayor of Mexico City she was more international, competent and pragmatic than Mr López Obrador has been as president. On election night she promised to preserve democracy, govern for all Mexicans, work with the United States and back investment and business.

To ditch his worst plans would be in her own long-term interest, as well as her country’s. Ms Sheinbaum inherits a fiscal deficit and a sluggish economy. She may soon discover that she cannot afford to continue with the redistribution that underpinned Morena’s landslide win—and which will underpin her popularity in office. During the campaign she talked about protecting the legacy of her mentor, Mr López Obrador. Ms Sheinbaum would do well to think about her own. ■