The reactions to what was announced by the government last week could not be worse. Opposition economists, risk analysts, specialized journalists and the mainstream press in their editorials — important in shaping the opinions of the financial sector (aka “the market”) — spared no criticism. They targeted the proposals, considered timid, and the way they were announced, mixed with changes in the .
Without clearly saying how bold — and politically viable — proposals could be to face once and for all the fiscal problem of the Brazilian State, critics in fact translate — and feed back — the distrust in the firmness of the economic commitments of the government in which the center-left leads a much broader party coalition.
For their part, economists and opinion makers who speak out in left-wing vehicles and networks did not leave anything unsaid: they denounced the “neoliberal” initiatives, contrary to the interests of the workers, once again defeated.
When participating in the announcement of the Adjustment PEC measures, alongside the minister, the President of the Republic and two other members of the government, the holder of the Planning and Budget portfolio, was realistic: “I am satisfied because the fiscal adjustment is possible , in the technical and political aspect”.
There are institutional and political reasons why the possible always displeases many on the right and left. Firstly, the institutional design enshrined in the Constitution limits the Executive’s latitude for action. Federative structure, electoral rules that produce accentuated pluri-partyism —and, consequently, coalition presidentialism—, strong Public Ministry and Judiciary, in addition to the growing power of the Legislature, produce multiple opportunities to veto government initiatives, requiring that they always be exhaustively negotiated.
Secondly, in the political field, fiscal adjustments, even pressing ones, are never simple to obtain and maintain, as they produce winners and losers. In Brazil, the public spending coalition is robust and does not discriminate between ideologies: it covers the entire political field.
It is true that disagreements on the matter are enormous in . For many of its intellectuals and leaders —who have not yet cleared up previous disasters—, public spending, if well directed, is always positive, as well as being instrumental in winning elections. What is remarkable is that, despite this, the proposed adjustment has come to light and only affects social programs, a rarity on an international scale when the initiative comes from left-wing governments.
In fact, resistance to measures in favor of a structural solution to the imbalance of accounts is not only in this corner of the partisan spectrum. They come from the beneficiaries of the many tax incentives; the high hierarchy of the civil and military public bureaucracy; of parliamentarians who defend their funds and resources for amendments, among others. In other words, the majority are groups with veto power and a preference for the right.
There is little that is possible not only because the government is divided and wavering, but because there are many interests blocking further progress.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
