Extreme political extremes, and have adopted the same orientation in voting, often as isolated voices against larger subtitles consensus.
This occurred in important projects for the Government (PT), such as the text that regulated the carbon market and the farm spending package.
Although the orientation coincides, most of the time the argument used by each party differ, with rare exceptions.
One of these occasions took place in the vote of the project that changes the rules for the application of the ineligibility of politicians – O. The two subtitles emphasized the negative effect of the approval of the proposal by passing the idea of impunity to the population.
Another example was the text that predicted and limited the real gain of, one of the measures of the government spending package. The argument of the two parties followed the same line, that the changes would exclude people who needed the benefit.
The alignment ends when the voting theme is economical, even if the orientation is the same. In, for example, Psol voted against, but used a speech that the change would remove public investments and prevent the Lula government from fulfilling campaign promises.
Already the new stated that the flexibility of the Fiscal Responsibility Law provided for in the proposal would generate consequences such as inflation, indebtedness and increase of interest, among others.
In the text that, the same argumentative divergence. While PSOL criticized the maintenance “polluting effects and destruction resulting from deforestation”, the new emphasized that the proposal would impair the economy with a collection bias and make international marketing unfeasible from Brazil from carbon credits.
The PEC (proposal for amendment to the Constitution) of the amnesty, which is another example. PSOL emphasized the damage of the text to black candidacies in the country. Already the new stated that the subject was thorny for establishing in the Constitution “a criterion of quotas we never support”.
Sought, PSOL’s leader in the House, Talíria Petrone (RJ), said there is nothing that brings the two parties closer. “The new defends Faria Lima, the reduction of investments in education and health. The new is against coping with poverty. The new is even against, even often, democracy itself defending the coup,” he says.
“PSOL wants more income for families, more public investment. And we do not give up defending democracy. The coincidence of a common vote means no proximity.”
Deputy Adriana Ventura (SP), leader of the new in the House, says, in turn, that the party is right and is in the ideological spectrum completely opposite to that of PSOL.
“As we support private property, they encourage invasions. While we believe that only the free market can generate wealth and take people out of poverty, they are statizers. As we defend freedom of expression, they support measures that encourage censorship,” he says. “There are occasional guidelines, however, where our vows coincide with those of other parties.”
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
