The Devil's Excrement

Rumors, lots of rumors abound, coups, self-coups (what for, he got us man?) sensible solutions coming, unreasonable ones being ratified, the OAS is pulling out, Carter is coming, Carrasquero is being blackmailed, the Supreme Court will intervene, the Amigos are pissed, Gaviria is not coming, Sumate leaders to be jailed, Cuba wants to get rid of Chavez, this was all planned in Cuba, and I am worrying about statistical significance…

You see, even if I am statistically insignificant, I can’t help but worry about the misuses and uses of statistics. You would think that a trained psychiatrist in a country with tropical diseases would have some idea about statistics. After all, he was trained as a medical doctor and I imagine they have a subject called epidemiology to help him understand the difference between one, one hundred and one thousand cases of an illness, as to being something to worry about or not.

I am, of course, talking about our esteemed CNE Director Jorge Rodriguez. That man who is full of compassion, who is fair, who is honest and impartial, according to the Government and who is a @#*/?^er according to the opposition. Just when I thought I would learn about that higher logic used in the decision by the CNE, he comes and says, just like that:

“It is clear in the regulations that the data of the citizen had by the citizen himself”

Being a nit picking wit since a long time ago, rather than go to the regulations I appeal to Merriam Webster online, where I find that the word clear means bright, luminous, clean, pure, plain, unmistakable, sure, innocent, unqualified, absolute and bare (my favorite). Then, I go to that wonderful work of German precision and engineering and pride of judicial creativity of the Vth. Republic , called in short “Regulations for recall referenda processes of the mandate of positions by popular elections”.

I search, but obviously after sleeping badly last night concerned about the future, I miss that particular article out of the 65 that would illuminate, cleanse and purify my mind with the truth. I go back to no avail. I then use the search feature in my browser and look for signature (“firma” in Spanish), there are many, but the only apparent relevant ones are Art. 22, 2. which says:

Art. 22. The form which constitutes the request to convoque a recall referendum should contain:

Name, Last name, position of the public official whose mandate is pretended to be revoked, as well as an indication of the effective date in which he was inaugurated.

Name, Last name, national ID number, birthdate, name of the electoral circuit, manuscript original signature and fingerprint of the electors that request that the recall referendum be convoked, in legible form.

Later it says in Art.29:

Art. 29. The signatures or requests will not be considered faithful and in consequence will be considered invalid, in any of the following assumptions:

If there is incongruence between the name, last name, birthdate and national ID number of the person signing.

If the person is not registered in the electoral circuit corresponding to the referendum that is being convoked.

If the signature is not manuscript.

If the signature is a product of a photocopy or nay other media of reproduction.

If it is determine that more than one signature comes from the same person

By now, reading all this legalese I realize I have become stupid or something, as I find no clear, bright or even naked mention to what our illustrious Dr. Rodriguez says. What I did find was two mentions to manuscript signatures and NONE to the rest that he so clearly sees. I imagine Paris Hilton must also be totally different through Dr. Rodriguez’s eyes. As usual, when I am tired or pissed, I digress.

Despite my poor reading Dr. Rodriguez continues:

In article 29, #5, where it is established that for a signature to be faithful the same person could not take the data or different signatures, but that each person had to provide his/her name, last name, ID number, birthdate, signature and fingerprint….that there was an instruction bulletin for observers (show me a copy!) that said that each person fills the corresponding data and that the CNE published ads that said that it was “very important” that the data be filled by the person signing. (Would love him to show us one, however, the regulations are above the ads or the instruction bulletins, that is why they are published in the official gazette).

By now, I give up, but continue reading Dr. Rodriguez eloquent explanation of his brilliant rationale. About the OAS suggestion of analyzing a random sample of the forms he said

“I have no problem; however, I consider it to be statistically unacceptable”

It is at this point that that light bulb goes on in my brain. Of course! That is the key! Statistical significance is where it’s at! Brilliant Dr. Rodriguez, absolutely brilliant! Something that was unclear to 40% of the people signing for the opposition was clear to him, something that was also unclear to at least 50% of those signing the pro-Chavez petition was very clear to him. Since the error goes as 1/root (sample size), and the sample size was in the one million size, it is statistically insignificant to have so many people think differently than him. No matter how many signatures we sample, the result will come out different that he wants, and that is what he calls statistical significance: If Dr. Rodriguez agrees with it, it is statistically significant, if not, simply forget it!

That is why I feel so insignificant tonight, statistically and otherwise!

Rumors, lots of rumors abound, coups, self-coups (what for, he got us man?) sensible solutions coming, unreasonable ones being ratified, the OAS is pulling out, Carter is coming, Carrasquero is being blackmailed, the Supreme Court will intervene, the Amigos are pissed, Gaviria is not coming, Sumate leaders to be jailed, Cuba wants to get rid of Chavez, this was all planned in Cuba, and I am worrying about statistical significance…

You see, even if I am statistically insignificant, I can’t help but worry about the misuses and uses of statistics. You would think that a trained psychiatrist in a country with tropical diseases would have some idea about statistics. After all, he was trained as a medical doctor and I imagine they have a subject called epidemiology to help him understand the difference between one, one hundred and one thousand cases of an illness, as to being something to worry about or not.

I am, of course, talking about our esteemed CNE Director Jorge Rodriguez. That man who is full of compassion, who is fair, who is honest and impartial, according to the Government and who is a @#*/?^er according to the opposition. Just when I thought I would learn about that higher logic used in the decision by the CNE, he comes and says, just like that:

“It is clear in the regulations that the data of the citizen had by the citizen himself”

Being a nit picking wit since a long time ago, rather than go to the regulations I appeal to Merriam Webster online, where I find that the word clear means bright, luminous, clean, pure, plain, unmistakable, sure, innocent, unqualified, absolute and bare (my favorite). Then, I go to that wonderful work of German precision and engineering and pride of judicial creativity of the Vth. Republic , called in short “Regulations for recall referenda processes of the mandate of positions by popular elections”.

I search, but obviously after sleeping badly last night concerned about the future, I miss that particular article out of the 65 that would illuminate, cleanse and purify my mind with the truth. I go back to no avail. I then use the search feature in my browser and look for signature (“firma” in Spanish), there are many, but the only apparent relevant ones are Art. 22, 2. which says:

Art. 22. The form which constitutes the request to convoque a recall referendum should contain:

Name, Last name, position of the public official whose mandate is pretended to be revoked, as well as an indication of the effective date in which he was inaugurated.

Name, Last name, national ID number, birthdate, name of the electoral circuit, manuscript original signature and fingerprint of the electors that request that the recall referendum be convoked, in legible form.

Later it says in Art.29:

Art. 29. The signatures or requests will not be considered faithful and in consequence will be considered invalid, in any of the following assumptions:

If there is incongruence between the name, last name, birthdate and national ID number of the person signing.

If the person is not registered in the electoral circuit corresponding to the referendum that is being convoked.

If the signature is not manuscript.

If the signature is a product of a photocopy or nay other media of reproduction.

If it is determine that more than one signature comes from the same person

By now, reading all this legalese I realize I have become stupid or something, as I find no clear, bright or even naked mention to what our illustrious Dr. Rodriguez says. What I did find was two mentions to manuscript signatures and NONE to the rest that he so clearly sees. I imagine Paris Hilton must also be totally different through Dr. Rodriguez’s eyes. As usual, when I am tired or pissed, I digress.

Despite my poor reading Dr. Rodriguez continues:

In article 29, #5, where it is established that for a signature to be faithful the same person could not take the data or different signatures, but that each person had to provide his/her name, last name, ID number, birthdate, signature and fingerprint….that there was an instruction bulletin for observers (show me a copy!) that said that each person fills the corresponding data and that the CNE published ads that said that it was “very important” that the data be filled by the person signing. (Would love him to show us one, however, the regulations are above the ads or the instruction bulletins, that is why they are published in the official gazette).

By now, I give up, but continue reading Dr. Rodriguez eloquent explanation of his brilliant rationale. About the OAS suggestion of analyzing a random sample of the forms he said

“I have no problem; however, I consider it to be statistically unacceptable”

It is at this point that that light bulb goes on in my brain. Of course! That is the key! Statistical significance is where it’s at! Brilliant Dr. Rodriguez, absolutely brilliant! Something that was unclear to 40% of the people signing for the opposition was clear to him, something that was also unclear to at least 50% of those signing the pro-Chavez petition was very clear to him. Since the error goes as 1/root (sample size), and the sample size was in the one million size, it is statistically insignificant to have so many people think differently than him. No matter how many signatures we sample, the result will come out different that he wants, and that is what he calls statistical significance: If Dr. Rodriguez agrees with it, it is statistically significant, if not, simply forget it!

That is why I feel so insignificant tonight, statistically and otherwise!

This is today’s Editorial of Tal Cual

At the CNE they placed under observation 213 thousand forms for the presidential recall referendum of which 148 thousand correspond to the so called “planas”. (Forms with the same calligraphy for the person’s data). This means that through an as yet unknown procedure, for which new specific regulations will be approved, citizens with their national ID card would have to clarify if they signed or not. It is the responsibility of the citizen to demonstrate he or she is not a crook. 

The presumption of innocence, which is the basis of all judicial systems, is transformed by the Carrasquero Doctrine in the presumption of culpability: All people are delinquents until they can prove the opposite. The Board of the CNE even rejected the sensible suggestion by the OAS and the Carter Center of verifying through a random sampling the legitimacy of the signatures and approved this grotesque inversion of the burden of proof.

We could see this coming when a draft of regulations (approved last night too) was announced that considered “suspicious” the same calligraphy not only on the signature but in the space where the data of the citizen is filled.

This was not contemplated in the “Regulations” for the verification of the signatures, in which the only cause for invalidating was the same calligraphy of the signatures.

And this is the only possible logic, because what makes the act of requesting the recall referendum “very personal” is the signature of the citizen and not the way in which his personal data which identifies him was entered.

The truth of the matter is that the majority of the Board of the CNE, in its attempt to avoid responsibility, has translated to the citizens the definite verification of the signatures. How would people be able to do this? It has not been established yet. Who guarantees that the process of exercising the right to amend the elimination of the signatures will not be blocked by new tricks or changes in the rules of the game? Will the Army be available to guarantee the security of the citizens? Will it be a simple process or an obstacle course so complex and difficult to fill as the cover forms for the petition signatures that will allow the CNE to approve a new path for the rules for those situations “that just happened“ as the Carrasquero Doctrine calls them? We have reached a very delicate point in the process. The feeling that the will of millions of citizens can be laughed at through the famous “tricks” mentioned by Carter, does nothing but be reaffirmed each day that goes by. And with it the perception that the country is dangerously approaching an inflection point in its immediate history.

By the usual 3-2 vote, the Consejo Nacional Electoral decided to keep under observation 148,000 forms with the signatures for the petition requesting for President Chavez’ recall. Next week, a decision will be made on how people will be able to contest the exclusion of their signature from the petition. Sobella Mejias, who voted against the decision, said this is a flagrant violation of the regulations the CNE approved and of the Constitutional right for requesting a recall. This is a very dirty decision and a rip off by the pro-Chavez members of the CNE, violates the law and goes against the tradition of what a person’s signature is worth and means.

Essentially in one big swipe, the CNE managed to set aside close to 1.4 million signatures of the 3.4 million submitted by the opposition, managing in this way to reduce the number below the 2.4 million required to hold a referendum to recall Hugo Chavez. The trick was to disqualify those signatures in which the person at the poll booth gathering the petition filled out the data, copying it from the national idenity card of the person signing. This was legal as the regulations only said that the person had to sign and stamp his/her fingerprint and the data had to match that of the electoral registry.  International observers monitored the process and both the OAS and the Carter Center knew that the opposition had the required minimum for the recall to take place.

What apparently will happen now, is that hundreds of thousands of people will once again have to go out to say they did sign the petition. This is a travesty, a simple petition has turned into a complex process in which the person’s signature and fingerprint were questioned without any basis whatsoever. The burden of proof was on the electoral body to show they were fake, not the other way around. Getting enough people to go and say they did sign is doable, but this uses up time, which is of the essence. According to the country’s Constitution, if the recall vote takes place after Aug. 19th., Chavez’ fourth anniversary in office, instead of electing a new President, the Vice-President takes over.

This is the third time that a referendum petition handed in by the opposition is blocked on the basis of technicalities. So much for the “participative” democracy that Hugo Chavez used to proclaim.

It is a very sad day for Venezuelan democracy, whatever is left of it.

The country is simply dead. No Alo Presidente on Sunday (a blessing!). Few politicians around, as the urgency of the political crisis is set aside for a few days, while people celebrate Venezuela’s non-existent Carnival. Instead, they go to the beach, to their hometown and those that are stuck at home or in the barrios throw water or eggs at passersbys. Such tradition!.

And speaking of tradition, Venezuelan politicians can’t even keep a promise for two days. Last Friday, the President of the CNE was on TV saying how the Board would work hard all weekend to resolve the huge issues facing them. But they acted with the same faithfulness and responsibility that characterizes Venezuelan fatherhood, no sooner had Carrasquero made his statement, that a caller to a TV program said that he was at the airport leaving for Maracaibo. The next day, he was not there but the other four Directors were. On Sunday they were still working, sans Carrasquero, but by today the CNE was a deserted as the rest of the city.

Thus the beat goes on and the only big topic of discussion was Chavez’ statements in Guyana, right before the Carnival holidays. You can read more details in Daniel’s blog but I can’t pass it up.

Essentially, Venezuela has had a long standing dispute with Guyana over a territory which is about 16% that of Venezuela (and 40% of Guyana’s!). At the turn of the century, there was a decision by an international Court that that area belonged to Guyana, then a British colony. Later, it was discovered through the will of one of those that participated in the decision, that it had all been fixed. Since 1949, Venezuela has been “claiming” this area. Venezuela has taken it to international courts and the “fight” has dragged on for years. It is a very emotional issue of the type I dislike.

Venezuela signed an agreement, known as the Geneva agreement, to look for a peaceful solution to the dispute. In 1999, the United Nations named a mediator to try to find a solution to the problem. Chavez’ own new Constitution defines the borders of the country and includes the Guyana territory within it, by defining the borders as those at the time of the “Capitania General” around 1810. Moreover, when the current Vice-President was Minister of Defense he got all worked up once, denouncing that Guyana was trying to assign areas within the claimed territory to oil companies for exploration. (It is not demonstrated that there is oil there anyway)

Last week. Chavez went to Guyana on an official visit and surprised everyone by giving the green light to that country’s President to begin oil exploration in the claimed area. This is a complete about face of the policy of the last six Venezuelan Governments including Chavez’.

The question is then, why would the supposedly hyper nationalistic Chávez change his mind on this issue all of a sudden? Easy, if Chavez were to stop the recall referendum, the OAS will likely attempt to invoke the Democratic letter of that organization, of which Venezuela is a signee. However, the countries of the CARICOM would have to vote against Venezuela for that to happen. Not an easy thing, given that Venezuela sells subsidized oil to many of these countries. Thus, the opposition charges, Chavez changed his mind simply to save his own skin.

In my mind, this is one of those nationalistic issues that seem to bring the worst in people. I find it amazingly hypocritical that politicians that have not been able to take care (then and now) of the almost one million square kilometers of land we already have, actually want to add more to it, to mismanage it or ignore it. But I am sure someone is going to get mad at me for thinking the Guyana claim is not that important. Sorry, I just don’t.  

Do we need that area to survive? Is it crucial to our development? Would we do anything with it if it were given back to us? Do the citizens of that area speak English or Spanish? Do they want to be part of Venezuela or Guyana? 

If we were up to me, I would negotiate something sensible with Guyana so that both countries could get on with their lives, the politicians screwing the citizens as usual. Of course, any agreemnet would have to be done under the law, with the approval of the National Assembly, which would have to change the Constitution and approve the treaty. This is essentially impossible. And this is where Chavez blew it; he can not act like he did at the personal level and make a decision which violates the law and the Constitution. But what else is new? Unfortunately this distracts attention from the more pressing problems of the country.

The country is simply dead. No Alo Presidente on Sunday (a blessing!). Few politicians around, as the urgency of the political crisis is set aside for a few days, while people celebrate Venezuela’s non-existent Carnival. Instead, they go to the beach, to their hometown and those that are stuck at home or in the barrios throw water or eggs at passersbys. Such tradition!.

And speaking of tradition, Venezuelan politicians can’t even keep a promise for two days. Last Friday, the President of the CNE was on TV saying how the Board would work hard all weekend to resolve the huge issues facing them. But they acted with the same faithfulness and responsibility that characterizes Venezuelan fatherhood, no sooner had Carrasquero made his statement, that a caller to a TV program said that he was at the airport leaving for Maracaibo. The next day, he was not there but the other four Directors were. On Sunday they were still working, sans Carrasquero, but by today the CNE was a deserted as the rest of the city.

Thus the beat goes on and the only big topic of discussion was Chavez’ statements in Guyana, right before the Carnival holidays. You can read more details in Daniel’s blog but I can’t pass it up.

Essentially, Venezuela has had a long standing dispute with Guyana over a territory which is about 16% that of Venezuela (and 40% of Guyana’s!). At the turn of the century, there was a decision by an international Court that that area belonged to Guyana, then a British colony. Later, it was discovered through the will of one of those that participated in the decision, that it had all been fixed. Since 1949, Venezuela has been “claiming” this area. Venezuela has taken it to international courts and the “fight” has dragged on for years. It is a very emotional issue of the type I dislike.

Venezuela signed an agreement, known as the Geneva agreement, to look for a peaceful solution to the dispute. In 1999, the United Nations named a mediator to try to find a solution to the problem. Chavez’ own new Constitution defines the borders of the country and includes the Guyana territory within it, by defining the borders as those at the time of the “Capitania General” around 1810. Moreover, when the current Vice-President was Minister of Defense he got all worked up once, denouncing that Guyana was trying to assign areas within the claimed territory to oil companies for exploration. (It is not demonstrated that there is oil there anyway)

Last week. Chavez went to Guyana on an official visit and surprised everyone by giving the green light to that country’s President to begin oil exploration in the claimed area. This is a complete about face of the policy of the last six Venezuelan Governments including Chavez’.

The question is then, why would the supposedly hyper nationalistic Chávez change his mind on this issue all of a sudden? Easy, if Chavez were to stop the recall referendum, the OAS will likely attempt to invoke the Democratic letter of that organization, of which Venezuela is a signee. However, the countries of the CARICOM would have to vote against Venezuela for that to happen. Not an easy thing, given that Venezuela sells subsidized oil to many of these countries. Thus, the opposition charges, Chavez changed his mind simply to save his own skin.

In my mind, this is one of those nationalistic issues that seem to bring the worst in people. I find it amazingly hypocritical that politicians that have not been able to take care (then and now) of the almost one million square kilometers of land we already have, actually want to add more to it, to mismanage it or ignore it. But I am sure someone is going to get mad at me for thinking the Guyana claim is not that important. Sorry, I just don’t.  

Do we need that area to survive? Is it crucial to our development? Would we do anything with it if it were given back to us? Do the citizens of that area speak English or Spanish? Do they want to be part of Venezuela or Guyana? 

If we were up to me, I would negotiate something sensible with Guyana so that both countries could get on with their lives, the politicians screwing the citizens as usual. Of course, any agreemnet would have to be done under the law, with the approval of the National Assembly, which would have to change the Constitution and approve the treaty. This is essentially impossible. And this is where Chavez blew it; he can not act like he did at the personal level and make a decision which violates the law and the Constitution. But what else is new? Unfortunately this distracts attention from the more pressing problems of the country.