The Devil's Excrement

Closing the Carter Chapter for the time being, in October 2002, when this was a young blog, I translated an article from Tal Cual in which the promises Chavez made to the US President were listed with witty comments from Tal Cual’s Editor Petkoff next to each one. Two years later, only two of the twelve promises have been or were ever fulfilled. Has Carter ever reminded Chavez about them?

CNE Director Ezequiel Zamora resigned today from the Electoral Board, fed up with being just a figurehead to allow the pro-Chávez majority to do whatever they wanted anyway. My only question is how come it was not done earlier. He mentioned many reasons, the fact that there was no audit on the day of the recall vote, that there was no willingness to do a full audit after the recall, the fact that the CNE can’t celebrate that people spent 13 hours in line. He said the CNE should plan for all Venezuelans to vote and not claim the process was so cumbersome because so many people voted and abstention was still 32%. He stated that what finally prompted him  to resign was the fact that the Electoral Board last Friday, by the customary three-pro-Chavez to two-pro opposition votes, decided to migrate one million voters to new voting centers.

A year ago, when the Supreme Court named the Electoral Board after the National Assembly had failed to do so, Zamora was named as one of the principal members of the Electoral Board. Each Board member has its alternates. Zamora’s alternate is Miriam Kornblith. Kornblith worked for many years in the CNE and was part of its Board. However, Director Jorge Rodriguez has in the past not allowed her to replace Zamora when needed, arguing that she is “partisan to the opposition” because she worked to help the opposition gather the signatures. I guess he forgot how hard he worked to stop the signatures under the guise of his “impartiality”. Enough said that he voted with the pro-Chavez majority every single time the vote was split, so who is accusing who of partisanship?

But the law can be stretched as far as the Chavistas want in this revolution and we already have an opinion from the glorious and very partisan legal counsel to the Electoral Board, who already has said that the Supreme Court should name Zamora’s replacement and Kornblith should not fill Zamora’s position. Makes you wonder why there are even alternates to the Directors if their absence will be filled by someone new? But I guess it would be very convenient at this point to have a CNE with four pro-Chavez members, at least the headlines could say the CNE decided an issue “almost” by a unanimous vote and they will be able to do anything they want anyway.

Meanwhile, the other CNE Director who was not pro-Chavez said she would not resign, as she would not leave the “space that had been gained”. Others claim that AD wants her there as a way of guaranteeing that party will be able to obtain a majority of the City Halls of the country. She criticized CNE Director Rodriguez for his nationwide address last Friday, saying that if the majority of the members of the Board never even heard the accusations by the opposition that there was fraud, how could he go and, in the name of the CNE, give an opinion that never existed.

At this point, the CNE still refuses to count all of the ballots, past and present. They argued in the recall that the Electoral law did not apply because it was a referendum, not an election. Now they are arguing that it worked “so well(??)” they should follow the same process. Venezuelan electoral law says all votes have to be manually counted. But it is so much easier to cheat using the machines, that why bother?

CNE Director Ezequiel Zamora resigned today from the Electoral Board, fed up with being just a figurehead to allow the pro-Chávez majority to do whatever they wanted anyway. My only question is how come it was not done earlier. He mentioned many reasons, the fact that there was no audit on the day of the recall vote, that there was no willingness to do a full audit after the recall, the fact that the CNE can’t celebrate that people spent 13 hours in line. He said the CNE should plan for all Venezuelans to vote and not claim the process was so cumbersome because so many people voted and abstention was still 32%. He stated that what finally prompted him  to resign was the fact that the Electoral Board last Friday, by the customary three-pro-Chavez to two-pro opposition votes, decided to migrate one million voters to new voting centers.

A year ago, when the Supreme Court named the Electoral Board after the National Assembly had failed to do so, Zamora was named as one of the principal members of the Electoral Board. Each Board member has its alternates. Zamora’s alternate is Miriam Kornblith. Kornblith worked for many years in the CNE and was part of its Board. However, Director Jorge Rodriguez has in the past not allowed her to replace Zamora when needed, arguing that she is “partisan to the opposition” because she worked to help the opposition gather the signatures. I guess he forgot how hard he worked to stop the signatures under the guise of his “impartiality”. Enough said that he voted with the pro-Chavez majority every single time the vote was split, so who is accusing who of partisanship?

But the law can be stretched as far as the Chavistas want in this revolution and we already have an opinion from the glorious and very partisan legal counsel to the Electoral Board, who already has said that the Supreme Court should name Zamora’s replacement and Kornblith should not fill Zamora’s position. Makes you wonder why there are even alternates to the Directors if their absence will be filled by someone new? But I guess it would be very convenient at this point to have a CNE with four pro-Chavez members, at least the headlines could say the CNE decided an issue “almost” by a unanimous vote and they will be able to do anything they want anyway.

Meanwhile, the other CNE Director who was not pro-Chavez said she would not resign, as she would not leave the “space that had been gained”. Others claim that AD wants her there as a way of guaranteeing that party will be able to obtain a majority of the City Halls of the country. She criticized CNE Director Rodriguez for his nationwide address last Friday, saying that if the majority of the members of the Board never even heard the accusations by the opposition that there was fraud, how could he go and, in the name of the CNE, give an opinion that never existed.

At this point, the CNE still refuses to count all of the ballots, past and present. They argued in the recall that the Electoral law did not apply because it was a referendum, not an election. Now they are arguing that it worked “so well(??)” they should follow the same process. Venezuelan electoral law says all votes have to be manually counted. But it is so much easier to cheat using the machines, that why bother?

Speaking of “pure” democracy and such mundane concepts, one has to wonder whether most Venezuelans even think about such a concept or whether they even care. In the last two Presidential elections, all candidates were elected by the same smoke-filled rooms or individual decisions of the past. Despite the fact that Chavez’ MVR wrote a new Constitution saying (Art. 67) that candidates had to be “selected by internal elections with the participation of its members”, the truth is that not a single candidate has been elected for the upcoming Gubernatorial and Mayoral elections…until yesterday…

Candidates from the opposition held yesterday a primary election to select a “unity” candidate for the gubernatorial race in Tachira state. I still don’t understand why there will be another round with the winner (The AD candidate, Rincon) running against popular figure and ex-Governor “Cura” Calderon. But the disappointing thing to me is how very few people went to vote. People want participation, ask for more democracy, but when it comes down to it, they don’t even show up!

In fact, I think the Coordinadora Democrática should have had the same procedure everywhere, whether candidates wanted it or not. This contrasts with Chavez’ MVR, where only candidates that have the approval of almighty Hugo will receive financial or political support from Chavez and his MVR. In Zulia, Chavez will back Gutierrez, but nobody wants him, another corrupt General (sue me!) with no popular support but he has Chavez’ wholehearted endorsement.

What still amazes me, as a naïve and innocent “comeflor” observer, is how politicians from both sides can get away with this. What’s the point of a Constitution if you don’t follow it? Where is the Supreme Court in all this? Chavez, what happened to your much ballyhooed participatory democracy? Dead at birth or dead on arrival? Moreover, in a country with 24 Governors and over 300 Mayors, so far only ONE of them will be selected following what the Constitution very explicitly says.  Democracy? Humbug!

To me, this was a big mistake by the opposition, if they had committed themselves to the grassroots democracy of primaries, they could have gotten people excited about the upcoming regional elections. As it is, people have no faith in the electoral process and abstention will likely hand out control to Chavez’ MVR of the whole nation. But of course, even if people show up, Chavez and his MVR will win anyway, using sophisticated “voting enhancing techniques” where needed. They have the means, the techniques and the will.

You have to wonder about Jimmy Carter’s integrity and judgement. In today’s opinion piece in The Washington Post, he complains about the conditions for the upcoming Florida election, using arguments that may have been taken right our of the Coordinadora Democrática press conferences during the last six months. If he wrote the piece himself, his capacity for cynicism is simply incredible. Where was he during the Venezuelan recall vote? Sleeping? Eating? (Speaking of Carter eating, one of my favorite Restaurants in Caracas, Urrutia in Solano Ave., had proudly displayed two pictures of the former President eating there, they have duly been removed).

But let’s looks at the ex-President’s laments about the Florida election:

“The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 now seems likely, even as many other nations are conducting elections that are internationally certified to be transparent, honest and fair.”

I certainly hope transparent, honest and fair does not refer to the Venezuelan process. The failed audit on Aug. 15^th was not transparent, neither was the electoral registry, nor the refusal to audit 50 machines selected by the opposition on the second audit on Aug. 18^th.  Or to think it is fair or honest that all important decisions were made by a three to two vote, with the three pro-Chavez Directors always voting together.

“A nonpartisan electoral commission or a trusted and nonpartisan official who will be responsible for organizing and conducting the electoral process before, during and after the actual voting takes place.”

This would never apply to our esteemed CNE, which was composed of three partisan pro-Chavez members and two partisan pro-opposition members. One of the pro-Chavez members was so partisan that he said in an interview to a Brazilian paper that the revolution had to be defended.

”Uniformity in voting procedures, so that all citizens, regardless of their social or financial status, have equal assurance that their votes are cast in the same way and will be tabulated with equal accuracy. Modern technology is already in use that makes electronic voting possible, with accurate and almost immediate tabulation and with paper ballot printouts so all voters can have confidence in the integrity of the process.”

Accurate and almost immediate tabulation? So that all voters can have confidence? Definitely not referring o the Venezuelan process he so superficially observed. Confidence has been shattered, and the integrity of the process is being questioned with very serious technical arguments.

“It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation.”

It is also unconscionable to superficially certify processes that perpetuate biased and fraudulent practices…

Finally, I have switched two arguments made in the article:

“It is especially objectionable among us Americans, who have prided ourselves on setting a global example for pure democracy.

The top election official has also played a leading role in qualifying Ralph Nader as a candidate, knowing that two-thirds of his votes in the previous election came at the expense of Al Gore. She ordered Nader’s name be included on absentee ballots even before the state Supreme Court ruled on the controversial issue.”

Whatever happened to the “pure democracy” he boasts of in the first paragraph? Why should Nader’s candidacy be part of a controversial issue? Yes, he took votes away from Gore in 2000, but he also has a right to be a candidate which is being blocked by the party Carter supports in 17 states, using legalese and political maneuvering to block Nader’s and his supporters rights to have him be a candidate. I disagree with Nader’s candidacy personally, but the attempts to block him represent dirty rather than pure democracy as described in the first sentence.

Well Mr. Carter, with this opinion piece, I can only conclude you are not only superficial, but want to cynically apply different rules to the Florida election than you even tried to enforce in Venezuela. Certainly a double standard, but what else is new?

You have to wonder about Jimmy Carter’s integrity and judgement. In today’s opinion piece in The Washington Post, he complains about the conditions for the upcoming Florida election, using arguments that may have been taken right our of the Coordinadora Democrática press conferences during the last six months. If he wrote the piece himself, his capacity for cynicism is simply incredible. Where was he during the Venezuelan recall vote? Sleeping? Eating? (Speaking of Carter eating, one of my favorite Restaurants in Caracas, Urrutia in Solano Ave., had proudly displayed two pictures of the former President eating there, they have duly been removed).

But let’s looks at the ex-President’s laments about the Florida election:

“The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 now seems likely, even as many other nations are conducting elections that are internationally certified to be transparent, honest and fair.”

I certainly hope transparent, honest and fair does not refer to the Venezuelan process. The failed audit on Aug. 15^th was not transparent, neither was the electoral registry, nor the refusal to audit 50 machines selected by the opposition on the second audit on Aug. 18^th.  Or to think it is fair or honest that all important decisions were made by a three to two vote, with the three pro-Chavez Directors always voting together.

“A nonpartisan electoral commission or a trusted and nonpartisan official who will be responsible for organizing and conducting the electoral process before, during and after the actual voting takes place.”

This would never apply to our esteemed CNE, which was composed of three partisan pro-Chavez members and two partisan pro-opposition members. One of the pro-Chavez members was so partisan that he said in an interview to a Brazilian paper that the revolution had to be defended.

”Uniformity in voting procedures, so that all citizens, regardless of their social or financial status, have equal assurance that their votes are cast in the same way and will be tabulated with equal accuracy. Modern technology is already in use that makes electronic voting possible, with accurate and almost immediate tabulation and with paper ballot printouts so all voters can have confidence in the integrity of the process.”

Accurate and almost immediate tabulation? So that all voters can have confidence? Definitely not referring o the Venezuelan process he so superficially observed. Confidence has been shattered, and the integrity of the process is being questioned with very serious technical arguments.

“It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation.”

It is also unconscionable to superficially certify processes that perpetuate biased and fraudulent practices…

Finally, I have switched two arguments made in the article:

“It is especially objectionable among us Americans, who have prided ourselves on setting a global example for pure democracy.

The top election official has also played a leading role in qualifying Ralph Nader as a candidate, knowing that two-thirds of his votes in the previous election came at the expense of Al Gore. She ordered Nader’s name be included on absentee ballots even before the state Supreme Court ruled on the controversial issue.”

Whatever happened to the “pure democracy” he boasts of in the first paragraph? Why should Nader’s candidacy be part of a controversial issue? Yes, he took votes away from Gore in 2000, but he also has a right to be a candidate which is being blocked by the party Carter supports in 17 states, using legalese and political maneuvering to block Nader’s and his supporters rights to have him be a candidate. I disagree with Nader’s candidacy personally, but the attempts to block him represent dirty rather than pure democracy as described in the first sentence.

Well Mr. Carter, with this opinion piece, I can only conclude you are not only superficial, but want to cynically apply different rules to the Florida election than you even tried to enforce in Venezuela. Certainly a double standard, but what else is new?

The Editorial that got Chavez mad:

The Nuthouse (Can’t find it in the digital edition)

The stubborn board of the CNE, in staying within the framework of violating the Election Law, together with the absence of independent public powers and the state of prevailing injustice that does not allow to resolve the differences that confront our society, now leaves society immersed in a nuthouse. There will be no threat that will convince a good part of the nation that the referendum and its ominous precedents did not conform to a catalog of a coarse and grotesque abuse of power, capable of diverting the vote intention as an expression of popular will. The warnings of legal action against those that dissent are nothing more than a repeat of the expressions and regulations that from the CNE turned into true threats against freedom of speech. This time around, just like the other one, the nuthouse has chief: psychiatrist Jorge Rodríguez.

In the same issue of El Universal, MIT Professor Roberto Rigobon says there will be another fraud if the regional elections are carried out in the same fashion as the recall vote. He also clarfies for the layman the meaning of their research.

In a nationwide TV address yesterday CNE Director Jorge Rodriguez “explained” why there was no fraud, saying no proof had been submitted by the opposition and that the Electoral Registry did not have the problems denounced by the opposition. E said the phenomenon of more voters than inhabitants had occurred in other elections and that in nay case the number was very small with only 32,000 voters involved. The latter is, of course, a silly argument since he is only taking into account those towns where the number of voters exceeded the number of inhabitants, but its says nothing of those where the number is exorbitant without exceeding the number of inhabitants.

Rodríguez also denied a lot of things that were not part of the accusations by the opposition such as rumors of Russian hackers or interference of the communications using satellites which were not part of the documents presented by the opposition. This part I found offensive and abusive on the part of the CNE Director, using superficial accusations which were not part of the challenge to laugh at the possibility of fraud.

He was superficial, referring to caps and mentioning Hausmann and Rigobon in that instance, but failed to note the coincidence problem where, as noted here, there are calculations that suggest the impossibility of what was observed. The cap problem once again, was not mentioned in the oppositions challenge but was used irresponsible by Rodriguez in his nationwide address.

He mentioned that pro-Chávez exit polls said the opposite of opposition exit polls, but nobody has been able to get their hands on that data while opposition exit polls from at least three institutions (Sumate, Primero Justicia and Proyecto Venezuela) have been distributed generously to be studied by anyone that has requested it. Moreover, the only pro-Chávez exit polls that have been publicly quoted yielded results that have too much error with the final results of the recall vote, given the size of the samples made.

He mentioned the “cold’ audit of August 18^th. but failed to mention the failed “hot” audit of Aug. 15rh. And results that remain mysterious to date.

Rodriguez closed by threatening to take to court anyone that continues making accusations of fraud against the CNE. All in all, I found Rodríguez to be strident, superficial and consider his use of a forced nationwide TV address to broadcast his point of view and abuse of power since the opposition has not been given the same ability to present its case to the nation and explain its suspicions as to what happened on Aug. 15^th.

Today Tulio Alvarez, the lawyer who prepared the case responded to Rodriguez saying that eh had not responded to any of the reasons why the CD challenged the results of August 15^th. , suggesting that Rodriguez had not even read the request. He reiterated the accusations and said that Rodriguez’s arguments about the Electoral Registry in no way address the massive and fraudulent issuing of ID cards without control that took place.

Alvarez said the Electoral Board continued its abuse of power by denying the challenge presented by the customary three to two vote, without any discussion or presentation of a study of the allegations. He called on the two opposition Directors to resign from the CNE.

In a nationwide TV address yesterday CNE Director Jorge Rodriguez “explained” why there was no fraud, saying no proof had been submitted by the opposition and that the Electoral Registry did not have the problems denounced by the opposition. E said the phenomenon of more voters than inhabitants had occurred in other elections and that in nay case the number was very small with only 32,000 voters involved. The latter is, of course, a silly argument since he is only taking into account those towns where the number of voters exceeded the number of inhabitants, but its says nothing of those where the number is exorbitant without exceeding the number of inhabitants.

Rodríguez also denied a lot of things that were not part of the accusations by the opposition such as rumors of Russian hackers or interference of the communications using satellites which were not part of the documents presented by the opposition. This part I found offensive and abusive on the part of the CNE Director, using superficial accusations which were not part of the challenge to laugh at the possibility of fraud.

He was superficial, referring to caps and mentioning Hausmann and Rigobon in that instance, but failed to note the coincidence problem where, as noted here, there are calculations that suggest the impossibility of what was observed. The cap problem once again, was not mentioned in the oppositions challenge but was used irresponsible by Rodriguez in his nationwide address.

He mentioned that pro-Chávez exit polls said the opposite of opposition exit polls, but nobody has been able to get their hands on that data while opposition exit polls from at least three institutions (Sumate, Primero Justicia and Proyecto Venezuela) have been distributed generously to be studied by anyone that has requested it. Moreover, the only pro-Chávez exit polls that have been publicly quoted yielded results that have too much error with the final results of the recall vote, given the size of the samples made.

He mentioned the “cold’ audit of August 18^th. but failed to mention the failed “hot” audit of Aug. 15rh. And results that remain mysterious to date.

Rodriguez closed by threatening to take to court anyone that continues making accusations of fraud against the CNE. All in all, I found Rodríguez to be strident, superficial and consider his use of a forced nationwide TV address to broadcast his point of view and abuse of power since the opposition has not been given the same ability to present its case to the nation and explain its suspicions as to what happened on Aug. 15^th.

Today Tulio Alvarez, the lawyer who prepared the case responded to Rodriguez saying that eh had not responded to any of the reasons why the CD challenged the results of August 15^th. , suggesting that Rodriguez had not even read the request. He reiterated the accusations and said that Rodriguez’s arguments about the Electoral Registry in no way address the massive and fraudulent issuing of ID cards without control that took place.

Alvarez said the Electoral Board continued its abuse of power by denying the challenge presented by the customary three to two vote, without any discussion or presentation of a study of the allegations. He called on the two opposition Directors to resign from the CNE.

This week, the Venezuelan Government announced that it would issue a new ten year bond maturing in 2014. The issue will be for US$ 1.5 billion and will be first be offered as an exchange to holders of the so called Front loaded interest reduction bonds (FLRB’s) and the Debt Conversion Bonds (DCB’s) due in 2007.

Now, a country issues bonds when i) it needs money, ii) when it wants to reduce yearly payments or iii) when it wants to extend debt in time. This case is not straight forward to analyze.

The first point i) Is definitely not the case as the outstanding FLRB’s and DCB’s amount to more than US$ 1.5 billion so that the Government certainly does not expect to get any “fresh” money from this issue.

Point ii) requires some thought and explanation. Most bonds have a maturity date and make regular interest payments called coupons. The new bond is like that, it will likely have a coupon of 9% payable in two parts every year for the next ten years. But the DCB’s and FLRB’s are different, they were issued as part of the so called Brady bonds, when the future of Venezuela was uncertain (don’t laugh!) so they would not only pay interest, but also make payments of capital regularly.

Thus, these bonds which mature in 2007, require that the Government in the next two years pay capital as well as interest. The capital payments are large, but the interest payments are small because these bonds have adjustable coupons of the order of only 2%. In contrast, the new Global 2014 bond will have payments of roughly 9%.

Ant that is what is difficult to understand: to avoid making payments of US$ 450 million in capital for the next two years, the Government is going to have to pay 7% more per year in interest or US$ 100 million. This seems to make no sense, because Venezuela currently has ample reserves, so there is no problem with making the capital payments, but you are paying too much in interest in the next three years!

You could argue that the reason is three iii) that the Government wants to extend the debt profile in time, however, this runs against the type transaction made by PDVSA in July.

That transaction had exactly the opposite characteristics of this one, PDVSA spent US$ 2.6 billion to buyback all of its debt at equivalent yields that seemed high for the markets and which reduced international reserves by that amount. In that case, the only possible explanation was that they wanted to remove any possible liability for the Board of Directors of PDVSA since that company still ahs not produced financials for 2003.

In this case, in my opinion, there is only one possible explanation: The Government thinks that things are not going to get better than they are and is issuing ten year debt at conditions that will not return. My evidence for this? Easy, despite record high oil prices, Venezuela’s international reserves have not risen at all in the last three months, suggesting any downturn in oil prices will make a dent in the country’s international reserves and force the Government to pay more interest to issue new debt.