After reading the articles about the election that happened in Mexico, it got me thinking about the nation reverting back to its old ways. Even though the President Vicente Fox Quesada was the first non-PRI (Institutional Revolution party) president since 1917, there was still PRI influence within the government system. With recent news of Enrique Pena Nieto winning the closely contested election gave Mexico a PRI president once again, but he did not walk away without controversy. Many protesters came out and rallied against the results and demanded a recount, sparking controversy that the PRI paid its voters with gift cards and such.
With the questions asked, I think Mexico never made the democratic transition yet, because the PRI power in the government was too strong and Quesada did not seem to improve the environment of Mexico over his tenure and still seems to be a semi-authoritarian regime. “Between 1994 to 1996, real wages dropped 27 percent, and an estimated 75 percent of Mexicans fell below the poverty line. Mexico had emvraced free trade and globalization as a response to the economic crisis of the early 1980s, but its response had made it even more vulnerable to economic instability” (O’Neil, p 382). Even though the percentage of Mexicans in poverty decreased to 40 percent over the years, they are still 2 percent under the international poverty line today. It is an improvement but I think they still have not embraced the fact that there is a huge gap between the rich and poor. I do not think ties between Mexico and the United States have gone south yet as they are, “the chief consumer of Mexico’s oil exports, and Mexico is now the United States’ second biggest trading partner, after Canada, (O’Neil, p 352). With what Nieto promised in his speeches, and whether his win was a result of bribing voters, Mexico can still be improving or go south really fast because of Mexico’s history of corruption.