Venezuela's Chavez gets powers to rule by decree

[420inTN]

Venezuela's Chavez gets powers to rule by decree

By Christian Oliver 1 hour, 5 minutes ago

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's Congress on Wednesday granted President Hugo Chavez powers to rule by decree for 18 months as he tries to force through nationalizations key to his self-styled leftist revolution.

The vote allows anti-U.S. leader Chavez, who has been in power since 1999, to deepen state control of the economy and other sectors of public life such as defense and security.

Afternoon headlines in the anti-Chavez press were scathing. Tal Cual splashed with "Heil Hugo" and equated the enabling law with powers granted to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler in the 1930s. El Mundo had the headline "Superchavez enabled."

The lawmakers, all loyal to Chavez after opposition parties boycotted the 2005 congressional elections, flaunted their populist credentials by taking the unusual step of holding their vote in public in a square in downtown Caracas.

more, full story http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070131/ts_nm/venezuela_chavez_dc_9">here

[Turbineguy]

1. I'm beginning to worry about this Chavez guy.

He's getting more like Bush all the time!

[EFerrari]

37. Well, no. Bush can do signing statements behind our backs.

The limited, task-specific powers Chavez is getting required a vote.

Remember voting?

:)

[Turbineguy]

48. Good point!

He seems to have been, afterall, elected.

[EFerrari]

53. The way BushCo and their media whores talk about Chavez

tells you a lot about how they themselves think.

Mostly, they're furious because they haven't been able to off him or get him out of office.


There's a great documentary about the last time they tried to get him out. Unfortunately for BushCo, there were two reporters that filmed the whole dirty exercise because they were just accidently on site -- from the fake protestors to the fake media broadcasts to the kidnapping of Mr. Chavez. And, they STILL failed.

It's called "The Revolution will not be Televised" and it will make your jaw drop as you watch the legitimate government of Venezuela try to defend itself against a not - so - covert (because on film) attack by the United States.

http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/home.htm

BushCo won't be happy until they kill Chavez. But meanwhile, he's helping to transform Latin America. He's a hard worker and so far, he's done a lot of good for just ordinary people and also, in helping the region pool its resources.

[Turbineguy]

80. Perhaps I should have included

a sacasm smilie in my post. By our standards, we would have to consider Chavez something of a dictator, but at least a benevolent one to the poor. But he has put in limits to his power. In reality, it may be that a lot of his actions are reactions to Bush and fall into the category of "hold my beer and watch this!" He has certainly earned the right to be pissed off at Bush.

I think he has a lot of good ideas, but these ideas have to be viewed in the context of Venezuela and its history. For example, a utility run by a corrupt government is bound to be better run in private hands where profit is a motive (In the end, they can only charge what the market is willing to pay. At some point you run into the problem of fixed costs at low output strangling profits). It's simply a question of what is worse.

As an aside, of course, in the US the Republicans like to privatize things on principle and so you take a perfectly well run publicly owned utility like San Diego Electric, privatize it. The new owners stop equipment maintenance to "save money" (meaning skim profits), until the plants have to be shut down as "inefficient". In steps Enron to reduce the rolling blackouts at vast costs to the customers. That's what happens when ideology trumps good sense.

[EFerrari]

83. If Chavez were a dictator by our standards (such as they are)

BushCo wouldn't be tarring him with the populism label. Really. lol

[paulk]

77. a vote in a legislature entirely controlled

(since the opposition boycotted the election) by one's own party ?

And I wouldn't call changing a nation's economic system over to socialism "limited". He is instituting major societal change with out the input of a large part of VZ's people even having a say. That's a recipe for civil unrest, if not civil war.

[EFerrari]

84. So, a majority is a bad thing? Better ring up Nancy now.

:)

[paulk]

86. our system has checks and balances

Venezuela's unicameral legislature doesn't seem to, since the bicameral system was changed when Chavez rewrote the Constitution.

Some people might call that a consolidation of power...

a consolidation that has resulted in a rubberstamp legislature. I don't see how that can be viewed as a good thing for a healthy democracy. A healthy democracy would protect the rights of minorities.

[EFerrari]

88. Btw, how are our "checks and balances" doing lately?

:)

[paulk]

89. they've been doing better, now that the Democrats

have taken over the Congress.


not that that has any relevance to this thread....

[EFerrari]

117. Right, because American exceptionalism has no bearing on

our consistent attacks on democracy in Latin America. :eyes:

[paulk]

123. speaking of which

I haven't recieved a reply from you yet that has any bearing on what I posted.

All you are doing is reciting the same old tired leftist rhetoric, and that as a non sequitur, even.

That may be an acceptable way to debate for you, however, I find it a waste of my time.

[LoZoccolo]

2. People are going to use the fact that this article says "anti-US"...

...to ignore the fact that Chavez is now a dictator. A dictator, look at that folks!

[niyad]

5. no, the phrase makes the article suspect, as so many articles about chavez in this country have been

suspect, given the hatred that the bush regime feels for this man.

are we going to invade another country because there is a dictator? let us not forget that we have a fool who thinks he is a dictator currently destroying THIS country. let's worry about HIM.

[LoZoccolo]

7. I don't care what the Bush* regime feels about this guy.

I care about what I feel about this guy. And I feel he is a dictator.

What, are you saying that they didn't just give him powers of decree? What exactly are you holding suspect?

[niyad]

10. frankly, I am a whole lot more worried about our own dictator, herr bush and company, than I am

a LEGALLY-ELECTED president of another country, who isn't bothering us, and just happens not to like our questionably-elected ruler (as in "god chooses our rulers") very much.

surely that simple fact isn't too hard to grasp?

[LoZoccolo]

12. This thread is about Chavez, not Bush* (second time).

If you want to talk about Bush*, you can do it in another thread. This one is not about Bush*, it is about Chavez.

[niyad]

16. I can talk about whomever I want. the fact that he was referred to as "anti-US" makes any comment

about bush a perfectly acceptable part of the discussion. the fact that you don't like the comments about bush is fairly irrelevant, particularly as you are not the OP.

[LoZoccolo]

18. I don't like the comments about Bush* because:

1. They are a distraction from this discussion of what Chavez is doing.
2. Nothing Bush* does can make what Chavez does alright.

Doesn't matter though; you really shouldn't have said this thing about me. You really really shouldn't. I'll give you a chance to apologize though, but you have to do it in the next reply.

[niyad]

23. exactly what did I say about you that requres an apology. all I did was point out that YOU are NOT

the OP. that isn't actionable, nor does it require an apology.

just as a matter of curiosity, WHAT are you going to do about my non-apology?

[LoZoccolo]

46. I'm sorry, I misread your post.

I thought you said "relevant" when you said "irrelevant".

[niyad]

24. just for the record, LZ, NOTHING that chavez does, by YOUR logic, makes anything BUSH does alright,

or had you not noticed that tiny little fact.

once again, you are NOT the OP, and there is no rule that says one cannot speak about OUR dictator in reference to a person YOU called a dictator, whom OUR dictator happens not to like.

[LoZoccolo]

42. Right. Nothing that Chavez does makes anything Bush* does alright.

They are two separate people.

Can we talk about Chavez now?

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mikelgb]

8. I said the same thing when congress passed the PATRIOT Act

A dictator, look at that folks!

some still ignore the fact that BUSH is a dicktater

[LoZoccolo]

9. This thread is not about Bush*, it is about Chavez. n/t

[mikelgb]

22. well

excuse me

I did not know you were the moderator of this thread, you're not even the OP

this thread has many themes:

anti-Chavez propaganda
dictatorial powers
oh and of course betting on what DUers will say in a thread

[niyad]

14. not to mention that bush is trying to grab more and more power each and every day.

THAT concerns me a whole lot more than a LEGALLY-ELECTED south american president who isn't threatening THIS country in any way.

[420inTN]

51. At least Bush isn't "seeking indefinite re-election."

That's one thing in the article that I find concerning.

from the linked article above:

"The economic reforms are set to work in tandem with increased political centralization. Chavez is forging a single party to lead his radical reforms, stripping the central bank of autonomy and seeking indefinite re-election."

[niyad]

81. well, there is the small matter of term limits in the constitution that is about the only thing

stopping him. of course, there is ALWAYS martial law, wonder when der chimpenfuhrer will get around to that?

[hack89]

87. Give me a break!

there will not be martial law in America - 2 years from now Bush will go away for ever.

[Megahurtz]

17. Not to Worry, We Have One Here!

:sarcasm:

[niyad]

3. the "anti-US" phrase makes the whole article suspect to me. wonder what is really going on, and

what bush and co are so damned afraid of.

[LoZoccolo]

4. What! did! I! just! tell! you!

There should be a DU bookie, so we can take bets on this kind of stuff. I would be swimming in cash!

[niyad]

6. perhaps there is a REASON we should take such articles with a grain of salt?

[LoZoccolo]

11. OK, what should I take with a grain of salt?

Again, am I supposed to doubt that they just passed this thing? That they've been talking about it for a long time and it's a big campaign by the media to smear Chavez that appears in several sources? That he's done this before? What?

[katsy]

27. OMG

Well that'll show you!

Next time don't boycott the elections. Make your voice heard, LoZoccolo. Vote for Chavez's opposition. Make a difference.

edited to add: :sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

38. A pillar of salt would just about do it.

[rocktivity]

13. Now that he and Bush have something in common, maybe they can be friends

Except that Chavez ASKED if he could rule by decree...

:headbang:
rocknation

[niyad]

25. and my guess is that chavez' popularity is a LOT higher than der chimpenfuhrer's.

[BestCenter]

50. Just wait until Chavez liberates Colombia!

:evilgrin:

[pampango]

35. Republicans and Socialist agree: "Ruling by decree is the most

effective way to govern." It is ironic how men in power (even though they are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum) can find common ground in the proposition that the more power they have the better.

It reminds me of how much Hitler and Stalin hated each other and the opposing political/economic system, but ended up governing in very similar manners. Maybe when you go too far right or too far left, you end up in the same spot on the opposite side of the political globe.

[peacetalksforall]

15. The Reuter's writer is Christian Oliver. Others are -

"(Additional reporting by Patricia Rondon and Fabian Andres Cambero in Caracas and Patrick Markey and Luis Jaime Acosta in Bogota) "

Anyone know anything about these writers? Paid by wealthy Venezuelan exiles in Miami unhappy that there unused, uneveloped property in Venezuela is being taken away for a Chavez people purpose? Who knows.

I wish he could perform his duties without acts that rile - I wish he could stick to helping those who've been controlled and held down - get them working, fed, and educated with a roof over their heads - but do it in such a way that he doesn't agitate and stays below the hyper level of critics (if that's possible).

[niyad]

20. found patricia, who writes for something called espin (and looking at the title of one article for

yahoo, talking about chavez being sworn in for "radical new term". still working on the others, probably more of the same.

[Bridget Burke]

30. Here are some Christian Oliver articles...

He keeps pointing out the evils of Chavez & the evils of Iran. But his major complaint seems to be that they have all that oil.

http://press.jrc.it/NewsExplorer/entities/en/110582.html

[peacetalksforall]

44. "But his major complaint seems to be that they have all that oil."

Now, that's a smile generator. Who else would complain about someone having oil that they can't get their hands on or control? Exxon? Cheney? George? Rice?

Writing for hire?

[Gloria]

19. Meanwhile, Venezuela state to own the largest fiber optic network in Latin America

http://www.eluniversal.com/2007/01/29/en_pol_art_29A829653.shtml

Venezuelan state to own the largest fiber optic network in Latin America

Since 1991, telecoms firm Cantv has overhauled its technological platform and upgraded technology (Nicola Rocco / El Universal)

When President Hugo Chávez questioned the "ridiculous price" at which the Venezuelan State sold phone firm Cantv to private investors in 1991, Wolfgang Schalk -an engineer who worked at the company up to the 1980s- reminded that while in state hands the corporation was lingering in technological backwardness, the top example of which was an entanglement of cables throughout the country.

SNIP

But now, when Chávez has moved to take Cantv back to the state hands -where it has been most of the time since it was organized- the telecoms company shows a face different from the one it had when privatized in 1991. While copper cables are still used for short-distance connections between houses or buildings and the Cantv's nearest connection point, the truth is that 90 percent of the Venezuelan telecoms network is digitally supported.

SNIP

But this is not the end of the story. Cantv fiber optic network provides more capabilities than thought. Cantv supports transmission of electoral results, satellite communications, telemedicine services in inhospitable areas, rural phone services, filtering of messages and e-mails over the Internet, wiretapping (which can only be done at the request of a court), and digital television service (a project scheduled to be implemented in 2008).

SNIP

Therefore, when purchasing Cantv -and including electricity utility La Electricidad de Caracas (which will be nationalized too) and state-owned CVG Telecom- the Venezuelan State will own the largest fiber optic network in Latin America.

For Schalk, this huge power is dangerous. However, what concerns Schalk the most is the likely politicization of the company -which already happened when Cantv was state-run.

MORE

[Judi Lynn]

21. So it's just fine when this authority is used by OTHER Venezuelan Presidents, ones the US likes!

That's consistant, isn't it?

Facts which can't be altered but do get ignored by right-wingers, from an article Say_What posted recently:

It is important to note that this type of power-transfer is allowed under the Venezuelan constitution of 1999, which expressly permits the President to issue executive orders specifically within these issue areas. Of course, the constitution continues to guide the country's overall legal framework, which is to say that no "decree" can supercede constitutional law.

What's more, this "enabling law" is not new to the current constitution. Venezuela's previous constitution allowed for similar powers shifts to the executive, and you can be sure that past presidents took advantage of this authority on multiple occasions throughout the 70's, 80's and 90's. Here are a few examples:

In 1974, Congress gave President Carlos Andres Perez the right to "rule by decree" on a number of economic matters, which he used to pass a slew of new regulations-instituting a minimum wage increase, freezing the market price of "necessary" goods, instating tax relief on agricultural activities, increasing government pensions, and even establishing new state institutions, including the National Institute of Housing and an Industrial Development Fund.

But Perez was a close ally of the US government, so there was little controversy from Washington.

Ten years later, in May 1984, Congress again gave authority to the President, this time Jaime Lusinchi, to deal with the country's financial crisis by decree. He enacted a complicated exchange scheme, which was different for various sectors. For example, he extended a fixed exchange rate (4.3 bolivars to the dollar) for the payment of foreign debt and for Venezuelan students studying abroad; a second rate (6 bolivars to the dollar) for trade in the oil and iron industries; and a third (7.5 to 1) for the commercial and financial sectors. A fourth, "fluctuating dollar," constantly changing by market forces, was in use for everything else.

Nobody balked at all this, certainly not on the international scene. Lusinchi is remembered for hosting the first-ever visit of a Pope to Venezuela, and left office a few years later with what at the time was the highest approval ratings of an outgoing Venezuelan president.

In 1993, interim President Ramon Jose Velasquez used these special "decree" powers to retool the country's debt and reform the financial system. Once again, nobody-well, nobody remembers much about Velasquez at all. He was sort of a historical footnote, serving only 8 months in office.
(snip/...)

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1946

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To normal DU'ers: don't be thrown off by rabid right-wingers who favor immoral US domination of Latin Americans. Just take the time to read and research for yourself to come to the understanding you seek, uncluttered by lies.

[Bushknew]

116. Excellent, Excellent post Thank You nt

[happydreams]

120. Your post totally destroys the Right-Wings claims.

[AikidoSoul]

127. Thank you for this information Judi Lynn, it's always good to see

clarification that's documented.:-)

[cigsandcoffee]

26. The man is a hard-line Communist - this is clear with each passing week

I just do not like Communism, and suspect Venezuela is going to be the new Cuba.

Is Bush an asshole? Sure. Does that mean I have to pay some respect to Chavez for being a pain in his ass? No way. Instead, I am going to go ahead and condemn what I see happening in Venezuela seperate and aside from the crap going on in the United States.

[niyad]

28. a communist?? geez, can we quit doing the "red scare" drivel?

[Judi Lynn]

32. It lives on, as in a time capsule, among the great minds of the hard right.

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=71334

This drunk is gone, but not forgotten.

[cigsandcoffee]

57. You're suggesting that Communism doesn't exist?

If so, that's pretty bizarre.

[paulk]

79. no, she's suggesting that if you don't like communism

then you're a hard right winger.

It's the usual smear.

[niyad]

82. don't even try that BS. I am suggesting that the calling of someone a "communist" is once again

becoming quite fashionable amoung the right, and it gets annoying, not to mention inaccurate. hence the "red scare" comment. I remember this kind of crap from the 50's and 60's.

[cigsandcoffee]

93. Fashionable or not, it's accurate.

Chavez is a Communist, much in the vein of Fidel Castro. He makes that clearer and clearer with every passing day.

What I remember from the 50s and 60s were politicians like Jack Kennedy taking a very hard line against Communism. They were quite right to do so.

[Psephos]

130. Chavez described himself as a communist in his Jan. 8 cabinet swearing-in

Do you think Chavez is red-baiting?

http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8522131

Concentration of political power does not lead to better government. Rule by decree is *by definition* dictatorship. It may be benevolent, and it may be for a specified time, but it's still dictatorship. Which puts it rather at odds with the accepted definition of communism. So the next year will prove instructive.

Peace.

[Judi Lynn]

29. Thanks for the terrible truth we have been struggling to ignore!

Hugo Chavez on Marxism

'I don't believe in the dogmatic postulates of Marxist revolution. I don't
accept that we are living in a period of proletarian revolutions. All that
must be revised. Reality is telling us that every day. Are we aiming in
Venezuela today for the abolition of private property or a classless
society? I don't think so. But if I'm told that because of that reality
you can't do anything to help the poor, the people who have made this
country rich through their labour and never forget that some of it was
slave labour, then I say 'We part company'. I will never accept that there
can be no redistribution of wealth in society. Our upper classes don't
even like paying taxes. That's one reason they hate me. We said 'You must
pay your taxes'. I believe it's better to die in battle, rather than hold
aloft a very revolutionary and very pure banner, and do nothing ... That
position often strikes me as very convenient, a good excuse ... Try and
make your revolution, go into combat, advance a little, even if it's only
a millimetre, in the right direction, instead of dreaming about utopias.'

https://www4.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/296440.html

[cigsandcoffee]

56. I prefer to watch what he does rather than what he says.

...and what he does sure looks like Castro-style Communism to me. Feel free to disagree.

[Psephos]

101. Seems self-evident that the definition of dictator is one who rules by decree.

You're wise to listen to what the man does, not just what he says...maybe not so wise to think that matters to the True Believers. Heh heh. Lord Acton would have a field day with the concentration of powers in Venezuela.

It takes two to speak the truth: one to speak, and another to hear.
- Thoreau

I used to think Chavez was something special. But as years pass he looks more and more like a garden-variety populist with the usual problems of ego and self-importance. There are worse politicians, there are better. Maybe Chavez will come back to the fold and prove his democratic bona fides. But then maybe someday I'll win the PowerBall lotto.

Meanwhile, I continue to read the Chavez threads for both entertainment and enlightenment about the psychology of those in thrall to a cult of personality. The seminal feature of such cults, of course, is that nothing the Great Leader does can be construed as wrong.

Peace.

[Missy M]

31. He is not a hard line communist, that's ridiculous....

he was given the authority to rule by decree for 18 months. He is leaning toward socialism. He was elected by the people that actually live in Venezuela and if they don't like what he is doing they can vote him out in the next election.

[Judi Lynn]

34. Even before that! Remember they also can do recall of their President.

I'm a little fuzzy on the mechanics of it, but I think any time after he's halfway through his term, they can vote him OUTTA THERE, just like what happened when the U.S.-financed Sumate Party organized the recall a couple of years ago, and went down in flames!

That must have really killed them.

Here's one of their leaders, Maria Machado, meeting her patron, who sends her political group OUR MONEY.

[endarkenment]

39. Oh really? And your evidence of that would be?

Please describe all of the programs and policies of Chavez that are 'hard line Communist'. Be specific.

[cigsandcoffee]

94. He's smooching on Castro, nationalizing industries, decrying capitalism...

...and setting up socialist education camps. Really, what more do you need?

[Judi Lynn]

95. Smooching? Is that an adult word?

Nationalizing industries is an old custom in Venezuela. They've been doing it far, FAR longer than Hugo Chavez has been Venezuela's elected President.

"Decrying capitalism......" Good grief. Why aren't you taking a shot at OTHER countries with different economic construction?

You don't seem to grasp the fact that outside South Florida, people don't get hysterical over people who respect Fidel Castro.

Latin America and the Caribbean have EVERY REASON IN THE WORLD to resent what certain U.S. Presidents have done to them.

Take time off and start reading the history which has escaped you. You'll need it for intelligent conversations.

[cigsandcoffee]

98. You're awfully condescending and combative - a chip on the shoulder.

In my experience, people who use ALL CAPS in their replies are pretty off balanced and hysterical, too - but that's an aside.

If you're comfortable with Chavez sliding ever closer to Cuban-style Communism, then that's fine. Enjoy. I find it to be a step backward in terms of human rights, individual rights, and freedom of expression. There is really nothing more dangerous to the human condition than an oppressive system of government, and Chavez is well on his way to establishing it.

America has done bad things? Sure. Does that mean Castro-style Communism is healthy for anyone other than those holding the power? No way. For instance, Cuba's claim to fame in recent years was that every citizen would get a free Chinese rice cooker. Gee. Swell. What a guy.

It reminds me of a famous letter to Michael Gorbachev written during his reforms in the late 1980s. The man writing it praised him for his progressive nature, and said that he thought it was wonderful that the system was adapting - but that he could not participate in Perestroika without socks.

If that doesn't highlight the root problem of a Communist system, then I don't know what does. Sorry, Chavez is an asshole.

[Warren Stupidity]

96. uh hmmm.... never mind.

[Megahurtz]

41. Right.

:eyes:

[arikara]

85. Back to the fifties with you!

Taking back the country's resources from plundering corporations. Giving land, education and health care to peasants. Off with his commie pinko head.

[rman]

109. bullshit

You think Chavez is a "pain in the ass"? Why is that?

And please do tell: what IS happening in Venezuela?

[stillcool]

33. These Chavez threads..

need some psycho-analysis. They're getting kind of funny...but I do worry about some of the posters.

[EFerrari]

61. Populism is the new communism.

:crazy:

[endarkenment]

36. Before you all get your knickers in a knot...

1) the new venezuelan constitution that Chavez and his bolivarian party enacted as their first reform of the corrupt Venezuelan republic provides for a recall election of the president (that would be Chavez). He is not a dictator.

2) rule by decree is not unusual in Venezuela, and Chavez has a limited power to rule by decree in specific areas. And once again, should he abuse this authority, he can be recalled.

3) the people and newspapers cited in the article are all the pawns of the out of power oligarchy, which is continuing its efforts to dislodge the reform movement, which efforts have included a military coup, an attempted chilean style strike of the middle class, a recall election, and an election boycott, all of which efforts have failed miserably as Chavez and the Bolivarian party he heads are hugely popular with the vast majority of the Venezuelan people.

Now get back to calling Hugo a commie and your usual teeth gnashing and hair pulling.

[Missy M]

40. Thank you so much for your input.....

I hope the teeth gnashers read it and can understand it. I'm afraid even with your intelligent comments they will still insist he is a commie dictator.

[BestCenter]

52. But the issue is

Why would a popular leader need rule by decree if what he's doing is in the best interests of the people? FDR never needed it. If he has nothing to hide, why doesn't he do it through the constitutional procedures established by the rule of law?

And remember, Hitler was also democratically elected.

[killbotfactory]

90. He was also given this power before

These powers are limited. He can't just go and ban opposition parties, rainbows, and fluffy puppy's at a whim.

[Judi Lynn]

91. You're right. We didn't hear a peep back then, did we?

The propagandists were caught sleeping at the wheel. They didn't manage to stir up the reactionaries.

[brentspeak]

43. It's not the nationalization of industries that angers me about Chavez

Heck, I wish we could nationalize the oil industry here in the U.S. It is our resources, after all.

No, what bothers me about Chavez is his anti-democratic, "rule-by-decree", Mussolini-like swaggering. He has absolutely zilch in common with the notion of a "democracy". And his needless, "in your face" hostility to the U.S. has accomplished nothing but increase tensions thoughout the entire region. We already have Bush to make international relations worse; Chavez just wants to do the same.

[Judi Lynn]

45. Then how do you explain the other Venezuela Presidents who used this authority?

Posted here, and in other threads:

It is important to note that this type of power-transfer is allowed under the Venezuelan constitution of 1999, which expressly permits the President to issue executive orders specifically within these issue areas. Of course, the constitution continues to guide the country's overall legal framework, which is to say that no "decree" can supercede constitutional law.

What's more, this "enabling law" is not new to the current constitution. Venezuela's previous constitution allowed for similar powers shifts to the executive, and you can be sure that past presidents took advantage of this authority on multiple occasions throughout the 70's, 80's and 90's. Here are a few examples:

In 1974, Congress gave President Carlos Andres Perez the right to "rule by decree" on a number of economic matters, which he used to pass a slew of new regulations-instituting a minimum wage increase, freezing the market price of "necessary" goods, instating tax relief on agricultural activities, increasing government pensions, and even establishing new state institutions, including the National Institute of Housing and an Industrial Development Fund.

But Perez was a close ally of the US government, so there was little controversy from Washington.

Ten years later, in May 1984, Congress again gave authority to the President, this time Jaime Lusinchi, to deal with the country's financial crisis by decree. He enacted a complicated exchange scheme, which was different for various sectors. For example, he extended a fixed exchange rate (4.3 bolivars to the dollar) for the payment of foreign debt and for Venezuelan students studying abroad; a second rate (6 bolivars to the dollar) for trade in the oil and iron industries; and a third (7.5 to 1) for the commercial and financial sectors. A fourth, "fluctuating dollar," constantly changing by market forces, was in use for everything else.

Nobody balked at all this, certainly not on the international scene. Lusinchi is remembered for hosting the first-ever visit of a Pope to Venezuela, and left office a few years later with what at the time was the highest approval ratings of an outgoing Venezuelan president.

In 1993, interim President Ramon Jose Velasquez used these special "decree" powers to retool the country's debt and reform the financial system. Once again, nobody-well, nobody remembers much about Velasquez at all. He was sort of a historical footnote, serving only 8 months in office.
(snip/...)

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1946

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lucky for Venezuelans, they are still, up to this moment, allowed to choose their own Presidents, and what makes Chavez different, HE'S THE ONE WHO CAN BE RECALLED BY THE VOTERS.

[EFerrari]

47. Um, what the f#ck?

These powers required a vote -- a vote that took place AFTER an extended public debate. They are limited and specific to a task.

And, did I read you, right? His "needless" hostility to the U.S.?!

You are conflating BushCo with the American citizenry. BushCo has tried every trick in their book to oust him. He has every reason to be hostile to THEM.

His attitude to wards Americans is entirely different, as evidenced by Venezuela's sale of cheap heating oil to the East Coast last winter.

Really, we can be more careful than this, can't we? Or, do we just drink every pitcher of Kool Aide that comes down the pike?

[BestCenter]

54. Time will tell.

Let's all see how events unfold in the next 18 months. But remember, dictatorship in the name of equality is not true equality.

[EFerrari]

58. DICTATORSHIP?! WTF #2

Have you any clue that the government in Venezuela is MUCH MORE democratic than ours is -- seeing as how Junior can have me or you picked up at any time and for no reason and with no charges and with no hearing?

That's just crazy.

lol

[BestCenter]

60. Again, time will tell.

It's too early to make judgments one way or the other.

[EFerrari]

63. Well, no it isn't. Your government can imprison you at will.

And you pretend to sit in judgement of VENEZUELA?

That's a Hefty bad full of denial. :)

[BestCenter]

64. What difference does it make what government I live under?

I can't make judgments on Venezuela? Are they some sort of sainted utopia? Your suppression of free speech is most disconcerting.

Again, time will tell how the next 18 months go.

[EFerrari]

67. What difference does it make that you are herded into "free speech zones"

and spied upon illegally and fed bullshit by the wingnut media.

lol

From your position, you are in a perfect place to judge an actually ELECTED leader in Venezuela doing his job as it is delineated by the constitution and voted on by the legislature after public debate!

But, don't let me SUPPRESS YOUR FREE SPEECH.

:rofl:

[BestCenter]

68. The very fact that you are capable of making such statements

Shows that free speech is very much alive.

And I never said that I'm judging right now. What I'm calling for is some RESTRAINT and withhold judgment until we see what Chavez can do in 18 months.

Is that so crazy?

[EFerrari]

73. Because we wouldn't be Americans if we weren't constantly judging

those little brown people?

What paternalistic cr@P.

Listen, as Americans we have enough on our hands without chasing BushCo disinformation about the most exciting democratic leader in the Western hemisphere.

Even if they off him today, Hugo Chavez has done more for Latin America than just about any one I can think of. And no thanks to the predatory policy of the American government who has raped, plundered and pillaged that region because, um, it's our God given right. Right?

I don't think we're going to agree on this one. And rather than be ruder than I've been, I'm just dropping it now.

[BestCenter]

76. What's wrong with judgment?

It makes no matter if they're brown or not. Governments are governments. If people don't criticize a state, then how can you call it a democracy? Why shouldn't we actively criticize ANY state, no matter if they're democratic or undemocratic? Your undivided praise worries me. This is the sort of black/white thinking that Bush has.

[EFerrari]

78. Where have I praised rather than described? :-)

Listen, anyone is corruptible, I suppose.

And Chavez sure has had time to line his pockets and subvert his constitution and do any number of the shady things we've grown used to our own government doing.

Thing is, instead, he's put in literacy programs so people can read their constitution. Hot meals in public schools. Helping renters buy their homes. Established medical clinics all over. Has taken a firm stance against the energy industry that want to strip mine Venezuela.

He's a goner, I think, and I admire him -- that's true. But there's nothing black n white about accurately recounting his accomplishments in standing up to American imperialism.

[Judi Lynn]

71. It's not suppression when you are expected to at least know what you're talking about.

Anyone can offer opinions, but their opinions are absolutely worthless, and a waste of everyone's time when they aren't based on reality.

It's about time certain people in the U.S. backed away from hoping to control the private business of countries elsewhere, and started creating a decent government HERE.

Meddling is ALWAYS wrong, always crude, and always ugly. It can be done, like someone picking his nose in public, only worse because it involves MURDERING people and STEALING their governments, but only the ugliest, nastiest, lowest among us would encourage it.

[BestCenter]

72. That's why I'm saying that we should wait

Until we see what Chavez does with his newfound powers, and THEN issue judgments. I'm calling for moderation and reason here.

[Say_What]

102. That depends on how much one knows about the situation...

plenty of DUers have been interested in Venezuela before the failed US-led coup.

If you really want to know about Chavez, you'll look outside the MSM for information. The MSM, run by the corporate elite of the planet, has an ax to grind with Chavez just like they did with Allende and a host of other democratically elected leaders that were overthrown/killed in CIA-led coups. They couldn't kill Chavez and the coup failed. There have been other coup attempts that also failed. Now they've ratcheted up the pressure with all kinds of anti-Chavez propaganda and US sheeple are buying it just like they've bought all the other bullshit over the decades. The headlines now are exactly like those of the Allende years--do a search of the NYTs archives and see for yourself. Chavez is a big threat to the multinationals--that's why he's hated. They'll spare no expense at trying to demonize and discredit him just like they did with Castro, Allende, Arbenz, etc, etc, etc.

BTW, all the stuff about Chavez that the press is screeching about is going on in Colombia. Why do you suppose we don't here anything about that? Uribe happens to be a US lapdog, friends with El Mono Bush.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2708619&mesg_id=2710110

[Say_What]

100. Chavez haters been saying the same shit for the past six years --don't hold your breath n/t

[Missy M]

62. His hostility to the US is certainly understandable....

we are always interfering and we did back the coup against him, what would you expect. Why you have such a strong feeling against him, when you don't live in that country is beyond me. He does have something in common with trying to help the poor which is certainly commendable. Don't you think your "Mussolini-like" swaggering is a bit over the top.

[rman]

111. good heavens

Such nonsense.

Why is Chavez taking so long to start doing the bad things he's preemptively being accused if?

Do you know when Chavez became president,
And do you know what he has done since in Venezuela?

[hack89]

49. It does not bode well for Venezuela in the long term ...

regardless of who is exercising these powers, the need to use rule by decree is a damning indictment of Venezuela's ability to govern itself. It looks like an admission that it's democratic institutions are too weak or immature to handle the country's problems. What is expected to happen in the next 18 months that would make the need for rule by decree go away? Has Chavez announced a plan to fix Venezuela's government?

[EFerrari]

55. Nonsense. These powers have been granted before to other leaders.

They are limited and required a vote. They are also specific to a development task.

[hack89]

59. So why can't their elected officials handle such problems?

Would you ever accept such a system here in the US? If my representatives said they were unable to solve some problem I would say that they need to step aside so the voters could find some competent replacements.

[EFerrari]

65. Pssssssssst! We are never asked to accept such a measure here

because Junior just does signing statements!

(slaps forehead)

I just LOVE TO DEATH the way the wingnut media whores can get you so worked up about Mr. Chavez because it gives Americans a rest from the beam in their own eye. :crazy:

[BestCenter]

66. So because Bush is bad, we can't criticize Chavez?

If we lived in Mussolini's Italy, we couldn't criticize Stalin?

Is that it?

[EFerrari]

69. Not at all. But let's be accurate. I'm all for critical but, facts matter. n/t

[BestCenter]

70. That's why I say wait 18 months. Then we'll be able to tell. (n/t)

[rman]

110. no, it's because Chavez is not bad

that you can't criticize him - not legitimately anyway.

Or maybe you can tell me about the bad things that Chavez has done?

[hack89]

74. But it has been done by previous Venezuelan presidents,

hasn't it? So there appears to be some systemic problem with Venezuelan democracy. It is not about Chavez - it is about a form of government that best looks after the interest of its people. If I reject rule by decree here in America (which I do vehemently) because it erodes my fundamental freedoms, how can I turn around and not be equally outraged at the erosion of Venezuelan freedoms?

[ohio2007]

75. Why couldn't his programs be carried under the current form of government

He is going to become president for life. There is no oposition to run against him or get term limits passed.

[Warren Stupidity]

97. Why don't you just make stuff up?

"Why couldn't his programs be carried under the current form of government"?

The current form of government allows for rule by decree. It has been done before in Venezuela, it does not abolish in any way the current form of government. His authority is limited in scope and time and he can be recalled at any time.

"He is going to become president for life" - or not, you just made that up.

"There is no oposition to run against him" - well of course there is. The opposition chose not to participate in the last election. Consequently they currently have no say in how things are run. That was their choice. The elections were internationally monitored and declared completely fair and honest. No such claims can be made about our elections.

"or get term limits passed" - so he is a bad man becuase Venezuela doesn't have term limits? Is that your argument? Currently their constitution does have term limits, although Chavez has indeed said he would like to amend that so that he can run again. Venezuela also has recall elections for the president.

[TankLV]

104. FDR

Remember him - no term limits for him either...

[Say_What]

105. Now that is a real stretch even for you...

Get some information before posting that regurgitated propaganda for keeerist's sake.

....This is the third time Chavez has received such authorization during his presidency and Chavez is the fifth Venezuelan president to take advantage of this power, which both the 1961 and the 1999 constitutions permit.

The enabling law, which Chavez has called the “mother law” for the laws that are to help bring about 21st century socialism, was passed in an outdoor meeting of the National Assembly today. In the course of the meeting, to which the public had open access, various representatives of the pro-Chavez coalition explained why they supported the law.

Most legislators talked about how they trusted Chavez to pass laws that would increase democracy in Venezuela and the need to act rapidly because this is what the Venezuelan people are expecting.

The second Vice-President of the national assembly, Roberto Hernandez, said, “We are living in a revolutionary time and a revolution is characterized by having as its fundamental objective social justice and social justice, for revolutionaries, cannot wait… We are promising justice for today and not for the future.”

Hernandez added, “We in the National Assembly do not vacillate in giving the president the enabling law to legislate… The laws that Hugo Chavez will decree are laws destined to satisfy the immense majority

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2207

[Judi Lynn]

107. This is so interesting, and so important, and it's right there in front of their eyes.

From your article, a few facts:

This is the third time Chavez has received such authorization during his presidency and Chavez is the fifth Venezuelan president to take advantage of this power, which both the 1961 and the 1999 constitutions permit.

What's not to understand? Doesn't seem all that complex, does it?

Facts get in the way of their delusions. Sad.

He's the fifth Venezuelan President to use this authority, yet the ONLY ONE who has drawn fire for it, as the others were US-approved. His choice in doing the same thing is really scary, but the same choice made by the others was not. Doesn't make too much sense, does it?

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vidar]

99. I'm anxious to see how he uses this power and wish him the best.

[Renegade Paladin]

106. Okay, let's just call it what it is.

Chavez is now a dictator. That's all "rule by decree" means; he has personal control over all aspects of the Venezuelan government and there is no check on his power. I will not be surprised if he decrees an "extension" of his period of fiat rule when the clock starts winding down.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

108. Did you even bother to READ...

the thread before spouting off? :eyes:

Everything Chavez is doing that you are so "concerned" about is completely legal and acceptable under the Venezuelan constitution. He is a lawfully elected leader engaging in actions santioned by his Congress and allowed under the country's law. A Congress, btw, that has the constitutional authority to kick his ass out if he gets too big for his britches.

And what he is doing is wrong because.....?


Good lord, the willful ignorance of some people...

[ItNerd4life]

112. I'm confused. Why are people supporting Chavez?

It states clearly "The lawmakers, all loyal to Chavez after opposition parties boycotted the 2005 congressional elections".

In other words, he is a dictator. He has no opposition because he doesn't allow it. The reason the opposition boycotted the 2005 election is because he didn't allow opposition.

He may claim it's legal, but so did Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin. Just because it's legal in their country, doesn't make it right.

Can you imagine this country with no opposition to Bush?

[Judi Lynn]

113. You've got to start reading in order to get a clue.

DU'ers were discussing the opposition's decision to boycott long ago, and they did it precisely because they knew they were going to be buried in the election, due to their FILTHY POLITICS.

If they had been doing right for the people of Venezuela, had some viable candidates who could elected they would have participated, and not tried to redirect everyone's attention from their unpopularity with a boycott.

Don't even try to bamboozle anyone here. We already know what's going on there because we are at least intelligent enough to read the news. It's only the least anyone can do.

You can't just make it up, not here. That's an effort which would be more effective among slow, disoriented people, like right-wingers.

[Judi Lynn]

114. Chavez "doesn't allow opposition." Good one.

Now, how about providing some links to the places where we can learn about this suppression of dissent. You'd be doing everyone a favor, and maybe people would stop supporting Chavez! Win-win!

Get out there and find those links!

[killbotfactory]

115. There is opposition in Venezuela

They boycotted the 2005 election because they were going to lose, and apparently it was a good way to make people think Chavez is a dictator.

There was opposition candidates in the 2006 election running against Chavez.

But it's nice to know that dictator now simply means politically popular with high approval ratings.

[mvd]

118. I don't support any rule by "decree," but let's wait a bit before

writing him off as some tyrant. I don't know how controlled Venezuela's Congress is, so I'll also avoid comment on that.

[SOS]

119. Chavez threads....

We've had dozens of threads about the democratically elected leader of Venezuela.

And yet, Saudi Arabia is our close ally in the Mideast. The Bush family is personally close to royal family. They supply the Sunni insurgents killing US soldiers in Iraq, 70% of Iraq's suicide bombers are Saudi, their banks ran the money for 9/11 and 15 of 19 hijackers were from here. Here are some highlights from the HRW report on this valued American friend:

"Freedom of expression and association were nonexistent rights, political parties and independent local media were not permitted, and even peaceful anti-government activities remained virtually unthinkable. Infringements on privacy, institutionalized gender discrimination, harsh restrictions on the exercise of religious freedom, and the use of capital and corporal punishment were also major features of the kingdom's human rights record. Freedom of expression remained strictly circumscribed and there was no independent press.

Capital punishment was applied for crimes including sodomy, and sorcery. In most cases, the condemned were decapitated in public squares after being blindfolded, handcuffed, shackled at the ankles, and tranquilized. By late September 2000, at least 104 Saudis and foreigners had been beheaded, exceeding in nine months the total of 103 that Amnesty International recorded in 1999. Two of the foreigners beheaded in 2000 were women.

Saudi courts continued to impose corporal punishment, including amputations of hands and feet for robbery, and floggings for lesser crimes such as "sexual deviance" and drunkenness. The number of lashes was not clearly prescribed by law and varied according to the discretion of judges, and ranged from dozens of lashes to several thousand, usually applied over a period of weeks or months. A court in Qunfuda sentenced nine Saudi alleged transvestites in April. Five drew prison terms of six years and 2,600 lashes, and the other four were sentenced to five years and 2,400 lashes. The floggings reportedly were to be carried out in fifty equal sessions, with a fifteen-day hiatus between each punishment. Suspects had no right to examine witnesses, or to call witnesses of their own, and uncorroborated confessions could constitute the basis for conviction and sentencing.

The government heavily restricted religious freedom and actively discouraged religious practices other than the Wahhabi interpretation of the Hanbali school of Sunni Islam.

Freedom of expression remained strictly circumscribed and there was no independent press.

Saudi women continued to face severe discrimination in all aspects of their lives, including the family, education, employment, and the justice system.

Saudi Arabia continued to provide refuge and financial support to Idi Amin, the exiled Ugandan leader whose regime was responsible for a reign of terror that left an estimated 300,00 dead in the 1970s. "

A dictatorial hell on earth. Yet in the US nobody says a word. With Saudi Arabia as a close friend of the US, criticizing Chavez from here is just plain ridiculous.

I'd rather live in Caracas than Riyadh.

[Bushknew]

122. With Saudi Arabia as a close friend of the US, criticizing Chavez is ridiculous.

Here here

[Stella_Artois]

124. Hold on a second

The Saudis are the bad guys. You can't compare Chavez to them and say he is OK because, hey the Saudis live in the middle ages.

Chavez rules by decree and is trying to make himself president for life.

Fact.

Now, spin that every which way you like.

Kinda like saying guy next door is a good guy really, becuase he only slaps his wife around because he knows best. Did you know that some guy over town killed his wife last year ?

Rules by decree and wants to be president for life. Great guy though ! He knows best.

[AikidoSoul]

128. I wish you would read JudiLynn's posts about how decrees are ALLOWED by the constitution ofVenezuela

for certain actions, within certain time frames. It is there for you to see.

Those saying that Chavez is a dictator for using the decree privilege --are purposefully ignoring the fact that it is constitutional to do so. Instead they are using context and language which is neither rational or fair.

Please do some background study as this discussion needs to stay fair or it will become a suck hole of idiocy created by those who refuse to do their homework.

Blind ideologues come to mind.


The phrase, "There are none so blind as those who will not see" also comes to mind.

[killbotfactory]

125. It comes down to money

If you are a friend of US corporate interests, you can run a country like the third reich for all the US cares.
If you aren't, you're a megalomaniac demon unleashed from the pits of commie hell.

The US only uses concepts like freedom, democracy, and human rights as propaganda.

[AikidoSoul]

129. That's exactly right. Now someone needs to make a list of ALL of the friends of America that

fall into category of regressive, and even evil regimes. There are many. As long as there's lots of money flowing into U.S. elite's pockets our government will kiss their butts ....

or hold their hands

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

121. Walks like one, quacks like one, must be a.......

[manic expression]

126. Good

Hopefully he can start making Venezuela a more equitable society. It'll be interesting to see how he uses this power, but one can only hope that he will collectivize industry and even out wealth as much as possible.