Miguel Angel Sandoval
It is embarrassing to see the presidential “debates”
Today it is necessary to discuss something that is out of date. There are no substantiated public policy proposals in the candidates, which can be seen from afar. And you don’t have to be a genius about finances or the scope and limitations of the national budget. But it can be said that today, the candidates who lead the polls (it doesn’t matter if we believe them or not) only sell smoke, as if they thought that the voters are all ignorant.
Given this, what can be seen in the electoral panorama and in the results that we will see after June 25, is a serious electoral absenteeism. People are not willing to give their vote for monumental nonsense that today’s candidates expose, with some exceptions. Worst of all, without wrinkling a muscle in the face and without blushing. It is embarrassing to see the presidential “debates”. For family reasons I saw a forum for open channels. Four candidates and no solid, structured, realistic proposals, with financial and legal data. In the same way nothing related to issues as urgent as rural development.
Example, for the field what is so proclaimed is needed: legal certainty. And for this, the first thing that the candidates should know is that there are no agrarian laws. As there is traffic, health, family, commerce, criminal, etc. But there is no agrarian code, nor special courts, let alone a prosecutor’s office that investigates all crimes that occur in the countryside, land occupations or expulsions. One of two, either you are afraid to touch the subject or you ignore it in a brutal way.
Same in mining. It is an insult to the nation for companies to give 1% of the royalties and pocket 99%. The same happens in other state businesses. This is what we saw a few days ago. The Palín-Escuintla highway was the business carried out. 1% for the country, 99% for the company. But this is not touched by the candidates.
Not to mention the tax. There is a collection rate of barely 11 or 12% of GDP. And all according to who presents data and how they present it. With that, very few possibilities of investing in public works. But everyone is silent. The cause is known: not to bother their financiers.
And as an issue that degrades us as a country, a TV channel has the luxury of summoning the candidates they like and leaving out those who are not part of their preferences. In such a way, those who lead polls, rigged or not, are the pretext to leave out the rest, that is, about 20 candidates. And the excluded keep their mouths shut, while the elected vulgarize a presidential forum without ideas, without proposals. It can still be rectified.
