Elected with a left-wing base that won only a quarter of the seats in the Chamber, Lula had to overcome a year full of negotiations with Congress to be able to even maintain the design of his ministries. The political agreements sealed involved mainly the distributions of strategic positions and many resources to senators and federal deputies. An important player in this was the political group called the “Centrão”, which has as members: PP, PL, Republicans, Solidarity, PTB, PSD, MDB and DEM.
This Content Is Only For Subscribers
To unlock this content, subscribe to MOVI NEWS.
Ministries
Amid many negotiations, the government distributed 11 ministries to Brazil Union, MDB, PSD, PP and Republicans. In addition, until September, R$ 24.2 billion were allocated to congressmen. In 2024, the budget foresees a total of R$53 billion.
Despite this, the relationship is highly unstable and full of episodes of frayed nerves due to problems in the political articulation and delays to pay the resources allocated and small positions within the state structure.
Tension to Continue in 2024
Parliamentarians assess that ups and downs will continue in 2024 if the government does not change the political articulation team. According to participants, parliamentarians stated that it was necessary for the government to speed up the release of amendments and position appointments, as it had previously signaled.
Government Victories
Despite the threat to return to the ministerial structure of Bolsonaro’s administration, which had 23 ministries, at the last minute, the government managed to maintain the 37 ministries, an important mechanism to negotiate support in Congress.
Another success was the approval of the tax reform and the project that changes the rules of Administrative Council of Financial Resources (Carf), considered priorities for the Finance team. The provisional measure (MP) that changed the ICMS subsidy rules were another important achievement for the Finance Ministry’s team.
Analysis:
Despite the obstacles and the many tense moments with Congress, the Federal Government managed to approve a series of reforms and bills important for the economy and the country’s administration. According to Folha de São Paulo, 20% of Lula’s campaign promises were delivered. On the other hand, the relation is still quite fragile, particularly because the government’s political bloc in Congress is the smallest since the return to the democratic regime. Furthermore, ideas announced by important political leader may indicate that the challenges for political stability will likely expand.
In the past times, the Legislative Power has been carrying out a campaign to expand its forces. From one side, it pushes projects that limit the capacities of the Supreme Court (STF), from another, Senate and Federal Chamber presidents campaign in favor of two ideas that can reduce the power of the Executive branch.
From the Presidency of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2003) until the present days the Federal Government has lost a lot of autonomy, previously manifested through provisional measures and almost total control over the allocation of resources to Congressmen. However, over the years, legislative changes gave Congress more power and more funds. Today, the president needs to reach an understanding with the deputies and senators, under penalty of not governing or even being removed from office.
In addition to the limitations to the power of the STF, which include the extinction of monocratic decisions, the Congress has been debating semi-presidentialism and ending re-election mechanism. Nonetheless, there is no consensus that such measures will bring gains to the Brazilian political system.
Political commentator Bruno Carazza point out that, when reelection was approved, supporters argued that a single four-year term would be too little to implement the reforms and it would also be an incentive for the holder of the position to meet the demands of the electorate, as he would be reevaluated after four years in power. On the other hand, now critics hold two main arguments to revoke it. First, they claim that two consecutive terms give a disproportionate advantage to those in power, even though the success rate of candidates for re-election for mayor, governor and president shows a balanced scenario. The other point against re-election follows the reasoning that, as soon as mayors, governors and presidents take office, they direct all their efforts to obtain a new mandate. But a study published in 2009 by P. Arvate, G. Avelino and J. Tavares found no evidence of this. They also found that first-term mayors behaved more responsibly than their second-term counterparts.
Meanwhile, semi-presidentialism is a political model in which Executive power is diluted. In many countries that adopt it, the president is the head of state, being responsible for appointing the prime minister, who will need to be approved by parliament. This agent will be the head of government. The model is adopted by some European countries, such as Italy.
The decision to revive the discussion about the end of re-election in Congress is based much more on rising political interest than on evidence from electoral data and academic studies.
For analysts, such as Carazza, the ideas defended by Lira and Pacheco will have the same effect, they will weaken Lula’s position. Even though both assure that the objective is to implement the new rules only after 2030, those who lose most with the reduction in the power of the Presidency of the Republic are those who currently occupy it and intend to remain there: Lula and the Workers Party (PT).
Initiatives such as semi-presidentialism or the end of re-election will require an effort from Lula and his government to contain the advance of those interested in undermining the president’s position. This can become a double challenge for the central authorities, which will have to negotiate to approve its measures, while containing potential proposals to limit its powers.
