Guide: 2014 Elections in the Americas

For the first time, Costa Rica and El Salvador will allow emigrants to vote in their presidential elections, both taking place on February 2. AS/COA Online looks at the countries’ new expatriate voting laws and what have been the changes and challenges of adopting these measures.

Costa Rica: The country’s revised 2009 electoral code permits overseas citizens to vote in presidential elections and national referenda, but not congressional members. With an estimated 300,000 Costa Ricans living abroad, the government will enable polling centers in 52 consulates and an electronic voting system in 31 countries. The consulates in New York (2,657 voters), Los Angeles (1,487 voters), and Miami (1,153 voters) have the largest number of registered voters. Roughly 120,000 Costa Ricans live in the United States alone.

In order to vote, overseas residents must be 18 years of age or older, have a national identification card, and register at a consulate prior to the elections. It’s thought that roughly 12,600 expats are registered to vote this year—a small number compared to how many live abroad.

In the event of an April 6 runoff, expats can go to their prior assigned voting posts to resubmit their ballots. In addition to dealing with travel costs and long distances, this year’s adverse weather conditions in Canada and northern United States could impede many Costa Ricans from making it to some polling centers, reports La Nación. Suffrage is obligatory, but failing to vote is not punishable.

El Salvador: In January 2013, the country passed the Special Law for the Exercise of Voting from Abroad in Presidential Elections, which allows expat residents to submit a ballot by mail. To register, voters must be at least 18 years old, possess a valid identification, and have a physical address abroad.

The new electoral law could afford emigrants—particularly in the United States—greater political clout, given their large contributions to El Salvador’s economy through remittances, which represent 16.5 percent of the Central American country’s GDP. According to the Central Bank, Salvadorans sent almost $4 billion home last year—a 1.5 percent increase from 2012. Around 3 million Salvadorans live outside the country, of which 2.5 million live in the United States. With over 400,000 Salvadoran residents, Los Angeles, California is home to the largest expat population.

But only a few weeks ahead of the vote, the electoral tribunal reported delays of at least 4,000 electoral packages that have not yet been mailed to recipients in the United States. Other residents faced issues mailing votes from postal offices in Canada. Out of the 250,000 expatriates expected to vote this year, only 10,000 registered. La Prensa Grafica reported that, as of January 23, the electoral agency received over 1,800 expat votes.

It used to be that elections in Central America occupied Washington for months at a time, capturing the attention of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, and all sides of the political spectrum. On Sunday, Washington will indeed be anxious to receive the results—of the Super Bowl, that is.

Attention is focused elsewhere. But that doesn't mean elections in El Salvador and Costa Rica are inconsequential. In fact, it's a commentary on how far the region has advanced, as well as how Washington has evolved, that the ideological differences of the respective candidates, which certainly exist, are not determinative. Rather, voters are attempting to discern which candidates might offer the best hope for improving their lives. Whomever they select, as Congressman Elliott Engel told the Council of the Americas in Washington recently, Washington will respect the results.

What are the primary issues?

Time and again, voters have expressed concerns about personal security and crime. They are also concerned about stagnating economies and slow recovery from the global economic crisis that is now over five years old. Both El Salvador and Costa Rica have candidates who promise job creation, better economic conditions, improved education, and a reduction in criminal activities. The question for voters on Sunday will be which of the candidates do they believe has the best chance of successfully addressing these difficult issues fairly, openly, and in a pragmatic, action-oriented way.

Recent elections in Honduras and upcoming elections in El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Panama (in May) mean that four of seven Central American countries face change. What are the prospects for Central America in the near term?

Central America has come a massive distance from the days of civil war, coups, extrajudicial killings, and human rights atrocities. The people of the region are to be congratulated. With significant U.S. assistance, the region is stable politically and generally democratic. Meanwhile the Dominican Republic-Central America-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) trade agreement has linked the region economically to the United States, the Americas' top traditional market, and total two-way trade rising from $35 billion in 2005 to $54 billion last year.

Nonetheless, government institutions and civil society remain weak and susceptible to manipulation, particularly by leaders corrupted by a desire to remain in office indefinitely and by mafias fueled by the proceeds from illegal activities such as narcotics. Economic opportunities and job creation lag, a situation that may well be exacerbated if the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is concluded and provisions therein allow Vietnamese production to erode CAFTA-DR benefits. At the same time, the propensity for Central American leaders to see the region as seven nations rather than one area for economic purposes needlessly segments markets and reduces the attraction of Central America as both a marketplace and a production platform.

Having said that, the expansion of the Panama Canal, potential immigration reform in the United States, and intentional cooperation between North America and Central America on energy, security, and other matters are important positives for the region, which should not be overlooked.

As Costa Rican voters prepare to cast their ballots on February 2, conflicting poll numbers make it hard to predict the outcome. A January 14 CID-Gallup survey reported that the frontrunner Johnny Araya, of the governing National Liberation Party (PNL), had 39 percent of voter support and was pulling ahead of his top contenders. But, two days later, a Unimer poll showed the former mayor of San Jose at only 20.3 percent. The same data puts the Broad Front's Congressman José María Villalta ahead of the pack with 22.2 percent and Congressman Otto Guevara of the Libertarian Movement neck and neck with Araya at 20.2 percent. Meanwhile, a January 22 poll to come out of the University of Costa Rica asked respondents who they would choose were the elections that day. Roughly 20.5 percent would elect Araya and 15.3 percent would choose Villalta. The frontrunner addressed the polling discrepancies and said he did "not really believe" the hefty lead that CID-Gallup numbers gave him. With such differences, it's unclear if any of the candidates will garner the 40 percent of votes needed to avoid an April runoff election.

One aspect of the race shows how "atypical" it has been, says political analyst Victor Ramírez. The number of undecided voters has climbed to 40 percent from 29 percent in November, and party lines appear to be shifting as the governing party loses support. Villalta, an environmentalist lawyer and the race's youngest candidate, counts younger voters in his support base, as well as those living in cities and from higher socioeconomic levels. Surveys show that 22 percent of his supporters voted for the PNL in 2010. Likewise, 21 percent of Guevara's supporters, mostly of lower socioeconomic standing, are former PNL  voters.

A January 20 televised debate focused on the economy, social security, and education and gave candidates a chance to trade barbs and sway undecided voters while solidifying their bases. For Costa Ricans, poverty and unemployment remain the two most important issues, according to a University of Costa Rica survey. During the debate, Araya discussed his social assistance plan, while Guevara reiterated his promise to create 500,000 new jobs, and Villalta defended himself against claims that his agenda resembled "Venezuelan communism." A series of debates that began in October will come to a close on January 27, when candidates will square off for the final time.

Candidates focused on security and the economy in El Salvador’s first ever televised presidential debate, held January 12—just three weeks ahead of the February 2 election. Broadcast on television, radio, and online, the event featured the three main candidates: Salvador Sánchez Cerén of the governing Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), Norman Quijano of the Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA), and Antonio Saca of the Unity (UNIDAD) coalition. Moderated by Mexican journalist Armando Guzmán of Univision, the debate also included two minor candidates—Óscar Lemus of the Salvadoran Patriot Fraternity and René Rodriguez Hurtado of the Salvadoran Progressive Party.

A two-year-old gang truce has led to periods of decreased homicides in El Salvador, but, given the deal’s tenuous nature and ongoing concerns about public safety, candidates shared their anti-crime proposals. Sánchez Cerén, current vice president and a former FMLN guerilla commander, promised to strengthen police forces with training and better equipment. Quijano, San Salvador’s mayor, pledged to militarize public security policies and agencies, as well as to try gang members in military rather than civilian courts. He also accused the government of negotiating with gangs, which Sánchez Cerén denied. Saca, an ex-president and formerly of the ARENA party, offered to augment police forces and increase preventative measures, such as increased opportunities for youth. But he also said he would avoid conflict with gangs—or a “blood bath.”

On the question of improving the economy, Quijano described himself as the only candidate who could generate investor confidence, whether domestic or international, while Saca reminded the audience that job creation is a central pledge of his campaign. Both Quijano and Saca promised to decrease government costs by trimming away at bureaucracy. Sánchez Cerén said he would negotiate with business leaders to boost the minimum wage, as well as promote increases in investment from the private sector.

Whether the debate will move the needle on the outcome of the February 2 election remains to be seen. Several observers criticized the event and the nature of candidates’ participation. “It wasn’t really a debate,” Roberto Rubio of El Salvador’s National Foundation for Development told the Associated Press. “In a debate, there’s confrontation between ideas, and argument against argument.” Columnists for Salvadoran news outlet La Prensa Grafica gave the night’s win to Quijano, but also lamented the lack of true debate, with Juan Héctor Vidal saying the candidates failed to respond to the moderator’s repeated question of how they planned to fund their proposals. El Diario de Hoy columnist Salvador Samayoa said the lack of argument could be attributed to the fact that the FMLN and ARENA previously negotiated a format to keep their candidates in a safe space, “assuring that no candidate would be able to criticize another.” Even current President Mauricio Funes complained about the event, calling it “more of the same.”

Polls show it’s unlikely that any candidate will get the necessary majority vote in the first round to avoid a March 9 runoff. Last week’s Data Research poll put the FMLN ahead with 30.4 percent, UNIDAD at 26.7 percent, and ARENA at 25.3 percent. A December poll by the University of Central America gave Sánchez Cerén the lead at 39.2 percent, Quijano 34.2 percent, and Saca 15.8 percent.