Last week’s contentious House vote over a presidential decree defining the structure of the current government laid bare, once again, the gulf between House Speaker Arthur Lira and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The episode had dramatic tones, with negotiations underway until minutes before the floor voted on the matter — and it was testament to the changes in the relations between the Executive and Legislative branches of government.
Many pundits rushed to declare the end of Brazil’s coalitional presidentialism, which, I am happy to announce, is not dead. At least not yet.
The tug-of-war between the Lula administration and the lower house of Congress is a product of three factors.
First, the balance of power between the Executive and the Legislative has changed, leaving the president with fewer tools to build his coalition. Second, the newly-elected House is more conservative than before, making Lula’s life particularly difficult.
Third, the government has made a number of mistakes in its dealings with lawmakers. Until the Lula administration changes gears to adapt to this new scenario, any statement about the end of our coalitional presidentialism is misleading.
Changes in Brazil’s coalitional presidentialism
The term “coalitional presidentialism” was first coined by the political scientist Sergio Abranches in the late 1980s to describe multiparty presidential regimes in which the president, never holding a majority in Congress, must build a legislative coalition to govern.
In the Brazilian context, the president has two main tools to do that: distribute cabinet and other government positions, and approve earmarked funds that benefit...
Search
