_data_revista_no_74_colombiainternacional74-02-analisis.pdf

7/28/2019 _data_Revista_No_74_ColombiaInternacional74-02-Analisis.pdf

1/18

Colombia 2010: anlisis de las eleccionespresidenciales y legislativas

Mnica Pachn

Universidad de los Andes

Gary HoskinUniversidad de los Andes

ResumenLos resultados de las elecciones de Congreso y presidente del 2010 en Colombia muestran laconsolidacin del multipartidismo en el cual las coaliciones postelectorales se han convertido enuna constante desde el colapso del sistema bipartidista a nales de los aos noventa. El propsitodel artculo es discutir los resultados electorales, con especial atencin a la forma en que lapropuesta del referendo para reelegir a lvaro Uribe Vlez impact la dinmica electoral. Primero,analiza el contexto de las elecciones, posteriormente los resultados electorales y nalmente cmo

este nuevo panorama consolida un sistema multipartidista en el nivel nacional despus de lareforma del 2003.

Palabras claveelecciones sistema de partidos lvaro Uribe Vlez Juan Manuel Santos Antanas Mockus Colombia

Colombia 2010: An Analysis of the Legislative andPresidential Elections

Abstract

The 2010 Colombian elections clearly moved the country toward a more multiparty system,characterized by the practice of post-electoral coalitions. These tendencies had been emergingsince the collapse of the two-party system in the 1990s. The purpose of this article is to discussthe 2010 electoral results, with particular attention to the manner in which the referendumproposal to re-elect President Alvaro Uribe Vlez impacted the elections. We discuss the context ofthe elections, the electoral returns for the congressional and presidential elections, and how theresults validate the hypothesis of party system transformation after the 2003 Reform.

Keywordselections party system lvaro Uribe Vlez Juan Manuel Santos Antanas Mockus Colombia

ColombiaInternacional 74, julio a diciembre de 2011: 9-26

Recibido el 12 de julio de 2011, aceptado el 23 de julio de 2011 y modicado el 3 de noviembre de 2011.


2/18

Mnica Pachnes profesora asociada del Departamento de Ciencia Poltica de laUniversidad de los Andes. Es doctora en Ciencia Poltica de la Universidad de California,San Diego.Gary Hoskin fue profesor asociado, hoy jubilado, del Departamento de Ciencia Polticade la Universidad de los Andes. Es doctor en Ciencia Poltica de la Universidad de Illinois,

Urbana-Champaign.


3/18


Colombia 2010: An Analysis of the Legislative andPresidential Elections

Mnica PachnUniversidad de los Andes

Gary HoskinUniversidad de los Andes

INTRODUCTION

Utl vy tly, Colomb w xllt xml o ltol ytmtht volvd oud ddt utto d omto o ot-ltololto (Cy d Shugt 1995; Ph d Shugt 2010). Howv, d-t th xtm oltl ty gmtto d lly t th m-lmtto o th 1991 Cottuto, wly ltd ogm otudto om tdtol ty ll tht llowd dt to om mjotd to gov. To, Colomb lgltv hld th oldt tyytm th go tht w bd uo ltol ytm wth gublyth hght dg o tty omtto th wold.

T oltl om lglto d 2003 (Hok d G 2006)odud gt modto th oltl ty ytm, dugth dg o gmtto d omotg -ltol olto btwddt. T two to w vouly ot htt o th l-tol ytm. By th 2002 lto, bo th oltl om, th NtolEltol Coul xtdd lgl ogto to 78 oltl t, 45 owhh hd tto th lgltu. I 2006 th umb o tomtg w gtly dud to 16, ult o th om d th

hgh ltol thhold.1

I 2010, oly t t w td th

1 The following parties were recognized by the National Electoral Council in 2006:Partido Liberal, Partido Conservador, Partido Apertura Liberal, Movimiento Alas EquipoColombia, Partido Convergencia Ciudadana, Partido Colombia Democrtica, MovimientoColombia Viva, Partido Social de Unidad Nacional, Partido Cambio Radical, PartidoOpcin Centro, Movimiento Autoridades Indgenas de Colombia Aico, MovimientoAlianza Social Indgena, Movimiento Mira, Partido Polo Democrtico Alternativo,Movimiento Poltico Afrounincca, Alianza Social Afrocolombiana Asa. Resolutionfrom the Consejo Nacional Electoral, No. 1057, July 13 2006. http://www.elabedul.

net/Documentos/Temas/Elecciones/Partidos_politicos_2006.pdf


4/18

COLINT 74, julio a diciembre de 2011: 9-26

PACHN HOSKIN

12

St d lv th Hou o Rttv.2 T ovd vdto th l mg o to-omg multty ytm.

Howv, dt th tutul tomto th ty ytm,th log otd wth lgltv lto dd ot ly to dtl

lto (o to gubtol o myo lto), lgly bu o thoblty o ddt ddt to u. A ult, th w wtv to th olto omto, t lt dug th t oud o bl-lotg.3 Tu th lg umb o ddt th t oud o th 2010Colomb dtl lto ultd om uxtd ot-ltololto, tuto tht mbld Bzl dtl lto both uto o th ltol ld 1994. T ult uggt thtdt th gmtto dtl lto, th ltol otht uotd Pdt Alvo Ub o two dtl tm w blto lly olv th b o Ub ddt d mxmz th -ult. O th oth hd, ddt o lyd dv ol th, but ld to t ltol ttgy tht would m gtumb o vot th od oud o bllotg.

I od to du lvt t o th 2010 lgltv d dtllto, th tl dvdd to ou t. T xt to ou uoth otxt o th lgltv d dtl lto, wth b du-o o th dtl mg d Pdt Ub ky ol th.T ubqut t lyz th ult o th two oud o dtlvotg. T outh to lyz th lgltv lto, d th olu-o du th tolzto o t, d how th lto o-odd to th -ogzto o th ty ytm ult o th 2003ltol om.

1. CONTEXT OF THE 2010 ELECTIONS

Nv bo th htoy o ubl oo ollg Colomb, hd -dt ttd uh hgh lvl o oul uot Pdt Ub (S

2 The parties with current legal recognition are: Partido Liberal, Partido Conservador,Partido Social de Unidad Nacional, Partido Cambio Radical, Partido de IntegracinNacional, Partido Verde, Movimiento Autoridades Indgenas de Colombia Aico,Movimiento Alianza Social Indgena, Movimiento Mira, Partido Polo DemocrticoAlternativo, Movimiento Afrovides - La Esperanza de un Pueblo, Movimiento de Inclusiny Oportunidad Mio. Resolution from the Consejo Nacional Electoral No. 1959, August 26,2010. http://www.registraduria.gov.co/Informacion/part_movi_poli.htm

3 Additionally, the uncertainty generated by the prolonged wait for the Constitut ionalCourts decision about the constitutionality of a referendum that would have permit-ted President Uribe to seek a third term prohibited a rapid denition of the candidate

eld further inhibited the political elite coordination.


5/18


COLOMBIA 2010: AN ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AND PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

13

Fgu 1). H w th t to b ltd th t oud o bllotg, wth53.05% o th oul vot, d th t bkg th moooly o thCovtv d Lbl t hold o tht o. Dt hvg dvl-od oltl loly otd wth th Lbl Pty, h ltol

ttgy o th 2002 lto w to dt hml om th tdtololtl mh. Shotly t umg o, h thtd Cog byllg o ottutol dum 2003 tht dd ot (ll hotby 1% o th qud umb o vot) whh ludd mot o h olyool d oth ovo tht would hv utld ogol ow-. A ult o h tyl d ly ult ootg llgl gou wthh uty oly Seguridad Democrtica - , Pdt Ub oulty th oll moutd. H lo ooldtd tog ogol olto thtovd mot o h oly ttv, d lt omotd ottutolom tht bld hm to k od tm. H w ltd 2006wth 62.35% o th vot.

Figure 1. Favorability of Presidents Samper,Pastrana and Uribe, 1994-2010

Source: Gallup Colombia Polls, Presidential terms: 1994-1998 Ernesto Samper, 1998-2000:Andrs Pastrana, 2002-2006 lvaro Uribe. 2006-2010: lvaro Uribe.

Dug Ub od tm th lgltv gd movd lowly d mjodl uoldd mo th 80 ogm d vl govmt

ot w lkd to llgl mlty gou (Boto 2007; Ph


6/18


PACHN HOSKIN

14

2009; Cogo Vbl 2009). Polt bm gly olzd ult o th Pdt oottol tyl, h tt lh wthth ooto d th Sum Cout du to th ogog vtgto ommb o h govmt, d h vlltg ltoh wth Pdt

Hugo Chvz o Vzul.Nothl, th govmt tt d th uul md

lh wth th arc mmuzd Pdt Ub om hh oototm, glly g h oulty th oll. Numou mltyvto oud dug h od tm. I hghly otovl bomb-g d o gull toghold Eudo Mh, 2007, Rul Ry, mmb o arc Stt, w klld. Aoth owd arc ld,Iv Ro, w td by h ow m t th Colomb mltyld th gou d vd t uly l.

I tol oll ly Ju 2008, 66% o Colomb ttd tht thyvod thd tm o Pdt Ub. Futh g th wv o arcdt, md-Ju Oto Jqu lbtd 15 kdd o,Igd Btout d th Noth Am otto mog thm, hghly uul tllg oto tht dd ot ult gl dth.Wth th vto ov th arc, th ommtt omotg th ltodum ttd t gtt momtum. owd th d o Augut,th ommtt td th Ntol Eltol Coul wth v mllogtu, o whh th mllo w td vld, blg th b-gg o qud lgltv o Stmb. Nothl, doubtbout obl mg volto o th dum vtdth Eltol Coul om ldg t ovl o th o. At lgthydbt bout th mt o th ojt d th tht t tld to thvblty o Colomb dmoy, Cog lly ovd th -dum Mh 2009.4 Pdt Ub l bout whth h wouldtd o lto odud hg th govg olto: mvwv o ogm blogg to th govg olto uotd Ub

lto, whl t lk Cambio Radical dld th ooto to thdum d lt th olto (Cogo Vbl, 2009).A ult, Rdl Chg (Cambio Radical) ddt Gm Vg

Ll luhd h mg Ju 2009. Sgo Fjdo, om myoo Mdll, dvotd ll o 2009 olltg th y gtu to u ddt ddt, d t th ooto ddd to hold

4 Cronologa de un referendo reeleccionista, in Votebien.com, published in February26, 2010: http://www.terra.com.co/elecciones_2010/votebien/html/vbn537-vida-pa-

sion-y-muerte-de-un-referendo-reeleccionista.htm [Last accessed: April 1st, 2010].


7/18



15

m to lt th ddt. T Dmot Pol (Polo Democrtico)d th Lbl Pty w th t to omt ddt Otob2009. Oth ddt ddt (th om Bogot myo EquPlo, Lu Edudo Gz d At Moku), ddd to jo o

ud th G Pty domt. T my w lo t o th dto ogol lto. T ttgy ovdd th ddt wth movblty d btt h o lgltv u.

O th govg olto d, th Covtv Pty, whh hd hd-uld t my (consulta) o th m dt th Dmot Pol d thLbl Pty, ddd to oto t to lud Nom S ddy od to omt gt Ad Fl A, Pdt Ub omAgultu Mt. Whl oth t dd to mov t od tohoo th ow ddt o ulll th y lgl qumt, JuMul Sto U Pty (Partido Social de Unidad Nacional) ttly wtd ovt to uold. Ev bo th Mh lgltv lto d th dto th dum, Ju Mul Sto oulty th oll bg to ,dt th t tht h hd ot omlly dld h ddy.

T o o ottutol vo bg Juy 2010, oly vmoth bo th t oud o dtl lto, d o Fbuy26th th Cottutol Cout dld th dum uottutol b-u o odul gult d ubttl lgl otdto wthth Cottuto. T 2010 lto w htzd by hgh lvl outty, mly du to th dum ool d Pdt Ubmut bout h tto. Although th dtl mg hd b-gu bo th Cottutol Cout ulg, t gd momtum Mh,whh tly xl th lg umb o ddt.

Fgu 2 vl th td tht mgd om th bgg o thuvy Otob 2009. A to tht td out th otog o SgoFjdo, ddt ddt who w om myo o Mdll. Hjoyd hgh dg o ogto d oulty th oll dug 2009,

but th oo om o h ogol ddt otbly ud-md h dtl bd. Alo og hgh th oll w Ju MulSto, who tll hd ot luhd h mg wtg th ult o thdum d Ub do to whth h would u g, vthough Sto xd tt bomg th U Pty ddt,o whh h w oud. T oth ddt ludd Nom S oth Covtv Pty, Gutvo Pto o th Dmot Pol, d GmVg o Rdl Chg. Ty h bg to th uvy wthoutotbly g th oulty. Sgo Fjdo md th ld

o th t oud, but h oulty dld thoughout th mg.


8/18


PACHN HOSKIN

16

Figure 2. Presidential Polls: October 2009-May 2010

Source: Various polls from Gallup Colombia, Ipsos Napolen Franco, Centro Nacional de Consul-tora, Datexco Company S.A.

At th bgg o Mh, ddt kg th uvy bg tohg: th G Pty ddt, At Moku, bg to gt d oulty. T Mh oll howd Sto hld btw34 d 36% o th vot tto, S btw 17 d 23%, d Mokuoud 10%. By th d o Al, Moku gtd btw 32 d 38%,Sto btw 29 d 34%, d S hd dmhd to 16%. By th thdwk o My, jut bo th t oud o bllotg, Sto gd 2%ld ov Moku 36%. T udd ug d tdy Mokuoulty w md La Ola Verde- T G Wv- by th md, tgtd lg tz moblzto d uot, lly om youg vot

d tudt Bogot d oth t th outy (Ll , ).Dt th lg umb o dbt td o th otuty o utuo th Ub govmt lgy, th lvg btw th govmt dth ooto ld to dftt lly btw ddt who wagainst or in favoro Ub. Moov, th mg dbt ld to th oulty o ooto t. Although th Dmot Pol -ohd th Lbl Pty d t ddt, Rl Pdo, bout omg olto, othg v m o th gotto. Moov, th govmtolto d t multl ddt, lly wth th Covtv

Pty, omltd th tlto o Ub oulty to h olto


9/18



17

ot. A vld Fgu 2, Nom S, th Covtv ddt,otod hl thd l th , lthough h oulty dlddly, lg h logd thmg ooto ddt.

T G Wv td. It mg ought to omt wth

dft dmo o w-tdtol olt, wth th log No todovale -ot vythg tbl. T o ou w vy lg to thubl, mmb d g o th tol govmt w bgvtgtd o outo hg d govmt tvto olt.Howv, t bm vdt dug th tlvd dbt tht th GPty ddt, Moku, lkd ot ogm d l t omjo ubl oly thm. Pt o th mg dlmm w lyt vloty. T G Pty lkd th oltl tjto o oth ttht hd b odutg tol mg o y.

Dt th fot to buld vy ot ool, oth ddtw bhd th oll d w ot bl to g momtum. Although thLbl Pty ddt, Rl Pdo, w o o th mot quld d-dt, h ld to tvt lg ud. T Lbl Pty utto o o th tdtol t , ould wth th ddt lko hm d low md xou th t t, lo otbutd toh oo howg. Gutvo Pto, th Dmot Pol ddt, kllullymgd to oto hml o ky u o th tol gd, d b-m t om ot th thd mot oul ddt o th Atlt otwhl mtg h tol oulty. T hgd th ot-ud d th Covtv lgd thmlv bhd gl ddt.5

Vot odd Ju Mul Sto o th U Pty th tul u-o to Pdt Ub. Sto w outtdg Mt o Ddug th ltt t o Ub govmt, d ovw wht w o-dd hghly uul oto gt th arc. H hd v bltd to oul o, d h oltl tjtoy w lmtd to thxutv bh, whh gv hm dg ov oth ddt lkg

uh x. Moov, Colomb w vy ml wth th mSto; mly ogzd t o th tol lt ult o towh o th mot mott Colomb dly w, El mo.Tu th mg volvd oud two ddt: thot bloggto vlgd Colomb mly, who hd htd th oltl tlo o o Colomb mot oul d otovl dt, d olto o ddt olt o th G Pty, who oultytmmd om th dmttv u t th lol lvl d l-tol tdto o oltl dd om tdtol t.

5 Gran Encuesta de los Medios, March, 2010.


10/18


PACHN HOSKIN

18

A how Fgu 2, tol oo uvy uggtd tght btw Moku d Sto. Coqutly, h ttglly ltd ug mt to otmz h h. Ju Mul Sto md om govo o Vll dl Cu Dtmt, Aglo Gz, who w

olt omd th lbo movmt d th oltl lt; h om-to gld dologl modto. At Moku ltd SgoFjdo h v-dtl ddt. Bu o h dt om thtdtol oltl tblhmt, Fjdo l o th tkt md tmoblzg ddt vot.

2. THE FIRST AND SECOND ROUNDS OF PRESIDENTIAL VOTING

T t oud o votg o th dy w hld o My 30, two d hl moth t th ogol lto (Mh 14th, 2010). T ltouoldd tmoh o ltv tqulty wth t to ubl -uty. Dt oll dto o tght , th l vot mg btwth two ddt w whog 25% dvtg o Sto. Aothu w Vg Ll thd l h wth oxmtly 10% oth vot. bl 1 how th ult. Sto gd momtum Mokuddy oudd.6

Fo th od oud o votg, Gutvo Pto d Rl Pdo xlodth oblty o omg ll wth th G, but At Mokublokd th fot, blvg tht y gottd olto would ot botml o h mg. Moku hd dld o multl oo hlut to og ltoh wth ooto ddt. H td thod h o th mg wthout th oml uot o oth to ddt.

Sto ttgy w omltly dft. At lultd hg thmg o th v o th t oud whh h umd h otowth th U Pty d Pdt Ub (h ly mg hd dowlydth lto vo o Sto ow mg), Sto ddd to k dd-

tol ll, ultg wht lt bm th Ntol Uty Govmt(Gobo d Udd Nol). T Covtv Pty w th t to dh

6 Why were the poll predictions so erroneous? Two plausible explanations emergedin the media after the rst round of balloting: (1) Most polls underrepresent ruralvoters, who tend to be more supportive of traditional parties and President Uribe;and (2) During the week previous to the elections, no polling was permitted, whichsignied that the latest poll projections failed to account for the campaign dynamicsduring this crucial period. For further details, see: http://www.analitica.com/va/inter-nacionales/opinion/3521742.asp, http://historico.elpais.com.co/historico/jun012010/

NAL/2encuestas.html


11/18



19

to Sto mg. At Nom S t oud dt, th Pty oughtto mt t l Ub olto, thby hog to um ky o-to th w govmt. Gm Vg Ll o Rdl Chg dRl Pdo o th Lbl Pty jod th olto md Ju. T two

ll w lly mott bu both t w mo dolog-lly d ogmmtlly tutud th th U Pty.

Table 1. Results of the First Round of Presidential Voting, May 30, 2010

Candidate Partido Votes %

Juan Manuel Santos P de la U 6,758,539 46.6Antanas Mockus ivickas Green 3,120,716 21.5

Germn Vargas Lleras Cambio Radical 1,471,377 10.1Gustavo Petro Urrego Polo Democrtico 1,329,512 9.2Noem Sann Posada Conservative 892,323 6.1Rafael Pardo Rueda Liberal 636,624 4.4Others 81,705 0.5Blank and invalid votes 249,211 1.7Total 14,515,151 100%Source: Registradura Nacional del Estado Civil.

T omdbl xtto gtd by Moku ddy votdqukly btw th two ltol oud, t oqu o hhky dbt om d h uwllg to vt oth oltlo to h mg to outt th tgth o th Ub ol-to. T hllg ootg Moku om th bgg my wll hvb umoutbl bu h w hllgg th omdbl lout oColomb t clase poltica.

h od oud w hld moth lt, d th ult howd

d o 41.6% btw th ddt. Although th ttot w l th th t oud1,900,000 w votth out-om vld th mot o vot dotd by th Covtv,Rdl Chg d Lbl Pty tlwt, uotg th Pogm oNtol Uty omd t th bgg o th od oud. AlthoughMoku l tlly d by om 400,000 vot ov th toud, h go t lo ttgy ld mbly. Ju Mul Stogtd tmdou ltol vtoy tht ubqutly bld hm tootut lgltv olto tht ubqutly lttd g o h

ogm Cog.


12/18


PACHN HOSKIN

20

Table 2. Results of the Second Round ofPresidental Voting, June 20, 2010

Candidate Party Votes %

Antanas Mockus ivickas Verde 3,588,819 27.5Juan Manuel Santos De la U 9,004,221 69.1Blank and invalid votes 744,618 3,4Total 13,337,658 100%

Source: Registradura Nacional del Estado Civil.

3. RESULTS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS

Bu lgltv lto hld bo th dtl d b-u o th olt tu o th dd, dt ul lyo ogol ott. Ev though oltl t ly momott ol mg t th 2003 ltol om, th out-om o tho dd mly uo th ot d g odvdul ddt, ot th t lto. h 2010 og-ol lto w mtd by th utty uoudg th d-tl mg, whh ovdd dvtg o th mjoty olto Cog. I both th St d Chmb o Rttv th w- w mly mmb o th Ub olto, whh ubttllyd t ogol tto.

T Lbl Pty, th ooto dug Pdt Ub two tm o, mgd to t gt umb o t (17 th St d35 th Chmb o Rttv), mkg t th bggt w mogom ooto t. T oth mjo ooto t, Rdl Chgd Dmot Pol, lot t both hou o Cog (S bl 3 d 4).

Nw t (tho omd by th uo o mll movmt tht wtd Cog but w dhd bu o th tto mlty gou), lk th Pty o Ntol Itgto (pin), u-

d udt wth th uxtdly lg vot. Howv, bl 3 d4 how tht t uh Convergencia Ciudadana, Alas Equipo Colombia,Colombia Democrtica, o Colombia Viva hld 17 St t d 17 Hout 2006, yt th umbll-lk pin obtd w t th t -golly bd do, th St d twlv th Hou.Som ltd pin ogm llgdly otd wth mltydl d oth om o outo, but dt th uto thltol om w otwothy.


13/18



21

Table 3. Comparison of Electoral Returns for the Senate - 2002 - 2010

Political Party Seats2002

Seats2006

Seats 2010(% votes)

Partido de la U Na 20 28 (25.1%)Partido ConservadorColombiano

13 18 23 (20.3%)

Partido LiberalColombiano

29 17 17 (15.5%)

Cambio Radical 2 15 8 (7.7%)Polo DemocrticoAlternativo

Na 11 8 (7.7%)

Partido de Integracin

(ConvergenciaCiudadana)

Na 7 8 (8.3%)

Alas Equipo Colombia 4 5 NaColombia Democrtica 0 3 NaMira 0 2 2 (2.9%)Colombia Viva 0 2 NaMovimiento Nacional 6 Na NaMovimiento de

Integracin Popular

4 Na Na

Va Alterna 2 Na NaColombia Siempre 2 Na NaMovimiento PopularUnido

2 Na Na

Partido Verde Na Na 5 (4.5%)Others 36 0 0

Source: Registradura Nacional del Estado Civil

*Results for the special districts are excluded.

Amog th o-tdtol t, th G Pty t th motuul . T om Bogot myo ddd to ut th o domt ogol . T utto, togth wth th t thtth ty my to hoo t dtl ddt w hld th m dy,tttd ough ttto to lt ou t-tm to d th t-tmttv, wll gol ld who w ltd to th t.


14/18


PACHN HOSKIN

22

Table 4. Comparison of Electoral Returns for theCmara de Representantes, 2002 - 2010

Political Party Seats2002

Seats 2006 Seats2010*

Partido de la U Na 29 48 (25,9%)Partido Conservador Colombiano 21 30 36 (21,4%)Partido Liberal Colombiano 54 36 36 (19,3%)Cambio Radical 7 20 16 (7,7%)Polo Democrtico Alternativo Na 9 5 (5,9%)Partido de Integracin (ConvergenciaCiudadana)

2 8 11 (7,4%)

Alas (Equipo Colombia) 4 7 1 (1,9%)Colombia Democrtica Na 2 NaMira Na

1 1(3,0%)Por el Pas que Soamos Na 2 NaMovimiento Nacional Na 2 NaApertura Liberal 5 5 2 (1,2%)Partido de Accion Social Na 1 NaConvergencia Popular Cvica 4 Na NaColombia Siempre 3 Na NaMovimiento de Integracin Regional 3 4 1 (0,01%)Fuerza Progresista 2 Na NaFrente Social Y Poltico 2 Na Na

Movimiento Popular Unido 2 2 0Movimiento Voluntad Popular 2 Na NaMovimiento Progresismo Democrtico 2 Na NaMovimiento de Participacin Popular 2 1 NaMovimiento de Salvacin Nacional 2 1 NaMovimiento de Renovacin Laboral 2 Na NaMovimiento Comunal y Comunitario 2 Na NaMovimiento Nacional Progresista Na 1 NaNuevo Liberalismo 2 Na Na

Huila Nuevo Liberalismo 0 1 NaMoral Na 1 NaPartido Verde (Opcion Centro) Na 1 3 (3,0%)Afrouninca Na 1 NaAlianza Social Afrocolombiana Na 1 NaAlianza Social Indgena 0 0 1 (1,9%)Unidad Liberal Na Na 2(1,8%)Others 43 0Total 166 166 162Fuente: Registradura Nacional del Estado Civil.

*Results for the special districts are excluded.


15/18



23

Flly, Sgo Fjdo lgltv mg w mjo dt. Wth d th umb o oltl t d th ubqut to-mto o th Colomb ltol , Fjdo ltol ttgy wult. S h dd ot wt y ty tthmt, h gtd

ddt, olltg mo th 700,000 gtu. o omot h -ddt o th lgltu, h ddd to mk ll d todu jotlt wth th Idgou Sol All (asi).7 Nothl, dt h -ot to mk t ubl, vot w ot bl to mk th oto btwFjdo d th asi, ultg vy oo om. Fjdo lt wot v bl to hv th lgl thhold (umbral) o tto.

I um, th 2010 ogol lto ultd thumb o t tht lot th lgl tdg, thby tg th m-t o th 2003 Poltl Rom At, whh w dgd to tgtholtl t d omot btt oodto btw olt. Aw gol movmt uvvd th low hou, tg th d-tlzd ht o Colomb olt, but th gou bomg lgt tm o th tto Cog (Eob-Lmmod Moo 2008).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

At log htoy o bt ooolm (Htly, 1988), dt- o th 1991 Cottuto ddd to du dtlly th qumto ttg th oltl ytm, odug wht bm th motgmtd ty ytm th Am; 2002, th Ntol EltolCoul ogzd 72 t o whh 45 hd tto Cog.8T omltd th tk o vot to dty t d th ogm tth tol lvl. Futhmo, th oblty o t to t mult-l lt uth omltd th tuto. Fo xml, th Dtmto Atlto, th Lbl Pty td 19 o th 49 lt o v t whh 26 t o movmt ttd th lto. I Putumyo,

7 Fajardo complet rmas para lanzar su candidatura presidencial, in VanguardiaLiberal, published in October27, 2009. :http://www.vanguardia.com/historico/43833-fajardo-completo-rmas-para-lanzar-su-candidatura-presidencialampquicktab-s30ampquicktabs12ampquicktabs23, [Last accessed: April 1st, 2011].

8 The 1991 Constitution permitted the formation of political parties and movements withthe presentation of only 50,000 valid signatures. In addition, it created the possibil-ity for citizens to belong to more than one political party. Those factors, plus a Hareelectoral system with the highest residuals and the possibility for parties to present an

unlimited number of lists, generated a highly fragmented party system.


16/18


PACHN HOSKIN

24

whh h two t th low hou o Cog, oly th Lbl dCovtv Pt td lt, th t wth th d th ltt wth o.

At vl ld ttmt to om th Colomb ltol ytm,ld th mot ddt-bd th wold (Shugt d Cy 1995),

ottutol om 2003 (Lgltv At No. 1 o 2003) hgd thul tht omotd xv lvl o ty gmtto (Ph dShugt, 2010). T om todud mmum thhold o 2% o thvot (umbral) t th tol lvl; t w ttd to tg gl o o lod lt ( lt o md otol); d thtoduto o th DHodt ytm gtd tv to th omtoo ltol olto, thby ftvly dug th umb o tttg lto.

A how bl 3 d 4, th umb o t wth t th lg-ltu bm gtly low 2006, d otud to hk th2010 lto. At th om, hg th tt mgd. A howby Ph d Shugt (2010), th z o th dtt th 2002 ltod, th ftv umb o t (ENP) ollowd ut. I Bogot, oxml, th enp vot mu w gt th 20 dt th t tht thumb o t w 18. T ltoh hgd th 2006 lto, d 2010 th hdly y vto th enp mud vot o todg to dtt z. Addtolly, 2006 d 2010 th umb o -t d mll dtt, bu mot todud lt ll dttto hv btt h o g th thhold, tv o th dttz. Coqutly, th vd tht t omtg lto mo tolzd, lthough th tll umb o gol twg t lly th Chmb o Rttv du to lowtto thhold.

Whl lto ottut th bdok o ttv dmoy, thy ot udtbl d voltl, lly out tht udgo-g d tomto th oltl ty ytm. Colomb t th

mold oqu o th domoto o hgmo bt tyytm th 1990 d th ght-y dy o lvo Ub Vlz,whh tdd to udm om o Colomb dmot ttuto oqu o h mo-mgg tyl d gt mh o how olto d h lbl ol th. Pdt Ub domtdColomb olt dug h two tm o o, d th mt o hlgy uo th outy dmot ttuto m ul.

T 2010 dtl lto w htzd by hot mg,lgly bu Cog ovd bll llg o dum blg

Pdt Ub to k thd outv tm, d th Cottutol


17/18



25

Cout lt do gdg th bll ottutolty gtd u-tty d gtly ftd ddt d ty ttg. T bb-vtd tm od, ould wth Pdt Ub ooud oulty,dttd th log o th dtl mg. Ju Mul Sto h-

td Ub oltl tl, d moutd hghly ool mgtht ultd ovwhlmg vtoy ov xtv ld o toud ddt d ov At Moku th od oud. Dtth G Wv tht olld Moku hd o Sto th oll t oot, Moku ll-tutud mg odud dml ult tht wobbly doomd om th tt bu h w ug gt th bulk oColomb oltl l.

T ogol lto w htzd by mg whhddt w mly obl o th ow lto (mot tylt w o, thby blg vot to t th bllot o dvdul). T U Pty, o xml, h vy loo dologl dogmmt tutu, d mly omod o gol oltl ld- who hv th ow ogzto d vot. O th 16 lt omt-g th St, oly o w lod. Fom th 282 lt o th Houo Rttv, 68 w lod but mot o th w two-mmbdtt (Rgtdu Nol 2010). T Ub olto wo ov-whlmg umb o t Cog, ovdg th utu dt wth bolut mjoty both hou o Cog. Howv, Pdt Stoubqutly xdd th Ub olto to lud th Lbl d RdlChg t d xludd th Ntol Itgto Pty (PIN) om tholto bu o th llgd t to mlty gou.

T ltol tu 2006 d 2010 tty to th mt o th 2003Eltol Rom Lw dug th umb o oltl t t thtol lvl,9 but utty m to whth ut t dth ty ytm wll bom ttutolzd th mdum o log tm th ol o dvdul ddt tll gt d ty-wthg

otu to b ommo t o ll ty lt.

9 While the 2003 Electoral Reform Law produced a reduction in the number of politicalparties at the national level, this apparently was not the case in the 2007 de-partmental and municipal elections where the number of parties remained the same oreven increased in number. See Forero, Mario. 2010. El impacto de la reforma electoraldel ao 2003 en el sistema de partidos a nivel municipal. Unpublished manuscript.


18/18


PACHN HOSKIN

26

PACHN HOSKIN

26

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

W wt to thk th Cogo Vbl tm t th Dtmt o PoltlS, Uvdd d lo Ad o th t, d th oymouvw o th ommt.

ReferencesBoto, Fl. 2007. Colomb: P, dmo o mlmt d-

g? Revista de Ciencia Poltica 27 (1): 97-111.Cy, Joh d Mtthw Sobg Shugt. 1995. Itv to Cultvt

Pol Vot. Electoral Studies 14 (4): 417-439.Cogo Vbl. 2009. Bolt d Congreso Visible 15 (July- Dmb). Avl-

bl t: htt://uu.om/ogovbl/do/ogo_vbl_15_julo-dmb_2009 [Lt d: Al 1t, 2011].

Eob-Lmmo, M d Ek Moo. 2008. Mjo Solo Qu MlAomdo: Poltl Etu d Lt Polto Colomb.E Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in LatinAmerica, dtd by Pt Svl d Sott Mogt. P Stt U-vty P.

Htly, Joth. 1988. Te Politics of Coalition Rule in Colombia. Lodo:Cmbdg Uvty P.

Hok, Gy d Mgul G, d. 2006. La Reforma Poltica de 2003:Salvacin de los partidos polticos colombianos?Bogot: Edo Ud.

Ll, Fo. . Colomb: lo t y tv t,Nueva Sociedad, .

Ph, M. 2009. Colomb 2008: xto, lgo y dto d lPolt d Sgudd Dmot d l dmt Ub. Revista deCiencia Poltica 29 (2): 327-353.

Ph, M d Mtthw Sobg Shugt. 2010. Eltol Rom dth Mo Img o It-Pty d It-Pty Comtto: T Ado-

to o Pty Lt Colomb. Electoral Studies 29 (4): 648-660.

_data_revista_no_74_colombiainternacional74-02-analisis.pdf

Documents