Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff reacts, according to local press, shortly after hearing the news that the impeachment process against had been anulled by the Lower House speaker, at a ceremony in the Planalto Palace in Brasilia, yesterday.
Brazilians worry that president’s removal may create a precedent for presidential change by popularity
RIO DE JANEIRO — With the 2016 Summer Games in Rio just three months away, President Dilma Rousseff lit the Olympic torch here last month and smiled for the television cameras. It was probably her last Olympic ceremony as president.
This week, Brazilian senators are expected to vote to open impeachment proceedings against her. Rousseff would be suspended from office, setting the stage for her permanent removal, after yesterday the next steps remain unclear.
But while Rousseff’s opponents seem to grow giddier with each step toward her removal, many Brazilians say it will bring them neither pleasure nor relief from the problems the country faces amid its worst economic crisis in 80 years.
Rather than a solution to Brazil’s woes, Rousseff’s impeachment looks more and more like a symptom of them, and maybe the beginning of a long detour into political dysfunction. Her exit, for many, would mark a new low point for a country viewed as an ascendant global power just a few years ago.
“There’s a sense of sadness about this whole process,” said Paulo Sotero, the director of the Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.
“Our democracy is not going to unravel,” he said. “But we are headed for a rough period, and we may be at it for five to 10 years.”
Rousseff’s impeachment process had taken on an aura of inevitability in recent weeks. She is increasingly isolated politically. Her alarm-ringing characterization of the campaign against her as a politically motivated, misogynistic “coup” has failed to generate much sympathy outside her base of left-wing supporters.
But the proceedings against Rousseff also have a credibility problem, with many Brazilians wondering whether her removal is being pursued because she committed a crime or simply because she is unpopular.
‘Show of horrors’
If she is impeached, there is no strong, unifying leader coming to Brazil’s rescue. This realization is sinking in. Nearly every major politician in the country is under a cloud of suspicion from the sprawling “Operation Car Wash” probe of bribes and kickbacks at the state oil company Petrobras.
The sense of gloom deepened for some last month when Brazil’s Lower House voted overwhelmingly to put Rousseff on trial after a televised marathon session that took on a circuslike atmosphere, with deputies taunting, shoving and even spitting at one another.
“That was a real show of horrors,” said Lucas Lisboa, 26, an online marketing director in Brasilia who opposes impeachment and said last month’s vote led some of his anti-Rousseff friends to change their minds about wanting her kicked out.
That vote was orchestrated by Rousseff’s arch-enemy, Eduardo Cunha, the former Lower House speaker who is himself under investigation over allegedly brokering as much as US$40 million in bribes. Last Thursday, the Supreme Court ordered him to step down because of the seriousness of the corruption allegations and the risk that he could use his post to interfere with that probe.
He has appealed the decision, but the court’s order further erodes the credibility of his push to oust Rousseff.
She faces impeachment proceedings for separate charges: that she spent money without congressional approval and improperly borrowed funds from banks for popular social programmes. Senators must decide whether this amounts to what is considered a “crime of responsibility.”
Rousseff insists that she did nothing wrong and that the financial tactics have been a standard practice of Brazilian presidents.
In an interview, former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who led Brazil from 1995 to 2003, acknowledged that he, too, moved money around while in office, but said “it’s not the same.”
“These were momentary uses of resources from banks,” said Cardoso, who backs Rousseff’s impeachment. “They were small reserves. It was a matter of cash flow, and quickly corrected.”
With Rousseff, he said, “we are talking about tens of billions of dollars over a long period of time. A continuous manipulation of fiscal data.”
The president’s critics say she used accounting tricks to deceive Brazilian lawmakers and the public about her spending.
“There were very bad choices,” said Sotero, the Wilson Center scholar.
The president’s opponents argue that her removal is the key to putting Brazil back on track. Latin America’s largest economy is headed for a 3.8 percent contraction of its gross domestic product for the second year in a row, and three million Brazilians have lost their jobs since January 2015.
The crash, the corruption scandals and Rousseff’s brusque, abrasive leadership style have left her with an approval rating that barely rises into double digits.
Still, that has not translated to widespread enthusiasm for impeachment, which would give Vice-President Michel Temer, Rousseff’s rival, the presidency. According to polls, he is just as disliked as Rousseff.
An electoral court recently ordered Temer to pay a fine for violating campaign-finance laws, a development that could potentially bar him from running for office for eight years. Temer, 75, has said he would finish out Rousseff’s term but would not be a candidate for president in 2018.
In a survey of more than 2,000 Brazilians in 142 cities last month by pollster Ibope, only 25 percent said they wanted to see Rousseff remain in office. But just eight percent said they supported her impeachment if it meant Temer would take her place.
‘Lousy’ impeachment
Ana de Sousa, 56, a retired manicurist living near Rio’s City of God slum, said Rousseff’s impeachment “wouldn’t improve things.”
“I don’t think the people who will take over are going to be any better,” de Sousa said. “They will come in and steal even more.”
Although Temer is not a popular choice to replace Rousseff, he is the only other leader who can claim a democratic mandate, said José Álvaro Moisés, a political scientist at the University of São Paulo.
“He has all the legitimacy he needs to be interim president,” Moisés said.
Temer’s honeymoon would be short. He would need to form a governing coalition, show Brazilians that he can contain the economic crisis and avoid doing anything that might create the appearance that he is trying to sandbag the Car Wash corruption investigations, Moisés said.
If Temer failed, the country would have little to show for an impeachment process that set a bad precedent for Brazilian democracy, said Christopher Sabatini, an adjunct professor at Columbia University and the editor of the online journal Latin America Goes Global.
“It reinforces the notion that a presidential mandate can be changed based on popularity,” Sabatini said. “So it’s not a coup, but it’s a lousy impeachment, and a lousy impeachment has a cost.”
@domphillips, @nickmiroff
Brazilians worry that president’s removal may create a precedent for presidential change by popularity
RIO DE JANEIRO — With the 2016 Summer Games in Rio just three months away, President Dilma Rousseff lit the Olympic torch here last month and smiled for the television cameras. It was probably her last Olympic ceremony as president.
This week, Brazilian senators are expected to vote to open impeachment proceedings against her. Rousseff would be suspended from office, setting the stage for her permanent removal, after yesterday the next steps remain unclear.
But while Rousseff’s opponents seem to grow giddier with each step toward her removal, many Brazilians say it will bring them neither pleasure nor relief from the problems the country faces amid its worst economic crisis in 80 years.
Rather than a solution to Brazil’s woes, Rousseff’s impeachment looks more and more like a symptom of them, and maybe the beginning of a long detour into political dysfunction. Her exit, for many, would mark a new low point for a country viewed as an ascendant global power just a few years ago.
“There’s a sense of sadness about this whole process,” said Paulo Sotero, the director of the Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.
“Our democracy is not going to unravel,” he said. “But we are headed for a rough period, and we may be at it for five to 10 years.”
Rousseff’s impeachment process had taken on an aura of inevitability in recent weeks. She is increasingly isolated politically. Her alarm-ringing characterization of the campaign against her as a politically motivated, misogynistic “coup” has failed to generate much sympathy outside her base of left-wing supporters.
But the proceedings against Rousseff also have a credibility problem, with many Brazilians wondering whether her removal is being pursued because she committed a crime or simply because she is unpopular.
‘Show of horrors’
If she is impeached, there is no strong, unifying leader coming to Brazil’s rescue. This realization is sinking in. Nearly every major politician in the country is under a cloud of suspicion from the sprawling “Operation Car Wash” probe of bribes and kickbacks at the state oil company Petrobras.
The sense of gloom deepened for some last month when Brazil’s Lower House voted overwhelmingly to put Rousseff on trial after a televised marathon session that took on a circuslike atmosphere, with deputies taunting, shoving and even spitting at one another.
“That was a real show of horrors,” said Lucas Lisboa, 26, an online marketing director in Brasilia who opposes impeachment and said last month’s vote led some of his anti-Rousseff friends to change their minds about wanting her kicked out.
That vote was orchestrated by Rousseff’s arch-enemy, Eduardo Cunha, the former Lower House speaker who is himself under investigation over allegedly brokering as much as US$40 million in bribes. Last Thursday, the Supreme Court ordered him to step down because of the seriousness of the corruption allegations and the risk that he could use his post to interfere with that probe.
He has appealed the decision, but the court’s order further erodes the credibility of his push to oust Rousseff.
She faces impeachment proceedings for separate charges: that she spent money without congressional approval and improperly borrowed funds from banks for popular social programmes. Senators must decide whether this amounts to what is considered a “crime of responsibility.”
Rousseff insists that she did nothing wrong and that the financial tactics have been a standard practice of Brazilian presidents.
In an interview, former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who led Brazil from 1995 to 2003, acknowledged that he, too, moved money around while in office, but said “it’s not the same.”
“These were momentary uses of resources from banks,” said Cardoso, who backs Rousseff’s impeachment. “They were small reserves. It was a matter of cash flow, and quickly corrected.”
With Rousseff, he said, “we are talking about tens of billions of dollars over a long period of time. A continuous manipulation of fiscal data.”
The president’s critics say she used accounting tricks to deceive Brazilian lawmakers and the public about her spending.
“There were very bad choices,” said Sotero, the Wilson Center scholar.
The president’s opponents argue that her removal is the key to putting Brazil back on track. Latin America’s largest economy is headed for a 3.8 percent contraction of its gross domestic product for the second year in a row, and three million Brazilians have lost their jobs since January 2015.
The crash, the corruption scandals and Rousseff’s brusque, abrasive leadership style have left her with an approval rating that barely rises into double digits.
Still, that has not translated to widespread enthusiasm for impeachment, which would give Vice-President Michel Temer, Rousseff’s rival, the presidency. According to polls, he is just as disliked as Rousseff.
An electoral court recently ordered Temer to pay a fine for violating campaign-finance laws, a development that could potentially bar him from running for office for eight years. Temer, 75, has said he would finish out Rousseff’s term but would not be a candidate for president in 2018.
In a survey of more than 2,000 Brazilians in 142 cities last month by pollster Ibope, only 25 percent said they wanted to see Rousseff remain in office. But just eight percent said they supported her impeachment if it meant Temer would take her place.
‘Lousy’ impeachment
Ana de Sousa, 56, a retired manicurist living near Rio’s City of God slum, said Rousseff’s impeachment “wouldn’t improve things.”
“I don’t think the people who will take over are going to be any better,” de Sousa said. “They will come in and steal even more.”
Although Temer is not a popular choice to replace Rousseff, he is the only other leader who can claim a democratic mandate, said José Álvaro Moisés, a political scientist at the University of São Paulo.
“He has all the legitimacy he needs to be interim president,” Moisés said.
Temer’s honeymoon would be short. He would need to form a governing coalition, show Brazilians that he can contain the economic crisis and avoid doing anything that might create the appearance that he is trying to sandbag the Car Wash corruption investigations, Moisés said.
If Temer failed, the country would have little to show for an impeachment process that set a bad precedent for Brazilian democracy, said Christopher Sabatini, an adjunct professor at Columbia University and the editor of the online journal Latin America Goes Global.
“It reinforces the notion that a presidential mandate can be changed based on popularity,” Sabatini said. “So it’s not a coup, but it’s a lousy impeachment, and a lousy impeachment has a cost.”
@domphillips, @nickmiroff
