Ecuador's Correa declares referendum victory

Source: Associated Press

Ecuador's Correa declares referendum victory
(AP) – 11 hours ago

QUITO, Ecuador (AP) — President Rafael Correa declared victory after an exit poll indicated voters approved all 10 ballot questions in a referendum Saturday, an outcome critics say will tighten his grip on power, inhibit press freedom and lessen the judiciary's independence.

The exit poll by SP Investigacion y Estudios, which regularly does work for the government, said voters approved all the questions by greater than 60 percent. First official results were expected Saturday night. Three hours after polls closed less than 1 percent of the vote had been counted.

The chief of an Organization of American States observer team, Enrique Correa of Chile, said the voting appeared to go smoothly and there was no evidence of fraud.

The plebiscite was an important gauge of a leftist U.S.-trained economist who has brought remarkable stability to a small, traditionally volatile and corrupt South American nation.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQEAo1llCgMaCZs3NR-INZ3klUEg?docId=a8f079f05fdf4da18c1e218d1b2bc988

scuttlebutt around the water cooler? the CIA fax? the billionaire banana magnate whom Correa trounced in the last election? the U.S. ambassador? Simon Romero?

I am SICK TO DEATH OF "HIS CRITICS SAY..." in corpo-fascist so-called 'news' articles about the Left in Latin America!!!

---

"President Rafael Correa declared victory after an exit poll indicated voters approved all 10 ballot questions in a referendum Saturday, an outcome critics say will tighten his grip on power, inhibit press freedom and lessen the judiciary's independence."

---

"...tighten his grip on power"? How about the power of the poor majority in Ecuador, who at long last have power, and who have voted for their "FDR," Rafael Correa, and his ideas, time and again, with 60+% majorities!

"His grip on power" is the PEOPLES' rightful grip on power!

---

"...inhibit press freedom"? Ha! This means that transglobal corporate media monopoly over news and opinion, such as just exhibited here by the Associated Pukes, is going to get busted. Corporations don't want "free speech"; they want CORPORATE speech, 24/7, all channels. That is the truth of the matter--and they shouldn't have it.

Bring back the Fairness Doctrine! We once had balanced political coverage in the U.S. on our public airwaves, and anti-monopoly regs. The public airwaves are regulated in every country in the world in the public interest. Some do it better than others. In the U.S., corporate control of news and opinion is abominable. Corporate brainwashing, via the public airwaves, is extremely dangerous. It should be stopped--and I can't think of a better government to bring fairness back to the public airwaves than the government of Rafael Correa, with a consistent 60% mandate for virtually everything he does.

---

"...lessen the judiciary's independence." Bullshit. Correa's mandate from the people is to bust up the oligarchic power of the rich. If the judiciary is corrupt and biased toward the rich and the corporate, it needs to be reformed. Again, Correa has an overwhelming mandate to reform the country and the Associated Pukes' CEO--or whoever's opinion has been interposed here, with no name and no attribution--can suck on it.

Can you link to an article rounding up what the 10 provisions actually do?

I shudder to think how hard it will be if a true progressive movement ever arises to enact reform in the US. Every loss in the power of corporate media, every devolution of powers to the people, will be treated like Soviet Russia is taking over by force.

~snip~
Main provisions in the Referendum:

•Ten questions, which include a restructuring of the judicial system.* The ten questions include decisions on limiting banking operations by financial services companies; forbidding media company ownership of non-media companies; restructuring the judicial system; prohibiting casinos and gambling; and limiting bullfighting and cockfighting. Regarding the judicial system, the proposed changes would allow judges to be chosen by a committee made up of an independent oversight group and members appointed by the executive branch and Congress. Currently, judges are named by an independent committee of jurists

* Voting in the referendum will be obligatory for all citizens, except the police and armed forces. Fines for non-participation has been raised from US$12 to US$34. (Economist Intelligence Unit)

http://www.electionguide.org/election.php?ID=1933

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-13280795 then hit 10 constitutional amendments or proposals to go here : http://larevolucionciudadana.com/

I can't read it. Does that help ?

:hi:

outcome critics say blah blah.......:rofl:

Here's question 3 (which Peace Patriot was annoyed by the "criticisms" rightly so):



Look for words which have similar English counterparts... 'prohibir'... 'institucions'... 'financiero'... hell even 'privado.'

I think Spanish legalese is far easier to read than even English!

Is it not there ?

I chose the #3 example because it was the one I was reading at the time when I had my "realization." (It dawned on me reading it that the words have many common English counterparts.)

How objective ARE the Ecuadoreans who supported the rule by the tiny racist oligarchy which drove Ecuador into the ditch, anyway? Holy smokes! They had three presidents in the 10 years prior to Correa, none of them finishing his term. THEY were the ones the "critics" loved.

"Critics say." What a hoot. Have you ever noticed when it involves a leftist Latin America president, the corporate media ALWAYS find what the "critics" have to say FAR more important than everything else? It's as if the ONLY reality is how the right-wing "critics" view events which move in the democratic direction.

Surprise, surprise. Newscorp as it currently exists in the US would have been illegal here, not so long ago. Can you imagine trying to force it to break back up?

Clinton, Barack Obama?

...from owning or investing in non-media companies (ie, corporate hegemony) is actually better than the fairness doctrine. I don't even think you'd need a fairness doctrine if such separation of companies was constitutionally deemed.

The Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities has been quite vocal in their opposition to the government over the past couple of years.

They view the Correa administration's attempt to control media content as an attempt to silence their protests.

So they certainly don't glorify him as Ecuador's "FDR".

I didn't realize Zorro -- the fictional one, with the sword -- was such a friend to the oligarchy. Or Chevron.

are friends to the oligarchy and Chevron because they disagree with the Correa administration?

http://www.ecuadortimes.net/2011/03/29/conaie-and-pachakutik-sue-president-correa-due-to-oil-exploitation/

Hope that link helps with your apparent lack of information about Ecuadorean politics. To reiterate, many Ecuadoreans are not Correa fanboys, despite attempts by the ill-informed to ignore that reality.

BTW, I encourage you to debate the contents of posts in the future, instead of resorting to lame personal insults.

Theoretically having media-investment-exclusivity, you are opening up more room for anti-government or government-critical thought. However, it can go the opposite way, where only those with the most "publicly invested" companies actually kill all competition because they're the only ones who can keep running.