On September 17th, Mexico City’s Mayor, Miguel Ángel Mancera, gave his first Administration’s Report within the 6th Legislature of the capital’s Legislative Assembly. Using a speech as plain as his tenure, Mancera highlighted the achievements of an administration distinguished by wasting political capital and legitimacy, of a politician that won a race that elected him with such a large margin (7 out of 10 voters) to rule one of the biggest cities in the world. The city doesn’t seem to know where it’s headed, boosted only by a thriving economy and a plural society. Generally speaking, there is a perception that the country’s capital has a passive and, sometimes, absent government. Even though it could be said that the length of his administration is still quite short to complaint about solving the metropolis’ main problems, the high frequency of Mexico City’s authorities getting into scandals due to a poor execution of power, contrasts with the capacity of its immediate successors – especially Marcelo Ebrard and Andrés Manuel López Obrador – to sort out similar or more serious predicaments. Mancera hasn’t even been close in facing similar obstacles such as an impeachment, a lynching or a tragic raid in a nightclub, and yet, his political future seems as gray as Mexico City’s skyline nowadays.
Regarding his leadership skills, Mancera has been losing the opportunity of being the representative of a “left wing without owners”. By not being member of any party, the former General Attorney reached the post with the chance of being a great unifying force of all the different factions, especially within PRD, in the middle of the left wing’s bastion. On the contrary, the Mayor has fallen into the trap of being diluted by the Pact of Mexico as any sort of political opposition. Unlike the (rhetorical) radicalism of Ebrard and his (apparent) separation from former President Felipe Calderón’s federal government, Mancera is always attending President Peña’s official acts. Paradoxically for Mexico City, the Ebrard-Calderón “fight” was more profitable than the Mancera-Peña’s “romance”. In the end, by directly co-working with the federal government, Ebrard could start the construction of Mexico City Subway’s 12th Line. In addition, using the approval of reasonable debt ceilings, as well as federal support, the former Mayor could broaden the Metrobús’ network rails, sustain the main programs of local social security and enhance the public-private associations in projects such as the Poniente Road and the so-called Urban Freeways. On the other hand, Mancera, who sometimes is self-diminished as “ruler”, suffers with his lack of leadership skills in the face of conflicts like he, righteously, claims, come from protests against the federal government and the absence of a clear path in his own administration, like he was waiting if solutions were to be leaked from the Presidency as well.
In the coming months, Mancera will face two essential challenges: negotiating the City’s budget as well as its debt ceilings, and one of the commitments made within the Pact for Mexico: the capital’s political reform. The first factor lies upon the economic feasibility of the project (if there is any) of Mancera’s tenure. Regarding the latter, its target is to provide greater powers – and responsibilities – for the capital’s government; the local Congress may set the basis for a better functioning of the city or a road to disaster due to a poor administration. Any given case, even with the current judicial limits of his post, it is time for the Mayor to act like one.
CIDAC
Comments