Countries of the World/COUNTRYS.BIN/dp/0050/00505.txt

Text File | 1991-06-24 | 41KB | 626 lines

$Unique_ID{COW00505}
$Pretitle{220}
$Title{Brazil
Chapter 4B.   State and Local Government}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{James D. Rudolf}
$Affiliation{HQ, Department of the Army}
$Subject{political
military
government
state
brazilian
early
federal
labor
church
national}
$Date{1982}
$Log{}
Country:     Brazil
Book:        Brazil, A Country Study
Author:      James D. Rudolf
Affiliation: HQ, Department of the Army
Date:        1982

Chapter 4B.   State and Local Government

     The Brazilian system of government is federative in name only. A number
of developments, particularly the overwhelming economic power of the federal
government and provisions in the Constitution allowing federal authorities to
intervene in the affairs of state governments, have led to an ever-increasing
concentration of authority in federal officials at the expense of their
counterparts in state governments. In addition to the federal government,
governmental units in Brazil consisted of 23 states, three federal
territories, a Federal District (Brasilia) and, in 1980, 4,011 municipios (see
Glossary).

     The states are granted the power to create their own constitutions and
their own government; both must conform, however, to those found at the
federal level. The chief state executives, governors, were popularly elected
from 1946 to 1965 and indirectly elected by the state assemblies (which, in
effect, meant they were appointed by the federal president) from 1966 until
1982, when the first popular elections for governor in 17 years were held.
Each governor-whose term of office is four years-has a number of secretaries
of state, comparable to the ministers at the federal level. Each state also
has a unicameral state assembly, whose members are popularly elected for
four-year terms on the basis of proportional representation. Each state also
has an independent judiciary headed by an appellate court known as the Court
of Justice.

     The Constitution grants the states all powers not conferred on the
federal government or the municipios. In a few areas, most notably education,
the states have concurrent powers to legislate along with the federal
government. In fact, the real power of each state has depended on its economic
resources; states may levy taxes on sales (some 70 percent of their revenue),
inheritances, transfers of property, and exports. This power brings
significant clout to the governments of rich states, such as Sao Paulo, Rio de
Janeiro, and Rio Grande do Sul, whose governors may be major national public
figures (see fig. 1). Because economic power generates political power, the
political power is in turn used to garner a larger share of revenues and
services dispensed by the federal government. This system, of course, works to
the detriment of poorer states.

     Municipios are granted autonomy in the 1967 Constitution, although in
fact their authority has gradually been encroached upon by state governments
much as states have been by the federal government. Municipios are headed by
mayors (also called prefects) and quasi-legislative councils, most of which
are popularly elected for four-year terms. Under military rule, however, a
number of mayors and councilmen have been appointed by state governors with
the approval of the federal president. Formally justified in terms of
"national security" (mayors were appointed in border areas, areas of major
mineral deposits, industrial establishments, and military bases), the
appointments were actually used to ensure the control of major cities by
supporters of the government political party. Initially, almost 700 local
governments were thus appointed; by 1976 the total had been reduced to 175
appointed in key cities and all state capitals. Municipio councils vary in
size, though they may have no more than 21 members. Each municipio also has at
least one trial court, and most have a justice of the peace.

     There were three federal territories-Amapa and Roraima in the North and
Fernando de Noronha, a group of small islands in the Atlantic Ocean, northeast
of the city of Recife. All are remote and sparsely populated. Because of the
growing population and economic importance, Rondonia was upgraded from a
territory to a state in 1982. Municipal government is administered by a mayor
appointed by the governor of the territory who, in turn, is appointed by the
federal president. The governor of the Federal District is also a presidential
appointee. Brasilia also has an elected, 20-member legislative council
(four-year term) and its own system of courts.

Interest Group Politics

     Although in 1982 the nation's attention was focused on electoral
politics, a more timeless and, in many respects, more meaningful analysis of
Brazilian politics may be pursued by examining various interest groups and the
interaction among them. Because Brazil is a large and complex society, these
groups are many and varied and rarely are united in their political points of
view. Therefore, the following presents a simplification of Brazilian reality
for the sake of clarity: groups labeled "conservative" represent, for the most
part, those that have benefited from the period of military rule; those
labeled "liberal" represent groups that have sought fundamental changes in the
policies pursued since 1964.

Conservative Groups

The Military

     The armed forces have long played a pivotal role in the nation's
politics. As in other nations of Latin America, military officers acted as the
moderators of intra-elite disputes, at times temporarily assuming the reins of
government in order to facilitate the transfer of political power. On other
occasions officers assumed power through the force of arms, then
institutionalized a system of personal dictatorship (see The Vargas Era,
1930-45, ch. 1). The post-1964 military regime has been unique in that it has
been neither a short-lived transition nor a period of personalistic rule.
Rather, the armed forces have ruled as an institution, faithfully adhering to
hierarchical principles of discipline, promotions, and retirement in order to
preserve the institutional integrity of the officer corps. It has not been an
easy task. Most analysts point to inevitable strains on institutional
integrity created during almost two decades in power as the primary
explanation of the regime's pursuit of abertura, which is designed eventually
to remove the military from a direct, if not indirect, role in the political
system.

     The post-1964 military government was by no means run exclusively by
military officers. In late 1982, for example, only six of the 21 cabinet
members were active-duty officers. The armed forces retained control of the
government by holding key positions, most important of which, of course, was
the presidency. The presence of active-duty officers in other key positions,
most notably as the heads of the CSN, the SNI, and the president's Military
Household guaranteed that executive policymaking would reflect the wishes
of the military hierarchy who, given a compliant electoral college, would also
control the presidential succession (see The Executive, this ch.). By holding
high government positions, military officers secured financial security and
prestige for their institution, as well as access to patronage jobs for active
and retired officers, their families, and friends.

     An alternate source of power for military officers lay in the command of
troops. Some two dozen division generals, brigadiers, and colonels who command
troop units must be considered by policymakers. In the event of severe
disunity within the officer corps, these commanders have the power to use
armed force, or to threaten the use of force, in a coup d'etat (see
Administration, Organization, and Training, ch. 5).

     In many nations military personnel are forbidden from taking part in
political activity. This is not the case in Brazil, where officers and
noncomissioned officers may vote and, under certain circumstances, run for
public office (see Constitutional Basis, ch. 5