by John Fitzpatrick

The ongoing controversy in Brazil over the comments made by vice president Jose Alencar on interest rates has started a debate on the vice presidency itself. Columnists have been bombarding us with their opinions and few of them seem to think that, as mere vice president, Alencar has the right to open his mouth. Perhaps eight years of the Fernando Henrique Cardoso administration during which the vice president, Marco Maciel, was virtually invisible and inaudible have implanted this idea. One Senator is even trying to get support for a constitutional amendment to scrap the position entirely. This may be a legitimate issue to raise but the timing is fishy and it seems a bit extreme to abolish the second highest constitutional post in the land, which goes back to 1891 when the Republic was established, simply because Jose Alencar has been calling for lower interest rates.

In a previous article I supported Alencar’s right to comment on issues since, in the event of anything happening to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, it is Alencar who would succeed him. If this happened then, at least, the public would know what to expect from the person who would be in command. It should also not be forgotten that the vice president is directly elected to that post. When the people go to the polls they know they are voting for a vice president as well as a president. It has been suggested that the chairman of the Lower House of Congress should assume power but this would be undemocratic since his electoral legitimacy stems from his election to the legislature and not the executive power.

Another important point is that, under the Brazilian constitution, when the president is abroad the vice become acting president and Alencar has already exercised this function. This gives vice presidents a “feel” for the job. So far Alencar has made no attempt to misuse this power. This is not the case in the US, for example, where the vice president only assumes power when the president is incapable of giving orders. This happened under the Reagan administration when the president underwent surgery.

Taking an important constitutional step like abolishing the vice presidency should be done in a rational way as part of a process, not as a hasty response to a topical issue. Any such change should also consider wider political reform to end, for example, the scandalous party-swapping as successful candidates switch to another party for greater favors or the “supplementary” candidates who take the place of deputies or senators who lose their posts. The best example of this misuse of power in recent years was the simple replacement of the disgraced Senate leader Antonio Carlos Magalhães by none other than Antonio Carlos Magalhães Junior, his son.   

In a country like Brazil, with almost no truly national political party, choosing a running mate is usually an attempt to broaden a presidential candidate’s support. As a result it is not unusual to have opponents on the same ticket. For example, Jose Serra’s running mate, Rita Camata, came from the PMDB and had voted against many of the main reforms supported by Serra’s PSDB. Ciro Gomes chose a trade union leader who one would normally have expected to support Lula. Lula faced great opposition within the PT when he announced his alliance with the right-wing evangelical PL party led by Alencar. On top of that, Alencar is a millionaire businessman. Lula squared this circle by saying he was forming an alliance between labor and capital. In some ways, Alencar is like Lula. He has had a relatively short political career, like Lula who never held any important position, such as mayor or state governor, but preferred to be a free agent. Both men are still learning on the job. 

Learning from History            
This discussion is not an academic point since the vice presidency has helped shape Brazil’s history over the last century.

Let us look at some incidents in recent history in which the vice president has assumed power: