adapt to the will of the people. The increased diversity in the legislature would lead to some conflict but in the long run it would be much better than an essentially single party system. The Presidential elections would also have to be changed. This must also be amended to ensure that PRI control the presidency. In the current system the outgoing president nominates their successor on the party level, then the elections between this candidate and the opposition take place. The presidential electoral system should be changed to a form like the one used in France or the CIS. This is a two-ballot system that if no candidate gets a clear majority then the top two candidates have a runoff election and the top candidate in that election wins. This would help make it easier for upcoming parties’ candidates to gain national recognition if not the office they seek. With these changes the whole governmental system would be open for new candidates and parties. With the new parties the politicians would have to actually represent the people’s wishes to get the votes. In terms of the actual type of government that should be in place in Mexico the current federal system with a legislature and president, is probably the best system for the land. A parliamentary system with the ever-present possibility of a no confidence vote would be too volatile for the Mexican political world. If Mexico did go tot a parliamentary system then there would be the distinct possibility of a situation like that in Italy, where governments seldom last more than a year or two. The presidential system allows for enough authority over the legislature to promote stability and also it doesn’t put the parties in the position of having to nominate and vote on a Prime Minister when they come to power. In conclusion, the historical precedents in Mexico are decidedly in favor of instability and rebellion when the outcome is not in a candidate’s favor. Altho...
