June 7, 2010.The results of Cuba’s elections, whether the municipal partial elections taking place every two and a half years or the national and provincial elections which take place every five years, require serious and detailed analysis. This will be done in a further work. However, it is important for the moment to deal in the form of notes with some media disinformation regarding the municipal elections which just concluded.

In a Miami Herald article by Juan Tamayo dated April 28, 2010, the headline reads: “Dissidents: Voting shows frustration”; the article adds that the voting reflects “growing disgruntlement” on the island.i He also provides some statistical results and uses them to support his assertion.

In this piece I will address the statistical material first and then discuss whether the data support´s Tamayo´s thesis.

The Miami Herald indicates that voter turn-out fell, even though it admits that the decrease was small, while putting a lot of emphasis on the increase in the percentage of blank and nullified votes. To his credit, Tamayo provides basically correct information on voter turn-out, but this does not tell the whole story. Partial municipal elections are held every two and half years from 1976 to 2010, for a total of fourteen elections.ii The 2010 final elections results, rounding off the figures, indicate that 95.9% of those eligible to vote did so. Tamayo insinuates that this is lower than every year since 1976 which registered a 95.2% voting rate. However, the statistics also show that aside from 1976, the first year of elections, this year’s voter turn-out were not the lowest. There was one year, 2002, in which 95.8% of the electorate went to the polls, a very small fraction lower than this year. The 2002 election results also showed that 2002 witnessed a drop from the previous elections in 2000.

However, did this decrease reflect a tendency in the Cuban electoral mood? No, because in the following elections (both in 2005 and 2007) the voting rate actually increased. The point is that one cannot look at changes in the Cuban elections results (such as 2010) and read into them a tendency according to personal whims or desires. Anyone hoping that the next municipal elections to be held as part of the general elections in two a half years (2012-13) may show a further diminution in voting patterns, can very well be disappointed as was the case after the drop in 2002. Furthermore, the fourteen elections show regular up and down swings in voter participation which do not necessarily indicate anything, as they are quite small differences. The main feature is that all fourteen municipal elections from 1976 to 2010 indicate a very high voter turnout from 95.2 % to 95.9%.

The Miami Herald article turns more openly negative when it deals with blank and null votes, indicating that
“The 8.91 percent of null and blank votes in Sunday’s balloting was higher than in three known previous elections – 7 percent in the 1993 national legislative elections, 7.2% in the 1997 municipal elections and 5.9 percent in the 2000 municipal elections, according to Jorge Domínguez, a Harvard University Cuba expert. Results for other elections were not available.”

With all due respect for Professor Domínguez, results are in fact available for other elections.iii For example, in the 1995 partial municipal elections, 4.3% cast blank votes while no less than 7.0% spoiled their ballot, for a total of 11.3% blank and spoiled ballots. This was a higher non-valid vote rate than this year, 2010. In the municipal elections following the 2005 vote, held in 2007, the percentage of blank and spoiled ballots dipped to 3.23% and 3.98%, for a non-valid total of 7.21%.

The article mentions elections for the National Assembly held every five years. Professor Domínguez is correct when he indicated that the total blank and null votes amounted to about 7.0% in the 1993 general elections for the Parliament; however, he insinuated that the 2010 elections results represent a noticeable reduction in positive voting. However, what is significant about these 1993 results, as we inquired above about the increase in non-valid votes on the municipal levels? Does the voting pattern in any way indicate a tendency departing from the general trend? No, this does not seem to be the case. For example, in the next three national elections for the parliament following the 1993 elections, the 7% non-valid result in 1993 melted down to 5.02% (1998), to 3.86% (2003) and to 4.77% (2008).iv Once again, one must be beware of jumping to premature conclusions. Like the municipal elections, national parliamentary elections consistently show a very high voter rate and a very low non valid voting rate, varying every five years, but only minimally.

In 2010, the final results in the first round show that 4.59% deposited blank votes and 4.30% spoiled ballots, the second highest in municipal elections since 1995. Let us make some notes on this. Firstly, not all blank and spoiled ballots represent a rejection of the system nor favour the dissident option for political change. Some voters do so by error and there are other factors such as the Jehovah Witnesses, who do not oppose the revolution or its political system; however, their religion beliefs prohibit them from casting a vote for an individual. Initial investigation indicates that that the number of Jehovah Witnesses is on the increase in Cuba.

However, the most glaring proof against the supposed homogeneity of non-valid votes lies in the spoiled ballots. I have directly observed on many occasions, especially in the 1997-98 elections and more recently the 2007-2008 elections the public counting of the votes by the electoral boards members in the polling stations after the voting had come to an end. With my own photos as a proof, quite a few ballots are spoiled by misplaced enthusiasm. For example, I have seen a ballot in a Plaza de la Revolución polling station where a voter wrote-in Raúl Castro. This was immediately declared by the electoral board to be a spoiled ballot because Raúl Castro was not a candidate in the constituency and in any case write-ins are not recognized in Cuba. I have seen other ballots dutifully completed according to the law; however a sketch of Che Guevara was drawn by the elector on the ballot which was thus nullified. There are many other such examples as well as others including errors. As far as errors are concerned, on the municipal level, one has the right to vote for only one of candidates on the ballot as compared to the right to vote for several at the national level. Despite all the efforts, there is apparently some confusion when some voters enter the private voting stall, thus their vote is inadvertently spoiled. For those who purposely spoil their ballot, it is very clear, they do so quite graphically as is their right.

And so while it is true that one cannot say what proportion of blank and spoiled ballots does not represent rejection but rather errors or misplaced enthusiasm; however, one thing for sure, it is safe to say that a certain amount of the total non-valid voting does not at all constitute a rejection of the system.

Let us now turn to the assertion in the Miami Herald that the April voting results reflects “frustration” and “disgruntlement.” This is presented as a major discovery which is obviously intended to drive a wedge between the citizens and the leadership at all levels, seeing as this conclusion regarding the elections results are attributed to “dissidents.” It is in fact true that there exists in Cuba at this time a lot of “frustration” and “disgruntlement,” if we make a concession for argument’s sake and use the terms employed by the Herald. However, the Cuban government from the leadership to the vast majority on down at the grass-roots level and from the base up to the leadership are trying to respond to dissatisfaction by solving problems.

Some of those who analyze negatively the 2010 elections results compare them to the previous ones, especially the 2007-2008 elections which showed a lower blank and spoiled ballot rate. Those elections terminated in January 2008. What has happened in 2008, 2009 and in the beginning of 2010? Firstly, Cuba like the rest of the world has felt the effects of the global economic and financial crisis. Secondly, combined with this, the Miami Herald surely remembers that Cuba was the victim of three massive hurricanes in 2008 in a very short period of time: Gustav, Ike and Paloma caused over $10 billion in damage and massive uprooting which is not even calculable in dollars. Thirdly, the Cuban government has been and is attempting to bring about changes, especially those concerned with perfecting economic activity such as production and distribution. The sincere talk and action related to change encourages expectations; however, given the complexity of the international and domestic situation this very prospective of striving to respond to frustration and disgruntlement with positive results can at times not come about as rapidly and massively as many Cubans would hope. This situation therefore results perhaps in more disenchantment and not less. These are questions that anyone seriously dealing with the current Cuban political process has to pose to oneself and reflect upon.

Taking all this into account, that is, the world economic crisis since the last elections, the three hurricanes in 2008 and the rising expectations of change within the limits of the international and domestic situation, one may have to say that the increase in the 2010 protest vote through blank and nullified votes is not very high.

The opponents of Cuba view the island, as Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano says, with a magnifying glass when it comes to what they perceive as a negative incident or tendency; it is only just therefore that all factors, even secondary ones, be taken into account while of course not exaggerating their relative importance such as potential voters absent on international missions, a holiday coinciding with elections and what some citizens see as an increase in the number of Jehovah Witness adherents.

There have been previous efforts by journalists and/or academic at showing that elections in Cuba demonstrate opposition by the Cubans. Following the 1995 municipal elections US academic Miguel Centeno, a Cuba detractor, declared that the results show “significant discontent.” However, according to the investigation carried out this was not supported by sources or statistics.v As indicated above, while the 1995 elections did indicate a decrease in positive voting, what happened in the next general elections at the national, provincial and municipal elections in 1997-98? The positive voting bounced back and increased. And here we are fifteen years later (after the 1995 misguided evaluation of “discontent”) and we still hear talk about discontent from basically the same sources.

Nor was the 1995 evaluation the last one to have proven to be wrong. For example, perhaps the dissidents were expecting a far lower voter turn-out and a far higher increase in black and spoiled ballots in the 1997-98 elections. Over ten years ago, in the 1998 general national elections for the parliament, there were major expectations from amongst the dissidents for a massive and noticeable rejection through the ballot box compared to the previous 1993 general elections. Cuban Parliament President Ricardo Alarcon indicated on January 13, 1998 that certain diplomatic sources in Havana sympathetic to the dissidents were anxiously expecting a sharp increase in blank and spoiled ballots.vi All the conditions were present for such an outcome: the effects of the 1992 Torricelli Act and the 1996 Helms-Burton Act, the 1997 call by President Bill Clinton for a “democratic Transition Government” in Cuba with the accompanying funding of dissidents, all this in the context of the Special Period in Cuba caused by the collapse of the former USSR and the resulting major damage to the Cuban economy. At the same time, some of the worst effects of this situation began to improve albeit slightly, such as the decrease in black-outs caused by energy sources. However, despite the mainly unfavourable situation which vastly outweighed the minor improvements, the dissidents did not see their dream come true.vii When their wishes did not come about, one of Cuba’s most noted dissidents, Elizardro Sánchez was obliged to admit “that the 1998 national elections ‘signified the renovation of the mandates and the legitimacy of the government.’” viii

Above we have outlined only two examples, the 1995 partial municipal elections and the 1997-98 national general elections for the Parliament.

Both the Miami Herald, their supporters in Miami and elsewhere in the US and the few that exist on the island do not understand a very important feature of the Cuban political culture. Going way back at least to the second half of the nineteen century to date, the very vast majority of Cubans think and act in the following way: despite all the shortcomings and problems in Cuba, many of which come about as a result of its own deficiencies, Cubans do not like to be told what to do, especially by the US and Europe. The response is always to defend the system and work to overcoming its negative features and imperfections on their own. The more one attempts to meddle in Cuba’s internal affairs, the more the Cubans continue to follow their own path with a view of perfecting its system, while not blindly following avenues which do not contribute to advancing the situation.

Examining cold statistics and superficially drawing conclusions according to pre-determined preferences from the slightest change in figures or graphic curves represents a weakness in Eurocentric social sciences and history. It blinds one from examining the content, that is, the society in question, its evolution and political culture. In any case, as far as the next elections in Cuba are concerned, it is the Cuban people who will have the last say. Even then, elections in Cuba constitute only one relatively small process in the Cuban version of democracy. Between now and the next elections, Cubans have many ways in which they can have their voices felt and act upon on them. For example, while the votes were being counted on April 25, important debates were and are taking place in the Cuban press regarding the current economic and social situation and what to do about it. The issue of election results and society in Cuba is a very complex one and cannot be studied superficially. You can even have citizens who are involved in revolutionary change with much more passion than in elections or being an elected delegate, even though they of course vote in this process.

A few more notes on the municipal elections. The current Cuban municipal elections are almost terminated but not quite yet. They were initiated on January 4, 2010 when the Council of State according to the Cuban Constitution and the Electoral law convoked the elections. One of the first acts is to update the voters’ registration list based on the ongoing and permanent list of citizens, their age and adresses. Voter registration in Cuba is ex-officio: it is automatic for all those sixteen years and older; there is nothing to do in order to get on the registration list which is public.

From February 24 to March 24 thousands of local compact neighbourhood nomination meetings were held with only a couple of hundred voters eligible to participate in each one. Citizens have the right to nominate any neighbour in their constituency (district/riding) to run as a candidate. From two to eight neighbours can be nominated, those getting the most votes in a show of hands voting procedure are declared to be candidates. Secret, universal suffrage elections then took place on April 25 whereby voters can choose one of these nominated candidates. Since one has to receive at least 50% of the votes to be declared the winner, it is quite frequent that no candidate gets 50% the first time around. This year 14% of the 15,093 constituencies had to go into a second tour whereby voters voted for one amongst the two who had gotten the most (but not 50%) votes or the two who were tied.

This second tour took place on May 2, the day after May 1, a major day for Cubans all across the island. Normally voter turn-out is lower for second tour election. For the 2010 second tour, all of the emphasis in the week leading up to the second tour was on the mobilization for May 1, virtually nothing on the elections. Surprisingly (including for this writer), 90% of the electorate voted despite all the emphasis on May 1. Normally voting the voting rate for the second tour is between 89 and 93%, always lower than the first tour; for example second tour voting rate was 93.6% in 1986, 89% in 1995, 94.77%, in 1997, 93.5% in 2005.ix

However, in three constituencies, seeing as that there was a tie between the two candidates, a third tour was called for. These elections are being held on May 16.

On May 19 the municipal assemblies’ newly elected delegates will meet in the 169 municipalities across the country in order to constitute the assemblies. One of the main objectives of this first session is to elect the president and vice-president of the municipal assembly by secret vote from amongst those elected to the Assembly. This brings to an end the 2010 municipal elections, even though in the coming weeks and months, the permanent work commissions in the municipal assemblies and the People’s Councils and their respective presidents and vice-presidents are updated taking into account the newly elected delegates, a large number of which are not incumbents, but rather elected for the first time. The daily work of the elected delegates, with all its trials and tribulations, begins so that the electors can see the results and act upon them before the next elections.

By Arnold August