In upcoming Mexican election, migrants living in the US could tip tight presidential race

New rules allowing Mexican citizens to register to vote from abroad could reshape the country's electoral landscape. 

Lucy Nicholson/Reuters
A line begins to form at a voter registration desk on Jan. 16 at the Mexican consulate in Los Angeles. Mexicans living in the US could influence Mexico's tight presidential race.

Tijuana native Alma Martinez will cast her first-ever vote for a Mexican president this July, but from across the country's northern border, where she is among hundreds of thousands of co-nationals whose participation could be decisive in a close race.

Seven times as many Mexicans in the United States have received voting credentials under new rules that let citizens sign up at local consulates rather than in Mexico, compared with the last presidential election six years ago.

Many are first-time voters.

"It could potentially decide the election," said David Ayon, a senior fellow at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.

Oregon resident Ms. Martinez, who moved to the US two decades ago and works as a hotel cleaner, said she was particularly motivated to cast her ballot because of the uncertainty for migrants under President Trump.

"Things haven't gotten ugly with Trump just yet, but you never know if you'll be deported," she said. "You always live with a part of your heart in Mexico."

Mexico's National Electoral Institute (INE) says it has already approved more than 460,000 credentials for voters abroad, and is processing thousands more applications, ahead of a March 31 deadline to register.

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a former mayor of Mexico City who now leads the leftist National Regeneration Movement (MORENA), is the front-runner ahead of the vote, an opinion poll showed this week.

Ricardo Anaya of the conservative National Action Party (PAN) was in second place. Jose Antonio Meade, who is seeking the nomination of the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), came in third.

In a tight race, all votes could be crucial.

In 2006, former President Calderon won by fewer than 244,000 votes, or less than 1 percentage point, the first time that Mexicans could vote for president outside the country.

In that race, INE counted 40,876 voters abroad, of which 80 percent voted, followed by 59,115 in the next election cycle, of which 70 percent voted.

This year's race is also shaping up to be hotly contested given the numerous corruption scandals plaguing the PRI, which has held power for most of the past nine decades.

"It's very early to say what percent of them will vote, but in a tight election, these votes could make a difference," said Benito Nacif, an INE official.

During the past two elections, Mexican voters based in the US largely favored the PAN, followed by Mr. Obrador, who is now making his third presidential bid. Last year, he drew crowds as he visited major US cities on what he described as a tour to support "our countrymen, the migrants."

Adrian Felix, a University of California Santa Cruz professor, said he expects more US votes to be cast than in previous elections. But he said the multi-step registration process, plus skepticism, could limit the increase among the estimated 12 million Mexicans living abroad.

"There are a number of institutional impediments that need to be changed to democratize the process," he said.

Most Mexican political parties have been staying quiet in the US restricted from campaigning abroad under INE rules, although news and social media flow across borders.

Some Mexican politicians are recognizing the burgeoning influence of voters far from home.

"Mexicans in the US could directly influence the result in this election," said Enrique Alfaro, a former mayor of Guadalajara who is running for governor in Jalisco state. "I'm seeing a lot of spirit among the community from Jalisco in various US cities."

Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said the effect of Mexico's diaspora in the US could be greater in future elections if politicians seize on growing participation.

"At some point there will be a candidate that wants to take advantage of the vote abroad, and that will be a game changer," he said. 

This story was reported by Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.