Havana. April 1, 2005

 ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA

 An equation impossible to solve

 BY MIREYA CASTAÑEDA

 Granma International staff writer

 JUST a few days away from municipal elections in Cuba

 (April 17) there are reasons for attempting to find an

 equation to parallel the electoral process in general on

 the island and that of the United States. For example, one

 of them would be that these are the first after the Bush

 administration announcement of the so-called report of the

 Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba.

 As the above-mentioned plan, an overtly annexationist

 project signed by President George W. Bush in May 2004,

 proclaims in its Title 3, the establishment of democratic

 institutions, respect for human rights, a state of law and

 justice and national reconciliation.

 The concrete measures of this section include: with the

 help of the United States, creating and strengthening a

 democratic electoral system for the drafting and reform of

 electoral laws and the training of electoral officials in

 matters of registering voters, keeping electoral censuses

 and in voting procedures.

 To sum up, at the stroke of a pen to eliminate existing

 electoral law on the island because it totally differs from

 the US electoral process and because, as Ricardo Alarcón,

 president of the Cuban Parliament, emphasized, it differs

 in terms of what they call democracy.

 The first step is to draw up an equation and set about

 clearing away incognitos in search of a final equality.

 There could be many variables, but just let's take the

 selection of candidates and the cost of political

 campaigns.

 I have to warn you that it's an impossible equation. In

 fact cost and political campaigning are already terms that

 do not fit in with the Cuban process, while in the United

 States the elevated cost of political campaigns is in

 itself a widely argued issue.

 For example, the Center for Responsive Politics, a US

 non-governmental organization, estimates that money in play

 in the 2004 campaign was more than $3.9 billion, of which

 $1.2 billion was directly spent on the presidential battle.

 Another investigation, from the Center for Public

 Integrity, revealed that the same companies financed the

 campaigns of Bush and John Kerry, the Democratic candidate,

 in 2004. Four companies are on the list of the 10 principal

 donors to both candidates: Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, UBS

 Ag. Inc. and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. Apparently, they

 believed that either of the two candidates would be

 beneficial to their interests.

 Of course, all those campaign funds came at a very high

 price, explained Charles Lewis, the executive director of

 CPI, an independent non-party organization and among the

 most outstanding in investigations into money and politics.

 He says it is about naming the price of power in the US

 commercial democracy where one pays for playing, but where

 both of the 2004 presidential candidates offered political

 favors to the principal contributors to their campaigns.

 In his recent book, The Buying of the President, Lewis

 argues that the US electoral system has broken down as, in

 fact, the big businesses interests select the candidates of

 both national parties. The real powers that exist in this

 country are not found on any voting slip, and are not

 accountable to anyone.

 The CPI report notes that the investment is nothing in

 comparison with the billion-dollar cascades coming out of

 legislation.

 Moreover, he affirms, the powerful corporations back the

 election of candidates who are already wealthy. In the case

 of the aspiring presidential candidates of last year, Bush

 and Kerry and their vice presidents, Dick Cheney and John

 Edwards are all millionaires.

 Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, have a $747-million

 fortune, of which $14.8 million corresponds to the

 candidate. Meanwhile, Vice President Dick Cheney and his

 life Lynn Cheney possess private wealth to the tune of

 $111.2 million. Edwards has a fortune of $44.6 million and

 that of Bush stands at $18.9 million.

 All that data, the selection of candidates and their

 personal fortunes, the centers of power, of commercial

 democracy and the campaign funding are other aspects of the

 impossibility of the comparison.

 In Cuba things are different.

 The upcoming municipal elections, which have been organized

 every two years since 1976, are scheduled for April 17 and,

 in cases where it is necessary, a second round takes place

 on April 24.

 In order to arrive at the act of voting (secret and

 non-obligatory) the electoral process was initiated in

 January and its most important stage has just concluded

 (February 24- March 24): the assemblies to nominate

 candidates for delegates. It is a highly participative

 process.

 A total of 41,606 neighborhood assemblies took place in

 which more than 84% of the eligible population (from 16

 years of age) participated; in other words, more than eight

 million Cubans. In those assemblies it was the neighbors

 who nominated (with their hand raised), and who seek in

 their candidates not the wealthiest or most powerful, but

 those with more virtue, merit, knowledge and capability.

 On March 27 what one should call the electoral campaign got

 underway, but in Cuba this simply means posting photos and

 biographies of the 32,640 candidates nominated (80%

 educated to intermediate and higher levels, 28% women, 23%

 young people aged 16-35).

 Another difference: the delegates who are elected fulfill

 their services to the community without receiving any

 salary whatsoever and without abandoning their professions

 and occupations.

 Roberto Díaz Sotolongo, minister of justice and president

 of the National Electoral Commission, has stated that the

 nomination of candidates is one of the elements that makes

 the Cuban democratic system unique in the world.

 Returning to Title 3 of the Plan Bush, let us consider the

 proposal of another electoral census. The intention of that

 alternative was explained by Ricardo Alarcón. "The text

 states that it is necessary to draw up a completely new

 electoral register and one that follows the US model. They

 would impose here by force voluntary self-enrollment, a

 system identical to that functioning in the United States

 and whose insufficiencies have been highlighted in the

 press and by civil rights and intellectuals organizations,

 all of which detail the regulations and restrictions

 currently being suffered by millions of citizens of that

 country, in order to be recognized as voters."

 Registration on the island is currently de jure, public and

 universal for anyone who has reached 16 years of age,

 without discrimination based on politics, ethnicity,

 religion or gender, and to appear on the roll is a right.

 An equation between elections in the United States and

 Cuba? Impossible.