Bolivia referendum: no closer to consensus

Bolivia's constitutional referendum on Sunday, Jan 25th, left both "yes" and "no" as far apart as.... well, left and right. President Evo Morales' new constitution, which passed with about 60% of the vote, seeks to revindicate centuries of inequality by creating 9 new indigenous regions with legal and financial autonomy, limiting large landholdings (traditionally owned by non-indigenous) to 5000 hectares and nationalizing all natural resources. Socialists, NGOs and indigenous groups are delighted. But old-style capitalists in the five eastern states - rich with oil and cattle-ranching - fear for their livlihoods. Clashes over the proposed constitution left several dead last year. Here's what two people on either side of the debate said today.
(Photo: Getty Images)

Regina Gualuo, President of the Indigenas Territory "Tacana 3", Beni State

"It's great. It's going to benefit the humble people of this country. It's going to improve education. Health care. The culture of the indigenous people."

Cristian Sattori, President of the Beni State Federation of Ranchers (FEGABENI)

"This constitution is seeking to divide the country. The government is governing for one half of the country to the detriment of the other half. There's two Bolivia's here trying to get along, but it's at risk.

Regina Gualuo

"Indigenous autonomy is going to benefit us hugely because it's going to decentralize federal funding that will go directly to our communities. Before, everything was centralized. The funding first went to the prefecture, then the subprefecture, then the municpality. We were like panhandlers outside the municipality. Now we can set out own priorities and fund our own projects."

Cristian Sattori

"We're the productive regions, regions that want development, that seek progress for the country, that seek to generate jobs. We'll respect the outcome of the referendum, but we are asking the government to respect our form of life, our ranching, our productive systems.

Regina Gualuo

"The ones who voted no are the ones who have been living off the resources of this country. And if there's any poor folks who voted no, it's because they've let themselves be fooled, bought for a few pennies and aren't thinking of their children."

Cristian Sattori

"The question of the 5000 hecatares (limit to land ownership) was predictable. What's dangerous is the intention of the government to use land distribution to redraw the political map in this country."

Regina Gualuo

"That's what hurts them. They say it's going to divide us, but it's not going to divide us, it's going to make us equal! Because it's not just going to be a few who benefit (from land). And they aren't going to be able to just hold on to it to use as collateral for bank loans like they used to.

Cristian Sattori

"It's absurd. We shouldn't be paying for errors of the past. I think it's great that indigenous are finally being taken into account, but you have to realize that most of this country is mestizo. It's not fair that those who were second class citizens suddenly become first class citizens, and those who were first class drop to second. It's as if Obama, to revindicate racism and slavery suddenly said that Anglo-Saxons can no longer get on buses."