For more than 70 years our country lived a hegemonic party regime through the PRI. However, in 1963 an electoral reform was promoted to open space to partisan political representation and the so -called party deputies were approved.
Through the party deputies, some leaders who, even if they had not won an electoral district, the National Political Party that obtained 2.5 % of the total vote of the respective election, would have the right to be assigned five deputies and up to twenty, assigning one more for each percentage point accredited from the total vote.
This reform allowed at the time a political representation to a minority social segment, despite the circumstances that the hegemonic party imposed and dominated at that time, such as the absolute disposition of public resources and security devices that sometimes used to repress the political opposition, among many other adverse issues.
In 1972, another electoral reform was carried out in which, among other issues, it reduced the percentage to access party deputies, of 2.5 % originally planned to 1.5 % with the electoral reform. However, the conditions that were practically very difficult to access opposition to political representation prevailed.
In 1977, another electoral reform was carried out in which the election of 300 elected deputies was established under the principle of relative majority and up to 100 deputies who would be elected by the principle of proportional representation by regional lists. This system was established as mandatory for federal entities, so that the proportional representation was also established at the state or regional level.
While it is true that this reform gave an important impulse to the political representation of a minority segment, the hegemonic party was still imposed, for example, in the formation of the Electoral College, which was the organ that described the elections and that was mostly integrated by the hegemonic party.
In 1986, another electoral reform was carried out in which the number of deputies of proportional representation until 200 was extended, while the majority deputies remained in 300. Regarding the multinominal deputies, all political parties were extended to all political parties and not only to minority, but established a top of 350 deputies The maximum that a political party could obtain for both principles.
In the period from 1990 to 1994, the reforms that practically ended up forming, in general terms, the electoral institutional and regulatory framework to the present day were promoted. In which the plural representation in the Senate of the Republic was expanded through the first minority senators, the creation of an autonomous electoral body and a Federal Electoral Court with a legal system of challenges.
The electoral system was designed from the experience of suffering from a hegemonic party system and that no longer responded to a politically plural society politically and with aspirations to consolidate a democratic regime.
Unfortunately, we need to continue forming Democrats, since, precisely to consolidate a democracy, convinced Democrats are also required, not only speech democrats and that in practice the little PRI they have inside (as Carlos Castillo Peraza said).
These days we are listening to that we want to convene a new electoral reform and point against the deputies of proportional representation, the partisan prerogatives among other issues that do not pay towards a plural representation such as social reality.
The electoral system that we have did not arise just a few years ago, was the fruit of the effort of a history of the democratic opposition for opening spaces for the political participation of citizenship of all political parties.
There are reforms that cannot and should not be subject to the criteria of the majority, because they end up extinguishing the participation of minorities, which is absolutely antidemocratic and unconstitutional.
