This has led me to evaluate from my humble exercise of my right to give an opinion on the behavior of the different components of our new parliament, it should be noted that, despite the hopes we have for something to improve, we are not facing a situation of guarantee . Possibly we are facing a situation of radicalization of the conflict and a counterpoint, no longer between leaders or groups, but between Public Powers.
Our politicians do not think like a nation, they think like ideological agglomerates, it's the truth. Those who still have the Executive Power have been destined to torpedo the rise of the opposition in the Legislative Power, instead of generating spaces for dialogue to prevent the game from continuing - because there was not much progress when they had a majority in parliament. For their part, those who now hold the Legislative Power have proposed a legislative agenda that presents elements that are considered necessary in the current situation, but incorporating others that correspond to more individual elements if we compare the number of affected / benefited by the measures, and that they seem to have a higher priority at this time.
If the serious situation of the country lies in socio-economic problems, why not legislate on it? The point that I aspire to address is the decision making according to the amount of population that can benefit or harm a law.
Our politicians continue to think, mainly, about the interests of their coalitions, above national interests and the real benefits that the population requires. While we do not achieve a change in this thinking and think beyond the political sectors, which is thought as a nation, we will hardly see real changes in the short and medium term. In the end, they (all) arrive by popular vote but pursue their own goals, to a large extent.