Venezuelans Question ‘Model’ Democracy : Government: Political trappings are in place, but pervasive poverty, joblessness and corruption make some long for more efficient rule.

Seventy years ago, Juan Vicente Gomez was a hated dictator. These days, some Venezuelans leave flowers and thank-you notes at his grave.

“Today in his tomb, Gomez is like a saint,” said historian Guillermo Moron. “He’s become a nice guy.”

Recent books emphasize that while Gomez was ruthless, he also balanced the budget, paid off foreign debt, developed the oil industry and ended a period of anarchy that went back to Venezuela’s independence in 1830.

“Gomez is the father of Venezuelan peace,” said Manuel Caballero. His book “Gomez, the Liberal Tyrant” won the prestigious National History Prize last year.

The softening of the academic and common man’s view of the 1908-1935 Gomez regime comes during a widespread questioning of Venezuela’s democracy, which seems to touch the lives of too few people in this South American nation of 21 million.

Political trappings undeniably are in place. Presidents have been chosen by election since 1958. The two main parties peacefully hand over power to the other. The armed forces accept civilian rule.

Nevertheless, there is little respect for the rule of law or the rights of minorities. Public institutions such as schools and hospitals offer deplorable service. Corruption is endemic. Tax evasion is a national pastime.

The previous president, Carlos Andres Perez, was impeached in 1993 and is being tried in the Supreme Court for allegedly misusing public funds. His predecessor and Democratic Action Party colleague, Jaime Lusinchi, also faces a Supreme Court trial for alleged corruption.

“It’s a completely false democracy,” said Jose Vicente Rangel, a former congressman who is an investigative journalist. “The only thing people do is vote.”

Luis Hernandez, who sells comic books and candy in downtown Caracas, agreed. “Democracy is very pretty, but it doesn’t work,” he said.

Venezuelans used to think differently. In 1958, when President Marcos Perez Jimenez fled to exile, ending a six-year dictatorship, they exulted and dedicated themselves to fashioning a democracy almost from scratch.

The two political parties, COPEI and Democratic Action, curtailed their intrigues and worked together on public policy. Governments in the 1960s defeated a leftist insurgency, modernized the armed forces and renegotiated the foreign debt.

Economic prospects were extremely favorable. Proven oil reserves are the greatest outside the Middle East, and there are large amounts of natural gas, gold, bauxite, coal and timber.

When world oil prices soared in the 1970s, Venezuela enjoyed the highest per capita income on the continent.

But the hopes are gone, replaced by cynicism. Lusinchi left the Central Bank empty. Perez promised a return to the days of subsidies, then abruptly imposed free-market changes that provoked food riots in which hundreds died.

President Rafael Caldera, in Miraflores Palace the last 21 months, was caught unaware by last year’s collapse of the private banking sector, which ranks among the worst financial debacles in Latin America history.

Some Venezuelans worry that their government has not curtailed an inflation rate that has topped 30% every year this decade. The government’s budget deficit is unabated. The currency devalues daily.

Standards of living have plummeted. The jobless rate, now at 11% by the government’s figures and nearer 18% by independent estimates, has climbed four straight years. By the state’s own data, one of every two Venezuelans barely earns enough to eat.

“Venezuela is a country with a lot of riches,” said Jesus Contreras, an impoverished employee at a clothing store. But “the politicians robbed everything. They’re well off and the people are going hungry.”

When now-retired Lt. Col. Hugo Chavez tried to topple Perez by coup in 1992, he won instant admiration and a national following by pledging to curtail public corruption.

The coup failed, as did a second one nine months later. But they exposed deep frailties in Venezuela’s democratic fabric.

The president understands that as well as anyone. Hours after the Chavez revolt, Caldera said in an oft-recalled remark, “It’s hard to ask people to make sacrifices for liberty and democracy when they think liberty and democracy aren’t capable of giving them food to eat.”

Some Venezuelans had hoped that Caldera, who also was president in 1969-74, would provide strong leadership along the lines of President Alberto Fujimori in Peru. Fujimori cracked down on Marxist guerrillas, suspended Congress, rewrote the Constitution and got Peru’s economy moving again.

“We’re almost at the point of anarchy,” said Arturo Sosa, a Jesuit priest and sociologist. “People want someone to establish order.”

That, at least, was something the dictators were good at.

Perez Jimenez, still living in exile in Spain, is recalled for keeping today’s perilous streets safe from crime and using Venezuela’s oil wealth to build bridges, tunnels, skyscrapers and Latin America’s best highway system.

“So many people say, ‘It was better before. What do we need democracy for?’ ” said Anibal Romero, a political scientist.