The seat of the Mexican government is Mexico City, in the Federal District, a jurisdiction with certain similarities to the District of Columbia in the United States. Mexico City, however, unlike Washington, D. C., combines the qualities of New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, for Mexico's political capital is also its intellectual and economic capital.
Roderic A. Camp, 2 0 0 3 322
In 2004, Mexico City’s population reached an estimated 22.1 million, up from 2.9 million in 1950. This growth, however, has been far from uniform. The city’s rapid growth, based on the import-substitution economic model, continued through the 1970s. Between 1950 and 1980, the population of the industrial zone north of the Federal District increased by 13.6 percent a year. In 1975, the Federal District and the adjacent State of Mexico provided 44 percent of Mexico’s GDP, and the Mexico City metropolitan area generated 46 percent of its industrial employment.323
Between 1970 and 1980 the city’s population increased by 5.1 million—its fastest growth ever. In part, this growth resulted from migrants seeking jobs created by 1970s prosperity. Industrialists located their facilities in the city to be close to government officials who made myriad decisions upon which the success of their business depended. However, official policy sought to discourage the further growth of the city. The 1978 National Urban Development Plan explicitly set as its goal “discouraging the growth of the Mexico City metropolitan area.”324
The decision at the national level to emphasize exports had a marked impact on Mexico City. During the 1980s, Mexico City increased in population by only 1.3 million. Between 1980 and 1988, manufacturing employment in the city declined from a little over 1 million to below 750,000 as non-competitive factories closed and new plants were located near the U. S. border. Many who lost or failed to find manufacturing jobs turned to street vending. By the early 1990s, an estimated
149.000 street vendors plied the city’s streets, drawing the wrath of established businesses. Shopkeepers complained that street vendors created health problems, caused more affluent customers to shop elsewhere, and competed unfairly since they did not have to pay rent or taxes. In the 1980s, to compound the city’s problems, the De la Madrid administration reduced the massive federal subsidies the city relied on as the federal government struggled to meet its foreign debt obligations.325
The city, which had been a beacon of hope for the rest of the country, lost its allure. The government estimated that between 1985 and 1990, the city suffered a net population loss of 300,000 as many abandoned its crime, pollution, and congested streets. Those remaining in the city vented their spleen at the ballot box. In the July 1985 elections, the PRI captured only 42.6 percent of the vote in the Federal District, 22 percent below the PRI’s national vote.326
In September 1985, an earthquake registering 8.1 on the Richter scale hit the city, which was already overwhelmed by uncontrolled growth and industrial decline. The quake hit the central city area hardest, killing 8,000—10,000, causing an estimated $4—5 billion in material damage, leaving
150.000 homeless, and destroying the workplaces of another 150,000.327
In the aftermath of the quake, one could see Mexico at its best—and worst. Neighborhood groups quickly organized in response to the quake, rescuing people and providing food and medicine. On their own initiative, college students formed brigades to dig survivors out of collapsed buildings. Residents later formed the Earthquake Victims’ Coordinating Committee to press for the rebuilding of old neighborhoods rather than the relocation of those who had lost their homes. The Committee successfully pressured the government into heavily subsidizing the construction of 28,000 housing units, which converted tenants of destroyed buildings into homeowners who could remain in their old neighborhoods.328
On the negative side, the government’s slow, inept response to the quake caused residents to lose what faith they had in government, as it exposed the inability of local and national politicians to manage the city’s basic services in a time of disaster. The quake also provided disturbing snapshots of life in Mexico. The owners of clandestine sweatshops that collapsed were manifestly more interested in salvaging equipment and inventory than in caring for their employees who had toiled off the books with no labor rights. Many of the more than 370 buildings that collapsed fell because corrupt contractors cut corners during construction.329
During the 1990s, commerce and services emerged as the city’s driving economic force, more than making up for the decline in manufacturing. During that decade the city’s population increased by 2.8 million. Between 1988 and 1996, the Federal District’s share of Mexico’s GDP increased from 21 to 23 percent, as the city emerged as one of the chief financial service centers of Latin America. By the turn of the century, the city provided 60 percent of Mexico’s banking services. Between 1990 and 1997, the number of top 500 Mexican companies headquartered in the city increased from 145 to 245. In 1998, only 24.9 percent of the city’s jobs were in manufacturing, down from 40.4 percent in 1970.330
World History
