On Feb. 15, Venezuelan voters threw their support behind President Hugo Chavez’s referendum to abolish term limits imposed on the presidency and other elected positions. At the same time, voters seemed to repudiate the decision they made in 2007.The vote on this referendum falls only fifteen months after voters rejected a similar referendum proposed by Chavez. At that time, Chavez vowed to continue pursuing the referendum, even as he lauded his country for harnessing the power of the vote.

Ricardo Gauna, a publicist from the slums of the capital Caracas, praised Chavez for standing up to the United States.

“Voting is the people’s weapon for defending our beliefs,” said Gauna, according to The New York Times. “We have cut our umbilical cord to the United States.”

Chavez was elected to the Venezuelan presidency in 1998 and reelected in 2000 under the new constitution. In 2006, Chavez won a second term with overwhelming support.

With the outcome of this referendum, Chavez has an opportunity to win a third consecutive term in 2012.

In an interview with The New York Times, Alan Brewer Carias of Columbia University Law School claimed the wording of the two referendums heavily influenced voters’ decisions.

“In the referendum of 2007, the proposals were clearly directed to establish a socialist, militaristic, centralist state, and eliminating the rule of law. So, the opposition was more clear eighteen months ago.”

In the 2008 referendum, Carias explains that the referendum was pitched as a means of expanding the voting power of all citizens.

“It was very difficult to find . the real intention . from the question submitted to the voters,” said Carias.

Opponents of Chavez claim that his tight control of Venezuelan media influenced the results. Employees of nationalized industries were allegedly encouraged to vote in favor of the referendum, as were all government employees and people dependent upon state-sponsored subsidies.

Chavez traditionally relies upon the large voting bloc of the poor, whom he has targeted with ambitious anti-poverty programs reliant upon oil revenues since his first election in 1998.

As an Organization of Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC) founding member, Venezuela accrues about half of its government revenues through oil trade. Though the price of oil has fallen dramatically in recent months, Chavez has renewed his pledge to pursue his anti-poverty agenda.

Sanjay Marwah, assistant professor of justice and policy studies, points to the referendum as a means of legitimizing a radical change in the Venezuelan constitution.

“Referendums are very populist and are the embodiment of direct democracy. They’re appealing because they represent the will of the people, and they’ve become very useful in Latin America.”

Marwah acknowledges that the small size of Latin American states makes the use of referendums simple.

“You wouldn’t see such a measure introduced on a federal level in a parliamentary system. Referendums work well for smaller populations,” said Marwah.

Alicia Villegas, a Venezuelan economist and supporter of Chavez, voted in favor of the referendum because she believes in the effectiveness of the anti-poverty programs.

“The destiny of the country is in play,” said Villegas, as quoted in The New York Times. “I’m voting for the continuation of the process that we have begun.”

Though Chavez’s popularity has ebbed and flowed over the course of his presidency, he still remains Venezuela’s most popular politician. The 2007 referendum was defeated by a slim two percent margin, whereas the 2008 referendum was passed with a 10 percent margin.

Though the United States and Venezuela were on bellicose terms during the majority of 2008, Chavez made an overture of diplomacy toward President Obama one day before the referendum.

The United States is alleged to have tacitly supported a failed 2002 coup against Chavez, and Bush maintained a hard-line approach to Chavez’s socialist domestic policies and style of leadership.

President Obama’s administration has taken a decidedly neutral stance toward Chavez, though Obama was critical of Chavez’s assistance to Colombian guerrillas in January.

Assistant Professor of Political Science Robert Duncan predicts that Chavez may soon face domestic problems.

“With the global economic meltdown and the drop in the price of oil, that’ll mean less revenue for the (Venezuelan) government and less subsidies for the people,” said Duncan. “And when the people don’t get what they want, they’ll seek to overthrow the regime.”

Duncan feels that the United States ought not interfere in Venezuelan domestic affairs if Chavez’s government faces hostile opposition because of the economic slump.

“If things do get bad in Venezuela, the U.S. should show compassion and offer medical assistance and other humanitarian relief efforts,” said Duncan. “We don’t have license to go in and assassinate him.