I think everyone recognizes that this government has given this country a sense of direction, after many years (of drifting). A "NO" win would be a reversal of this process which hasn't been easy to get going; this country ties itself in knots (at times). I'm not saying we've been absolutely successful in this task, but clearly there is a perception that this government knows where it wants to take the country. Today, although some people would question this, the country has a National Development Plan. We have a Development vision. And I believe this is a really important asset with which we can build many things. It is clear to me that a "NO" win would represent a serious setback in this process.
There is another problem, frankly. On the one hand you can see that "NO" has clear and undisputed leadership. You know that if "NO" wins, then a specific person wins. And someone will have to sit down and negotiate with that person. Unpleasant though that might be. This could be good or bad for the country. But the real problem if "NO" wins is that (the triumph of "NO") would be followed by a civil war among this group.There isn't clear leadership there.
So, on the one hand there would be the government, if not with its back to the wall, since I don't think that will happen, then at least reduced in its political viability. Then on the other hand a bloodbath (figuratively speaking - among the "NO" factions) in which the winner is anyone's guess. So the governability of this country is reduced enormously. The private sector of this country and ultimately the workers of this country pay for those broken dishes. I think it is really important that businessmen understand that the topic here isn't only, or even fundamentally, commerce. What is at stake here is governability.
A country that is ungovernable is a country where the private sector cannot produce.
Democratic Institutions
In the last couple weeks it has become clear to many of us that (Costa Rica's) institutional integrity is at stake as well, given statements made by some people (in the "NO" camp). Some people are playing with things that don't have any spare parts.
We're taught pretty much from 5 years old that one thing you never do is deny the results of an election. End of story. You have to respect mothers, can't hit women, and can't deny the results of an election.
At that level of importance. So the rhetoric of some people has been a real surprise and obviously really dangerous. That rhetoric leaves a residue. And that residue builds up in the minds of our children. So it is crucial that we end this (rhetoric), and end it now. The best way to end it is with a convincing triumph for "YES".
"Soft" and "Hard" Convictions Among Voters
(The current intent to vote in favor of CAFTA – "YES") is not as soft as I thought. Evidence from the polls on this particular point is very contradictory. Some polls show that the "NO" vote is very hard, but other polls don't. Some say that the "YES" vote is more fixed. So the evidence is not clear. Frankly, we talk about hard and soft votes, and a fervent, divided ("polarizado") electorate.
Yes, about 10% of the country is fervent and divided. But I think, thankfully, that the great majority [of voters] in this country will go and vote for or against CAFTA, but they'll do so very calmly. This division (between the camps) is a limited phenomenon. Let us not blow this out of proportion.
If there was one time I was really proud to be a Costa Rican it was after the last (Presidential) election. That one-month period after the election showed us all that the Costa Rican people have a really solid civic sense. Practically in no other country in the world would a manual re-count have been taken with such calm. Nobody hit the streets. This speaks volumes for the quality of our democracy here.
Government 
