Although opinions differ on whether Chávez's rule should be characterized as authoritarian or democratic, just about everyone appears to agree that, in contrast to his predecessors, Chávez has made the welfare of the Venezuelan poor his top priority. His government, the thinking goes, has provided subsidized food to low income families, redistributed land and wealth, and poured money from Venezuela's booming oil industry into health and education programs.  Unfortunately, it is wrong, says Francisco Rodríguez, Assistant Professor of Economics and Latin American Studies at Wesleyan University.

In an article published by Foreign Affairs, Rodriguez, who was Chief Economist of the Venezuelan National Assembly from 2000 to 2004, says that "neither official statistics nor independent estimates show any evidence that Chávez has reoriented state priorities to benefit the poor. Most health and human development indicators have shown no significant improvement beyond that which is normal in the midst of an oil boom. Indeed, some have deteriorated worryingly, and official estimates indicate that income inequality has increased. The 'Chávez is good for the poor' hypothesis is inconsistent with the facts."

Under the title "An Empty Revolution, the Unfulfilled Promises of Hugo Chávez," the article states that by late 2007, "Chávez's economic model had begun to unravel" and  the growing economic crisis is the predictable result of the gross mismanagement of the economy by Chávez's economic team.

"For the first time since early 2004, a majority of voters claimed that both their personal situation and the country's situation had worsened during the preceding year. Scarcities in basic foodstuffs, such as milk, black beans, and sardines, were chronic, and the difference between the official and the black-market exchange rate reached 215 percent."