Brazil’s Administrative Reform Belongs in the 2026 Campaign

Brazil’s next election campaign should not treat administrative reform as a technical footnote. According to single-source commentary published by O Globo, a proposed constitutional amendment now moving through Brazil’s Congress would make the structure and cost of the public sector a central test of seriousness for presidential candidates.

The article, written by José Luis Minc, a lawyer and career prosecutor at Rio de Janeiro’s City Council, argues that PEC 38/2025 is the broadest proposal to reorganize Brazil’s civil service since the 1988 Constitution. The measure is coordinated by federal deputy Pedro Paulo of the Social Democratic Party (PSD-RJ), a centrist party with strong regional machines.

Why It Matters

Brazil has already passed reforms once dismissed as politically impossible, including labor, pension and tax changes. Administrative reform is the next hard file because it touches payrolls, career rules, job stability, political appointments and privileges inside the state.

Minc’s core point is sound: voters should know whether candidates intend to defend the current machine or change it. A country that spends heavily on personnel but struggles to measure results cannot keep treating public-sector design as an internal matter for Brasília, Brazil’s federal capital.

The proposal would alter roughly 40 constitutional articles and come with two companion measures: a Responsibility for Results Law and a Legal Framework for Public Administration. Together, they would try to move Brazil away from patchwork management and toward a state judged by outcomes, not only procedures.

Four Main Axes

The first axis would require strategic planning across federal, state and municipal governments. Annual targets would be published on transparency portals, spending reviews would become routine and primary expenditure growth would face a 2.5% annual cap.

It would also expand the role of Brazil’s audit courts, known as Tribunais de Contas. Instead of limiting oversight to whether officials followed formal rules, they would monitor the quality of public policies and issue binding external-control precedents.

The second axis would push full digitalization of public services. The third would constitutionalize periodic performance evaluations, link bonuses to targets and make career progression depend more on merit than seniority.

The fourth targets privileges. The proposal would end 60-day vacations, automatic seniority bonuses and the uncontrolled use of commissioned posts. Political appointments would be capped at 5% of the workforce and require technical selection. Indemnity payments outside the constitutional salary ceiling would also face limits, including in state-owned companies.

The Political Test

The federal reach matters. Minc notes that Brazil’s public servants are spread across the federal government, states and municipalities in shares of roughly 10%, 30% and 60%, respectively. A national minimum standard for management by results would therefore affect the entire public sector, not only Brasília.

Resistance is inevitable. Organized categories have already pressured lawmakers, and several deputies withdrew their signatures from the proposal. That does not make the reform wrong; it makes the politics real.

The strongest objections deserve serious treatment. Performance evaluation rules must be objective enough to prevent political retaliation. Transition rules matter because abrupt changes can destroy support before reforms begin. Public servants who do not enjoy the privileges under attack, but keep essential services running, should not be treated as the enemy.

Still, the direction is right. A leaner, clearer and more accountable state is not a weaker state. It is a state that can spend less energy feeding itself and more energy serving citizens. If PEC 38/2025 cannot pass in this legislature, candidates should still be forced to answer the question it raises: will they manage Brazil’s government as an entitlement system, or as a public service with measurable duties?