Javier Milei, who came to power as president at the end of 2023, cultivated an ultra-liberal profile distinct from right-wing populism while speaking of a mole “who dismantles the state from within” during the campaign process.[i] The economic crisis, high inflation, and chronic budget deficits for years decreased voters’ trust in traditional parties; Milei’s radical discourse resonated especially with the middle class. However, since coming to power, not having the absolute majority in parliament compelled him to govern with an interim budget. This situation paved the way for centralized decisions in the financing of public services.
According to data provided by the Council of Argentine Universities (CIN), since December 2023, higher education institutions’ budgets decreased by 30% in real terms and faculty members’ salaries decreased by 40%.[ii] Similarly, the state’s biggest child hospital, Garrahan—especially pediatric centers—encountered serious resource scarcity. This scene does not only mean fiscal contraction but also a structural cut damaging the fundamental basis of public services such as education and health.
Congress enacted two different laws to curb the trajectory in August 2025: one guaranteed university financing, and the other the emergency budget of pediatric hospitals. Both laws foresaw wage increases indexed to inflation and infrastructure investments. Nevertheless, Milei vetoed these laws with the justification of “protecting fiscal balance.” According to the government’s explanation, the opposition aimed to “sabotage the economic program”; though public perception evolved in a way that the vetoes are seen as an ideological step targeting institutional rights.[iii]
The scene observed on 13 September 2025 in Buenos Aires laid the groundwork for cross-sector merging, which had not been seen for a very long time in Argentina. While university students and scholars chanted slogans such as “No to Veto” at Plaza de Mayo, Garrahan workers a few steps away were carrying posters reading “Public health for children.”
This meeting demonstrated that, going beyond union actions, health and education workers have established a basis for collective struggle. The nationwide strike declared by faculty members merged with the walkout continued even on weekends by hospital workers. Left-leaning trade unions made a call for a march involving the whole country on 17 September. This date is critical, as it is the day on which the opposition will try to reject the veto decision at Congress.
The Milei administration did not stop with the vetoes. The Ministry of Human Resources reported the University of Buenos Aires (UBA) administration to the prosecutor’s office, accusing them of “publishing partisan content.” The reasoning was the university’s posting of the phrase “No to the veto” on its official website. This step is being interpreted as an attack on university autonomy and drew strong reactions from academic circles.
The statement by UBA rector Ricardo Gelpi — “We will be able to work on a critical level until the end of the year” — drew attention to the unsustainability of university budgets, while the government’s increasing pressure through judicial means rekindled debates on “authoritarianism.”[iv]
Milei’s policies aim to minimize the role of institutions in providing social rights such as education and health rather than being solely austerity measures. This approach recalls the neoliberal wave seen since the 1980s in Latin America; yet Argentina’s historically strong student movements and trade union traditions are not easing this transition.
The protests are expected to put the government in an even more difficult position before the general elections to be held on 26 October 2025. Milei was already defeated by Peronist candidates in the midterm elections in Buenos Aires at the beginning of September. This defeat demonstrates that the political cost of the vetoes might be high as public support declines.
In case of Congress’ rejection of the vetoes on 17 September, the tension between the government and the legislative body might turn into a new constitutional crisis. With presidential decrees and interim budgets, the governance process is becoming more controversial. If the vetoes are upheld, the risk of universities closing mid-term, the contraction of services, and staff shortages in pediatric hospitals will increase. This situation might affect the social fabric of Argentina as 2026 begins.
In the international arena, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and regional financial institutions advocate the preservation of fiscal discipline, while human rights organizations also criticize the government for violations of the rights to education and health. This dual pressure might create hardships for Milei in both domestic and international politics.
These developments in Argentina are very significant in terms of the future of democratic participation and the financing of public services throughout Latin America. Examples such as the national student movement in Chile in 2011 and the national strike in Colombia in 2021 demonstrated that societal opposition in the region might become long term. Milei’s vetoes not only affect Argentina’s internal politics but also trigger debates about the privatization of public services continent-wide. That’s why faculty members in Argentina, students, and public health workers’ strikes are being closely followed by other trade unions across Latin American countries and civil society organizations, and in some regions they are being supported in the name of “solidarity.”
Also, it would be prudent not to overlook the effects protests may have on the institutional functioning of Argentine democracy. University autonomy has a strong historical legacy since the 1918 Reform and is also guaranteed in the Constitution. The judicial threat against UBA is interpreted not only as targeting a single university but also as a challenge to the constitutional tradition. If the government insists on continuing on this line, the possibility of regression in autonomy in higher education and of other public institutions becoming exposed to similar political pressures may arise; this would represent a critical test for Argentine democracy.
It is an indication of an ideological conflict intertwined with Argentina’s economic crisis. Javier Milei opposed the areas most involving broad segments of society—universities and child health—in pursuit of “fiscal balance” and the goal of “shrinking the state.” In response, a broad coalition, including faculty members and pediatric nurses, students, and leftist trade unions, has demonstrated strong resistance both in the streets and in parliament.
In the coming weeks, both the voting in Congress and the nationwide mass marches will mark a critical turning point, determining not only the fate of the two laws but also the legitimacy of Milei’s administration and Argentina’s approach to public services. This process also serves as a laboratory that must be observed closely for the role of the state and the future of social rights in Latin America.
[i] Lorca, Javier. “Profesores, médicos y estudiantes enfrentan con paros y marchas los vetos de Milei”, EL PAÍS Argentina, 13 Sept. 2025, elpais.com/argentina/2025-09-13/profesores-medicos-y-estudiantes-enfrentan-con-paros-y-marchas-los-vetos-de-milei.htmi, (Date Accessed: 14.09.2025).
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid.
