SPONSORED BY:

Overstaying Their Welcome

 
PHOTOS
The Power of Tyranny

Some leaders, like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, lack global influence, but hold the power of life and death over their citizens.

 
By Adam B. Kushner | NEWSWEEK
Published Jun 6, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Jun 15, 2009
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

Critics of former president Bush's democracy-promotion agenda say he confused liberal ends (good government) with liberal means (elections). After all, leaders can use elections to perpetuate bad governments. In mature democracies, the answer has been to limit executive terms. But recent, controversial moves to dodge term limits are being taken by leaders in New York City and Colombia, which are widely seen as popular and successful models of good government.

THE IDEA: term limits are inadequate tools because they would toss out the Roosevelts with the Hoovers and constrain the democratic desire to restore a popular incumbent to office. Also, the prospect of reelection makes presidents responsive to voter demands. Waiving the rules from time to time—as Colombia may do for President Álvaro Uribe and New York did for Mayor Michael Bloomberg—strengthens democratic institutions.

THE EVIDENCE: take Uribe in Colombia and Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, both popular presidents. Uribe wrangled a constitutional amendment from Congress in 2006 allowing him to serve a second term; Congress has now authorized a referendum on whether he can run for a third. Chávez reset his term clock by enacting an entirely new Constitution in 2000, and he just won a plebiscite (on his second try) freeing him to run again. But there is a big difference, experts say, between negotiating an extension with the legislature (which means recognizing checks on presidential power) and harnessing popular passion. The latter acknowledges no other institutional actors; indeed, Chávez has used the courts to attack political opponents. Plebiscites weaken courts and legislatures "at the moment they are most needed," writes Dartmouth democracy scholar John Carey in the forthcoming issue of Americas Quarterly. Latin America populism has been here before: it was the route Peru's Alberto Fujimori and Ecuador's Rafael Correa used to stack their governments "with reliable supporters."

THE CONCLUSION: most of the world's stable governments have term limits on the books, but suspending them doesn't end democracy. It matters who dodges them, how and why.

© 2009

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Solving the Palin Puzzle
Solving the Palin Puzzle

See how well you can see Sarah from your house, by taking our trivia quiz.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Dial 'A' for Accessory
Dial 'A' for Accessory

This season's top i-Phone add-ons.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: TheDailySketch @ 06/09/2009 2:48:54 PM

    Sorry France has 2 term limits.
    India - No term limits
    Japan - no term limits
    German Chancellor - no term limits
    Italy - no term limits
    UK - no term limits
    Australia - no term limits
    Canada - no term limits
    US Senators & Congressmen - no term limits
    Spain - no term limits

  • Posted By: TheDailySketch @ 06/09/2009 5:44:48 AM

    Who wrote this drivel?

    BS Nº 1: "In mature democracies, the answer has been to limit executive terms." Crap. The Most 'mature' of all democracies, the UK, has no term limits, neither does the US Senate. Neither does France, Germany, Spain, etc., etc., etc.

    BS nº 2: "Uribe wrangled a constitutional amendment from Congress in 2006 allowing him to serve a second term". Now talk about hiding facts behind the use of language. 'wrangled' actually means in this case 'bribed'. Uribe bribed Yedis Medina whose vote gave him the 2nd term. This was a criminal conspiracy and makes his re-election illegitimate, yet the author is trying to convince us that that's OK in democracy as long as the person who does it is 'our' friend'.

    BS Nº 3: "But there is a big difference, experts say, between negotiating an extension with the legislature (which means recognizing checks on presidential power) and harnessing popular passion". Firstly, who are these 'experts' or is this just a nasty underhand way of disguising personal opinion? Secondly, what is being implied here is elitist rubbish that will almost certainly secure the writer his well-paid position as propagandist to power. He implies that institutions run by elites for the elites are a more democratic process than the people's voice. Thirdly, is he trying to tell me that an institution as corrupt as the Colombian Congress where 41 of the 102 Senators have either been investigated or are in detention and 27 of the 166 representatives likewise linked to the paramilitaries, is a 'check on presidential power'? Perhaps someone ought to explain to the author that 'harnessing popular passion' is actually the very essence of democracy and why for example the abstention in the recent European elections is a danger sign showing that the people do not believe in western style democracy where our only function is to decide which group of elites to put into power in the knowledge that they will not represent us in any way at all but the corporations that nurture them. (Phew, nearly ran out of breath there!)

    BS Nº 4: "Plebiscites weaken courts and legislatures "at the moment they are most needed," writes Dartmouth democracy scholar John Carey". What chutzpah! Quoting the man behind attempts to undermine democracy in Bolivia and foment separatism, the man behind the designing of the quisling government in Iraq, and using a quote which says that democracy weakens legislatures is truly Orwellian.

    BS Nº 5 "THE CONCLUSION: most of the world's stable governments have term limits on the books, but suspending them doesn't end democracy" Most of the worlds stable governments? Name them. In fact as I mentioned previously, they don't have term limits, so the conclusion is shot to pieces.

    And the final comment "It matters who dodges them, how and why" just takes the biscuit. It proves the double standards inherent in elitist discourse.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

View All Comments »