2.4 Executive Term Limits

Topics 2.4 and 2.5 will explore term limits and the removal ⛔ of executives.

When examining term limits, we will focus 🔍 on their advantages and disadvantages in promoting stability 🎖️ and effective policymaking in our Comp Gov countries.

For the removal of executives, we’ll explore how leaders can be removed from office and how these processes help control the abuse of power in each of our course countries.

---

Key Terms 📇

1. Executive Term Limits: Institutional rules that limit the amount of time an executive can serve in office.

   • Example: In Mexico 🇲🇽, the executive may serve one 6-year term (A Sexenio) and is not eligible for re-election. This restriction is outlined in the Mexican Constitution.

2. Fixed Term Election System: A system in which election dates are scheduled and announced in advance.

   • Example: In the UK 🇬🇧, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act (2011) established a default election date for general elections, set to occur every 5 years unless an early election is triggered under specific conditions.

---

The CED (Course and Exam Description) emphasizes two key points:

1️⃣ Identify whether term limits exist in each course country (UK 🇬🇧, Russia 🇷🇺, Iran 🇮🇷, Mexico 🇲🇽, China 🇨🇳, and Nigeria 🇳🇬) and understand what those limits are.

2️⃣ Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of executive term limits, particularly regarding their role in promoting stability 🎖️ and effective policymaking.

Since understanding term limits is crucial, let's break down how they are structured in each of our course countries. A comparison chart will be the best way to visualize this! 🚨

Executive Term Limits

| UK | NO Formal Time/Term Limit | Common Law (No written Constitution) | There is no formal term limit, Monarchy serves for life; Prime Minister-If a confidence motion is lost then the Government is obliged to resign or seek a dissolution of Parliament and call a General Election; also every 5 years fixed election | | Mexico | 1 - 6 Year Term Limit (Sexenio) | Constitution | Can only serve the one term; this changed from 4 years to 6 in 1928 for good. |

| Nigeria | 2 Consecutive-4 Year Term Limit | Constitution | Coup d' etat’s have removed Presidents over the history of the country as well. | | China | 10 Year Term Limit | Constitution | Under President Xi, the Chinese National Party Congress changed the Constitution in 2018 to allow the president to serve indefinitely. | | Iran | 10 Year Term Limit: S.L. has 2 consecutive-4 Year Terms | Iranian Law | Supreme Leader has a 10 Year Term Limit; however, neither S.L. has ever been removed after 10 years by the Assembly of Experts. President is limited to 2 consecutive 4-year terms. | | Russia | 2 consecutive-6 year terms | Constitution | Changed from 4 years to 6 years by Constitutional amendment in 2012. Putin went from President to Prime Minister after his 2 consecutive terms and was re-elected president in 2012 and 2016. |

The first key concept of Topic 2.4 is simple: be able to discuss executive term limits in each of the course countries.

😔 However, there’s a second key concept that’s equally important: understanding the advantages and disadvantages of term limits in 2️⃣ key areas:

1. 1️⃣ Political stability
2. 2️⃣ Effective policymaking

Let’s first examine what the CED (Course and Exam Description) outlines regarding the advantages and disadvantages of term limits 😤:

1. Advantages ✅

There are several advantages to having executive term limits, including:

• Checks on power — By regularly limiting executive terms, governments reduce the risk of authoritarian figures or dictatorial personalities emerging.
• Focus on governance — Term limits help ensure that executives focus on their duties rather than constantly campaigning for re-election.
• Innovation of ideas — Term limits create opportunities for new leaders with fresh ideas, policies, and goals. By encouraging participation from individuals across generations and backgrounds, term limits promote innovation and diverse leadership.

2. Disadvantages ❌

Despite these benefits, there are also several drawbacks to term limits:

• Forces good executives to leave office — Popular and effective leaders may be forced out of office despite strong public support.
• Insufficient time for policy implementation — Policymaking is often complex and time-consuming. Term limits may prevent executives from completing long-term policy goals.
• Impedes policy continuity — As new leaders take office, policy priorities can shift drastically. For example, a president can easily revoke executive orders from their predecessor, disrupting established policies.
• Weakens accountability — Since executives cannot stay in office indefinitely, they may face less pressure to maintain accountability during their final term.
• Lame Duck Period — This refers to the period when an outgoing executive, nearing the end of their term, loses influence over policymaking. During this time, their ability to guide the government is significantly diminished.
• Prevents the executive from gaining experience — Unlike legislators, who can refine their skills over multiple terms, executive leaders have less time to develop expertise and improve their effectiveness.
• May lead to poorly designed policies — Due to limited time in office and potentially less experience, executives may rush to implement policies that are underdeveloped or poorly planned.

Interestingly, the CED does not require students to apply these advantages and disadvantages to specific course countries. However, the College Board has shared a sample Argument FRQ ✍️ question during a recent review 📽️ session that highlights how this concept could appear on the exam 📝.

Be prepared to apply these ideas to different course countries when constructing arguments for FRQs!

Sample Argument FRQ ✍️

Different countries have different rules regarding executive term limits. Are executive term limits an effective constraint of executive power? In your response, be sure to address one of the following course concepts: democratic regimes, authoritarian regimes, political legitimacy.

SAMPLE RESPONSE:

Executive term limits are not an effective constraint of power, because they don't effectively limit how much power the branch or an individual can gain over time. There is evidence of this particular claim in both a democratic regime, such as Mexico and an authoritarian regime like Russia.

In Mexico all Presidents can only serve, 1, 6-year term often referred to as the sexenio, and all Presidents have adhered to this term limit throughout the course of Mexican history. However, despite the term limit, the power of the office has continued to grow over time. An example of this power in Mexico is the President's ability to appoint or remove cabinet members and heads of executive branch employees without opposition.

In Russia, an example of an authoritarian regime where there is a 2 consecutive, 4-year term limit, Vladimir Putin's power has been unchecked. Putin, in fact, manipulated the system in 2008 moving from President to Prime Minister and back to President and the power of the office has only continued to grow under his.

💡TEST TIP I want you to take notice of a few things in my response. 1st, 1️⃣ keep the same argument going in both examples, in this case, we discussed that even with term limits, the power of the executive branch or the individual both times. 2nd, 2️⃣ be sure to incorporate the term that was required, in this case, I was able to discuss both authoritarian 👑 and democratic 🙋 regimes.