Latest news with #termLimits
Associated Press
4 days ago
- Politics
- Associated Press
Trump administration: El Salvador's Bukele not a dictator
MEXICO CITY (AP) — The Trump administration said El Salvador President Nayib Bukele should not be lumped together with leaders in other countries it considers dictatorships after his party and allies discarded presidential term limits. Bukele posted the statement of U.S. support on X Tuesday. On Wednesday, the U.S. State Department said in a statement to The Associated Press that the constitutional change axing term limits in the Central American country was made by a 'democratically elected' Congress and that 'it is up to them to decide how their country should be governed.' 'We reject the comparison of El Salvador's democratically based and constitutionally sound legislative process with illegitimate dictatorial regimes elsewhere in our region,' the statement said. The speedy approval of indefinite presidential terms last week generated warnings from watchdogs and El Salvador's beleaguered opposition that it spelled the end of the country's democracy. The Congress also approved extending presidential terms from five to six years. 'It's unfortunate to see the US government is defending efforts to establish an autocracy in El Salvador. This undermines the credibility of the State Department's criticism to other authoritarian governments and dictatorships in the region,' said Juan Pappier, Americas deputy director for Human Rights Watch. El Salvador's archbishop José Luis Escobar Alas joined those expressing concern on Wednesday and called on lawmakers to reconsider approving the overhaul 'without consulting' the Salvadoran people, which was crucial for the 'legitimacy' of the constitutional reform. The populist leader and his New Ideas party have spent years consolidating power, weakening checks and balances as they placed loyalists on the highest courts, undercut government watchdogs and pursued political opponents and critics. Bukele remains wildly popular, largely because his all-out pursuit of the country's once-powerful street gangs has brought security, though critics argue at the cost of due process. Bukele defended the constitutional changes last week, writing on X that many European nations allow indefinite reelection 'but when a small, poor country like El Salvador tries to do the same, suddenly it's the end of democracy.' Critics have said that is a false comparison, as those nations have stronger democratic institutions to serve as a check on executive power. Increasingly though, those critics are leaving the country out of fear of arrest. Watchdogs say an escalating crackdown on dissent is underway by Bukele, who has been emboldened by his alliance with U.S. President Donald Trump. After initially being critical of Bukele, the Biden administration also remained largely silent over human rights violations and concentration of power in El Salvador as the country helped slow migration north. But as Trump has reshaped American democracy, Bukele's critics say that lack of U.S. pressure and praise from Trump officials has offered the Salvadoran leader an opening to more rapidly consolidate power. In just a span of months, Bukele's government has detained some of it's most vocal critics, violently repressed a peaceful protest, and passed a 'foreign agents' law similar to those used by governments in Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Belarus to silence dissent by exerting pressure on organizations that rely on overseas funding. More than 100 human rights activists, academics, journalists and lawyers have fled El Salvador in recent months, saying they were forced to chose between exile or prison.
Yahoo
27-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rep. Ralph Norman announces bid for South Carolina governor
Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., a member of the hard-right Freedom Caucus, announced Sunday that he is running for governor, looking to succeed GOP Gov. Henry McMaster, who cannot run for re-election due to term limits. Norman has at times been a thorn in GOP leadership's side, particularly on sweeping spending bills. Norman was also one of the few House lawmakers not to endorse President Donald Trump in the presidential primary, instead backing former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley's presidential campaign. He praised Trump during his announcement, saying his actions would make him one of the 'greatest' presidents. 'What he did to wipe out the world's, the terror of Iran, what he did, the courage that he had to do what he did is going to put him on the annals of the greatest presidents we have ever had,' Norman said. 'And I believe that South Carolina needs that same kind of leadership right now, which is why I'm here to announce I'm running to be the 118th governor of South Carolina.' 'I'm running for governor to shake things up,' he added, amid cheers of 'Ralph! Ralph! Ralph!' Norman said he would work to pass term limits for state legislators, a message that was also emblazoned in front of his microphone: 'Term limits. Clean up Columbia.' The representative touted his conservative bona fides, pointing to his time in the House Freedom Caucus. "Some people say I've earned a reputation of being uncompromising, always trying to build — to make a bill more conservative. Well, folks, I take that as a compliment," Norman said. "I'm proud of it. When it comes to defending South Carolina values and protecting your hard-earned tax dollars, I drive a hard bargain, and I don't apologize for that." Haley previously served as South Carolina's governor and she endorsed Norman's gubernatorial campaign on Sunday, according to a press release from his campaign. Several GOP contenders have already announced their bids, including Alan Wilson, the state's attorney general; and Pamela Evette, the state's lieutenant governor. Norman made his announcement in Rock Hill, South Carolina. He was introduced by his son and walked onstage to the song "I Won't Back Down," which the Trump campaign has previously used. The election is next year. This article was originally published on
Fox News
08-07-2025
- Business
- Fox News
DeSantis not keen on Musk's new political party, has another idea for disrupting DC
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis suggested that business magnate Elon Musk push for balanced budget and congressional term limit amendments to the U.S. Constitution, rather than build a new political party. Musk, who has been beating the drum about the need to rein in government spending, announced that he is launching a new political party called the America Party. "Backing a candidate for president is not out of the question, but the focus for the next 12 months is on the House and the Senate," he noted in a post on X. DeSantis is not on board with the idea. The governor suggested that if Musk funds candidates in competitive Senate and House contests, Democrats will likely win. But DeSantis acknowledged that the GOP has an issue with people running on spending less, but then failing to do so. "There's a gap between the campaign rhetoric, and then the performance," he said. He explained that he does not believe "electing a few better people" will alter the "trajectory" on the debt issue. DeSantis said that the "incentives" in D.C. will "lead to these outcomes, really, regardless of the outcome of elections at this point," asserting that a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution is needed. Musk "would have a monumental impact" if he got involved, DeSantis said, adding that the U.S. also needs term limits for lawmakers.
Bloomberg
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Gambia Rejects New Constitution That Allows Barrow to Extend His Rule
Gambian lawmakers rejected a new draft constitution that imposed presidential term limits, but contained a loophole that would have allowed President Adama Barrow to run for re-election after his current five-year term ends in 2027. The draft would limit presidents to two five-year stints in office – replacing the current constitution that has no such restriction – but it would permit whoever was in power when it became law to start with a clean slate, potentially extending Barrow's rule by a decade.
The Independent
14-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
How Trump could subvert the Constitution and stay in office for a third term
United States President Donald Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of remaining in office after his second term ends in 2029. Since the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1951, no U.S. president has challenged the two-term limit it established. However, attempts to circumvent constitutional term limits are not unprecedented elsewhere. Virtually every country in Latin America has enshrined constitutional term limits as a safeguard against tyranny. These rules vary: some allow only a single term, some permit two, while others enable non-consecutive re-election. Yet several presidents have managed to defy these provisions. Recent examples include Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador. Although the institutional norms and political cultures of these countries differ from those of the U.S., examining how term limits have been dismantled offers valuable insights into how any similar efforts by Trump might unfold. How presidents have overstayed their term The most common tactic is for presidents to first ensure their political party in the legislature is fully subservient to them, and then leverage a loyal majority to amend the constitution — a move that has already been initiated in the U.S. Ortega and Correa successfully used their legislative majorities to pass constitutional amendments that eliminated term limits in Nicaragua and Ecuador. Whether Trump has achieved the same level of unwavering loyalty among Republicans is debatable, but getting amendments through the U.S. Congress is significantly more difficult. The process requires a two-thirds majority vote in both houses, followed by ratification from three-quarters of state legislatures. In contrast, Nicaragua's constitution can be amended with a 60 per cent majority and, as in Ecuador, sub-national jurisdictions have no say in the matter. Another crucial step involves co-opting or capturing the judiciary. In Bolivia, Morales achieved a controversial third term in 2014 supported by a partisan Constitutional Tribunal. More recently, El Salvador's Bukele secured a 2021 Supreme Court ruling (from judges he appointed) allowing him to seek immediate re-election in 2024, despite a constitutional prohibition on consecutive terms. We have seen a worrying pattern of subservience to Trump by the U.S. Supreme Court. The limits of this deference are increasingly uncertain. Securing popular support Some presidents have turned to plebiscites to legitimize constitutional tampering by appealing directly to the electorate and framing the move as a democratic exercise. Chávez employed this strategy in Venezuela, winning a 2009 referendum to abolish term limits. The absence of a national referendum mechanism in the U.S. — where popular consultations are organized at the sub-national (state) level — limits the options available to a president seeking to remove term limits through this type of populist ploy. Related to this, populist presidents who have successfully circumvented term limits have typically done so while enjoying extraordinarily high levels of public support. Correa maintained approval ratings near 70 per cent during much of his presidency, while independent polls have put Bukele's support at well over 80 per cent. Both, along with Morales and Chávez, leveraged their popularity to justify constitutional changes through legislative and judicial channels, framing their actions as carrying out the will of the people. In contrast, Trump's approval ratings have consistently remained far lower. Currently, his favorability sits in the low 40s, making any attempt to claim a broad popular mandate for a third term both dubious and precarious. The military matters Due to inevitable opposition, military support is central to any leader's attempt to defy the constitution. In much of Latin America, the military is highly politicized, and armed forces have historically been shaped by doctrines of internal control rather than external defence. Rooted in Cold War-era national security ideologies, this orientation casts domestic dissenters ('socialists,' Indigenous movements, unionists) as internal enemies, legitimizing repression as a patriotic duty. In some countries, military oaths reflect this politicization. In both Nicaragua and Venezuela, these oaths increasingly emphasize loyalty to the president or ruling party and their revolutionary legacy, undermining institutional neutrality. By contrast, in the U.S., military personnel swear an oath to defend the Constitution, not the president. While they must follow orders, these must align with constitutional and legal boundaries. The absence of a tradition of using soldiers against American citizens and an institutional culture of constitutional loyalty and political neutrality may, at least in principle, provide some protection against the authoritarian overreach that has allowed certain Latin American presidents to remain in power indefinitely. But a substantial portion of the U.S. armed forces leans politically to the right, like their counterparts in Latin America, raising concerns that partisan sympathies within the military could influence its response to a constitutional crisis. Furthermore, the increasing use of non-military security forces — such as local police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — against civilians demonstrates that the state has a range of instruments at its disposal for exercising control. The U.S. government's use of ICE is reminiscent of how governments in countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua have used police and paramilitary units loyal to the president with impunity to suppress dissent. The perils of complacency Many in the West still hold on to the belief that constitutional erosion is something that only happens in the Global South. Some believe that American institutions are uniquely resilient and therefore capable of withstanding any attempt to subvert the constitution. For much of U.S. history, this confidence may have been justified, but today, it's not only complacent but dangerous. The strength of democratic institutions depends on the political will to defend them. Time will tell if the barriers that exist in the U.S. are strong enough to withstand the pressures now being placed upon them. What is clear is that relying on increasingly tenuous institutional resilience or historical exceptionalism is no substitute for vigilance and active defence of democratic norms.
