Assignment #3 SWOT

TERM LIMITS SWOT

Strengths of term limits:

When performing a SWOT analysis on the issue of term limits in the United States it becomes obvious to us that the arguments made in the strengths section are easily accepted as concrete. Some examples of strengths, as far as term limits go, are briefly discussed below.

 Limited terms for council members allows for a greater number of candidates, and a more diverse range of individuals running for office. This small change makes the system more democratic in our view. Term limits also ensure greater accountability for our council members. We argue that if term limits are imposed, members will focus their efforts on the council towards improving constituents' lives rather than just to get reelected. Term limits will end the cycle of career politicians running our city and replace them with citizen legislators who will be more inclined to serve the overall interests of the people they represent.

Weaknesses of term limits:

There are some weaknesses to this argument that can be overcome through collaboration, education, and oversight. Term limits being imposed would usher out experienced legislators and bring in untrained, possibly, easily malleable new members to the council. We also face the issue that new council members may not be as up to date with legislature or the expectations of their new role. This means a period of education is required to make sure they can do their job as well as possible, leading to a slow in progress. Another solution would be through high level education, instituting a schooling or degree that allows you to be eligible for election. The most powerful argument in favor of zero term limits is: new members are easily swayed by constituents and staff, leading to decisions being made that are not necessarily in Boulders best interests. This issue would have to be overcome through oversight by the people, but it is also self correcting. No matter how “toxic” a legislator may be, they too will be limited in power by the application of term limits.

http://apecsec.org/pros-and-cons-of-congressional-term-limits/

http://wichitaliberty.org/politics/arguments-term-limits/

Opportunities of term limits:

With a volatile party system represented by the established Democrats and a divided republican party the opportunity for change is now. People are more willingly questioning the regimes policies and are almost hungry for change. In a city like boulder there are strong possibilities that the liberal based population could institute such a change. Starting in liberal areas, term limits will increase in popularity and spread. Check and balance on power is a democratic ideal and will be popularly spread through the United States given the opportunity to do so.

 Threats of term limits: 

In order to have a true conversation or debate about term limits we must assess certain threats to the argument of pro term limits. Those already holding office may argue against term limits in order to maintain their position of power despite how they may feel about term limits objectively. Political corruption could no doubt be a threat against term limits because those in the entrenched establishment could hold positions of power and not be held accountable nor will answer to the voters. The establishment politicians are also a threat to term limits because they spend much of their time lobbying for appointments and corporate jobs rather than passing legislation. This only maintains the establishment and makes them stronger, keeping the power fixed at the top, not allowing for progression.

NO TERM LIMITS SWOT

Strengths:

Strengths possessed by anti-term limit groups would most likely center around their corporate backing. Reiterating how companies are in strong support of their cause and proving this through aggressive lobbying. Companies tend to have much deeper pockets than individuals and love/hate to remind us of that via their spending in politics. Relationships between lobbyists and politicians can run deep. The longer a politician holds their position, the longer lobbyists have to build and nurture that relationship.

Weaknesses:
            A weakness of anti-term limits is the frustration of failed politicians. People who have been trying to get into the political system and failing due to lack of term limits, leading to few open positions in politics. These people are politically active, knowledgeable, often motivated, and frustrated with the lack of opportunity to enter the realm of politics. People want an end to the cycle of career politicians running our cities, and want to replace them with citizen legislators who will be more inclined to serve the overall interests of the people they represent.

Opportunities:

Similar to above, large lobbyists are the number one group of individuals who are keeping term limits from being instituted. The opportunities provided by these people are large enough to keep term limits by the wayside in order for them to continue growing relationships with career politicians. If politicians were to be up for reelection often, they may begin to focus their efforts on being reelected instead of doing their job.

Threats:

The primary threat to anti-term limit groups is, as stated above, the rejected or frustrated politician who is in search for a position to help begin his/her political career but unable to find an opening. Term limits benefit these individuals, at least temporarily, more then they benefit everyone else on a personal level. Areas like Boulder are a good example of populated areas where term limits seem to be widely opposed but still stand. If people in a city like this were to organize, there is little doubt that term limits would disappear. Organization of large groups of people presents a collective action problem and therefor is difficult, but not impossible, to undergo.