Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Term Limits and Political Dynasties: Unpacking the Links

2019, SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

This paper reviews the empirical evidence linking political dynasties to the imposition of term limits under the 1987 Constitution. It finds evidence that political clans have found a way around this Constitutional constraint, by fielding more family members in powergiving rise to more fat political dynasties. Hence, we carefully argue that the introduction of term limits-combined with the failure to introduce other ancillary reforms (notably an anti-dynasty law)-may have brought about instead some unintended consequences. So it is not term limits per se that created fat political dynasties. We further argue that it is a non sequitur to argue that dynasties will be curbed by removing term limits. This is particularly true given fat political clans are already prevalent. Simply removing term limits at this point will secure the political foothold of many already fat political dynasties. Real reforms should be focused not on removing term limits, but on further strengthening those reforms that should have accompanied itincluding enhancing competition in the political sphere, such as by supplying alternative leaders, strengthening political parties and regulating political dynasties.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What trends exist in political dynasty formation over time?add

The evidence indicates political dynasties have proliferated since the American colonial regime, with significant emergence in the post-Marcos era.

How did political families circumvent term limits in the Philippines?add

Politicians adapted by nominating relatives for office, evidenced by 20 provinces with continuous clan dominance from 2004 to 2013.

What are the implications of removing term limits on political dynasties?add

Removing term limits risks entrenching existing dynasties, likely amplifying their political control and associated poor governance outcomes.

What is the relationship between term limits and poverty outcomes?add

Long-term leadership by political dynasties correlated with a 0.07% annual increase in poverty compared to a 0.58% decrease under term-limited governance.

What reforms are recommended to address political dynasty issues?add

The paper suggests enhancing competition and regulating dynasties rather than simply removing term limits to create a more equitable political landscape.

References (14)

  1. Hutchcroft, P. and Rocamora, J. (2003). Strong demands and weak institutions: The origins and evolution of democratic deficit in the Philippines. Journal of East Asian Studies 3.
  2. Labonne, J. Parsa, S. and Querubin, P. (2017) Political Dynasties, Term Limits and Female Political Empowerment: Evidence from the Philippines Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2930380 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.29303
  3. Manacsa, R., & Tan, A. (2005). Manufacturing parties: Re-examining the transient nature of Philippine political parties. Party Politics, 11, 748-765.
  4. McCoy, A. (1994). An anarchy of families: State and family in the Philippines. (Ed.). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
  5. Mendoza, R., Beja, E., Venida, V. and Yap, D. (2016). 'Political Dynasties and Poverty: Measurement and Evidence of Linkages in the Philippines', Oxford Development Studies, pp. 189-199.
  6. Mendoza, Ronald U. and Ong Lopez, Anne and Banaag, Miann, Political Dynasties, Business and Poverty in the Philippines (March 5, 2019). Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3356437 ASOG WORKING PAPER 19-005
  7. Querubin, P. (2011) Political Reform and Elite Persistence: Term Limits and Political Dynasties in the Philippines. Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies.
  8. Rocamora, J. (1998). Philippine political parties, electoral system, and political reform. New York, NY: United Nations Public Administration Network. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/ unpan006915.pdf.
  9. Sidel, J. (1997). Philippine politics in town, district, and province: Bossism in Cavite and Cebu. The Journal of Asian Studies, 56, 947-966.
  10. Simbulan, D. (1965). A study of the socio-economic elite in the Philippine politics and government (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Australian National University, Australia.
  11. Simbulan, D. (2005). The modern Principalia: The historical evolution of the Philippine ruling oligarchy. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.
  12. Tadem, T. and Tadem, E. (2016) Political Dynasties in the Philippines: Persistent Patterns, Perennial Problems. South East Asia Research 2016, Vol. 24(3) 328-340.
  13. Teehankee, J. (2001). Emerging dynasties in the post-marcos house of representatives. Philippine Political Science Journal, 22, 55-78.
  14. +AMDG Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3356437