The Department of Health has accused Taipei City and Kaohsiung City of being the two biggest deadbeats in the nation in terms of the money they owe the national health insurance program. They have, in fact, become habitual deadbeats, said the department. These two special municipalities receive more funds annually from the central government than any other local government, so there should be no excuse for not paying their bills. But neither city appears apologetic; if anything both governments bask in self-righteousness about the problem. Given the largess that comes their way, the "special" municipalities are dreadful role models. Should their behavior be imitated by the far more cash-strapped county governments, the national health insurance program -- which benefits so many people -- could cease to exist.
A pattern appears to be emerging under which the Taipei City Government holds its national health insurance debts hostage whenever the central government refuses to fork out. Last year, the city refused to make its payments to protest a reduction in the amount of centrally-allocated funds it received. This year it has again emphasized that the central government should first pay the money it owes to the city, including the funds for hosting World League baseball games, before asking the city to clear its debts.
Times are hard for the Taipei City Government as they are for everyone right now. But its attitude and tactics are simply unacceptable. Certainly, Taipei can whine all it wants about the lack of funds. There is no excuse, however, to link the city's debts with the funds allocated from the central government. After all, the government could threaten to withhold those funds until the city pays its debts and the whole cycle could start anew. Not only are such tit-for-tat antics childish, they are not constructive in finding a solution to the problem.
The Kaohsiung City Government is, regrettably, no better. The director of the city's Bureau of Finance, Lin Hsiang-kai (
Lin's statements are simply outrageous. The measures he mentioned have been imposed -- uniformly -- on all cities and counties. They were almost certainly a grater blow those administrations which receive less in funds from the central government to begin with. So why aren't those cities and counties complaining? How is it that they are managing to pay their national health insurance program dues? It is the city government itself that needs to engage in some serious self-criticism, starting with its attitude.
While the Department of Health's talk of pursuing administrative litigation is a step in the right direction, lawsuits are simply too time-consuming. Why not simply deduct the amount of the overdue bills from the amount of funds the deadbeats are supposed to receive from the central government next time subsidies are allocated?
The national health insurance program is not perfect, either in terms of funding or service. Long-term measures must be adopted to stabilize the program's funding; if this means raising the premiums for national health insurance, then so be it. The service would still be a bargain and of immense value for the vast majority of the people it serves and for the nation as a whole.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers