The political donation scandal surrounding Liu Tai-ying (
Let us take a look at a campaign finance reform law recently passed in the US. In October, the US Senate passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, introduced in the House by Representatives Martin Meehan (Democrat) and Christopher Shays (Republican), by a vote of 60-40.
The Bush-Gore race in the US presidential election more than two years ago set the stage for a campaign finance reform law, as huge campaign donations flowed into the bank accounts of the two national parties, influencing the election. At the same time, the American people felt their opinions received little attention in comparison to corporations, trade unions and wealthy individuals.
As a result, some Congressmen, such as Senators John McCain (Republican) and Russell Feingold (Democrat), as well as Meehan and Shays, took the lead in calling for limitations on "soft money," hoping to create a clean electoral environment and return government to the people. Soft money funds are donated to political parties and campaign committees in both houses of Congress.
On the pretext of party building, the parties and committees then spend the funds on propaganda and campaign-related activities in federal elections. For example, political parties often spend these funds on campaign ads that display the photographs of their candidates.
The ads, however, refrain from using catchwords like "vote" or "elect" in order to avoid criticism for illegal use of donations. Such illegal practices of spending campaign contributions in connection with federal elections render the campaign law, which sets the limits on campaign contributions, almost obsolete.
To prevent political parties from engaging in schemes to circumvent the law, both houses of Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. The act is deemed a breakthrough in campaign finance reform following the amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act in response to the Watergate scandal more than twenty years ago. It prohibits the raising and spending of "soft money" in federal elections, placing restrictions on corporations, non-profit organizations and trade unions to run campaign ads prior to an election.
On the other hand, the new law raises the maximum amount for individual contributions to political parties (including national, state, local committees and candidates). As a result, the mutually beneficial terms between political parties (and their candidates) and corporations, non-profit organizations, trade unions and wealthy donors will begin to weaken to some extent. It reduces the risk of the former being used by the latter as a condition for receiving huge contributions. The latter will not need to worry about spending too much money due to the former constantly asking for more contributions.
As for our country, democracy is not yet fully on the right track and the problem of "white gold" (political contributions from businesses) has been so tainted that it must no longer be ignored. The US campaign finance reform law will hopefully give our people some inspiration. Let us further ask our party leaders and the Legislative Yuan to forsake disputes and controversies that serve no purpose to clarifying the rules of democracy, putting an end to the negative effects of political contributions on the development of democracy.
Huang Kwei-bo is an assistant professor in the department of diplomacy at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Grace Shaw
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US