When the new format for today's legislative elections was finalized, this newspaper supported it despite anomalies in voter-legislator ratios across counties that give one side -- the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) -- a distinct advantage.
The change from a near-anarchic system of multiple candidates per district to a single-member system was necessary to increase long-term accountability of legislators to their constituents. In the short term, there were always going to be teething problems, and in this campaign they have been very apparent.
The changes have been condemned in some quarters as increasing the power of legislators and turning electoral districts into corrupt fiefdoms. This criticism ignores the fact that the new legislator-at-large vote ensures that an increased proportion of candidates is elected by party affiliation. A balance of interests between legislators who answer to party headquarters and those who answer to local constituents is a vast improvement over what came before.
The new system was never going to eliminate the pestilence of vote-buying. Commentators who hoped at the time that the entrenched culture of vote captains, factional patronage and illegal surveillance of voting behavior would disappear overnight were naive; in the face of thousands of reports of vote-buying and other mischief, some analysts now seem nostalgic for the old regime, which is absurd.
Aberrant election culture can only be reformed if there is a bipartisan commitment to do so. The KMT, for its part, has spent vast amounts of advertising dollars sabotaging the referendums while ridiculing the Central Election Commission and manipulating election conditions through sympathetic local governments, which suggests that bipartisanship will not be possible anytime soon.
Even by Taiwanese standards, this campaign has been short on policy and long on inept character assassination, laughable melodrama and dubious incidents of "violence." The KMT is highly likely to have an outright majority in the next legislature, and this has forced many candidates to turn the contest into one based on image, charisma, notoriety and slanging matches rather than content and ability.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must get between 40 and 45 of the 113 seats to maintain its current representation; more than 45 would be a big bonus, but a few seats less than 40 would be catastrophic because it would give the KMT an outright two-thirds majority -- or the prospect of forging one with sympathetic minor parties and/or independents.
The KMT would then have the power to effect radical change at the expense of democratic institutions -- and even national security.
The DPP's failure to cut a deal with the Taiwan Solidarity Union will likely lose it one nominally pan-green seat (Chiayi City) and scuttle a number of closer contests elsewhere through a fracturing of the pan-green vote. The KMT is much less likely to suffer from votes leaking to its stablemate, the New Party.
On the referendum questions, a low voter turnout and the KMT boycott will likely invalidate the plebiscite through a failure to reach threshold.
The DPP has failed to make significant inroads into KMT dominance over local politics, and this will be reflected in a district vote that will reward the KMT for its regressive behavior. Of more interest is the new and purely party-based vote for legislators-at-large. This offers a preview of the presidential election and may yet give the DPP and presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
Today should mark the functional demise of President Chen Shui-bian (
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS