THANKS TO THE adoption of a new electoral system -- the single-member district, two-vote system -- the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won nearly three-fourths of the legislative seats in the Jan. 12 elections, giving the party the ability to control the legislative agenda. This will have a far reaching impact on the legislative climate.
First, the halving of the number of legislative seats from 225 to 113 that comes into effect when the new legislature convenes on Feb. 25 will further expand legislative power.
The KMT will undoubtedly be resistant to changing any rules that benefit the party. If KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) were to win in the March 22 election, the fact that the KMT holds more or less the same majority in the legislature that it had during the presidency of Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) would mean that the president would have almost unlimited power, stripping the country of the balance of power that should exist in a democracy and making it wholly dependent on the KMT to voluntarily exercise caution.
Second, the fact that voters were unwilling to split their two votes between parties has resulted in a further "localization" of legislators.
In the larger districts under the old system, a diverse multitude of legislators were elected, while the single-member district system has created a stronger connection between legislators and local districts. This and the reduction of legislative seats means that legislators will likely focus more on grassroots issues. However, there is cause for concern over legislative quality and the compromises and conflicts of interest that stronger local ties could lead to.
Third, the KMT's large legislative majority does not imply that conflict between the two camps will be reduced.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), with its 27 seats, can still paralyze the legislature. Issues such as the opening of the three direct links and signing a peace and coexistence pact with China may heighten conflict in the legislature. Unless the DPP can persuade deep-green legislators to back off, such issues could easily result in a stand-off. And the KMT, with its large majority, could easily launch larger and stronger counterattacks than it had in the past.
If the KMT gets control of both the Cabinet and the legislature, the legislature could become a KMT rubber stamp. Since the party tends to be more conservative when it comes to social welfare and tax reform issues and given its solid ties to business, it is difficult for more idealistic politicians to find acceptance in the party. Neither is the party known for working closely with environmental, women's rights and nongovernmental organizations. This could mean that the DPP may have to once again work together with these social organizations to monitor the KMT by building public pressure.
What could be done to deal with the legislative chaos that could result from the KMT's large majority?
First, the DPP should be active in proposing legislation to reform the legislature and amend the shortcomings resulting from one party holding a huge majority. These include the Lobby Act (
And second, more efforts should be directed at pursuing constitutional amendments to change unreasonable components of the electoral system. The only chance for legislative reform is for the DPP to become a catalyst for constitutional amendment.
Li Ming-juinn is the deputy secretary-general of Taiwan Society.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has upheld the core goals of “making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” fully implementing an “America first” policy. Countries have responded cautiously to the fresh style and rapid pace of the new Trump administration. The US has prioritized reindustrialization, building a stronger US role in the Indo-Pacific, and countering China’s malicious influence. This has created a high degree of alignment between the interests of Taiwan and the US in security, economics, technology and other spheres. Taiwan must properly understand the Trump administration’s intentions and coordinate, connect and correspond with US strategic goals.