The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has never been shy about putting party interests before national interests. So when Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) on Thursday promised the legislature’s full cooperation on budget matters after the new administration is sworn in, it came as no revelation.
After reports emerged that the incoming Cabinet would seek to bolster its budget by around NT$100 billion (US$3.3 billion), Wang said the legislature would pass any fiscal proposals by June. That’s 10 days after president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is inaugurated, which would certainly be quick work for a legislature that has made dragging its feet an art form.
Should the public be breathing a sigh of relief?
The fattened budget is intended to fund Ma’s “i-Taiwan 12 projects” — a series of infrastructure proposals that the government, already laboring under fiscal woes, can ill afford without raising taxes.
Nevertheless, as budget matters have for years been held hostage in a fierce power struggle between the pan-blue legislature and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Cabinet, Wang’s statement was an indication that the nation can probably look forward to cooperation on pivotal issues.
The clogged veins of the legislative floor should soon be flowing healthily again and other crucial bills that had fallen victim to partisan politics may may finally be passed.
However, Ma has yet to be inaugurated, the new Cabinet has yet to be named and many proposals have yet to land on legislators’ desks.
Wang’s premature pledge of cooperation was nothing more than a sign that the rules of the game haven’t changed: party blood runs as thick as ever.
The KMT caucus has drawn on myriad untenable excuses for blocking bills, arguing, for example, that it should not pass a budget for compensating victims of the 228 Incident because the Executive Yuan had requested that the funds be placed under the authority of the Ministry of Education.
Nor was there any indication in the months leading up to the presidential election that the caucus would change its tactics any time soon — despite its vow to serve the public responsibly in light of the extra powers it gained by securing an absolute majority in January.
On the anniversary of the 228 Incident, as Ma pledged to see through a budget for compensation if elected, the KMT caucus fended off criticism of its voting record by reiterating its dubious rationale for previously sabotaging the bill.
For this reason, a victory for DPP Chairman Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) in the presidential election would undoubtedly have meant another four years of vicious partisan wrangling, with crucial amendments left to languish.
The nation can look forward to smoother functioning government over the next four years, not because politicians are shaping up, but because a single party has secured both the executive and legislative branches. Real progress toward a mature democracy — and politicians who behave in a manner befitting democracy — will only come if the public demands it. Unfortunately, severe partisanship has very clearly served the KMT’s interests.
As it reaps the rewards, what incentive does it have to reform damaging habits?
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS