Department of Health (DOH) Minister Yaung Chih-liang (楊志良) made headlines on Monday by suddenly announcing his resignation, catching Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and the public off guard.
Yaung said he wanted to resign because he could not fulfil Wu’s request that 75 percent of those insured be exempted from a proposed increase in health insurance premiums. The Department of Health had proposed exempting only 59 percent of those insured. Saying the difference between the two could not be reconciled, Yaung insisted on leaving even though Wu rejected his resignation.
Yaung said when he took up the job seven months ago that premiums would have to be increased to resolve the National Health Insurance Program’s long-standing deficit. Yaung has kept his word, and his resignation has some lauding him for sticking to his guns and showing a sense of political responsibility.
However, while many are heaping praise on Yaung’s strength of character, many also vividly remember another promise he made when he assumed the post in August — to seek payment from the Taipei City Government on the debt it owes the national healthcare system.
“The Taipei City Government must pay its debt or the National Health Insurance’s finances will collapse sooner or later,” Yaung said at the time, adding that the city’s debt was the bureau’s biggest problem.
Taipei still owes the national healthcare system more than NT$34 billion (US$1.1 billion) and the Supreme Administrative Court has repeatedly ruled that it must pay up. The Kaohsiung City Government owes NT$16 billion, and has proposed paying the central government in installments. Meanwhile, the Taipei City Government has just been stalling.
Bureau of National Health Insurance Director Cheng Shou-hsia (鄭守夏) said the insurance program is running a NT$58.5 billion deficit, and its debt could exceed NT$101.5 billion by year-end. Yaung said the DOH’s proposed premium plan could help the bureau by bringing in an additional NT$4.5 billion per year.
Simple math suggests that the national healthcare system could quickly cut its debt nearly in half if Taipei followed Kaohsiung’s lead and paid its share of NT$34 billion. Indeed, the DOH could ask the Ministry of Justice to auction off plots of land that have been confiscated from the city government as security against the unpaid debt.
This begs the question: Why hasn’t Yaung kept his other promise and gone after the Taipei City Government? Could it be because the debt was accrued by former Taipei mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who is now the head of state?
Yaung has demonstrated strength of character by sticking to his word, even if it means putting his career on the line. However, his move may be perceived as little more than pretentious grandstanding when we take into account that he has been selective about which “guns” he sticks to and has avoided going after the big tiger.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS