In the final televised presidential debate, the contending parties’ nomination lists for legislators-at-large sparked much discussion. Parties have deliberately nominated figures who have a good public image to help win support and also to attack their opponents. Voters have the right and responsibility to monitor those in government and they welcome competition between parties that helps disadvantaged people and experts in certain subject fields get into the legislature.
However, parties need to be reminded that, although they have nominated these “squeaky clean” people, they also need to make sure that if they are elected, they turn their party’s political views into laws and carry through on major policies.
According to the Central Election Commission, 11 political parties have registered to take part in next month’s legislative and presidential elections. These parties display some common patterns in their nominations.
First, the list of nominations for legislators-at-large is a way of managing what kind of impression the public receives about each party. Nominees from disadvantaged groups and those who have a good social standing are normally placed high up on the “safe list.”
Second, party lists for legislators-at-large also function as a way to foster political talent. For example, the Democratic Progressive Party is using the concept of a “new generation” to signal a changing of the guard.
Third, the at-large nomination lists reflect the personal aspirations and election concerns of the three presidential candidates.
Fourth, the processes by which the parties have drawn up these lists show that they all lack an internal democratic mechanism for doing so. The timing of each party’s nominations shows their varying methods of political calculation, their attempts to pacify internal dissent and the way in which they have sat on the fence and tried to out-wait election variables. They also show that the parties have not yet reached a consensus on what qualifications legislators-at-large should have.
So how should voters go about casting their second vote — the one cast for a party as opposed to a candidate? Hopefully the following suggestions can be of some help for those who want to make a rational decision and avoid voting for certain candidates, but then regretting it later.
First, voters should carefully read the information provided on the election notice sent to them before polling time, including the stated political views of each party, and then think about whether the various parties’ at-large nominees are capable of effectively putting their parties’ political views into action.
Second, voters should consider whether the legislator-at-large nominees are capable of speaking up as representatives of public opinion. In the case of incumbent legislators, people can refer to legislative reports released by Citizen Congress Watch, which will tell them at a glance whether those nominees are worthy and competent candidates for the legislature.
The final point to be made is that smart voters know that even after an election they should not stop monitoring the government.
Keeping an eye on elected leaders is the only way to ensure that democracy is really in the hands of the public, rather than just being a system for handing power over to elected representatives, only for them to become the “masters” of democracy and trample on the rights of their supposed bosses — the public.
Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizen’s Congress Watch.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and