There are many reasons for voting to have a casino in one’s county, city or even neighborhood, just as there are many reasons for voting not to have a casino. Although this article will not examine those arguments, when Matsu recently held a referendum on whether to build a casino resort, those voting had to consider such issues.
However, the impact of the referendum was not limited to the issue of casinos and the result promises to shake the nation, because the vote also involved democracy, the rule of law and both the real and metaphoric aspects of gambling and bluffing.
Matsu is a small island off the coast of China, but it is not part of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Instead, it is part of the Republic of China (ROC) or Taiwan. Matsu, unlike China, has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and, unlike Taiwan, was never part of the Japanese Empire. It has its own strange and unique history.
However, one problem this small island and its surrounding archipelago has is that it currently has only 7,762 registered voters, compared with about 17 million plus eligible voters in Taiwan proper.
In other words, when it comes to political clout and securing improvements in Matsu’s infrastructure, those fewer than 8,000 voters are a drop in the ocean, hardly worth the time of day when public funding allocations are discussed.
Enter now the quirks, advantages and disadvantages of present day reality and democracy. In the nation of Taiwan, gambling is illegal, even though many people like to and do gamble.
For this reason, no approval has ever been given for the building of a casino because such a proposal has to be approved by the legislature to become law and most legislators do not want to face the concerted opposition of anti-casino activist groups. Whenever the possibility of casinos has been raised, such groups have quickly squashed all debate.
However, in 2000, in an effort to help development in the outlying islands, the legislature passed the Offshore Islands Development Act (離島建設條例, OIDA), a seemingly innocent law designed to promote tourism. This act sat quietly on the books until an amendment in 2009 subsequently included the building of casinos as part of offshore development.
At that time, the building of casinos was declared legal if approved by a local referendum.
Taking advantage of this latest development, pro-gambling lobby groups in 2009 pushed for a referendum on Penghu, but it was defeated.
It should be noted that these island development referendums do not have to pass the high bar set for national referendums. For example, in national referendums, more than 50 percent of eligible voters must turn out and vote for the result to be valid. In contrast, the outcome of a local OIDA referendum is determined by a majority of those who vote.
On July 7, when Matsu voters went to the polls, 1,795 of them voted in favor of building a casino and 1,341 voted against.
Put another way, 454 voters on this small, out-of-the-way island determined the fate of casinos in the nation and the rest of the electorate had no say in the matter. It was all perfectly democratic and legal.
Now follow the consequences. Since the voters have approved the building of resort casinos, Weidner Resorts Taiwan quickly said it would not only build a resort casino, but also contribute handsomely to the development of infrastructure in Matsu.
Likewise, the national government, no doubt silently encouraged by pro-gambling groups who for obvious reasons do not want to be named, must also commit resources to the project.
It is also required to pass bills to manage casino development and the many issues and challenges such projects bring.
To its credit, the government appears to have anticipated the result and already drafted legislation to be examined.
However, the question is why Matsu residents voted the way they did.
Certainly, one factor is that they had nothing to lose, largely because Matsu has been unable to attract much investment or infrastructure development because of its lack of political influence.
If the OIDA was meant as window dressing, a bluff to convince other voters that the legislature cared about all the citizens of Taiwan, the voters of Matsu called their bluff. With the Matsu referendum passed, the ball is now firmly in the government’s court.
Unfortunately for Matsu, even as the government prepares to deal with this latest development, they are not quite home free yet, because Kinmen, an island with better infrastructure, could hold a referendum of its own.
Whether that happens remains to be seen, but in Matsu, the people have spoken and they want development.
For the general public, this is a lesson in democracy: There will always be times and situations where individual votes clearly do count; there will be times when a minority can exert an influence far beyond its numbers.
The pro-gambling groups have achieved their desired outcome and can rejoice; for others, like the anti-gambling groups, it was all perfectly legal and they have no recourse. Their only hope is to hold another referendum in three years.
For Taiwan, this represents a significant moment that everyone can point to and say the course of a nation was determined by 454 votes on an out-of-the-way island, and that is part and parcel of democracy.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China