While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has vowed that it will do everything possible to win the presidential election in 2016, former premier Yu Shyi-kun has been advocating a different idea. While winning the presidency is important, winning a majority in the 113-member Legislative Yuan could be even more crucial for safeguarding Taiwan’s sovereignty and prosperity, Yu says, adding that “de facto governance” would not be achieved until the DPP wins a legislative majority.
Yu, the longest-serving premier under the 2000 to 2008 DPP administration, understands to what extent a legislative minority can hamper an administration, as many DPP-initiated bills and proposals were blocked by the majority Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) during his tenure, while domestic politics was deadlocked by party ideology. Things have not improved since the KMT returned to power in 2008, enjoying what President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called “total governance,” with the KMT controlling the executive branch and enjoying a dominant majority in the Legislative Yuan. What the public has experienced during the past five years is a rubber-stamp legislature. KMT lawmakers have supported every major controversial policy proposal and piece of legislation including relaxing the ban on US beef imports, the introduction of a capital gains tax on securities transactions, resumed construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市) and, most recently, the cross-strait service trade agreement.
Although the legislators did not always personally support these policies, as most of them speaking in interviews or on political talk shows voiced concerns about or opposition to Ma’s policy ideas, they nonetheless supported these ill-fated policies when the bills were put to a vote in the legislature because they would have been committing political suicide by defying Ma, who doubles as KMT chairman and can decide on future party nominations.
For KMT lawmakers, the objective was not to represent the public’s voice, but to secure their own futures and those of the groups that backed them. As for Ma, he never respected the legislature. Voting along party lines may be common in any given democratic country, but the practice should never be used in such a way as to completely ignore public opinion.
This is why Yu’s proposal makes sense. The former premier said that winning a majority in the legislature would probably be harder than winning the presidential election, and a party that controls only the legislature would have to operate more passively, as it would be unable to take the initiative in formulating policies that enhance livelihoods and national development. The DPP, or an opposition coalition, could safeguard Taiwan’s sovereignty, national security and the everyday concerns of the public if it controlled the Legislative Yuan, whereas the KMT seems obsessed with pushing through the cross-strait service trade agreement.
Yu is right. It would be difficult for the DPP to jump from 40 seats to more than 57 in order to gain a legislative majority.
The current electoral system, which was changed from the system of single, non-transferable votes in multi-member districts to the single-district, two votes system in a 2005 constitutional amendment, does not favor those who wish to challenge the incumbents. Nor does it help that the DPP’s rival is the richest political party. If the DPP pursues Yu’s vision, it must do so unwaveringly. If the DPP wins the next presidential election, but is a minority in the legislature, it could be in for a deja vu experience.
Over the past few years, migrant workers’ rights have improved in Taiwan, but there has not been a comparable improvement in protections for employers, who are faced with a range of challenges, such as family nurses mistreating patients or workers threatening to change brokers or demanding that employers change their jobs. Then there is the decrease in work standards. Migrant workers too often find the lure of the underground jobs market irresistible, are unaware of employment laws and regulations, or have found that National Immigration Agency (NIA) checks are lax, and as a result abscond. If this happens, what protections or
The Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) has been giving daily COVID-19 updates for almost four months, and on several occasions when major developments have arisen, the news conferences have attracted large numbers of viewers. The entire nation is anxious about the pandemic, and interest in the latest news has become a part of daily life. Watching the center’s daily news conferences has become something of a national ritual. The pandemic has stabilized within Taiwan due to the admirable efforts of each person living in the nation conducting themselves with the utmost responsibility, and in certain cases making considerable sacrifices within their
This year marks the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II. In that war’s aftermath, novelist George Orwell produced two prophetic works. The first, Animal Farm, was published in August 1945; the second, Nineteen Eighty-Four, came out in June 1949. Both still ring true and cover a wide range of messages, including even how the mid-sized nation of Taiwan achieved its democracy and why it still maintains an outlier status in a COVID-19 world. With its full planetary scope, WWII left untold millions dead and injured, cities were destroyed and the future path of most nations was altered. New
United States Senator “Kit” Bond (R-MO) was a real leader on Asia policy during his time in Congress. Like most senators, he had a ready one-liner for every occasion. The one I never tired of hearing is “Well, looks like everything has been said. The problem is not everyone has said it.” It’s sort of like with US-China great power competition. There is not much new to say. This is especially true because it’s largely a story of what’s already happened: BRI, Made in China 2025, aggression in the South China Sea, provocations on the Indian border, cyber-hacks, erosion of “one country,