The Central Election Commission last week issued a strong rebuttal of an online rumor that it was using procedural jiggery-pokery to suppress the electorate’s voting rights, which, it was claimed, would deter a large section of the public from voting.
Its decision to issue separate ballots and ballot boxes for the proposed referendums to be held alongside the nine-in-one local elections stemmed from a difference in the minimum voting ages for elections (20 years) and referendums (18 years).
How did such a muddle develop? If the voting age for both was 18, there would be no basis for the rumors and the commission would not have needed to design such complicated and confusing measures.
The legal voting age for referendums was last year lowered from 20 to 18 through an amendment to the Referendum Act (公民投票法).
However, the change was not extended to elections, so 18 and 19-year-olds have been given the power to vote on important matters in referendums, but are not deemed old enough to select candidates in elections.
As the Legislative Yuan saw fit to pass the amendment, the hope is that legislators would fully implement intergenerational justice by reducing the voting age for elections to 18.
This could be achieved simply by amending Article 130 of the Constitution, and would bring Taiwan in line with other democratic nations.
One of the proposed referendums addresses whether “Taiwan” should be used for the national sports team at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.
A series of “anti” referendums has been proposed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), through which it seeks to overturn government policy on air pollution and nuclear power, food from regions affected by the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster, the construction of a new Shenao Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Rueifang District (瑞芳) and same-sex marriage.
These proposals touch upon matters crucial to the nation’s future. How can legislators grant 18-year-olds the right to vote on these far-reaching issues, but prevent them from taking part in electing government officials?
Legislators have failed to complete voting age reform, delivering only a messy compromise that insults young voters.
Democratic Progressive Party politicians — custodians of the temporary majority in government granted to them by the electorate — must live up to the “democratic” and “progressive” in their party’s name by allowing people to vote in referendums and elections from the age of 18.
None of the referendums proposes lowering the voting age in elections to 18, but the hope remains that intergenerational justice would become a reality sooner rather than later.
Hung Yu-chiang is director of Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital’s Chinese medicine department.
Translated by Edward Jones
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers