The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was left bruised and battered by Saturday’s local elections, losing more than half of the positions it held, including two special municipalities.
The DPP is left with only six of the nation’s 22 cities, counties and municipalities — a drastic decline in local power by any measure.
Granted, factors such as China’s meddling and rampant disinformation played roles in affecting the outcome, but the one key reason for its losses was the DPP itself.
It was the central government’s poor performance over the past two years that hurt the party’s showing on Saturday, as voters with a negative impression of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) vented their dissatisfaction.
Kaohsiung mayor-elect Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), who the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) parachuted into the city just a few months ago, beat his DPP rival Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) despite Chen’s extensive administrative experience and policy platforms because of the central government’s dismal performance record.
It was the same with Taiching, where Mayor Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) of the DPP fared poorly, not because of his own track record, but largely due to voters’ negative perceptions of his party.
While the KMT won in 15 cities and counties, including the DPP’s long-time stronghold of Kaohsiung, it did not win victory on its own merits, but because voters are unhappy with Tsai’s administration.
Tsai took office on May 20, 2016, with a pledge to reform. More than two years later, many voters’ high expectations have been met with disappointment.
Tsai boosted her reform campaign with flowery words and ornate language, but her government has failed to live up to the beautiful-sounding promises she made. All she has managed to achieve is to erode the public’s trust and make people question her competence.
No one ever said governing and implementing reforms would be easy, but in the case of Tsai’s administration, its many shortcomings have been exposed as it failed to prioritize its reforms, be responsive to the public’s needs and concerns, and quell factional nepotism, among other things.
Its labor reform policy that focused on “one fixed day off with one flexible rest day” is one example that demonstrated the government’s aforementioned failures, alongside its reforms of pensions for public-school teachers, military personnel and civil servants.
Meanwhile, the judicial reform that many have called for has been shelved, with Tsai saying her government’s plans on that front do not include assessing judges — which shows how much she has underestimated the public’s dissatisfaction with so-called “dinosaur judges.”
The Transitional Justice Commission, whose former deputy chairman resigned in September over an alleged effort to manipulate public opinion against a KMT politician, is a prime example of Tsai’s lack of judgement when it comes to political appointments.
In short, the lessons from Saturday’s elections are that: One, they demonstrated that in a democracy, the people are the masters; and two, that people do not necessarily follow the lead of those who brand themselves the people’s leaders, regardless of the rosy picture they have painted to voters.
Following the substantial changes to the nation’s political map, it is to be hoped that all political parties, particularly the DPP, have been humbly reminded that the “people are the masters.”
Politicians, especially leaders, must shelve their egoistic attitude that demands that the public “catch up” with them, rather than their needing to “walk with” the people.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS