The Ministry of the Interior's proposal to change the electoral system for legislators to medium-sized (smaller) constituencies with two votes per person -- or to allow votors to vote once for a candidate and once for a party of their choice -- has initiated a war of words between the ruling and opposition parties. The opposition objects to the idea, the DPP favors it. Some legislators and scholars hope to implement a system with single-member constituencies (one legislator per constituency) and two votes per person.
A single-member constituency, however, will give rise to many thorny issues, including what to do about the guaranteed quota for women. Also, legislation will be difficult without Constitutional amendments. The ministry can only initiate electoral reform within the Constitutional framework by suggesting smaller constituencies and a two-vote-per-person system, and shouldn't be criticized for not wanting to implement a system with single-member constituencies and two votes per person.
After the KMT had evaluated the proposal in 1995, in the end only Taipei County was divided into three constituencies. Given the KMT's strength in the legislature at the time, the reason that there was no support for the plan was that it was not beneficial to the KMT. Why would they want to shoot themselves in the foot?
In the last few legislative elections, support for the DPP has hovered around 30 percent, especially in the cities. If electoral support in a multi-member constituency electoral system is evenly divided between the candidates, the more seats a party wins, the greater may be the difference between votes received and seats won.
If the standard is five seats for each constituency, and the DPP nominates at least two candidates in each, election can be almost guaranteed. The parties' prospects will differ from district to district, but it can't be denied that if the DPP, with a support rate of 30-odd percent, wants to obtain 40 percent of the seats, precisely such a divergence between votes and seats is a distinct possibility. This is also the reason why the KMT proposed the single-member constituency system with two votes per person and denounced the medium-sized system.
In the past, there was often no set standard according to which constituencies were divided, and even though the situation wasn't what is known as gerrymandering, it still took the distribution of local factions into full consideration. There is therefore suspicion that the medium-sized constituency system with two votes per person is an attempt to benefit the ruling party and that it therefore cannot possibly receive the support of the opposition parties.
The medium-sized constituency system and the two votes per person system are, however, two different things. The redrawing of constituencies must be carefully considered before being decided upon, while amendment to laws regulating the two-votes-per-person system can be implemented quickly.
Legislators are now elected through a multi-member constituency system. There is no competition to speak of between parties, and it creates a number of factions within the same party. It is only by implementing a single-member constituency system, with one candidate per party, that there will be competition between political parties instead of political fighting.
The implementation of a single-member constituency system with two votes per person is therefore a matter of urgency. Since opposition parties are already opposed to a transitional multi-member constituency system, an amendment to the Constitution should be initiated to design an overall plan for the legislative electoral system.
Lee Ching-hsiung is a legislator for the Taiwan Independence Party.
Translated by Perry Svensson
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on