The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) gained most seats in the local elections held in 17 cities and counties on June 13. Although the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) continues to claim that the local political map remains unchanged, it is clear that the DPP has finally started to put a grassroots strategy into practice that is proving highly successful.
Led by DPP Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), the DPP won four irrigation association chairmanship seats on this occasion and vowed to win over 1,000 seats after the elections in November.
From the way KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) has ordered the party to review the these election results, there are obviously some concerns that the DPP is starting to pose a serious threat to the KMT at the local level.
As the special municipality elections on Nov. 27 approach, the DPP plans to nominate even more candidates for village and borough chief elections. Regardless of whether they win or lose, this is certain to impact on the structure of the KMT’s grassroots factions, many of which are being undermined by the inroads the opposition is making into their areas of influence.
As a result of Ma’s hostility to local factions but the KMT’s continued use of them as useful local proxies, they are sometimes friend, sometimes foe and their loyalty is increasingly unsure.
In reality, factions in and of themselves are a natural phenomenon and neither good nor bad. Unfortunately, having enjoyed a long-term regional economic monopoly under the KMT they have declined in quality and have become obstacles to the improvement of local government. Despite this, the party that caused the trouble refuses to deal with the situation.
Winning or losing an election is one thing, local governance is another. Taiwan is currently facing the collapse of local autonomy.
As a result, urban areas, where about 60 percent of the population lives, will enjoy greater administrative efficiency after the abolition of certain local elections. In contrast, rural areas where the rest of the population lives are likely to suffer fragmented budgets and diminishing resources as they remain obligated to continue such elections.
In terms of city governance, the rise and fall of administrative efficiency will broaden the gap and effectively turn people in rural areas into second-class citizens.
In response to this problem, the DPP has proposed the abolition of elections to rural and urban townships as the simplest and surest way to enhance government efficiency.
The KMT opposes the direct appointment of these officials in the name of local autonomy. In reality this strategy amounts to little more than a cynical ploy to win elections, as the KMT often wins small-scale elections through financial support for grassroots factions or vote-buying.
As a result, even if the party loses major city and county elections, it is still able to allocate budgets directly to rural and urban townships in ways that benefit the KMT heads of those bodies.
However, Taipei City does not hold district chief elections at all, and no one is suggesting that this undermines the democratic rights of its citizens.
In stark contrast, rural and urban townships face numerous difficulties but have insufficient financial resources and staff. Without government compensation for major infrastructure projects in their areas, many are already having trouble meeting even basic salary payments.
At the same time, each rural and urban township representative has the right to make proposals concerning the allocation of “small construction funds,” which contributes to a fragmented budget and undermines administrative efficiency.
Despite their financial difficulties these locally elected bodies still have to deal with such proposals. Even though government purchasing regulations have become more transparent, they remain an onnerous burden on local finances.
It is difficult to argue that paving rural roads and installing traffic mirrors is not important work. However, from an administrative perspective doesn’t it make more sense for county governments to handle such projects directly?
These questions will be addressed after the special municipality elections. If the new administrative areas prove to be more efficient, then we should switch to a system of appointment for all rural and urban township heads across Taiwan.
The DPP’s performance in grassroots elections continues to improve. Despite this, the party’s commitment to rational and efficient government means it is unlikely to abandon its long-term policy of direct appointments in favor of poorly managed rural and urban township governments anytime soon.
However, even as the party pushes for direct appointments, it needs to continue playing an active role in local elections. If the system proves resistant to quick change, then it can at least be coaxed in a direction more conducive to administrative efficacy by encouraging the participation of talented individuals.
In this context, the future of administrative planning and government efficiency are far more important to continued prosperity than winning the local elections.
Lee Tuo-tzu is a research coordinator at the Taiwan Brain Trust.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has formally announced his intention to stand for permanent party chairman. He has decided that he is the right person to steer the fledgling third force in Taiwan’s politics through the challenges it would certainly face in the post-Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) era, rather than serve in a caretaker role while the party finds a more suitable candidate. Huang is sure to secure the position. He is almost certainly not the right man for the job. Ko not only founded the party, he forged it into a one-man political force, with himself
RSS