The eighth session of the seventh legislature began a few days ago. It is also the last session of the first legislature elected under the single-district system, halving the number of legislative seats compared with previous legislatures.
Not long ago, the US journal Foreign Policy listed Taiwan’s legislature as one of the world’s most incompetent.
Some blame the legislature’s poor performance on systemic factors, saying the extremely powerful executive branch has weakened the legislative branch, and that the quality of legislators has declined following the introduction of the single district system and the halving of the number of legislative seats. It has also been said that national issues are not given enough attention because of the small number of legislators-at-large.
Foreign Policy wrote that Taiwan’s pan-blue and pan-green camps see each other as enemies, which often leads to brawls on the legislative floor, and that it was difficult to find examples of cooperation.
Indeed, the long-term confrontation between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, which consider only one’s party affiliation and not whether one is right or wrong, makes dialogue and negotiation difficult.
As a result, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) blocks about 1,000 proposals by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) at the legislature’s Procedure Committee in each legislative session.
The DPP, on the other hand, sometimes disregards the KMT’s legislative majority and to this day still resorts to minority violence in the legislature.
To examine the performance of a legislature, we can start by studying its political concerns or its ability to influence policy. Former US House speaker Newt Gingrich believed the US Congress, with its legislative rights and ability to promptly reflect public opinion, should be better able to direct the nation’s future development than the US president.
In the 1994 congressional elections, he led more than 300 Republican US House of Representative hopefuls under the slogan “Contract with America.” They proposed congressional reform and put forward 10 draft bills in the financial, economic, welfare, national defense and judicial areas. In the end, about half of the bills were passed into law, in what has called an outstanding legislative achievement.
Perhaps the pan-blue and pan-green camps can learn from the US. When it comes to problems that need to be resolved urgently, such as national development, social justice and legislative reform issues, Taiwan’s party leaders and the different parties’ legislative candidates should propose a “contract with Taiwan” by proposing a list of well-planned bills and avoid making short-term election promises.
In other words, they should attract votes by proposing complete and excellent policies.
It is only with solid voter support that such policies can be smoothly implemented after the election.
Bernard Chou is an associate professor at National Cheng Kung University’s Graduate Institute of Political Economy. Huang Tzu-che is director of Legislator John Chiang’s office.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS