After some initial difficulties and subsequent changes, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has finally managed to publish its legislator-at-large list.
Former legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) voluntarily withdrew his nomination, while former Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) was removed when fewer than half of the party’s Central Standing Committee members signaled support for his nomination.
Apart from that, some nominations were also reordered, but in general the list is still strongly colored by the will of KMT Chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and lacks any refreshing highlights.
Not only is there no glowing, new vision in the list, the nominees are also on the older side, implying that no preparations are being made to pass the baton to the next generation. This could lead to disappointment among the KMT’s intellectuals and rational voters, and could drive them away from the party.
In the single-member district, two-vote system used in Taiwan’s legislative elections, voters get one ballot for a candidate and one for a party. Legislator-at-large seats are distributed based on the proportion of party votes a party gets. The main focus for bigger parties remains the vote for constituency-based legislators, because the single-member district system is advantageous to them.
However, as the political literacy of the public has increased and information on the Internet is becoming more accessible and transparent, a greater focus has been placed on lists that coincide with both party and public opinion. A good list must meet fundamental demands for expertise, representativeness, policy formation and deliberation.
Looking at the top 17 names on the KMT’s legislator-at-large list, there are nominees with military, police, legal, economic, financial, educational, social welfare, agricultural, water conservation and data analysis expertise.
Yet, there are none with care and nursing backgrounds, which is the experience most needed as Taiwan’s population ages. Furthermore, 12 of the top 17 names have a background in the party, government or China Youth Corps, making the political considerations behind the list all too obvious.
In terms of representativeness, youth representative Wu Yi-ting (吳怡玎) was included on the list as a result of public pressure to make it more attractive, while Niu Chun-ju (牛春茹), who represents new immigrants, hovers near the safe side of the list and does not stand a great chance of getting in. As for representatives of the disabled, culture and diversity, there are none.
When it comes to deliberation, Legislator William Tseng (曾銘宗), former legislator Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and KMT Tainan chapter head Hsieh Lung-chieh (謝龍介) are all able debaters, and the other former legislators who are also on the safe list might too be able to help raise the strength of the KMT’s legislative party caucus, but it also highlights Wu Den-yih’s strong yearning for the position of legislative speaker.
This is a legislator-at-large list that prioritizes politics above expertise and representativeness, but while it is clearly about political positioning, it does nothing to improve the party’s outlook for next year’s presidential election.
To be fair, the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) legislator-at-large list is not particularly outstanding either. The traces of factional infighting are obvious, and major disagreements had to first be resolved through internal procedures. Although it is clear that politics are overriding expertise, Legislator Wu Yu-chin (吳玉琴), who occupies the top spot, is an expert representative of welfare for the elderly and long-term care.
The second spot is filled by Green Citizens’ Action Alliance Deputy Secretary-General Hung Shen-han (洪申翰), an expert on nuclear power opposition and green energy, while National Taiwan University professor Fan Yun (范雲) in third position is a well-known social activist.
As a founder and former convener of the Social Democratic Party, Fan caused significant controversy, but these three top names clearly highlight an important DPP policy direction.
Comparing the DPP’s list with the KMT’s list, which lacks iconic leaders with a clear political stance on major national issues, it is easy to see which is better. Wu Den-yih should be ashamed for creating such a legislator-at-large list.
Thomas Ho is a professor and director of the Department of Future Studies and LOHAS Industry at Fo Guang University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
RSS