He was elected twice, with more than 16,000 votes each time, but on Jan. 16, 84,582 people voted to oust him in a recall vote. Could former Taoyuan city councilor Wang Hao-yu (王浩宇), who left office on Friday last week, really have behaved badly enough for more than 80,000 people to vote for his ouster?
Some people say this happened because of loud voices on the Internet. Others put it down to mobilization by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
No matter why it happened, the simplest factor involved is a mathematical one. In a multimember electoral district where 90 percent of voters support the KMT or other pan-blue parties, Wang was re-elected in 2018 with just 8.68 percent of the vote.
However, when it came to this month’s recall vote, the pan-blue voters concentrated all their voting power on one target. Given that pan-blue candidates had garnered nearly 90 percent of the total votes in the election, it is hardly surprising that 96 percent of the votes in the recall vote were in favor of recalling Wang.
What this shows is that, in any traditionally pan-blue electoral district, blue-camp voters can easily recall a non-KMT official just by concentrating all of their votes on that individual.
This objective numerical reasoning is enough to explain why they can.
In theory, the same thing could happen in electoral districts with an iron-clad pan-green majority, but there is no proof of this theory because it has not happened so far.
The Taoyuan recall is not comparable to the recall of then-Kaohsiung mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), who is a member of the pan-blue KMT, in June last year, because Kaohsiung is not a region in which an unusually high proportion of people vote for pan-green parties.
This sequence of events highlights a risk that badly needs attention.
The problem is that, although the law regarding recalls was last amended in 2016, it immediately led to a recall vote in which then-New Power Party legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) was nearly ousted.
It also led to Han becoming the first-ever municipal mayor to be successfully recalled.
Evidently, the rules laid out in the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) need to be re-examined and adjusted to achieve a balance between it being either very easy or impossible for recall bids to succeed.
If that does not happen, any political camp that can mobilize a long-term transient population of 500,000 voters would be able to recall elected officials from the opposing camp wherever it wants to.
If that comes to be, Taiwan’s democracy would be extremely imperfect and unstable.
Joshua Tin is an economist.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US