Civic groups have launched campaigns to recall legislators after improper legislation proposed mainly by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The preposterous budget cuts and freezes that the KMT has led the way in pushing through have led to difficulties in government functioning and sparked nationwide discontent. Voices calling for recalls have spread far and wide, showing an upwelling in public consensus.
The threshold for a recall is high and passing one requires a strong consensus among voters. For KMT legislators who face the potential loss of their seats, the only means they have to protect themselves is to adjust their political stance and respond to voters’ demands, yet the KMT central leadership is responding to the recall crisis by proposing recalls of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators who have “acted improperly.”
The DPP is a minority in the legislature and is unable to guide its agenda — the KMT is in the driver’s seat. Despite attempts by DPP legislators to stop the budget disaster, they were restricted by their numerical disadvantage.
Seeing this, the electorate is not buying the KMT’s proposals to recall DPP lawmakers.
The central government general budget review process went completely off the rails this year and the Executive Yuan is expected to request a review. The atrocious review quality is one of the reasons for the rise in the number of people calling for a mass recall.
KMT legislators should acquiesce if the Executive Yuan seeks a reconsideration of the budget proposal and review it again, keeping in mind that acceptance of a review does not mean an unconditional acceptance of the Executive Yuan’s version. It would merely be an agreement to carry out a reasonable and rational review.
Through this process, budget cuts or freezes would still be a viable option, but they would be reasonable and well explained, not based on political vendettas or impulses.
The legislature’s duty is to serve as a check on the government’s budget, not to paralyze government operations.
By leveraging the control over the legislature that the opposition parties have, the KMT caucus’ aim would be to go through the motions if a review is conducted, but ultimately stick to its original proposal.
However, it faces increasing pressure from recalls. Every KMT legislator must answer to the voters in their respective districts. When recall groups question them, lawmakers must justify the cancelation or freezing of budget items.
A recall is not the same as a general election. Each recall petition is submitted independently and for a single legislator.
Lawmakers facing a recall must answer for their words and actions in office and articulate why they should not be recalled.
The best course of action would be to draw a line separating themselves from the improper legislation that has been approved and the unpopular budget measures. That would help them to show voters that they do not support irrational or unreasonable legislative decisions.
Voters have keen vision and hearing. If legislators blindly support the KMT caucus’ improper legislation, they would find it difficult to answer their constituencies. While the KMT leadership and caucus do not directly face the voters, individual lawmakers are unable to avoid pressure from them.
If their goal is to protect their political careers, the priority for KMT lawmakers would be to agree to reconsider the budget proposal they helped approve. In doing so, they could give the country another chance by guaranteeing unimpeded government functioning and avoid a shutdown of the legislature.
The KMT leadership has repeatedly said that it promotes legislation that “benefits peoples’ livelihoods,” but the most vital item it has sway over is the central government’s budget proposal.
It would be better for KMT legislators to undo the damage they have done.
The winds churning the great recall wave would only be calmed through the willingness of individual legislators to adjust their stance and not blindly support absurd decisions.
Wang Chih-chien is a distinguished professor in National Taipei University's Graduate Institute of Information Management.
Translated by Tim Smith
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS