With the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral elections over, discussions and rumors about the upcoming presidential election in 2004 have begun to fill the air. The KMT and the PFP are working to build a coalition, while the DPP has adopted a low-key approach, hoping that its administrative achievements will enable the party to meet the challenge from the opposition parties. Following the mayoral elections, President Chen Shui-bian (
He will certainly feel that the decisive factor in the presidential election will be neither candidate pairings nor coalitions of parties. Rather, it will be who the public regards as a national leader who can create an environment in which the people can live in peace and enjoy their work.
The new leader must be able to bring Taiwan out of the economic slump, promote declining industries and substantially lower the unemployment rate. Chen hasn't got much time left in his term of office. He is in a race against time to overcome the difficult problems facing the country so that he can present himself as a re-electable leader.
Recently, some people have argued that Chen should give up seeking a second term, so that he can concentrate on the economy and reform. By giving up the intention to seek re-election, Chen would be able to discard many of his problems and devote himself to the country's economy for the one-and-a-half years remaining of his term, the argument goes.
Those who recommend this give the example of South Korea's president. Because the South Korean president can only serve a single, five-year term, they believe he or she can concentrate on government affairs without worrying about re-election. They think Chen could do this voluntarily. But we think Chen is under no obligation to give up seeking a second term.
Besides, the administrative achievements of Chen should be examined by the voters, and no one else should impose their opinion. The spirit of the Constitution, under which the president may seek a second term, should not be altered.
Nevertheless, we still believe that Chen should devote the remainder of his term to government affairs instead of focusing on votes. Nor should he distort the direction of national economic development and reform because of electoral concerns. It is important for Chen to note that there is no need to worry about losing votes if his achievements can gain general acceptance from voters.
In fact, many of the policy difficulties over the past two years originated in the Legislative Yuan. After the DPP came to power in 2000, the first blow to the economy was the reduction in working hours. At the time, the executive branch, industry and labor groups had already reached an agreement to reduce the working week from 48 hours to 44 hours and make work schedules more flexible. But the legislature insisted on implementing the 84-hour-per-fortnight measure, reducing Taiwan's working week to an average of 42 hours without flexible work schedules.
As a result, not only did industrial labor costs increase dramatically, but arranging work shifts became more difficult, making it impossible to improve operational efficiency. The government, labor groups and other parties finally reached another consensus on increasing the flexibility of work schedules at last year's Economic Development Advisory Conference (EDAC). More than a year has passed, however, and only recently did the legislature pass measures on schedule flexibility.
Next, the executive branch last year proposed a NT$110 billion plan to expand public investment. But this budget plan was seriously cut down by the legislature, undermining its effectiveness. Last year, Taiwan's exports fell sharply because of the international economic downturn, causing the economy to contract and unemployment to rise.
Perhaps the situation would not have been so bad had the NT$110 billion plan been passed. The privatization of Taiwan's state-owned enterprises -- long advocated by the former KMT government -- has made negligible progress because of the Legislature's unreasonable restrictions on conditions and timetables.
These examples show that without the legislature's cooperation, Chen cannot improve government efficiency even if he gives up his re-election bid. If Taiwan's economic crisis is to be solved, the most urgent task is not resolving the question of whether Chen should give up his re-election bid, but rather to push for cooperation between government and opposition in the Legislative Yuan for the sake of national interests.
Besides, an announcement from Chen that he is not seeking a second term may have serious consequences. In other countries, presidents who do not seek re-election usually become "lame ducks" later in their presidencies and are therefore unable to push policies forward. With the severe economic, political and military challenges facing Taiwan today, the incumbent president may immediately become a lame duck if he does not seek a second term. There are several reasons why this would be extremely disadvantageous to the nation.
First, an incumbent president not seeking re-election would lose authority within the ruling party. Once the battle for succession begins, the ruling party will immediately face the risk of internal collapse. Given the ruling party's minority status in the Legislative Yuan, and given the deliberate boycotts of the opposition parties, gaining cooperation from the legislature for policies will become even more difficult.
Next, if the incumbent president does not seek re-election, then the public will become doubtful about the continuity of current policies. This will lead to an increase in uncertainty about policies as well as difficulties in getting them implemented.
Finally, if the incumbent president does not seek re-election, the civil service system may become lackluster in its policy implementation. This all goes to show that for a president to not seek re-election is not the proper way to improve policy results.
To avoid spending too much time planning the upcoming election, our suggestion to Chen is not that he give up his re-election bid, but that he concentrate on policy implementation. On a deeper level, this is also the best election strategy.
Democratic politics is all about holding regular elections. Only with constant competition can ruling and opposition parties improve. What political commentators should pay attention to is whether either side is using methods that are unreasonable or detrimental to the nation's interests. Asking the president to give up seeking re-election has nothing to do with seeking harmony. Even if a minority believes the state leadership is incompetent, it is not a reasonable suggestion that the president should refrain from seeking re-election.
Chen has every reason to seek re-election, but he must also observe the difficulties facing the people, formulate better policies acceptable to a majority of the people and work to realize them so as to set the country in the right direction.
Translated by Grace Shaw, Eddy Chang and Francis Huang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS