The first legislative elections using the new voting system are over and, as former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator Lin Cho-shui (林濁水) predicted in 2005, the DPP suffered a crushing loss of seats.
The green camp won 40 percent of the vote, so its support base remained largely stable, but these votes translated into not even a quarter of the legislative seats. If 40 percent of the vote translated into 27 seats, then 1 percent was only worth 0.675 seats. The pan-blue camp won 86 seats with 60 percent of the vote, with 1 percent worth 1.43 seats. When votes for the green camp are worth less than half of those for the blue camp, it's obvious that the voting system is seriously flawed.
After the elections, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) suggested that the Constitution be amended after two years. He said that once the new system had been in place for two years, its efficacy would become clear. By that time, amending the Constitution could also be looked into, as well as other issues, like increasing the number of seats in the legislature, giving every vote the same weight or rearranging the voting districts. Wang also hoped that a future system could be oriented toward improving the parliamentary system, to ensure long-term political stability for the nation.
Alongside this change, the idea of reinstating legislative consent for the appointment of the premier is not as desirable as changing the parliamentary system and doing away with presidential elections. This would not only conserve resources, but also save the country a lot of money. The matter of how to pick a symbolic head of state could be further explored and the position of vice president would no longer be necessary.
Regardless of whether the number of legislative seats is increased, the voting system should be changed into a fully proportional system, with the threshold for parties to win a seat lowered to 3 percent. A proportional system would not only fully reflect the actual support for each party, but would also be in accordance with the democratic principle that each vote should have the same weight.
Furthermore, lowering the threshold would also allow the smaller parties to have their voices heard. Even more importantly, a proportional system would eradicate the much-criticized tradition of vote-buying. For many years, the election that saw the least interference from vote-buying was the National Assembly election in 2005, which was carried out using a fully proportional system.
The task of elected representatives should be concentrated on national issues, instead of spending too much time on local minor issues rather than governing the country. This would significantly improve the quality and professionalism of representatives of all parties in the legislature and ensure that both the country and its government improve their performance.
A parliamentary system based on proportional representation is the same as combining legislative and presidential elections. A party or party alliance that wins more than 50 percent of the vote has the right to control the Cabinet and the right to govern.
The ridiculous outcome of this past legislative election is perhaps a turning point. This could be the moment to seriously reconsider how the country can achieve long-term, peaceful and stable government under a new system. Each party should set aside its own partisan interests and work together for the future of Taiwan.
Kuo Chang-feng is a doctor and a member of the Northern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
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