During the second provisional session of the summer recess that began last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-dominated legislature pushed through a number of controversial proposals, including the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) and an amendment to the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法). This latter move froze the boundaries of legislative electoral districts for the next decade and deserves serious scrutiny.
The amendment invalidates an announcement made by the Central Election Commission (CEC) in May that the number of legislative seats in Greater Tainan and Greater Kaohsiung would be increased and decreased by one respectively for the next legislative election.
Although the KMT said that the amendment, which was initiated by KMT Legislator Lee Fu-hsing (李復興) from Kaohsiung, was meant to stabilize electoral districts, it could just as easly be interpreted as improper interference in the workings of the nation’s supposedly independent top electoral body.
The CEC proposed the adjustment in response to the planned mergers of Kaohsiung, Tainan and Taichung cities and counties, in accordance with Article 4 of the Amendment to the Constitution, which stipulates that the distribution of legislative seats should be in proportion to the population of special municipalities, cities and counties.
As the population of Greater Tainan may reach 1.8 million after December’s merger, while that of Greater Kaohsiung will become 2.7 million, it makes perfect sense for the CEC to re-demarcate electoral districts to ensure residents are fairly represented.
The freeze not only makes the seat adjustment stipulated by the Constitution impossible for a decade, but also in effect suspends the CEC’s authority to rearrange legislative electoral districts, as empowered by the Organic Act of the Central Eelection Commission (中央選舉委員會組織法), which was pushed through by the KMT in May last year.
In light of this, one cannot but ask whether the KMT’s decision to push through the amendment was motivated by its own political interests.
The KMT holds six of the nine legislative seats in Kaohsiung City and County, but none in Tainan — a traditional Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) stronghold.
In terms of turnout for the last legislative election in 2008, the KMT received 30.5 percent of the vote in Tainan County — about 25 percentage points fewer than the DPP — while in Tainan City, the KMT lost to the DPP by 1 percent.
In Kaohsiung City and County, the KMT had a 5 percent lead over the DPP.
Given these figures, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the KMT had much to lose if the commission had gone ahead with its planned re-adjustment of seat allocations.
On Saturday, KMT caucus whip Lin Yi-shih (林益世) and five other KMT Kaohsiung legislators accused the DPP caucus of sacrificing the rights of Kaohsiung residents by threatening to file an application for a constitutional interpretation of the amendment.
Needless to say, those legislators conveniently forgot to mention that Tainan residents have the right to be as well represented in the legislature as their counterparts in other parts of the nation.
Instead of passing a controversial amendment that was dubbed “a life-saving bill for Kaohsiung legislators,” the legislature should have spent more time deliberating how to ensure residents from different cities and counties are best represented in that body.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS