With the legislative and presidential elections less than a year away, the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been busy maneuvering to ensure Ma’s re-election.
A driving force behind this move is Ma’s low popularity rating, which is barely 33 percent, according to a recent survey, and Ma and his handlers are obviously nervous and are looking for ways to turn the tide around.
One controversial move that has generated heated debate was the decision by the Central Election Commission (CEC) last week to combine the legislative elections, originally scheduled for December or early next year, and the presidential election, scheduled for March 20 next year. The combined elections will be held on Jan. 14.
By combining the elections, the administration is likely hoping to boost voter turnout, which would benefit Ma. Voters who are lukewarm about his performance might go to the polls to vote for their favored legislative candidate (perhaps induced by a financial incentive from the cash-rich KMT) and then think they might as well as vote to re-elect the president too.
The official argument is that merging the elections would save taxpayers about NT$500 million (US$17.3 million). That is an argument that always plays well, but interestingly enough, the administration has at the same time been pushing for a 3 percent salary increase for civil servants. That would cost taxpayers another NT$2 billion per year, but the beneficiaries would only be a group of voters who are likely to vote for Ma.
The CEC should have paused and reflected on two other implications of merging the elections. First, the elections are now scheduled for the middle of January, but the presidential inauguration date remains unchanged: May 20. This transition period of more than four months doesn’t bode well for Taiwan’s young democracy.
If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) were to win, it would not be unthinkable that pro-China elements in Taiwan could cause havoc, leading to social and political instability, which in turn would give Beijing an excuse to intervene and prevent the newly elected government from assuming power.
The least that needs to be done by the legislature to amend the situation is to move the inauguration of the president forward so that the lame-duck period is minimized and the newly elected president can start governing effectively within two months of the election.
Second, combining the elections would have a negative impact on the system of checks and balances in government. The strength of the US system is that it has mid-term elections in which the electorate can express its views on the policies of a sitting president. With the new system, Taiwanese will have to wait a four years before they can voice themselves through the ballot.
This move seems to be a careful calculation to give the KMT an advantage, while creating obstacles for DPP supporters. By holding the presidential election two months early, it will deprive about 50,000 first-time voters who were born between Jan. 14 and March 20 from voting. Polls show this group of young voters is more likely to vote for the DPP.
Ma, who was elected in 2008 with a comfortable margin and whose party holds a legislative majority, has lost credibility with the public. His policies have resulted in high unemployment and people are much worse off than before. Now that his re-election prospects are dim, he has resorted to these electoral moves with the intention of influencing voters.
Democracy is a hard-won Taiwanese achievement. Taiwan can remain truly free and democratic only if people can openly and freely express their preferences for leaders in elections that are fair and just.
Chen Mei-chin is a commentator living in Washington.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent