While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has vowed that it will do everything possible to win the presidential election in 2016, former premier Yu Shyi-kun has been advocating a different idea. While winning the presidency is important, winning a majority in the 113-member Legislative Yuan could be even more crucial for safeguarding Taiwan’s sovereignty and prosperity, Yu says, adding that “de facto governance” would not be achieved until the DPP wins a legislative majority.
Yu, the longest-serving premier under the 2000 to 2008 DPP administration, understands to what extent a legislative minority can hamper an administration, as many DPP-initiated bills and proposals were blocked by the majority Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) during his tenure, while domestic politics was deadlocked by party ideology. Things have not improved since the KMT returned to power in 2008, enjoying what President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called “total governance,” with the KMT controlling the executive branch and enjoying a dominant majority in the Legislative Yuan. What the public has experienced during the past five years is a rubber-stamp legislature. KMT lawmakers have supported every major controversial policy proposal and piece of legislation including relaxing the ban on US beef imports, the introduction of a capital gains tax on securities transactions, resumed construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市) and, most recently, the cross-strait service trade agreement.
Although the legislators did not always personally support these policies, as most of them speaking in interviews or on political talk shows voiced concerns about or opposition to Ma’s policy ideas, they nonetheless supported these ill-fated policies when the bills were put to a vote in the legislature because they would have been committing political suicide by defying Ma, who doubles as KMT chairman and can decide on future party nominations.
For KMT lawmakers, the objective was not to represent the public’s voice, but to secure their own futures and those of the groups that backed them. As for Ma, he never respected the legislature. Voting along party lines may be common in any given democratic country, but the practice should never be used in such a way as to completely ignore public opinion.
This is why Yu’s proposal makes sense. The former premier said that winning a majority in the legislature would probably be harder than winning the presidential election, and a party that controls only the legislature would have to operate more passively, as it would be unable to take the initiative in formulating policies that enhance livelihoods and national development. The DPP, or an opposition coalition, could safeguard Taiwan’s sovereignty, national security and the everyday concerns of the public if it controlled the Legislative Yuan, whereas the KMT seems obsessed with pushing through the cross-strait service trade agreement.
Yu is right. It would be difficult for the DPP to jump from 40 seats to more than 57 in order to gain a legislative majority.
The current electoral system, which was changed from the system of single, non-transferable votes in multi-member districts to the single-district, two votes system in a 2005 constitutional amendment, does not favor those who wish to challenge the incumbents. Nor does it help that the DPP’s rival is the richest political party. If the DPP pursues Yu’s vision, it must do so unwaveringly. If the DPP wins the next presidential election, but is a minority in the legislature, it could be in for a deja vu experience.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS