2024/12/27

Taiwan Today

Taiwan Review

The Revitalized Vote

April 01, 2007
The floor of the Legislative Yuan (Photo by Chang Su-ching)
Taiwan's next legislative election will take place in radically redrawn electoral districts, and voters will cast ballots for both a member and a party.

The Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), which the Kuomintang (KMT) regime imported to Taiwan in 1949, has undergone seven rounds of amendments since 1991. These most notably include enabling direct presidential elections in 1996 and the new single-member, two-vote legislative election system, which goes into practice this December.

The president of the ROC had previously been elected by the National Assembly, a body also responsible for constitutional change. In 2000, the way was cleared for the Legislative Yuan to be the nation's sole law-making institution when the assembly made itself a non-standing, or ad-hoc, body.

The assembly had developed a bitter rivalry with the Legislative Yuan. In a time of particularly wild hostility, legislators called assembly members "garbage" and threatened to cancel their budget. Assembly members immediately retaliated by calling legislators "cockroaches" and said they were considering amending the constitution to obliterate the insects' home once and for all.

The constitutional amendments proposed by the Legislative Yuan in 2004, however, cut its own number from 225 to 113, lengthened legislators' terms of office from three to four years (in step with that of the president), adopted a new legislative election system and a new constitutional amendment process that requires legislative initiatives to be approved by Taiwanese voters through referendum. In June 2005, the National Assembly ratified the amendment package and, in a final flourish, agreed to abolish itself. It was hoped the result would be a cleaner, leaner and more professional political playing field, but familiar problems have lingered and new ones arisen, particularly for the next legislative election scheduled at the end of this year.

The recent amendments were a major step toward lightening the overlapping governmental structure designed to rule a territory far larger than Taiwan, and over which the KMT government had never really extended control before it came to the island in 1945. Now the Legislative Yuan is unmistakably the nation's only parliament as the Control Yuan's powers, such as supervising government officials and budgets, become increasingly limited, and its power to impeach the president or vice president, for example, has been transferred to the Constitutional Court under the Council of Grand Justices.

A Tsunami of the Citizenry

Even though the legislative body halved its own number, this act of self-regulation was widely seen not so much as sincere cognizance of its checkered past, but as a response forced by the public. "Legislators have got a very bad name," says Hawang Shiow-duan, professor in Soochow University's Department of Political Science. "The idea of so dramatically reducing the size of a national parliament was largely an accidental fancy in history, and many politicians wondered why the idea became so popular." Such a large number of nonprofit groups and highly respected public figures such as former DPP chairman Lin I-hsiung promoted a reduced Legislative Yuan that it became politicians' moral touchstone, and the movement quickly gathered momentum. "It rolled like a huge wave toward the coast," recalls Wu Den-yih, a legislator and KMT secretary-general. "No one dared stand against it." He thinks that the call for a smaller legislature was not adequately considered, and many critics and scholars like Hawang agree.

The rise and fall of the number of legislators was typical of the sensational theater of constitutional amendments. The 1997 amendments increased the number of seats from 164 to 225, largely to accommodate former provincial councilors, unemployed as a result of streamlining the then overweight and now defunct Taiwan Provincial Government. The act was widely regarded as one of aggression against James Soong, the first and last elected governor of Taiwan Province whose government then had jurisdiction over more than 80 percent of the nation's territory and people. It is also considered the prime mover in Soong's decision to split from the then ruling KMT and run as an independent in the 2000 presidential election.

After Soong's electoral defeat (with 36.8 percent of the votes to President Chen Shui-bian's 39.3 percent) in 2000, he founded the People First Party (PFP), which, in a shaky alliance with the KMT, has formed the legislative majority during both Chen administrations. In addition to some lawmakers' infamy for fistfights and corruption, the opposition majority's blocking of Chen administration policy was a major reason behind the wide support for a diminished legislature.

The opposition's obfuscatory strategy continues with, for example, an arms budget for weapons from the United States having been refused entry onto the legislative agenda more than 50 times since the Ministry of National Defense submitted it in mid-2004. The beginning of this year witnessed a blocking of the central government's entire annual budget in the legislature. "The opposition has not learned to be smart enough to heed people's real concerns," says Hawang, who is also a board member of the Taiwanese Political Science Association. "I know there are opposition legislators who think otherwise, but their voice is drowned out by their colleagues' overbearing antagonism," she says.

The Lay of the Land

With respect to the new legislative election system, Hawang thinks that a major problem is the redrawing of electoral districts. In contrast to the old system in which multiple members were elected in each constituency, voters will cast two votes: one for a candidate in their constituency and another for a party. The number of a party's at-large seats depends on its share of the second, party votes. In the election slated for early December this year, 73 of the 113 legislators--excluding six seats reserved for indigenous peoples--will be selected by direct ballot in individual geographical districts. The remaining seats will go to 34 national at-large legislators through proportional representation according to party lists.

The formidable task of redrawing the electoral districts was eventually completed at almost the last possible minute at the end of January this year. The Central Election Commission, the opposition camp and the ruling party all had their own versions of the districts, and could not agree who had the authority to decide. Consensus was reached at the 11th hour when the speaker of the Legislative Yuan and the premier drew lots in order to decide whose version would prevail. "The districting project suffered from gerrymandering," Hawang says. There seems to be an attractive logic to letting the process be decided by chance when political parties are incapable of doing so.

An image of Yushan dominates a DPP rally in Taipei City for the 2004 legislative election. (Photo by Chang Su-ching)

One of the more peculiar amendments stipulates that at least one legislator be elected in each of the 25 existing counties or cities. As a result, Yilan County, with a population of more than 400,000, for example, has just one representative, while the tiny islet county of Lienchiang, with slightly more than 10,000 residents, has one too. This is a sore point for the DPP, which claims that Lienchiang and the two other offshore counties of Kinmen and Penghu, taken with the two least-populated eastern counties of Hualien and Taitung as well as the six seats reserved for an estimated aboriginal population of 480,000 are all very likely to elect a representative from the KMT or PFP. "We lose 11 seats from the very beginning," says Lin Chia-lung, the DPP secretary-general.

A former minister of the Government Information Office, Lin points out that the unequal value of each vote contradicts the basic concept of equal political rights for each citizen and needs further modification. He thinks that the KMT will take great advantage of the new election system. Nonetheless, the ruling party supports the reform. "Faced with a life-and-death situation, we have to cope with the new system to win the election," Lin says. "If everything is predictable, then we cannot call ourselves a democracy." He says that in Japan, the new election system also caused considerable initial confusion, which later stabilized. Hawang believes that even if the KMT gets the upper hand in the beginning, the situation will correct itself in the long run. "In contrast to the multi-member system," she says, "there is more possibility and unpredictability in the new selection process."

In the past, the candidates competed for votes not only with those from other parties but also with their fellow party members. "More often than not, party infighting was even more intense than the inter-party rivalry," says Hawang. In fact, the DPP tried to promote the voters' tendency to support the party rather than individual candidates through a vote-allocation scheme that was designed to distribute the votes evenly among DPP candidates so that as many as possible could win. Supporters were asked to vote for the candidate assigned to them according to, for example, their birth month or the last digits of their identity number. This strategy was successful although many DPP politicians complained that they were not allowed to run their own campaigns and that freedom of choice was threatened.

In All Likelihood

These problems are supposed to disappear under the new election system. The image of a party and the desirability of its single candidate in an electorate are reckoned to reinforce each other, and it is thought that parties will select their best candidates. "In the past, we'd save the best for the at-large seats," says the KMT's Wu Den-yih. "Now our candidates must concentrate on each district." The KMT adopted the ruling party's system for its primaries: 30 percent of the vote is by party members and 70 percent from public opinion polls. Originally designed by the DPP, however, this mixed system's value is now under scrutiny. "The role of opinion polls conducted among the general public came into being at a time when the DPP had fewer members," says Lin Chia-lung. "It's time to reconsider this--I'm afraid there's no other selection process like it in the whole world." For the time being, survey questions are designed to exclude those who are not DPP supporters but might participate in order to skew the results.

The obviously binary opposition in the coming legislative election poses a big threat to smaller parties and independent candidates. Fearful for its survival, the PFP will cooperate with the KMT to field joint candidates; however, the grassroots organizations that the former ruling party relies on may have differing approaches from those of party headquarters. The DPP also seeks cooperation with the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU). This party, also split from the KMT and mentored by former president Lee Teng-hui, is widely seen as a supporter of Taiwan independence, but has recently modified its party platform toward a more moderate stance that mainly caters to the needs of disadvantaged people and has developed an increasing tension with the DPP. "The at-large seats offer some opportunities for smaller parties," Hawang says. "But there are too few such seats."

Among other things, the former multi-member district system had long been criticized for encouraging extremism--candidates only needed between 35,000 and 40,000 votes to win a seat, so could appeal to a small group of voters with specific views. "Now candidates have to attract as many votes as possible," Hawang says, "by taking a middle way that speaks to a broader public interest." Wu Den-yih points out, however, that a district where a camp has a strong showing can still elect a representative with extreme views. "The smaller electoral districts are also likely to produce a national legislator with local concerns," says Wu, also a former Kaohsiung mayor, "and to intensify vote-buying."



The Empowering of the Legislative Yuan

According to the Constitution of the Republic of China, promulgated in Nanjing in 1947, the National Assembly and the Legislative Yuan were established as national congresses. Comprised of members elected from China's counties and provinces, the National Assembly was responsible for constitutional amendments and electing the president and vice president, while the Legislative Yuan made laws to govern the republic. The Control Yuan, consisting of members elected by provincial councils, supervised government officials and budgets. The three organizations came to Taiwan in 1949 and later recruited supplementary members by election in Taiwan. The terms of office of the Chinese members were indefinitely prolonged, even though they no longer lived in the country where they were elected, and became one of the prime targets of democratic reform.

The following is a brief history of the Legislative Yuan gradually attaining the sole status of the national parliament.

1991: April 22
The first National Assembly passes 10 additional amendments to the constitution requiring that all members of the National Assembly, the Legislative Yuan and the Control Yuan be elected in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and its overseas communities.

1991: December 31
All members of the first National Assembly, the first Legislative Yuan and the first Control Yuan who were elected in China "retire" from office.

1992: May 30
The second National Assembly approves a constitutional amendment requiring that the 29 members of the Control Yuan be nominated by the president and no longer elected by representatives of local governments. The watchdog body thus loses its quasi-congressional status.

2000: April 24
The National Assembly makes itself a non-standing body, which convenes only when proposals of impeachment, constitutional amendment and changes to the national boundaries are initiated by the Legislative Yuan.

2001: November-December 1
During campaigning for the fifth Legislative Yuan election, in which the DPP wins 87 of the 225 seats, the KMT 68, the PFP 46 and the TSU 13 seats, the number of legislators becomes an issue. The DPP requires its candidates to sign a pledge of support for a smaller legislature.

2004: August 23
The Legislative Yuan passes a resolution on the constitutional amendments to halve the number of its seats, adopt a new single-constituency, two-ballot system for future legislative elections, abolish the National Assembly and incorporate the right to referendum in the constitution.

2005: May 14
In the election for the 300-member ad-hoc National Assembly, voters choose among parties rather than candidates. The DPP wins 127 seats and the KMT 117, but voter turnout is a historic low of 23.36 percent.

2005: June 7
The ad-hoc National Assembly approves the constitutional amendment package proposed by the Legislative Yuan in August 2004 to abolish itself, reduce the number of seats in the Legislative Yuan from 225 to 113 and adopt a new legislative election system.

2007: January 31
The Central Election Commission announces the 73 single-member districts, redrawn from the 29 multi-member ones, for the legislative election in December. The seventh Legislative Yuan will also have six aboriginal representatives and 34 at-large seats.

Write to Pat Gao at pat@mail.gio.gov.tw

Popular

Latest