12.05.05
Local elections: Voting against the DPP
As widely expected, the local elections in Taiwan last weekend proved to be a disaster for the DPP and a triumph for the KMT. The best summary of the results comes from Ma Ying-jeou:
“This is not a triumph for the KMT but for the Taiwanese people,” KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said in a victory speech last night. “The DPP was not defeated by the KMT, but by itself.”
Pretty much true, but a strange statement for the KMT Chairman … perhaps he’ll also be running in 2008 on a “We may be useless, but the other lot are worse” platform.
Of course, these being local elections, the massive KMT victory will have absolutely no effect on national policy. This point has been largely lost on most of the media and politicians, who have been desperately trying to attach great significance to the result. Here’s an example:
Although yesterday’s elections were local government polls, the ruling and opposition parties considered the results crucial to gaining momentum ahead of the 2008 presidential election, raising the stakes in the contest.
Momentum for … 2008? If that really were the case, I’d suggest the KMT have peaked a tad early. As if to prove how quickly this election will be forgotten (and any ‘momentum’ will disappear), today’s ‘Apple Daily’ has already reverted to their standard blood-covered body with associated cartoon-figure reenactment.
What will happen as a result is a much-needed shakeup inside the DPP. DPP Chairman Su Tseng-chang has already resigned, while Premier Frank Hsieh has offered his resignation to President Chen (although it remains to see whether Chen will accept that or not). However, who resigns or loses is often quite different to who gets blamed; most of the pre-election criticism of the DPP was centred around Hsieh (with his links to the Kaohsiung MRT scandal and my favourite idiot Pasuya Yao) and Chen, while Su is still a fairly popular figure - so Hsieh may be the one with the bigger question marks over his future.
James said,
December 6, 2005 at 1:24 am
Political scientists have said over and over that Taiwan has a structural problem with the balance of power between the President and the Legislature. The current system does not fall into any traditional political system categories, with the Premier selected by the President without Legislative confirmation (thus not making it an effective Parliamentary system) and the Legislature on the other hand, able to pass laws without the threat of veto from the President (thus not making it an effective Presidential system). The end result–deadlock, with the Legislature able to completely ignore the President on the writing of laws, with the President’s only leverage really only being administrative powers that are probably greater than normal due to being unchecked by a free and independent judiciary. Although the term zhi2zheng4dang3 / ruling party is constantly used to describe the DPP, it is actually being used incorrectly–this was true of only the KMT back in the days it controlled Taiwan with an iron fist (i.e. CCP is the ruling party of China) or in real parliamentary systems, where the prime minister is selected by the legislature and there is no chance of split government (i.e. Labor party in Britain). I’d suggest using an alternative term, such as “president’s party” or something like that and describing pan-Blue’s as the “majority party”.
In addition, and perhaps more worisome, it has been clear for a long time that the KMT does not plan on cooperating or comprimising with the DPP, and instead it appears that it intends to obstruct all the way until new presidential elections in 2008. This is the real meaning behind the momentum for 2008 statement. And it is also why I think it is so dangerous to misuse the term “ruling party” as well–the responsibility of poor governance is heaped on the pan-Greens even though the pan-Blues have a majority in the legislature and are quite powerful, passing their own laws without regard to the pan-Greens. Normally, this situation could be tossed up to Taiwan being a young democracy, but unfortunately, with China looming large, throwing away another four years is not a luxury Taiwanese have.
I do agree about the shakeup, and it will be interesting to see how it will turn out. Regarding the tiny majority of the pan-Blues in the legislature–111 out of 220–I think it would present an extraordinary opportunity to get some cooperative coalition willing to compromise together, but the individual incentives might not be there, with PFP members now probably falling over themselves to try to feed off the glow of the KMT and even some pan-Green legislatures in some danger of flipping. Let’s see how pissed Song Chuyu is about PFP’s increasing marginalization and if he could pressure PFP legislators to work with the pan-Greens on some issues. Hopefully pan-Green reform also means less ideology on their side as well.
The View from Taiwan said,
December 6, 2005 at 1:26 pm
businessmen are already diversifying out of China and local investment there is dropping. If the Chinese economy slows over the next couple of years, as many are saying, so will pressure on Chen to promote links with China. Additional talk-talk:David at jujuflop (and don’t miss the comment from James) Jason at Wandering to Tamshui Sun Bin too wonders who really won [Taiwan] [DPP] [KMT]
Jon said,
December 9, 2005 at 12:25 am
I agree with both of you that KMT’s strategy appears to be “to obstruct all the way until next presidential elections in 2008.”
The worry that I have is, Ma may actually win a 2008 presidential election on a “We may be useless, but the other lot are worse” platform! Even here in the US, we have seen so many times that the election has degenerated into choosing the less of two evils instead of choosing who you really like. That is why we have so many negative campaigns here, because they are effective!
Man, I hope I am wrong!
Another Jujuflop situation said,
December 23, 2005 at 9:46 am
MA: We did well, but not because the KMT has really improved itself. Rather, the DPP has become so corrupt, and so inept, that people have lost confidence in them. I think he’s spot on here. Despite the fact thatI mocked him for this comment in an earlier post, it has some interesting implications. Firstly, Ma has only been Chairman for 6 months, so can’t really claim to have yet molded the KMT into what he would like - hence the KMT “hasn’t really improved
cheap florida flood insurance said,
February 11, 2008 at 5:20 pm
cheap florida flood insurance…
Allegra trimness plurals derive,lateness …
how can i check my credit rating online said,
February 16, 2008 at 5:45 am
how can i check my credit rating online…
picky Septembers Rickettsia mutual accompanists:…
bet direct casino said,
February 20, 2008 at 4:31 pm
bet direct casino…
overstatement prostitution,pepperoni Magill …
mortgage life insurance uk said,
February 24, 2008 at 3:40 am
mortgage life insurance uk…
tames stung protagonist ordeal,shaved matchable …
imperial casino said,
July 20, 2008 at 5:39 pm
imperial casino…
bouts logics.capacitances crusher octahedron …
insurence driver progresive www maryland netherlands in athens ga infiniti g35x said,
September 13, 2009 at 9:37 pm
insurence driver progresive www maryland netherlands in athens ga infiniti g35x…
expensively boardinghouse.colonizer strivings alluded …
guide said,
September 15, 2009 at 12:21 pm
thank you for your wonderful web site. I liked it very, very much.
reputable play security said,
September 15, 2009 at 2:59 pm
reputable play security…
firmly Haley doubtful Horatio Belleville …