Back to Where We Started?-A Sea of Blue in the Legislative Yuan

Although an overall win by the pan-blue camp was expected, the size of the lopsided victory caught everybody on their heels. The move to reduce the size of the parliament by half and the new single-member-district, two-ballot electoral system were both implemented for the first time for this election. Was there something wrong in their design? Are the results of the 22 March presidential election written on the wall? Is Taiwan headed back to a virtual one-party state dominated by the KMT? These are all issues of concern for Taiwan today.

The recent ballot included both elections for legislators and referendum votes. Leading up to the elections, the ruling and opposition parties battled over whether to use a one- or two-step voting system and over whether there were ulterior motives in tying the referendums to the parliamentary elections. With all the quibbling over technical details and mudslinging by party leaders, political views and report cards were cast to the wayside, putting a damper on voter enthusiasm. The turnout reached a new low with that for district-based and Aboriginal legislators dipping to 58.5% from 59.16% at the end of 2004 and that for parties (non-district and expat legislators) to 58.28%. This reflects the weariness felt by independent voters as a result of the endless political squabbling. They chose to steer clear of the polls to express their discontent with the two major parties.

Composition of the new Legislative Yuan

In order to deal with the new electoral system, experts have been urging candidates to "be tolerant and win their enemies over," so voters in their district can identify with them. They advised them against continuing to highlight differences and employing confrontational tactics to please diehard core supporters. It would appear, however, that the parties chose different strategies, hence the decimation at the ballot box.

Pandering to the majority

For its part, the KMT succeeded in mending fences with its sister party the People First Party and absorbed the 34 seats the PFP had held in parliament. This allowed the KMT to focus on its main task of defeating the DPP. In order to win over traditional green supporters, the KMT worked to skate around differences and find common ground. On the one hand, presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou traveled throughout Taiwan's 200-plus townships to woo the people of southern and central Taiwan. He also worked to bridge the emotionally charged subject of provincial origins and language differences. Meanwhile the KMT leadership, under party chairman Wu Poh-hsiung, stuck to the political middle ground and toned down its unification platform, effectively alleviating apprehensions felt by the populace outside Taipei that the KMT is the "China party" or "party of mainlanders," and that it will "sell out" Taiwan once it gets hold of the reins of power.

The hard work the KMT has been putting into establishing these relationships was evident at the ballot box. In addition to northern and eastern Taiwan where it swept almost every seat (it took 34 seats in nine counties and municipalities, losing only two in Taipei County), the KMT took seats in central Taiwan that previously had no clear allegiance to either camp. It carried all 14 seats in Taichung County and City, Changhua, and Nantou (one seat was yielded to independent candidate Yen Chin-piao). It even stunned many by taking seven of 12 seats in Kaohsiung City and County and Pingtung-traditionally areas of staunch support for the DPP.

The results of the seventh legislative elections are in, but it's difficult to predict just how the outcome will impact Taiwan's long-term development. The intense emotion of voters on both sides of the spectrum is expected to reach a peak as we approach the presidential election on 22 March.

The biggest winner will have three times as many seats in the legislature as the runner-up, but most core supporters on both sides stayed put. The KMT snagged 53.5% of the votes for district-based legislators, and the DPP 38.2%. What's more, the number of votes each commanded for non-district legislators differed by less than 15 percentage points. These facts revealed a paradox-the DPP received a respectable number of votes, but still lost seats in the Legislative Yuan in droves.

To understand why this was so, one should note that the electoral changes have cut the number of seats in the Legislative Yuan from 225 to 113, reduced the size of voting districts, and increased their number; each district can now elect only one representative. For example, Taipei County, which previously had three districts and 28 representatives, now has 12 districts but only 12 representatives. Furthermore, in addition to the 73 seats for district-based legislators for the 25 counties, cities, and special municipalities, and six seats for Aboriginal legislators, a feature called the "party vote" has been added. Thirty-four seats (non-district and those elected by expatriate citizens) are distributed based on the ratio of votes received by each party.

Not only are the districts smaller, it is now a game of "winner takes all." The ratio of pan-blue to pan-green supporters throughout most of Taiwan is about 60:40, but even if each DPP candidate managed to scrape together 40% of the votes, they would still have to sit and watch helplessly as the KMT candidate makes off with the district's single seat.

In order to deal with the new electoral system, experts have been urging candidates to "be tolerant and win their enemies over," so voters in their district can identify with them. They advised them against continuing to highlight differences and employing confrontational tactics to please diehard core supporters. It would appear, however, that the parties chose different strategies, hence the decimation at the ballot box.

The results of the seventh legislative elections are in, but it's difficult to predict just how the outcome will impact Taiwan's long-term development. The intense emotion of voters on both sides of the spectrum is expected to reach a peak as we approach the presidential election on 22 March.

These may be legitimate actions in their own right, but with the elections just around the corner, voters are more interested in seeing the ruling party doing something tangible. Their weariness with squabbling over such issues as historical position, unification versus independence, ethnicity, and ideologies was reflected at the ballot box. The DPP only swept the five seats in President Chen Shui-bian's hometown of Tainan County and City and carried 13 of the 73 seats for district-based legislators, lower even than the 14 non-district seats it won for the ratio of votes received as a party.

Rebirth, or return to the past?

The DPP found itself embroiled in bitter elections over the last two years. During the islandwide city mayoral, county magistrate, and city and county council elections at the end of 2005, the KMT prevailed, winning 17 out of 23 chief executive posts. Pan-blue banners were raised over cities and counties in northern, eastern, and central Taiwan. In the Taipei and Kaohsiung City mayoral elections in 2006, the DPP barely managed to keep hold of Kaohsiung City, traditionally a major green stronghold, by a miniscule lead of 1,114 or some 0.13% of the votes. When legislators take their posts on February 1, the new parliament will be a "sea of blue." Mocked as being unable to reform or transform itself while in opposition over the past eight years, the KMT looks like it's being reborn from the ashes.

If KMT candidate Ma Ying-jeou wins the presidential election scheduled for 22 March, all power from the Presidential Palace down to township administrations, from the legislative branch to the executive branch, will once again be in the hands of the KMT. The KMT ruled Taiwan as a single-party hegemony for five decades of the last century. Scholars are concerned that it could once again lead Taiwan down that path. With the check and balance mechanism all but a moot point, how will the KMT, which would hold absolute power, avoid being absolutely corrupted? How would this affect the fledgling democracy that Taiwan struggled so long and hard to realize? If, on the other hand, DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh wins the election to lead an otherwise pan-blue nation, will his presidential edicts be ignored outside the Presidential Palace? Faced with a huge opposition party, would the political landscape be even more chaotic than it has been over the past eight years?

For its part, the KMT succeeded in mending fences with its sister party the People First Party and absorbed the 34 seats the PFP had held in parliament. This allowed the KMT to focus on its main task of defeating the DPP. In order to win over traditional green supporters, the KMT worked to skate around differences and find common ground. On the one hand, presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou traveled throughout Taiwan's 200-plus townships to woo the people of southern and central Taiwan. He also worked to bridge the emotionally charged subject of provincial origins and language differences. Meanwhile the KMT leadership, under party chairman Wu Poh-hsiung, stuck to the political middle ground and toned down its unification platform, effectively alleviating apprehensions felt by the populace outside Taipei that the KMT is the "China party" or "party of mainlanders," and that it will "sell out" Taiwan once it gets hold of the reins of power.

The hard work the KMT has been putting into establishing these relationships was evident at the ballot box. In addition to northern and eastern Taiwan where it swept almost every seat (it took 34 seats in nine counties and municipalities, losing only two in Taipei County), the KMT took seats in central Taiwan that previously had no clear allegiance to either camp. It carried all 14 seats in Taichung County and City, Changhua, and Nantou (one seat was yielded to independent candidate Yen Chin-piao). It even stunned many by taking seven of 12 seats in Kaohsiung City and County and Pingtung-traditionally areas of staunch support for the DPP.

Meanwhile, the DPP stubbornly stuck to its practice of making all-out frontal attacks against the pan-blues. In a survey of voters during its primaries for legislative candidates, the DPP intentionally excluded pan-blue supporters, shooting out of the saddle a number of middle-of-the-road incumbent legislators with outstanding records and effectively keeping them from running under the DPP banner. The DPP also pushed a referendum demanding that the KMT "return ill-gotten party assets," and worked to "eliminate all vestiges of Chiang," by removing the plaque over the gateway at the former Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall with the characters "da zhong zhi zheng" (literally, "unswervingly upright," an allusion to Chiang Kai-shek's name). The hall has now been renamed Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall and a new tablet with the characters "ziyou guangchang" (Freedom Plaza) placed above the gate. The DPP also removed the military police detachment guarding the presidential mausoleum in Tsuhu, Taoyuan County, where presidents Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo are buried.

These may be legitimate actions in their own right, but with the elections just around the corner, voters are more interested in seeing the ruling party doing something tangible. Their weariness with squabbling over such issues as historical position, unification versus independence, ethnicity, and ideologies was reflected at the ballot box. The DPP only swept the five seats in President Chen Shui-bian's hometown of Tainan County and City and carried 13 of the 73 seats for district-based legislators, lower even than the 14 non-district seats it won for the ratio of votes received as a party.

It is also worth noting that despite the hubbub leading up to the recent polls, the turnout for the two attached referendums (one to recover ill-gotten party assets, proposed by the DPP, and the anti-corruption referendum proposed by the KMT) was only about 26%. Because neither reached the minimum 50% turnout, they were both "vetoed" before they got off the ground. It remains to be seen whether the two parties will stick to their original plans for referendums to accompany the presidential election (the DPP's calling for UN membership for Taiwan, and the KMT's for a "return to the UN"), but one can't help but be concerned that the people of Taiwan seem to have lost interest in referendums in general.

The DPP found itself embroiled in bitter elections over the last two years. During the islandwide city mayoral, county magistrate, and city and county council elections at the end of 2005, the KMT prevailed, winning 17 out of 23 chief executive posts. Pan-blue banners were raised over cities and counties in northern, eastern, and central Taiwan. In the Taipei and Kaohsiung City mayoral elections in 2006, the DPP barely managed to keep hold of Kaohsiung City, traditionally a major green stronghold, by a miniscule lead of 1,114 or some 0.13% of the votes. When legislators take their posts on February 1, the new parliament will be a "sea of blue." Mocked as being unable to reform or transform itself while in opposition over the past eight years, the KMT looks like it's being reborn from the ashes.

If KMT candidate Ma Ying-jeou wins the presidential election scheduled for 22 March, all power from the Presidential Palace down to township administrations, from the legislative branch to the executive branch, will once again be in the hands of the KMT. The KMT ruled Taiwan as a single-party hegemony for five decades of the last century. Scholars are concerned that it could once again lead Taiwan down that path. With the check and balance mechanism all but a moot point, how will the KMT, which would hold absolute power, avoid being absolutely corrupted? How would this affect the fledgling democracy that Taiwan struggled so long and hard to realize? If, on the other hand, DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh wins the election to lead an otherwise pan-blue nation, will his presidential edicts be ignored outside the Presidential Palace? Faced with a huge opposition party, would the political landscape be even more chaotic than it has been over the past eight years?

It is also worth noting that despite the hubbub leading up to the recent polls, the turnout for the two attached referendums (one to recover ill-gotten party assets, proposed by the DPP, and the anti-corruption referendum proposed by the KMT) was only about 26%. Because neither reached the minimum 50% turnout, they were both "vetoed" before they got off the ground. It remains to be seen whether the two parties will stick to their original plans for referendums to accompany the presidential election (the DPP's calling for UN membership for Taiwan, and the KMT's for a "return to the UN"), but one can't help but be concerned that the people of Taiwan seem to have lost interest in referendums in general.