The Aisa Connect (a free weekly e-magazine) this week spotlights an interview of me and the Formosa Foundation. The spot has been re-posted by several bloggers and whose readers are writing me emails to express their support for Taiwan.

Never good at self-promotion, I did the interview with the original intention of promoting the Formosa Foundation and its missions, with the hope that more people will become aware of Taiwan's issues.

Here is the link to the interview. Your comments are welcome. http://www.theculturalconnect.com/new/2007/09/20/amy-lin-asia/

The Economist has a "briefing" about Chen's situation: "Trouble in Taiwan." It doesn't have much new information, but there is some decent analysis. And it's interesting to see the "outside" perspective.

Taiwan's undemocratic referendums
by Chris

Traditionally, when someone threatens to recall the president or publicly considers a no-confidence vote against the premier, thoughtful pundits first decry the possibility of either motion succeeding, then go on to explain what success would actually entail.

In light of today's news, I'm going to go straight to the second one.¹

Both the KMT and PFP have indicated that a recall—rather than impeachment or a no-confidence vote²—will be the weapon of choice. That means that Taiwan may actually face a referendum on whether to recall its president (an impeachment vote would send Chen's case to the Council of Grand Justices).

On the face of it, a referendum is the truest and most intuitive form of democracy. It was, in fact, what the word democracy was coined to describe. But the structure of Taiwan's referendums effectively disenfranchises much of the electorate.

Most referendums, including a recall motion, need only a simple majority to pass, but they need a majority of eligible voters to show up at the polls in order to be declared "valid"—that is where the problem lies.

Because it's much easier to convince people to stay home than to go vote, opposition to Taiwan's referendums tends to take the form of boycotts. Theoretically, this means that all votes in the referendum will be "yes" votes—"no" voters will simply not vote. If 50.1% of the people show up and votes "yes," the referendum passes; if only 49.9% show up and votes "yes," the referendum fails, even though in both cases it had 100% support among those who actually voted.

One troubling aspect of this is that it makes it far easier to vote "no" than to vote "yes." It is sometimes argued that this ought to be the case. If people really want to change the status quo, the argument goes, they ought to get up off their caboose and vote. The problem is that votes are supposed to reflect the collective opinion of the electorate. The practice of making it easier for opponents to vote (by staying at home) than for supporters gives disproportionate voice to a select group—exactly the opposite of what a referendum is supposed to do.

How to vote with your backside—whether you want to or not
Tactics used in America's "Jim Crow" laws of the past, which sought to make it difficult for newly enfranchised blacks to vote, were more malicious in execution but similar in effect. In the 2004 US presidential election, election organizers in Ohio were accused of deliberately setting up polling places near people who were likely to vote Republican, making Democrats have to travel farther to vote.³

Voter turnout is a big deal. In most elections, "turning out the vote" (convincing supporters to spend the time and effort to go vote) is as important as getting people to agree with you.

This is especially problematic since Taiwan does not offer absentee ballots. In order to vote, supporters of a referendum must travel back to their home districts, sometimes from abroad, which is always expensive and sometimes impossible. In the 2004 presidential election, which also featured a referendum, the LA Times estimated that 7,000 returned to Taiwan from Los Angeles alone. That was a presidential election, so the burden may have been placed more-or-less equally on both sides; if there is a referendum to recall Chen, supporters from abroad will face huge hurdles before they can vote. Opponents need do nothing to have their voice count.

It gets much worse. By using a boycott strategy, the "no" camp converts all non-votes into "no" votes (and, ironically, "no" votes into "yes" votes—more on that later). Not only do supports have a harder time voting, but those who do not vote end up effectively voting for the other side. Opponents of the referendum automatically have a higher turnout, plus they get all the votes that supporters fail to produce.

Then there are those who do not vote because they don't want to: they may not feel well-enough informed, they may be disgusted with whole process, they may simply not care—or they may feel that abstaining best reflects their feelings. In any case, the choice not to vote is one that ought to be available. Under the current system is it not.

To sum up:

yes = yes
no = yes
staying at home and watching TV = no

The (not very) bright side
Two factors mitigate these problems (except the last) to some degree. One is that Taiwan has a very high voter turnout. In the 2004 presidential election, turnout was around 80%. The greater the turnout among the "yes" camp, the less the unfair advantage of the boycott strategy. But even if 100% of referendum supporters vote, the "no" camp still gets a boost from those who don't want to vote at all. And 80% is not 100%. The "no" camp still has a 20% head start.

The other factor is that a boycott campaign will not have a 100% success rate. In other words, some people will go to the polls and vote "no." Since the "yes" camp will always win the actual vote, and any vote pushes the overall turnout closer to 50%+1, a "no" vote is actually the same as a "yes" vote. In the 2004 referendum, 8.20% of the votes were "no" votes. Had another few hundred thousand people voted "no," the referendum would have passed.⁴

However, do not expect the small amount of people who vote "no" out of ignorance to go far toward offsetting the head start granted by the boycott strategy. That 8.20% "no" vote in 2004 represented only 3.5% of potential voters. That still leaves 16 or 17 points unaccounted for. Opponents of the referendum were probably over-represented in those votes. Nonetheless, it would have taken only about five points, less than a third of the "unaccounted" votes, to swing the referendum the other way.

And that was in a referendum that was simultaneous with a presidential election, so those "no" voters had a ballot in front of them anyway. In a special recall referendum, it would presumably be easier to keep Chen's supporters away from the polls. Besides, voters today are more educated than before about how and why a boycott works.

No means no
There are easy solutions to these problems. First, it should be easy to register to vote in a new city, no matter where you were born. There is no valid reason to make people go from Taipei to Tainan simply to participate in an election.

Second, absentee ballots need to be made available to those who need them, especially those who live abroad. In a country with as large a diaspora as Taiwan, it is appalling that this has not happened already.

Third, the "50%+1" requirement for referendums ought to be scrapped. It both unfairly privileges referendum opponents, forces many to vote who would rather not, and effectively makes others vote against their conscience.

Recalling a president is serious business, and, as objectors to this essay will point out, it shouldn't be easy. But there are plenty of legitimate, democratic means of making sure that leaders aren't sacked at the drop of a hat. Far better to require two-thirds or three-fifths support among those citizens who bother to show up. That way, yes means yes, no means no, and voting is left to those who actually have an opinion.

_______________________

¹The Taipei Times, which has uncharacteristically excellent coverage of the indictments, has compiled these numbers:

Occupied seats in LY: 220
Votes needed for recall or impeachment: 147 (2/3 of total)
KMT seats: 90
PFP seats: 22
TSU seats: 12
Non-Partison Solidarity Union: 8
Independent: 3

Both of the Non-Partison Solidarity Union and the three independents "tend to vote with the pan-blue parties," writes the TT.

"Therefore, a minimum of 12 of the 85 Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] legislators would also have to back a recall or impeachment motion in order for it to pass" (assuming all others vote for the recall). That isn't a given, but neither is it impossible, as DPP legislators seek to distance themselves from Chen or simply vote their conscience (it does happen from time to time).

²Which does not directly affect the president, and may lead to snap legislative elections, which may in turn cause one of those constitutional crises Taiwan is so fraught with.

³If "having to travel farther to vote" sounds like whining, it is not. Imagine two people: one passes a polling place on the way from her house to 7-11; the other needs to spend an hour on a bus (an American bus at that) after a long day at work. Even if this only makes a difference in a small percentage of potential voters, it has still been known to swing elections.

⁴Ironically, although the referendum did not pass, it may have been responsible for Chen's narrow victory. Supporters of the referendum, most of whom also supported Chen, had two reasons to vote: the presidential election and the referendum. Opponents of the referendum had only Lien Chan to lure them to the polls.

Disclaimer
I’m not a law major. I am just trying to use the Constitution to figure the mess we see now, before and after Double Ten Day. I also tried to do some math, which I’m really bad at. :P I would love for you guys to give me some feedback or correct me where I’m wrong..

The anti-Chen rally seems like it will never end. Meanwhile, KMT legislators are preparing the third recall motion. How many votes do they actually need to pass the recall motion?

According to Article 2, the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan), “Recall of the president or the vice president shall be initiated upon the proposal of one-fourth of all members of the Legislative Yuan, and also passed by two-thirds of all the members. The final recall must be passed by more than one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the electorate in the free area of the Republic of China takes part.”

There are 225 seats in the Legislator Yuan and currently 220 legislators. The KMT will need more than one-fourth of all members of the Legislative Yuan, which is 56 votes at minimum, to initiate upon the proposal. The first step can be achieved easily by the KMT. What’s hard is that the KMT needs more than two-thirds of legislators, which are 147 legislators at minimum, to pass this proposal. Even though the recall proposal is passed in the Legislative Yuan, it has to be passed by one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the electorate in the free area of the Republic of China take part. It requires more than one-half of the people that possess voting rights in the ROC, approximately 8.25 million people would need to vote to make the result valid, and 4.13 million votes would have to be anti-Chen. In the Presidential Election of 2004, there were 2.43 million votes in favor of pan-blue. They would still need about 1.6 million votes even if the referendum is validated.

KMT has 89 seats, which include 3 seats from the New Party.
People First Party (PFP) has 22.
New Part has 1.
Wudang Tuanjie Lianmeng (無黨團結聯盟) has 6. It is pro-KMT in general.
5 legislators do not belong to any political parties, but are pro-KMT.
The above is pan-blue, and there are 123 seats in total.
In order to pass the recall proposal, they need 24 more votes in the Legislative Yuan.

DPP has 85 seats.
Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) has 12 seats.

To break the deadlock, the KMT may consider working on Lee Teng-hui. With his influence, he can not only determine the 12 votes of TSU for sure, but also some of the DPP legislators. 12 votes from the DPP will be required to pass the proposal.

It sounds almost impossible for pan-blue to recall the president. That is why there has been mention of a no-confidence vote against the president of the Executive Yuan.

Article 3 (3), Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan), says, “With the signatures of more than one-third of the total number of Legislative Yuan members, the Legislative Yuan may propose a no-confidence vote against the president of the Executive Yuan. Seventy-two hours after the no-confidence motion is made, an open-ballot vote shall be taken within 48 hours. Should more than one-half of the total number of Legislative Yuan members approve the motion, the president of the Executive Yuan shall tender his resignation within ten days, and at the same time may request that the president dissolve the Legislative Yuan. Should the no-confidence motion fail, the Legislative Yuan may not initiate another no-confidence motion against the same president of the Executive Yuan within one year”.

The seats of the KMT, the PFP, and the New Party are already more than half of the total seats in the Legislative Yuan. In other words, pan blue can easily pass the no-confidence motion. Why don’t KMT go for it?

First of all, the focus of the anti-Chen rally and the KMT focus is on Chen right now. A no-confidence vote against Su Tseng-Chang, the president of the Executive Yuan, has nothing to do with the whole event. There’s no reason for the KMT to run the risk of being criticized under this advantageous situation. Keeping people’s focus on Chen is now the KMT’s best strategy.

Secondly, since Chen has the right to appoint the president of the Executive Yuan,[1] it is not wise for the KMT to change the president of the Executive Yuan. The next might be even worse for them, and the KMT has no control over this position. All they could do is keep voting no-confidence.

What else can the pan-blue do besides join in the anti-Chen rally, and how can the KMT sustain this anti-Chen sentiment among the people until the coming presidential election? Or maybe, with a great possibility, neither of the two can bother the KMT, if the DPP cannot come up with a new strategy to deal with this crisis.


Helen





p.s You can go check the Constitution here:
Chinese:
中華民國憲法 http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4B.asp?FullDoc=所有條文&Lcode=A0000001
中華民國憲法增修條文 http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4A.asp?FullDoc=all&Fcode=A0000002
English: http://www.president.gov.tw/en/prog/news_release/document_content.php?id=1105498684&pre_id=1105498701&g_category_number=409&category_number_2=373&layer=on&sub_category=455

[1] Article3, the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan) says, “The president of the Executive Yuan shall be appointed by the president. Should the president of the Executive Yuan resign or the office become vacant, the vice president of the Executive Yuan shall temporarily act as the president of the Executive Yuan pending a new appointment by the president. The provisions of Article 55 of the Constitution shall cease to apply”.

Hi~I am Mike~

Below are some important topics which can stimulate our deep thought. I think it is highly the time for us to learn something from what has happened recently, and I also love to know how you guys think over the things happening in our lives.Besides the issues I offer below, I also attached the response from my friends to my article, and hope that their voices will help you to contemplate these issues.

1. When you are going abroad , how would you intro yourself to foreigners , like where are you from and why ? And think about when people think you are from China or any other Asian Country , what would you think and how will you answer or explain? 2. Do you think National Identity matters ? What do you think about National Identity when you go abroad ? Is it becoming an important issue when you go abroad ? And why ? 3. Tell us your opinions on National Identity , you are encouraged to talk about your personal observation and thoughts. 4. Tell us how would you do to improve Taiwan's international recognition ? 5. What do you think about Taiwan's Media Problem and why ? Do you think it is good or not ? If not , please tell us how would you do to improve it ?

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Mike,
great issue, important issue.
The National Taiwan Normal University Dean of Fine Arts, Professor Apex Lin, has just launched an exhibition on the subject titled "My homeland".
He says that Taiwan is "drifting " , like a cloud in the sky or a leaf on the ocean. He urges his students to search their hearts and their own personal history then to assert a new national and person identity.
Interestingly, he states that his intention is not born of political considerations. He also points to the importance of "spiritual" aspects in the search for a new Taiwanese identity.
I notice that Australia is making use of citizenship tests (for foreigners wishing to become Australian citizens) to stimulate debate on the issue of Australian nation identity. Who are our heroes? What place does sport have in our culture? How do we view the disadvantaged? What relationship do we aim to maintain between the people and our politicians? What foreign policies do we stand for? What vision do we hold for the future?
The same is obvious when teaching IELTS or TEFL.These tests are being used to integrate and assimilate new residents and those aspiring to citizenship. They test English levels while importing cultural values. The content of these tests is more and more frequently an issue in the public arena. This forces the community to define and realign themselves. Clever politics wouldn't you agree?

David

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Here is from one of my another friend, Hank, to the Taiwan issue.

First of all，I think that recognition is not the same with awareness.
But it has some logical relationship，that is we have to let foreigners know Taiwan and then we can tell him what are they different between Taiwan and China.
It means strengthening Taiwan awareness is first step.
So I try to provide some ways to enlarge Taiwan awareness first.
Basically，as a new product is put on the market，we have to do some promotion campaigns，so does Taiwan.
I want to divide promotion tools into two parts，one is software and the other is hardware. Moreover，according its effect speed，I also divide them into fast and slow.

This is the structure built thought these two thinking ways.

Hardware: 1. people2. product3. food4. construction5. etc..
Software: 1. music2. culture by movies or operas3. trip4. Olympic event5. religion6. charity7. etc..

These are ways we can use to improve our awareness.Once they know Taiwan，and then we can position what we want.
But it is really hard to change someone’s thoughts if a perception has occupied it first.
So through interviews or questionnaires in recent years，we can understand Taiwan has an image of technology.
Hence，we still can deepen this concept and no need to change.
That will make others remind Taiwan very soon if technology，this term，strikes them suddenly.
Finally，it is the most difficult part eager to recognize the difference between Taiwan and China.First of all，it depends on the TA is us or foreigners.
For Foreigners，maybe they just want to know what is Taiwan and where it is.If they really want to understand a lot，I prefer to let them come to Taiwan for a trip.
It is the most efficient way to know what it is different with China.
Maybe by this trip they will know Taiwan is more diversified than they already knowand then tell their friends.
It is better than any other promotion strategies.
Action speaks louder than words or media.
But if we want us to recognize the difference between Taiwan and China，it is totally different from the above.
Perhaps，we could also divide it into lots of parts from country to people.
It is involved in the national identity，it is more complicated than promote a country.
And it is also out of the area of this question.Recognition is a very wide term.
It depends upon which part you want to let others understand，it can derives different strategies.
However，I think in this stage making more people knowto all of you!!
Taiwan is the most important.

I've posted links to both ESWN and Jujuflop in the "Links" section of this blog (on the righthand side). Please give them a look. ESWN does great translations that often lead directly to stories in the mainstream media, including the NY Times, the Guardian, and other huge newspapers. Jujuflop does (actually, "did," since the blogger moved away) the best research and analysis of any English Taiwan blog.

You can add your own links to the list by looking in "Template" section. Scroll down near the bottom and copy the format of the other links. If you don't feel comfortable with HTML, just e-mail me the link and I'll do it for you. (If you don't know what HTML is, that counts as "not feeling comfortable with HTML.")

Also, Sigrid, Meg, and Rado have all written updates recently. I want to remind you that you don't just need to agree in your comment. Well-reasoned criticism is valuable, too.

Oh, and don't forget to sign your name at the end of each entry and comment.

—Chris