The KMT and DPP: In a Race to the Bottom

The KMT and DPP: In a Race to the Bottom
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 3, 2009

Late last year, in response to calls from the Ma administration, the KMT Provisional Plenary Committee substantially tightened the party's Anti-Corruption Provisions. For a moment it appeared as if it was committed to genuine transformation. But lo and behold, the KMT Central Committee discreetly created an escape clause. It announced that the provision "A candidate found guilty in the first instance will be denied nomination" would not be made retroactive. For all intents and purposes, it surrendered to the forces of corruption.

The KMT is big and powerful. Its progress on the road to reform has always been two steps forward, one step back, shilly-shallying all the way, betraying a lack of determination and perseverance. That is why voters spurned it in 2000 and why it wound up in the political wilderness for eight years. Now that it has finally regained political power, it ought to resolve to do better. It ought to let people know it has reformed. Yet the moment it runs up against anti-reformist forces, it caves in. Is this what the KMT means when it trumpets "complete government, complete responsibility?" The KMT says it relaxed the requirements for nomination of candidates because it feared a backlash from local officials. But if the KMT's much trumpeted reform turns to mush, isn't it afraid of backlash from voters?

The KMT has been repeatedly revising its eligibility standards, touching a sore spot within the party. When Ma Ying-jeou was party chairman he tightened the anti-corruption provisions to read, "A candidate who has been indicted will be denied nomination." But when he found himself mired in a major political crisis due to the Discretionary Fund case, the KMT recut the party constitution to fit him, drastically relaxing the requirement to read, "A candidate found guilty in the third instance will be denied nomination." This was done to ensure that Ma would remain eligible to run for president. As a result, the KMT Provisional Plenary Committee changed the provision back to "A candidate found guilty in the first instance will be denied nomination" from "A candidate found guilty in the third instance will be denied nomination." As we can see, determining the "right" standards for candidate nomination is no simple matter.

Can Ma Ying-jeou's Discretionary Fund case be used as an excuse to open the floodgates for the nomination process? Of course not. What the public finds most objectionable about the KMT is the caliber of its local officials, and its "black gold" elements manipulating local construction projects. At the county magistrates, city mayors, and county councilors level, criminal triads often join forces with politicians and industrialists, and engage in flagrantly lawless behavior, taking unfair advantage of local opportunities. This "seige mentality" on the part of local KMT officials is one of the main reasons for the serious gap between the north and south. The KMT has a clear advantage at the central government level, in the Presidential Office, the Executive Yuan, and the Legislative Yuan. It has a perfect opportunity to push for reform. How can it casually retreat and compromise?

True, if the threshold is set too high, some officials may leave the party and run as independents, upsetting the election scenario. But will relaxing eligibility requirements transform these indicted officials into public heroes who command the support of the electorate? That underestimates the intelligence of the voters. Hsu Tsai-li in Keelung and Wu Chun-li in Taitung were both under indictment. Their nominations were rammed through nevertheless. Their subsequent election, conviction, and sentencing severely undermined the KMT's image. The public remembers. Doesn't anyone in the KMT Central Committee know that?

Consider Diane Lee's dual nationality. The KMT condoned her behavior and shielded her. When the truth came out, she quit the party, letting the KMT take the heat, and leaving a dark shadow in the hearts of Da-an District voters. Can the KMT's image withstand such repeated traumas?

The KMT is not alone. It is not the only party eager to debase itself. When it comes to degeneracy, the DPP takes a back seat to no one. The DPP Pary Constitution originally specified that "An official who has been indicted will be stripped of authority." But Legislators Kao Chi-peng, Hsu Ling, and Tsai Huang-lang were all indicted or convicted of criminal wrongdoing. Yet the three of them are still DPP Legislators At Large. The DPP Central Evaluation Committee acts as if nothing is wrong. Even worse, last July the DPP revised its "Articles for Clean Government." It changed "An official who has been indicted will be stripped of authority" to "An official who has been convicted in the first instance will be stripped of authority. An official who has been convicted in the second instance will be expelled." The purpose was to provide Chen Shui-bian with an escape clause, and to help Kao Chi-peng and his ilk skate by. So where is the DPP's commitment to reform and rehabilitation?

DPP Chairman Tsai Ing-wen ridiculed the KMT's attempt to rationalize its grandfather clause. She said if the KMT repeatedly compromised its principles, it would "regress to an unspeakable state." But look at the DPP's revisions to its party constitution last year. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. The DPP "regressed to an unspeakable state" long ago. KMT and DPP promises to end corruption have already been reduced to a race to the bottom.

The two major parties' myopic conduct in recent years has changed the face of Taiwan's democracy beyond recognition. Chen Shui-bian's lip service to "transitional justice" and "the highest possible ethical standards" merely showed how far he could degenerate in eight years. and how swiftly democracy and justice could vanish in the wind. The KMT and DPP are competing to see how far they can lower their anti-corruption standards. They are showing how easy it is for the ruling and opposition parties to jettison their commitment to reform. They are providing the public with front row seats to their race to the bottom.

兩黨比爛：「排黑條款」的倒退競賽
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.03.03 03:38 am

國民黨臨全會去年底大幅調高黨內「排黑條款」門檻，呼應馬政府的廉能訴求，一時之間彷彿展現了脫胎換骨的決心。孰料，黨中央最近卻悄悄擅開小門，宣布「一審有罪即不提名」的限制將不溯及既往。此舉，無異是向黑金惡勢力的反撲宣告投降。

家大業大的國民黨，在改革的道路上從來是進進退退、牽牽扯扯，缺乏決心與恆心，所以在二○○○年才遭到選民唾棄，痛失八年江山。如今好不容易奪回政權，正應好自為之，給人一新耳目的印象，卻一遇反改革力量作怪就彎腰妥協，這豈有絲毫「完全執政，完全負責」的魄力？放寬提名門檻，國民黨說是擔心地方民代反彈；但改革落到如此和稀泥，難道就不怕選民反彈嗎？

國民黨提名門檻修來改去，牽涉到黨內一段椎心之痛：當年馬英九擔任主席，將排黑條件提升到「一起訴即不提名」的高門檻，但後來他因市長特別費案而身陷重大的政治危機，國民黨遂為他量身打造黨章，把條件放寬到「三審定讞」，以免他喪失競選總統的資格。也因此，去年底才有臨全會將「三審定讞」再修回「一審有罪」的演出。可見，提名資格寬嚴的拿捏，並非易事。

然而，馬英九的特例，是否可變成濫開提名閘門的藉口？答案當然是否定的。以國民黨的生態，最受民眾訾議之處是地方民代的素質低落，以及黑金勢力操控地方建設。往往在縣市長及縣市議員這一層級，黑道藉著政治與工商勢力的連結，即可目無法紀包山包海，剝削地方利益與發展。台灣南北差距嚴重，這類「山寨心態」的地方民代橫行正是主因之一。如今，國民黨在中央府院均佔絕對優勢，正是放手改革地方的大好機會，怎麼可以又輕易退縮妥協？

的確，如果門檻過高，可能造成一些民代脫黨參選，對選局造成干擾。但放寬資格，就能把這些有案在身、且目無黨紀的人變成選民擁戴的偶像嗎？那未免太低估選民的智慧。試想，當年基隆的許財利、台東的吳俊立，都是在有案在身的情況下強行提名當選；但二人均在任內判決定罪，重創了國民黨的形象。這點，人民記憶猶新，黨中央難道毫無所覺？

再看李慶安國籍事件，國民黨縱容她、包庇她；真相大白後，她拍拍屁股退黨了之，國民黨則概括承受罵名，也在大安區選民心中留下一道永遠的陰影。國民黨的形象，禁得起如此反覆不休的磨損嗎？

無獨有偶，甘於自辱門風的，並非只有國民黨，民進黨的倒退表現亦不遑多讓。民進黨黨章原規定「起訴即停權」，但立委高志鵬、薛凌、蔡煌瑯分別因案被起訴或求刑，三人卻仍照樣出任不分區立委，中評會亦裝作沒事而不處理。更有甚者，民進黨去年七月間更大修「廉政條款」，將「起訴即停權」的門檻砍成「一審有罪停權，二審有罪除名」；名為幫阿扁的國務費案預留後路，也順便幫高志鵬等人偷渡過關，又何嘗有任何改革自新的意向？

國民黨近日做出「不溯既往」的解釋後，民進黨主席蔡英文嘲諷道：一再妥協，將使國民黨「重回不堪的年代」。但如果對照民進黨去年修訂的規格，簡直是「龜笑鱉無尾」，民進黨實已早一步重回「不堪的年代」。藍綠對清廉排黑的宣示，已淪為一場倒退競賽而不自知了！

台灣的民主，由於兩黨的短線經營，近年不斷地土崩石流，已到了面目全非的地步。就像陳水扁把「轉型正義」與「最高道德標準」掛在嘴上，結果八年只驗證了他的徹底墮落，民主和正義消散在風中。國、民兩黨競相降低「排黑」門檻，除反映朝野改革精神蕩然，也著實讓人看到政黨政治「比爛」的危機！