Ma Administration: Ratings Fall, But Still on Probation

Ma Administration: Ratings Fall, But Still on Probation
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
April 19, 2010

During a recent interview with Singapore's Lianhe Zaobao, KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung spoke frankly about President Ma Ying-jeou's approval ratings. He said that compared to political leaders in the United States and Japan, Ma's ratings have fallen more precipitously. But in response to the substantial 18 percent decline in the latest poll, King Pu-tsung said "This is a positive sign." The KMT's internal polls may offer some comfort to the Ma administration. But the accompanying decline in approval ratings suggests that public approval of President Ma's job performance has not increased, and is frozen at its current level. In other words, the public has put Ma on probation, and is adopting a "wait and see" attitude. Neither Ma nor the KMT should be too pleased with themselves.

Why has President Ma Ying-jeou's halo been so badly tarnished in two short years? This is a conundrum that has bedeviled the Blue Camp. Since the Ma administration took office two years ago, the Blue Camp been defeated in several legislative by-elections, and in last year's three in one county and municipal elections. These defeats reflect the decline in President Ma's popularity. Ever since the Ma administration took office, such challenges as the global financial tsunami and Typhoon Morakot have brought the Ma administration's ability to govern into serious question. Premier Wu's political finesse has allowed the ruling administration's approval ratings to recover somewhat. But President Ma's own approval ratings have not followed suit.

President Ma may not be willing to admit it. But apart from its determination to sign the cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA), the Ma administration is a governing body without guiding principles. During the Ma administration's first term it set up a Tax Reform Commission. It invited a wide range of scholars and experts to participate. But frictions arose and it was dissolved, because the government lacked a comprehensive understanding of the tax system. Its economics and finance oriented officials lacked an overview of the nation's finances, including inheritance taxes, capital gains taxes, and most recently, business taxes. Yet they cavalierly changed their tax rate recommendations in response to pressure from higher ups, against their profession judgment.

The Industrial Innovation Act changed the government's long held 20% bottom line on business taxes, almost overnight. It incorporated a tax rate even lower than the DPP's. The KMT was amenable to political appeals. It was even more eager than the DPP to cut taxes. Besides attracting votes, its tax cuts had no professional justification. The Industrial Innnovation Act is an evolution of the old Investment Awards Act and the Production Promotion Act. These two acts should have been sunsetted upon expiration. After years of development, industries that received special privileges or incentives have all become both powerful and profitable. Their tax umbrellas should have been closed up long ago. Who knew these umbrellas would be opened even wider, until they covered traditional and small and medium industries? Who knew that business taxes would be also cut, to the point where the Industrial Innovation Act has lost all meaning?

The Ma administration's lack of guiding principles is not limited to the Industry Innovation Act. Last year the Legislative Yuan reviewed the Local Government Act. The Ma administration yielded to the Taipei County Government in order to pander to voters in Tainan and Kaohsiung. With a single stroke of the pen, it increased the number of directly administered metropolises the government had planned from three to five. This has planted the seeds for even more uneven development on Taiwan. Agencies in the executive branch never planned for five directly administered metropolises. They have never completed either land plans nor administrative plans. Agencies responsible for financial matters have never completed the requisite revenue and expenditure plans. The ruling administration failed even to settle on suitable candidates for the five metropolises. It has without a doubt shot itself in the foot.

No one seems to care about the problems created by the establishment of these five directly administered metropolises. Both ruling and opposition party politicians are concerned only about who will be nominated and how they can win. Is the creation of these five directly administered metropolises compatible with the overall development of the nation? That is not their concern. They already occupy positions of power. They hope to become the heads of these five metropolises, or even higher offices. The larger interests of the nation are not their concern. Their sole concern is their own election campaigns. It is clear to see that no matter how many changes in ruling parties Taiwan undergoes, it is unlikely to lead to a healthy democracy, and even less likely to produce political appointees with vision.

Before Ma Ying-jeou became the leader of the nation, no one thought he lacked vision or convictions. But less than two years later, the government's weaknesses have been exposed. This includes conflicts between the cabinet and the ruling party legislative caucus, leading to government paralysis in times of crisis. The cabinet has been reshuffled. But major policies still fall victim to cavalier deal making within the legislature. Expert staffers are completely sidelined. The Liu cabinet was too elitist. The Wu cabinet is too unprofessional. The Ma administration has yet to find a balance between the public and its specialists, making it difficult for the public to give President Ma or his cabinet an accurate evaluation.

At about the same time King Pu-tsung was being interviewed, yet another Commonwealth Poll showed President Ma's approval rating stuck at 30% or so, and his disapproval rating rising to 66%. The KMT can interpret this data however it wants. But as long as one's approval rating have not rebounded, and one's disapproval ratings have not diminished, voter support will not be forthcoming. The Ma administration, including the party and the government, fully understands the public's perception. They know the public believes that "President Ma is a good man." But merely being a good man does not make one a leader the public can trust.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2010.04.19
社論－不滿意度雖降 馬政府仍「留校查看」
本報訊

國民黨秘書長金溥聰最近接受新加坡《聯合早報》訪問，直言馬英九總統的民意支持度，相較於美日等政治領導人，下滑是凶了一點，但不滿意度在最新的民調則大幅下滑十八個百分點，金溥聰認為，「這是一個正面跡象。」這份國民黨內部民調，或許可讓馬政府稍感安慰。但相應於不滿意度的下滑，馬總統的滿意度並未相應提昇，甚至原地踏步。換言之，民眾對馬總統的表現，其實還在「留校查看」的階段，沒有讓國民黨或馬政府沾沾自喜的理由。

馬英九總統個人聲望，為什麼會在兩年不到、這麼短的時間內破功？是藍營百思不得其解的大問題，從馬政府就任以來幾次立委補選，以及去年底三合一基層選舉失利，只是馬總統聲望下滑的反應。馬政府上台，全球金融海嘯、莫拉克風災等接續而來的挑戰，讓馬政府的執行效能遭到民意嚴重質疑，吳揆接手行政院之後，有一段時間，因為吳揆個人的政治手腕，讓政府形象回穩，但馬總統個人的民調滿意度，並未因此提昇。

不論馬總統願不願意承認，除了兩岸經濟合作架構協議（ＥＣＦＡ）非簽不可，馬政府是一個缺乏政策中心思想的團隊。馬政府就職第一任即成立賦改會，廣邀學者專家，最後弄到不歡而散，就是因為政府對「稅制」沒有整體觀念，從遺產稅、證交稅到最近的營所稅，財經首長腦中無國家財政之全貌，卻隨時隨地可因應「長官」之非專業見解，欣然調整降低之。

產創條例從政府堅守百分之廿的營所稅底線，到一夕改變，提出並通過比民進黨版本更低的稅率版本，除了政治上可以訴求，國民黨降稅比民進黨更爽快，並以此拉攏選票之外，沒有任何專業規畫的依據。產創條例沿革於早年的獎投條例與促產條例，照常理，這兩個特殊立法既落日就該回歸常態，因為所有當年因特許或特殊獎勵而存在的產業，經過這些年的發展，都已經成為大賺其錢的強勢產業，稅的保護傘早該收了，沒想到，這把傘愈張愈大，全面擴大到傳產與中小企業，並相應將修正營所稅法，那麼所謂的獎勵產業創新的特別法還有意義嗎？

馬政府缺乏政策中心思想的問題，不僅產創條例一端。早在去年立法院審議地方制度法，馬政府為了屈從台北縣、討好南高選民，一舉將政府規畫的三都，直接擴大為五都，就已經埋下台灣距離均衡發展愈來愈遠的惡果。做為執政黨，行政部門事前從未有五都之國土與行政規畫，財主單位亦無相應之財政收支劃分，甚至腦袋裡連適合的首長人選都無，就貿然點頭拍板五都，無異是搬石頭砸自己的腳。

而所有與五都相關的問題，迄今無人聞問。不論在朝、在野的政治人物，只想到誰參選、如何勝選，至於五都整體發展，或者五都如何配合國家發展，全然不在政治人物思考範圍之中。已居高位者、乃至志在逐鹿五都或更高位的政治人物，心中全無國家發展之願景，念茲在茲只有選戰的攻擊與防禦，可以想見，台灣不論歷經多少次政黨輪替，都不可能產生健全民主文化，更不可能培養出有遠見的政務官。

馬英九就任國家領導人之前，沒有人認為他是沒有遠見、或者欠缺政策中心思想的政治人物，這兩年不到的時間，政府作為表現所曝露的弱點，包括政府團隊與國會黨團時有衝突，使政府陷入失能空轉的危機；政府團隊調整之後，重大政策又輕易妥協於國會喊價，使專業技術官僚完全喪失幕僚功能。從劉內閣太菁英到吳內閣太不專業，馬政府始終無法在庶民與專家間找到平衡，就很難讓民意給予馬總統或政府團隊一個適切的評價。

在金溥聰受訪幾乎同時間，另一份由天下遠見所公布的民調，馬總統的滿意度依舊低到三成左右，而不滿意度還是高達六成六，不論國民黨如何詮釋這些數據，最重要的，只要滿意度不能明確回升，不滿意度降低是不可能帶來支持度的，馬團隊從黨到政，都得更精確地理解民心向背：「馬總統是一個好人」，但「好人」顯然還不足以成為民意認可的國家領導人。