Campaign Promises: Vote Buying, or Public Welfare?

Campaign Promises: Vote Buying, or Public Welfare?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
March 19, 2014

Summary: The year end elections are six months away. We are concerned that the bandwagon to increase the number of holidays is just getting warmed up. The next election will result in even more outrageous campaign promises. The ruling and opposition parties will compete in their efforts to bribe voters. But can Taiwan's competitiveness and the government's finances withstand the stress? We doubt it.

Full text below:

The Ministry of the Interior invited the business community and local governments to discuss legal holidays. They decided that when a national holiday lands on a two day weekend, employees will receive compensatory leave. Next year will have 115 non-working days. This was in response to an earlier declaration by Premier Chiang Yi-hua, who wanted to increase the number of holidays so that people could enjoy a "small but real benefit."

In fact, everyone knows this is a charade. It is simply a Blue Camp post-Chinese New Year election ploy in the upcoming local election campaigns. Take for example, the Chinese New Year. New Taipei Mayor Eric Chu said people want pay raises, but giving them pay raises is hard. Instead, if the government allows people to have more days off, it will stimulate consumption and make people felt better. Taichung City Mayor Jason Hu then announced that the Taichung City Council proposed making the traditional Hakka Festival a legal holiday. If the bill is passed, it will be submitted to the Executive Yuan. Taipei mayoral candidate Lien Sheng-wen let it be known that if elected he would restore Constitution Day, making December 25 a holiday. This would increase tourism and create economic value. Faced with such artificial presssures, Premier Chiang Yi-hua said the government must view these "small hut real benefits" through the peoples' eyes. He wanted to study the possiblity of changing the legal holidays next year.

A gaggle of politicians have spoken up just in order to have more days off, Premier Chiang Yi-hua in particular. He even adopted the younger generation's vernacular, and used the expression "small but real benefits." As we can see, the political elites are eager to pander to the public. Eric Chu was the most direct. Since they cannot get raises, they may as well get more holidays. After all, when it comes to holidays, who besides the business owner or employer is going to disagree? Administratively speaking approving extra days off is not that complicated. The ruling and opposition parties are accustomed to competing to see who can legislate the most holidays. This would never lead to all out war, such as that over the trade in services agreement. As anyone can see, most of the politicians who have spoken out in favor of more holidays are candidates in county chief and city mayor elections. Their mouths are full of talk about holidays. But their heads are full of thoughts of votes.

Everyone is of course happy to take more holidays. But anyone who knows anything about economics knows that there is no such thing as "more holidays for economic revitalization." Otherwise, why not simply implement a three day weekend? Then Taiwan's economy would really take-off, right? A few years ago the IT industry was hit by the global financial crisis. This brought upon economic winter and severe recession. Technology and electronics manufacturers resorted to "unpaid leave." No employees rejoiced at the extra days off. They worried that their jobs were no longer secure. They were less likely to take advantage of the opportunity to go shopping. Their income was no longer assured, so why would they want to spend? What's more, the productivity loss must be borne by the employer. Manufacturers may suffer lowered productivity and refuse to increase pay. The price of the vicious cycle will ultimately be borne by the public.

This wave of controversy, motivated by year end campaign considerations, is nothing new. During the previous five cities elections, Taichung mayoral candidate Su Chia-chuan declared that, if elected, he would increase welfare payments to the elderly, from 1,600 NT to 2,000 NT. Other welfare benefits for the elderly would also be provided. They would be comparable to with those provided by Taipei and Kaohsiung. Taipei mayoral candidate Su Tseng-chang was even more magnanimous. He proposed distributing prepaid garbage bags to the public, for free.

Political candidates compete in using public funds to engage in vote buying. Some scholars are disgusted. They have cited Bureau of Audit statistics. They have cited the outstanding balances in central government public debt for the past year, This increased from 2.6490 trillion NT in late 2001 to 4.2962 trillion NT. Fortunately the candidates who promised the stars were not elected. That spared the treasury from accelerated bankruptcy. But bipartisan vote buying is long-term policy. The government's fiscal balance has deteriorated, By the late January, outstanding balances on central government debt were 5.4618 trillion NT. Next year we are is likely to hit the government debt ceiling.

Every election year, all manner of improvised, short-sighted electioneering tricks emerge. In the past, it was common to use welfare checks as bait. Most common were a variety of annuities. After all, the local governments can make these promises ahead of time, and later blackmail the central government into footing the bill. If they don't succeed, they can provoke other disputes. Election promises have recently created in a new precedent. Council members in six Changhua townships fulfilled campaign promises by privately connecting street lamps without paying for the electricity. Taipower sought payment from the Township Office. But the township administration refused to pay. Taipower sued and won. But the Township Office insists it has no money to pay its electricity bills. The result is six townships will now have a bunch of unlit street lights.

Several major bills are pending in the Legislative Yuan. Most commentators are pessimistic about them passing because this is an election year. Each time an election rolls around, everyones' thinking becomes distorted. The ruling and opposition parties compete in short-sighted pandering to the public. For example, they compete in issuing a variety of annuities. Which beneficiary is going to object? A few extra days off? Who doesn't love that? Will it undermine the government's finances? Will it affect national productivity? Who cares?

The year end elections are six months away. We are concerned that the bandwagon to increase the number of holidays is just getting warmed up. The next election will result in even more outrageous campaign promises. The ruling and opposition parties will compete in their efforts to bribe voters. But can Taiwan's competitiveness and the government's finances withstand the stress? We doubt it.

社論－選舉支票競相加碼非全民之福
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年03月19日 04:10

內政部邀集工商界及縣市政府討論放假方式，決定未來國定假日碰到周休2日一律補假，明年全年放假天數將達到115天。這是為回應行政院長江宜樺早先的宣示，要增加放假天數讓民眾感受「小確幸」。

其實誰都清楚，這齣加假戲碼，根本是為春節以來藍營民選首長的政治加碼秀解套。先是在農曆年前，新北市長朱立倫表示，民眾想加薪比較難，政府應讓大家多放點假，以刺激消費，也讓民眾心裡好過些；接著台中市長胡志強指台中議會正爭取在客家傳統節日「天穿日」放假一天，若通過便向行政院申請。然後台北市市長參選人連勝文也放話，若當選會恢復12月25日的「行憲紀念日」放假，以創造觀光與經濟價值。面對這股加假壓力，行政院長江宜樺才表示，應站在民眾角度創造「小確幸」，要求針對明年休假方案加以研擬修正。

不過就是為了多放幾天假，竟惹得一堆政治人物搶著表態，尤其閣揆江宜樺，連新世代的流行語言「小確幸」都搬出來了！可見得為了討好民意，政治精英們可是卯足了勁。特別是朱立倫的說法最直接，既然加不了薪，就加假嘛！畢竟談到放假，除了企業主或雇主之外，有誰會反對？　在行政作業上，核定多放幾天假一點都不複雜，朝野政黨習慣競相加碼，不可能鬧到像審議《服貿》般全面開戰。任誰都看得出來，這一波衝著放假表態的政治人物，絕大多數都是現任民選縣市長或是爭取提名的候選人，他們口中講要多放假，心中想的，不折不扣是選票！

多放假大家當然都高興，但大概任何懂點經濟學的人都清楚，根本沒有所謂「放假拚經濟」這回事，否則乾脆推行周休3日，台灣經濟不就騰飛了？前幾年科技業遭逢全球性金融海嘯帶來的景氣寒冬，業績成長出現嚴重衰退，科技電子大廠紛紛祭出「無薪假」，那時可沒有任何員工喜形於色，為多放幾天假歡欣鼓舞，反而擔心飯碗可能不保，更不可能還有人利用放假機會出門消費，收入都不保了，誰還想消費呢？更何況，多放假所造成的生產力損失，全要由雇主承擔，還可能導致廠商以生產力降低為由拒絕加薪，惡性循環最終還是要全民承擔！

這一波為年底選票考量所惹出的話題，並不陌生。上一次五都選舉，競逐大台中市長的蘇嘉全宣布如果他當選，將把重陽敬老金從1600元提高至2000元，其他老人福利也比照北、高發放。當時參選台北市長的蘇貞昌手筆更大，主張垃圾袋免費發放市民。

候選人競相推出「公款買票」政見，有些學者看不下去，搬出審計部統計數據，指中央政府一年以上公共債務未償餘額，從民國90年底的2兆6409億元逐年增加，已達4兆2962億元。所幸濫開選舉支票的候選人均未當選，才避免了國庫加速破產的命運。但在兩黨長期政策買票趨勢下，政府財政收支惡化問題愈演愈烈，今年一月底，中央政府債務未償餘額計5兆4618億元，明年很可能就觸及政府舉債上限。

每逢選舉年，所有即興式、短線式的政見就會跑出來！過去多半以福利支票做誘餌，最常見的就是加發各種年金，反正地方政府先開支票，屆時再強要中央埋單，若是埋單不成還會引發其它爭議。選舉支票引發的最新惡劣案例，就是彰化6鄉鎮部分議員，為履行選舉政見而私接許多的路燈，卻不繳電費，台電追繳電費，要鄉公所負責，但鄉公所不埋單，台電提告雖然贏了一審官司，鄉公所卻堅持沒有錢繳電費，結果就是6個鄉鎮多了一堆不會亮的幽靈路燈。

目前有一些重大法案正在立法院候審，多數評論者對能否順利通過持悲觀態度，因為今年是選舉年，只要逢到了選舉，所有的思考都會受到扭曲。反而能在短時間內討好民眾的政策會被提出來，朝野還競相加碼，譬如加發各種年金。能得到政策好處的人，誰會反對？多放幾天假，誰不喜歡？至於是否會破壞政府財政，是否影響國家生產力，誰會在乎？

距離年底選舉還有大半年，我們擔心增加放假的話題，還只是熱身，接下來還會有更驚人的選舉支票出現，朝野再度競相加碼賄賂選民。但台灣的整體競爭力、國家的財政負擔，經不經得起折騰，我們真的不樂觀。