Huang Guochang choked on the debate on the unfairness of health insurance for generations. The DPP counterattacked: read the two articles first before proceeding

Yesterday (16th), the Legislative Yuan passed the "Amendment to the Elderly Welfare Law" on the third reading with the Blue and White joint effort, advocating that the central government subsidize the health care premiums of the elderly over 65 years old. Executive President Zhuo Wengtai criticized it as unconstitutional and causing generational injustice; People's Party Chairman Huang Guochang countered Zhuo Kui's "Come out and debate if you have the guts." In response, the DPP responded by asking Huang Guochang, who has a doctorate in law, to first read Article 70 of the Constitution and Article 91 of the Budget Law before discussing who is willing to debate with him.

According to Article 70 of the Constitution, “the Legislative Yuan may not propose additional expenditures in the budget proposed by the Executive Yuan.” Article 91 of the "Budget Law" clearly stipulates, "If a bill proposed by a legislator significantly increases annual expenditure or reduces annual revenue, the Executive Yuan shall be consulted first to specify the source of supplementary funds; when necessary, amendments to other laws shall also be proposed at the same time."

Huang Guochang issued an article today questioning whether the DPP is playing double-dealing, or is Zhuo Rongtai simply unable to understand the needs of the local area? If the system of subsidizing health care premiums for the elderly is wrong, why do DPP legislators running for county and mayor have the same political views? Why did Shen Boyang, Su Qiaohui and others not express any objection when the Legislative Yuan voted yesterday?

Huang Guochang said that what is unacceptable is that as soon as the amendment was passed, the Executive Yuan immediately took the lead in spreading rumors, saying that the younger generation would be sacrificed. The fact is that the government fully subsidizes the health insurance premiums for the elderly who are over 65 years old and whose income tax rate bracket is less than 20%, which can effectively reduce the burden of the sandwich generation.

Wu Siyao, CEO of the DPP Policy Association, said in an interview that as the ruling party, the DPP’s position has been clearly reflected in the negative votes cast in the vote. There is no need to make an issue of whether individual members who were not present voted. The ruling party’s opposition to the law amendment is a common position. The DPP’s reasons for opposing the law amendment include illegality and unconstitutionality, generational injustice, harming the financial sustainability of health insurance, and another violation of administrative authority. Every reason is tenable, and they are all aimed at safeguarding the system and the spirit of constitutionalism.

Wu Siyao also criticized that the amendment to the law promoted by the People's Party has triggered opposition from the medical and professional circles. National medical resources should be allocated rationally. If the elderly's health care premiums are fully subsidized, it will crowd out the budget for caring for medical staff and increase the medical construction, and ultimately the whole people will suffer.

"Spend your money, my money, and the money of the next generation, to buy blue and white tickets!" Wu Siyao emphasized that health insurance is a system shared by all people, and the core spirit is mutual aid. If in order to meet the needs of health insurance subsidy for the elderly over 65 years old, the younger generation should bear the greatest burden, this is a political "meat barrel bill" and "money pit bill."