30-Second Overview: Tsai Tong-rong was born in 1935 in Xintun, Budai, Chiayi. After going to the US in the 1960s, he became an overseas Taiwan independence activist and served as the first president of FAPA in 1982. Returning to Taiwan in 1990, he moved "self-determination" from overseas advocacy into the streets, political parties, and the Legislative Yuan; in 1997, he also participated in founding Formosa TV. After the Referendum Act was enacted in 2003, Taiwan finally had a statutory entry point for referendums, but thresholds and deliberation mechanisms narrowed that door. To understand Tsai Tong-rong, one must simultaneously see what he opened and why he remains dissatisfied with the manner of its opening.

Figure: Portrait of Tsai Tong-rong. Source: Legislative Yuan; provided by Wikimedia Commons, subject to conditions and attribution requirements as detailed in the file page. ¹

From Xintun to a Ticket Back to Taiwan

On June 13, 1935, Tsai Tong-rong was born in Xintun, Budai Township, Chiayi County. Official biographies preserved by the Legislative Yuan list that he studied Law at National Taiwan University, earned a Master’s in Political Science from the University of Tennessee, and a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Southern California, later teaching at the City University of New York. ²

This academic trajectory easily reduces him to a resume, yet misses a more concrete turning point: during his time at NTU, he was elected chairman of the National Taiwan Student Union, and subsequently drew the attention of the Kuomintang government due to political activities, leading him to leave Taiwan. Records from the New Taiwan Peace Foundation indicate that in June 1960, he participated in the Guanze Ridge Conference, discussing the overthrow of the KMT regime and the issue of Taiwan independence. He later went to the US, where he was barred from returning for over twenty years. ³

"Being unable to return home" was not merely rhetoric for Tsai Tong-rong, but a concrete political condition. The US provided him with space to teach, organize, and lobby, but also fixed him outside the island. This distance later became his tool: he learned to translate the Taiwan issue into language the US Congress could understand, yet became increasingly aware that voices from overseas could never substitute for votes cast by people on the island.

📝 Curator’s Note: Tsai Tong-rong’s starting point was not "returning to Taiwan to participate in politics," but first losing the right to return; his repeated questioning of whether the people could decide their fate was, in essence, a questioning of how someone excluded from the door could return the power of decision to the island.

A Timeline Not Just for Biography

Tsai Tong-rong’s political life spans overseas organizations, mass movements, media establishment, and legislative battles. Aligning these years reveals that his work was not four disconnected resume entries, but the same question changing tools across different fields: Who speaks for Taiwan? Who decides Taiwan’s future?

The significance of this table lies not in slicing the figure into years, but in seeing how "overseas" and "on the island" translate each other. Lobbying during the FAPA era relied on organization and Congress. The referendum movement after returning to Taiwan required streets, party caucuses, bills, and votes. The tools changed, but the core question remained unchanged.

Learning to Speak Taiwan to Congress Overseas

In 1970, Tsai Tong-rong served as the first chairman of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA). In 1982, he co-founded the Formosan Association for Public Affairs with comrades and became its first president. The nature of work in these two organizations differed: the former directly handled the organizational network of the Taiwan independence movement, while the latter brought the rights of overseas Taiwanese and Taiwan’s democracy into the US public policy space. ^{3 4}

FAPA’s official memorial article states that Tsai Tong-rong, along with Peng Ming-min and Tang Shau-tang, were the organization’s founding fathers, confirming his role as the first president in 1982. This source can prove positions and organizational relationships, but cannot alone prove all the diplomatic outcomes often later attributed to "his efforts." ⁴

This distinction is crucial. The biographies of political figures are often compressed into a string of "founding, promoting, succeeding," but organizational achievements usually stem from long-term collective work. The capability Tsai Tong-rong truly left behind was the ability to break down Taiwan’s democratic dilemmas into issues the US political system could handle: human rights, immigration quotas, congressional resolutions, and international visibility.

After returning to Taiwan, he still carried this method, only changing the audience for lobbying. Washington Congress members became Taipei legislators. Overseas hometown associations became street crowds. "Taiwan needs to be seen" became "Taiwanese people must be able to vote to decide."

1990: Referendum Transforms from Slogan to Organization

Records from the New Taiwan Peace Foundation indicate that Tsai Tong-rong returned to Taiwan in 1990 under the pretext of attending a funeral, subsequently establishing the Referendum Promotion Association and serving as its founding president. Through torch relays, marches, and the April 10 hunger strike, he transformed the referendum from an overseas proposition into an island-wide mass movement. ³

His resume and this movement are closely linked in time: Official Legislative Yuan data lists "Founding President of the Referendum Promotion Association" as part of his experience, and Legislative Yuan audio-video transcripts preserve his reflections on the referendum movement, mentioning proposals made in 1990 to handle Taiwan’s UN accession via referendum. ^{2 7}

At that time, Tsai Tong-rong was not merely demanding a law. He sought to first create a political common sense: major issues in Taiwan cannot forever be decided by the President, Congress, or party caucuses on behalf of the people. This is why his movement simultaneously featured marches, hunger strikes, proposals, and international advocacy; he needed "the people to take charge" to become a visible action before the system appeared.

📝 Curator’s Note: The story of the Referendum Act often begins with articles, but Tsai Tong-rong’s story reminds us that before articles, there are bodies: walking, hunger strikes, standing on the street with signs are all rehearsals for a system that does not yet exist.

Formosa TV: Another Way to Place the People in Media

Tsai Tong-rong’s political practice was not limited to ballots. Formosa TV’s official history records that in 1994, two teams applying for the fourth wireless television station merged to establish a preparatory office, obtaining preparation permission in 1995. On March 27, 1996, when the Board of Directors and Supervisors was established, Tsai Tong-rong was elected as Chairman. Formosa TV finally launched officially on June 11, 1997, becoming Taiwan’s first privately owned wireless television station. ⁵

Figure: Formosa TV Logo. Source: Formosa TV; image file preserved by Wikimedia Commons, copyright status determined as public domain according to the file page, but trademarks and identification purposes remain subject to relevant regulations, see file page for details. ⁸

Formosa TV’s self-stated founding principles include the democratization of shareholding, separation of ownership and management, and media autonomy. These words belong to Formosa TV’s own historical narrative, but they still illustrate what Tsai Tong-rong saw media as at the time: not just a company broadcasting programs, but a public project breaking the existing wireless television structure. ⁵

In his 2003 first-person article "Formosa TV and I," Tsai Tong-rong wrote: "For Taiwan, I founded Formosa TV; also for Taiwan, I withdrew from Formosa TV." He placed founding Formosa TV and resigning as Chairman within the same political judgment, citing the hope to facilitate "the withdrawal of party, government, and military from media." This is his self-account and cannot replace all evidence of Formosa TV’s operational history, but it clearly displays his imagination of media. ⁹

His desired "people taking charge" thus had two entry points: one is the ballot, the other is the narrative people encounter daily. Referendums allow people to answer questions; Formosa TV influences which questions are seen and how they are discussed. Both encounter the same difficulty: Who has the right to set the agenda?

2003: The Law Finally Writes "Referendum"

The English institutional introduction of the Central Election Commission states that the Referendum Act was enacted on December 31, 2003, establishing the legal basis for people to vote directly on laws, legislative principles, or major policies. National referendums are managed by the Central Election Commission; proposals can originate from citizen petitions, the Legislative Yuan, the Executive Yuan, or requests from the President. ⁶

For Tsai Tong-rong, this was a result of a long campaign: people directly deciding public affairs finally had an operable legal entry point. But "having an entry point" is not equal to "easy to pass." Referendums must go through proposal, petition, deliberation, voting, and result determination; every threshold changes whether people can reach the final step.

In his Legislative Yuan verbatim speech records, reviewing the referendum system, Tsai Tong-rong stated that the Referendum Act was passed by the Legislative Yuan on November 27, 2003, and also discussed that the competent authority for the Referendum Act is the Executive Yuan. This record preserves his institutional perspective: a referendum is not a one-time election activity, but a legal procedure requiring the competent authority, the Legislative Yuan, and the people to share responsibility. ⁷

From overseas advocacy to domestic legislation, Tsai Tong-rong finally obtained what he pursued, but did not obtain a law written exactly according to his ideals. This is precisely where the story becomes uncomfortable and worth understanding.

The "Birdcage" Is Not One Person’s Handiwork

Data from the Legislative Yuan deliberations on the 2003 Referendum Act, compiled by the Legislative Yuan Observation Alliance (LYOA), indicates that of the 63 articles passed in the second reading on November 27, 35 articles were passed according to party caucus negotiations, 22 articles according to the KMT version, 5 articles according to the Executive Yuan and DPP caucus version, and 1 article simultaneously according to all three versions. ¹⁰

The same compilation also points out that Tsai Tong-rong’s version and the Taiwan Solidarity Union version originally designed the handling of "voter turnout not exceeding half" as rendering the referendum invalid. Other versions treated not exceeding half as a veto. These two designs were altered during party caucus negotiations on November 26–27. ¹⁰

Thus, the later popular "birdcage referendum" cannot be simplified as Tsai Tong-rong closing the door himself. The LYOA’s vote compilation presents a result shaped by multi-party negotiations and seat politics. Tsai Tong-rong pushed the referendum into law, but did not control every railing of the enacted law. ¹⁰

If the prevailing narrative only throws responsibility at "Tsai Referendum," it reverses half the causality. A statement closer to historical materials is: Tsai Tong-rong pushed the issue of direct people’s decision into the Legislative Yuan, but the final threshold was a choice made jointly by party versions, caucus negotiations, and voting majorities.

📝 Curator’s Note: The most memorable aspect of the "birdcage" is not who it is used to scold, but that it makes two stages of democracy simultaneously visible: first, someone builds the door; then, someone decides how narrow the door should be.

The Problem of Law Stays in Law

A study published in the English academic journal China Perspectives in 2006 indicates that the 2003 Referendum Act and the 2004 defensive referendum triggered multiple legal issues, including the constitutionality of certain articles, legal basis, legal effect of referendum results, and limitations on the President’s power to convene defensive referendums. The researcher ultimately concluded that the responsibility for correcting these issues should lie with Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan. ¹¹

This study does not write Tsai Tong-rong as the sole driver, nor does it attribute the limitations of the Referendum Act to personal failure. It provides another scale: once a political movement enters law, it must accept tests of constitution, separation of powers, and legal effect. Tsai Tong-rong’s movement gave the people the language of voting; legal research then questions whether this language is precise enough.

This is also the contradictory legacy Tsai Tong-rong left. He constantly demanded handing Taiwan’s future back to the people, yet had to negotiate between party caucuses, international pressure, and state organs. For someone accustomed to pushing problems forward through action, institutionalization itself is a compromise. But without institutions, action can only stop at the next march.

From "Overseas Compatriots" to Legislative Yuan Seats

The Legislative Yuan’s official biography lists Tsai Tong-rong as a 7th term "National Not-At-District and Overseas Compatriots" Legislative Member, recording his long-term participation in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. This electoral district position is not merely an administrative classification; it brings his early overseas networks into Taiwan’s formal representative system: a person once excluded from returning to Taiwan later represented voters, including overseas Taiwanese, in the Legislative Yuan. ²

Here lies an easily overlooked turning point. Tsai Tong-rong did not first drop his overseas identity to completely become an island political figure before discussing referendums. His Legislative Yuan status itself binds overseas advocacy and domestic bills together. For him, the Legislative Yuan was not the endpoint of overseas movements, but another place where he had to relearn negotiation.

This also explains why he repeatedly bounced between "Taiwan’s future," "self-determination," and the "Referendum Act." Overseas organizations needed to speak Taiwan to foreign legislators; the Legislative Yuan required him to break down the same propositions into articles, jurisdictions, and procedures. Once political ideals enter institutions, they must accept the speed of wording. Once wording becomes law, it is interpreted differently by different camps.

Three Types of Evidence, Three Tsai Tong-rongs

Writing about Tsai Tong-rong cannot rely on only one type of data. The Legislative Yuan’s official biography provides position and education. FAPA and the New Taiwan Peace Foundation preserve organizational memory and the figure’s timeline. Tsai Tong-rong’s own "Formosa TV and I" provides first-person political reasons. English academic research further places the Referendum Act within the framework of constitution and legal effect. These data complement each other and remind readers not to treat one narrative as the whole truth. ^{2 3 4 9 11}

Official biographies are best suited to answer "where he served," but may not answer "why he did so." Figure historical materials can explain the sequence of actions, but may carry a commemorative tone. First-person articles allow Tsai Tong-rong to speak for himself, but they represent his political judgment, not the common conclusion of all bystanders regarding events. Academic research can deconstruct institutional problems, but will not supplement the figure with unverified inner drama.

Putting these four layers of data together, Tsai Tong-rong is no longer just a collection of titles like "Father of Referendum" or "Founder of Formosa TV." He is a person who needs to be read across multiple archives: biographies show how he entered the system, organizational history shows how he built networks, self-accounts show how he understood his actions, and legal research shows how the system in turn constrains action.

Why Legislative Victory Still Feels Like Failure

The contradiction of the 2003 Referendum Act lies not only in whether the threshold is high, but in "whose version" was left. Of the 63 second-reading articles compiled by LYOA, 35 came from party caucus negotiations, 22 from the KMT version, only 5 passed according to the Executive Yuan and DPP caucus version, and 1 simultaneously according to all three versions. This distribution indicates that the enacted law was not the complete landing of Tsai Tong-rong’s draft, but a text produced jointly by majority politics and negotiation procedures. ¹⁰

Therefore, Tsai Tong-rong’s victory has two directions. The first direction is symbolic: the referendum transforms from a proposition of a political movement into an institutional name in national law. The second direction is procedural: once the law is established, whether people can use it is constrained by proposal, petition, review, and voting result rules. The former gives movement participants a historical position; the latter forces them to face the compromises movement participants dislike most.

The questions raised by English legal research exactly catch this contradiction: Is the constitutional basis of the Referendum Act sufficient? Is the legal effect of referendum results clear? How is the President’s power to launch defensive referendums limited? These questions show that referendums do not automatically become legitimate just because they are called "the people’s direct decision." They still require clear legal boundaries and testable procedures. ¹¹

What Tsai Tong-rong left behind is not a perfect law, but an un-withdrawable institutional proposition: Do the people have the right to directly answer the state’s most important questions? The threshold of the Referendum Act can be corrected, the design of the system can be debated, but once this proposition enters public life, it is hard to pretend it never existed.

What He Left Behind Is a Door, or a Reminder

After Tsai Tong-rong passed away in 2014, he was often called "Tsai Referendum," and remembered as the founding president of FAPA, founder of Formosa TV, or Legislative Member. These titles each capture one aspect of his life, but none are sufficient to explain why he repeatedly performed the same action across different fields: pushing the power of decision from the hands of a few into the hands of many. ^{2 3 4 5}

His route had obvious costs. Putting political ideals into media easily causes media autonomy and political mobilization to pull against each other. Putting sovereignty issues into referendums easily encounters international relations, constitutional boundaries, and security risks. Putting referendums into law requires accepting that thresholds may be so high as to disappoint the people. These are not merely附带 controversies at the end of a biography, but the weight brought by the political tools he chose.

If one only remembers Tsai Tong-rong "promoting referendums," the story ends in 2003. If one only remembers the "birdcage referendum," the story writes him as a failure from the beginning. A more accurate reading is: He pushed a door originally existing only in movement slogans up to the face of the law. After the door was installed, he and later people had to continue dealing with the doorframe, locks, keys, and who could stand on the other side of the door.

This is likely the place where Tsai Tong-rong is hardest to simplify. His political legacy is not a completed answer, but a still-valid question: For people to decide their own future, what should the system protect for them, and what should it not block for them?

Further Reading

• Taiwan.md: Taiwan Overseas Compatriots: From Exiled Students to Silicon Valley Engineers, A Diaspora Map of Two Million People
• Central Election Commission: National Referendum Procedures
• China Perspectives: The Referendum Law 2003 in Taiwan
• Wikimedia Commons: Tsai Tong-rong Member.jpg
• Wikimedia Commons: Formosa TV logo.svg

Images and Licenses

This article uses two images with verified file pages and sources. The portrait of Tsai Tong-rong comes from the Legislative Yuan’s 7th term member page; the Wikimedia Commons file page states the author is the Legislative Yuan, adopting the Legislative Yuan Government Website Open Data License; attribution to "Legislative Yuan" should be made when using. The Formosa TV logo comes from Formosa TV’s official SVG; the Commons file page judges the text and geometric shapes as public domain works lacking sufficient originality, but simultaneously reminds that trademarks and other identification rights may still apply; therefore, this article only uses it as a historical identification image, not extending to commercial brand use.

References