Do you remember Roh Moo-hyun; the guy who used to publicly wonder if he was the right man for the job; the guy who seemed to offer to resign whenever he had a setback?
Well, it seems that his party’s recent defeat does not faze him (JoongnAng):
At a meeting with government public relations officials on Friday, Mr. Roh first mentioned the opposition his administration faced in building a publicity system and said, “Maybe that’s why we lost in the elections. But that is of little importance to me.” He went on, “Democracy does not mean a system where one or two elections decide whether a country and a political party go well or badly. It is a level of system, consciousness, culture and political structure that decides the future of the nation.”
Aside from the pesky fact that was exactly two elections that put Roh and Uri in power, this is a welcome change from Roh. For better or worse, the people of Korea elected Roh and he has a sacred duty to fufill his term and try administrate the government to the best of his ability.
However, Uri party officials are not pleased with his seemingly nonchalant attitude towards the party’s recent drubbing (same link):
Several critics questioned whether the party should continue its association with the president. Chung Bong-ju, an assemblyman, said, “The president did not understand public sentiment at all. Uri in this condition is sure to lose next year’s presidential election.” He added, “We have to reconsider whether we should continue to go on with the president.”
Lee Kye-ahn, another legislator who was a contender for the party’s nomination to be Seoul’s next mayor, echoed that sentiment. “Maybe Mr. Roh said that because he is the president,” Mr. Lee said, “But the governing party may well vanish after it fails in elections.”
I have long been saying that Uri would break up in 2006 and the anger built up in the party right now certainly makes that break-up more likely.
On a related note, I think the latest results reveal a structural problem with Korea’s political system. There is no way for voters to effectively register their views of an administration’s performance mid-term, so they punish the president’s party with votes on basically unrelated local offices. The Grand National Party recognized this and framed the local elections as a mid-term judgment on Roh and the Uri party.
National elections need to be restructured. There has already been talk of changing a president’s term of office from a singe 5-year term to a 4-year term with the possibility of reelection to a second term. That will help some.
I would also like to see changes in how Kuk Hoe elections are done. Right now, all seats are up at the same time once every five years. This sometimes leads to wild fluctuations in the composition of the assembly that are stuck in place until the next wild fluctuation four years later. 243 are elected in districts and 56 are South proportional representation members.
If the Korean government were to ask me how they should do things (and I notice that they are not), I believe that 240 seats should be divided into 120 districts, with assemblymen serving 4-year terms. The terms should be staggard so that one of the two members in each district would be up for election every two years. 59 PR seats would filled every two years.
In short, voters would have a chance to adjust government policy by voting for one district-based assemblyman and one party every two years. The 100 seats not up for grabs that year would provide stability.
I believe that kind of system would free voters to use local elections to decided local issues.
13 Comments
How does blaming his party’s failure in “building a publicity system,” whatever that means, equate with “finding a spine”? He’s still the same clueless, shameless, incompetent nimrod he always was. I would imagine at this point that he does not offer to resign because no one believes he actually will anymore. I also expect more impotent squeaking about Korea’s “balancer role” and “narrowing the wealth gap” as Roh’s ship slowly sinks out of sight.
I guess that in saying that Roh has demonstrated that he has a spine, you mean his rather truculent insistence on staying the course with policies that even his own party nows says are impolitic (if not incorrect). e.g, the very misguided real estate policies.
The likely resulting paralyis in implementation of existing govt policy without any realistic chance of a transition to an alternative is a pretty good practical illustration of the need for structural changes in the Korean political system of the sort that you outline - in particular more frequent elections to the Kuk Hoe. If these local elections had been accompanied by national midterms, tho one just concluded would have been more more meaningful, not least for really putting the ball in the mitt of the GNP so that they would actually have to do something before the next presidential election.
I don;t get the idea of electing two representatives from the same district in staggered fashion, though - although I concur that the silly apportionment of seats to porportinally appointed reps should be abolished. Instead, I think Korea needs to think about a a bicameral body with one chamber elected fro longer terms from larger jurisdictions in order to provide the sort of bulwark against short term thinking and an outlet for regionalism such as the US Senate was originally designed to provide.
If South Korea had such things as Senators and electoral college votes, the government would be more attentive to the farmers, and perhaps pay them more money to start a new life. At least as much as they pay North Korean defectors to start a new life.
See, in the US, Senators from small states have great power, because every state gets 2, no matter the size, and electoral college votes add up in a close Presidential race, thus the President nor the Senators can say,
“You guys farm too much, and produce too much wheat and corn. The subsidies are paying you guys to stock silos full of grain, on top of grain that has been sitting there for 5 years or more. We’re gonna have to cut some of your subsidies, so you guys farm less…”
This never happens in America. Recently, anyway.
Roh wants to rob the rich and give it to the poor. Robin Hood. Robbing the rich to bring up the poor. It’s an illusion. Yeah, they do it Europe, Austrailia, and Canada, but with a higher tax on everything. Mostly to the middle class. More like, rob the middle class, bring up the poor. There’s a reason why European unemployment rate, and in Austrailia and Canada, is always 10% plus.
I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I heard a Canadian doctor doing internal medicine in Canada gets paid a US equivialent of $50k. A US doctor doing the same job in the US is paid $100k.
Socialism is great !
The setup you and Sperwer mentioned would go a long way toward bringing some stability to Korean politics. Also, I would do away with the prime minister position, because it allows the president to offload some responsibilities I think he alone should handle.
“Robbing the rich to bring up the poor. It’s an illusion. Yeah, they do it Europe, Austrailia, and Canada, but with a higher tax on everything. Mostly to the middle class. More like, rob the middle class, bring up the poor. There’s a reason why European unemployment rate, and in Austrailia and Canada, is always 10% plus.
Socialism is great!”
WJK, with all due respect, you’re talking rot. Granted, SOME European countries have dreadful structural problems that are perpetuating high unemployment rates - France, Germany and Italy, to name three. But what of the Netherlands, Ireland, the UK and Norway? All of these (and there are more), according to the OECD, have had lower rates of unemployment than the US for at least the last three years. And when did that well-known hotbed of socialism Australia last have unemployment over 10 percent?
And tax? Yes, the US has a low overall tax take by OECD standards, but it’s not that simple. The personal income tax rate is higher than many, as is the top rate of income tax. Rob from the rich, bring up the poor, I guess you could call it.
Just because a country chooses not to leave around one-sixth of its population without health insurance does not make it socialist.
Whoops, that should be, “according to the OECD.”
Austrailia, seems to have had one last during the early 90’s, basically when everyone else was having one, too.
http://www.econstats.com/IMF/IFS_Aus1_67R___M.csv
Sorry, danger mouse, I admit it’s a stretch. I am indeed talking rot. Sometimes, I prefer to think
Fair enough, wjk. I should probably do a bit more of that myself.
i’ll believe it when he wipes that idiotic grin off his face.
I am afraid that Rho is right. This election defeat will not doom the party. Actually, it will work for the Uri.
Hannara is in party mood with wrong sense of superiority. This election result does not necessarily support Hannara. Rho is slammed, for sure, but that does not mean people love Hannara, either.
Park Gun Hye will be likely to the presidential candidate. The kiss of death. Park, the daughter of the dictator. No special talent other than pure name recognition. No clear goals for Korea, either. She is Lee HoyChang, all over again.
People hate this type “elite” candidate who wants to be a president because he or she wants to be a president. No directions or goals for Korea. Just status quo, working for the establishment.
A strong candidate is one who promises a big thing. Rho did that in 2002 by promising closer ties with NK and possible unification, which turned out to be a losing proposition. However, it is better than Lee’s “I will maintain law and order”.
Hannara should be careful. Their constant pandering to the rich and big corporations along with their greed (receiving heavy bribes) will doom the party when the next big scandal is made public.
The Uri must go. However, Hannara is not supported by the people, either. Hannara party, set up by former dictators, is filled with dirty politicians and they must be impeached.
Koreans need new political party. GoGun is working on it. I hope he suceed.
Not that it really matters too much but Canada ’s unemployment rate is just over 6 % now and Australia’s is just over 5%….Google it, so I think it is just a tad bit unfair to make comparisons to the French and Germans. Furthermore Canada’s finances…pick a stat…are not the impending disaster that the US’s are.
I noticed that true to pattern, on this incident too, someone from the Blue House had to “clarify” what Roh meant after he spoke off the cuff.
“In short, voters would have a chance to adjust government policy by voting for one district-based assemblyman and one party every two years. The 100 seats not up for grabs that year would provide stability.”
You mean, like permanent elections? And, endless campaigning, money politics, and corrupt lobbying? People only ask for more resolute government when they want something, but when the government screws up, they wish it were neutered. Divided government is the best hope for moderate, incremental change. Today’s sure answer could be tomorrow’s “what if” dilemma. South Korea already has its checks and balances between national and regional governments. The problem is not the political system, but the social structure that doesn’t go with it, internecine warfare between incompetent aristocrats and between ruler and ruled. Just wait, perhaps another dictator will arise to give ROK government a little speed. NOT!!!
One Trackback
[...] On the political front, Joshua at The Korea Liberator has, not one, not two, but three pieces on the fall out of last week’s local elections. I don’t agree with everything he has to say (he thinks that it is 50/50 that Roh will resign while I think Roh has found some backbone) but it is all good reading. [...]