[Deputy Editor's Column] Dead Vote (Sapyio)

[Asia Economy Reporter Ryu Jeong-min] The name 'Democratic Korea Party (Minhan Party)' is a source of embarrassment in Korean political history. This is because of its embarrassing nickname as a 'satellite party.' In the 11th general election in 1981, Minhan Party secured 57 constituency seats, gaining the status of the second-largest party in the National Assembly.

Although it secured enough seats to check the ruling Democratic Justice Party (Minjung Party), public expectations were not high. This was because it was known as a 'nominal opposition party' created out of necessity by the new military regime. A common trait among famous politicians rooted in Minhan Party is their discomfort when their past is revealed. Would anyone be proud of having belonged to a 'satellite party'?

The reason certain forces fall into the temptation of satellite parties is that exploiting loopholes in the electoral system can yield political gains. The satellite party controversy is reemerging ahead of the 21st general election in 2020. When the United Future Party pulled out the Future Korea Party card, the Democratic Party of Korea turned its attention to a 'proportional representation coalition party.' The Democratic Party plans not to field its own proportional candidates and instead urges voters to concentrate their votes on the proportional coalition party.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

They may want to package this as a desperate measure against the satellite party trick, but is there really such a thing as a 'good trick' or a 'bad trick'? The satellite party has become a key variable in the 21st general election because the first step was taken incorrectly. The focus was solely on the positive functions of the 'mixed-member proportional representation system,' overlooking its dysfunctions. While it was meaningful to address the problem of wasted votes for small parties, a new wasted vote problem has emerged.

In the 20th general election's proportional representation vote, more than 14 million voters cast ballots for the Democratic Party and the Saenuri Party (now United Future Party). According to the changed electoral system, these 14 million votes can effectively be treated as wasted votes. This is because, considering the expected constituency seats for the Democratic Party and the United Future Party, they are likely to be excluded from the allocation of the 30 proportional seats.

Ultimately, the major parties have no choice but to focus on indirect strategies to secure seats, and reality is unfolding accordingly. The assumption that everyone will play fair is not a premise suitable for real politics. If the number of proportional representatives had been significantly increased to expand the playing field for small parties, it might have led to results consistent with the purpose of 'electoral reform.'

However, both ruling and opposition parties chose to protect their vested interests by maintaining '253 constituencies.' In the end, the political world showed no retreat in the face of desire, and voters became scapegoats. Isn't this a nasty situation where voters are forced to choose in front of a 'festival of tricks' that crosses the line between illegality and loopholes?

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.