Limitations of Voter Appeal... Ruling Party Retreats on 'Economic Basic Rights' Pledge

Gyeonggi Governor Lee Jae-myung's 'Basic Income'
Former Leader Lee Nak-yeon's New Welfare Policy
Former Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun's Seed Bank Account
Failing to Capture Voter Support and Develop Policies Deeply
Populism Attacks...Challenges in Securing Funding and More

[Asia Economy Reporter Koo Chae-eun] As Lee Jae-myung, Governor of Gyeonggi Province, who put forward the 'basic income theory' as his representative pledge, leads the ruling party's presidential candidate approval ratings, other competitors have also proposed welfare policies with similar concepts, jumping into the so-called 'basic income competition.' There was even speculation that the biggest issue and agenda of this presidential election would converge on basic income. However, once the Democratic Party's presidential primary began, related discussions seemed to have subsided.

This appears to stem from the fact that Lee himself no longer claims basic income as his 'trademark.' It is interpreted as a judgment that the policy concept of basic income itself has weak 'vote appeal' and a consciousness of the backlash against populism. This is why it can be seen as a strategic retreat rather than the ruling party candidates 'abandoning' the related policies.

The ruling party's economic basic rights-related pledges included not only Lee's 'basic income' pledge but also former Democratic Party leader Lee Nak-yeon's new welfare policy and former Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun's basic asset and seed bank policies. These policies, which were competitively raised before the primary, do not seem to be heard much during the primary phase. At a debate held on the 7th, when criticism of basic income arose, Lee said, "That is 100% correct. I cannot say it like that." At a press conference on the 2nd, he also clearly repositioned basic income to the end of his pledges, saying, "I cannot say basic income is my number one pledge." Because of this, discussions and debates about the feasibility and effectiveness of basic income weakened during the primary phase.

Lee also pledged 'annual basic income payment of 1 million won' when he ran for the 19th presidential election in 2017, and last year, he paid 'disaster basic income' to Gyeonggi residents, which could be used at local currency affiliated stores, establishing basic income as a 'Lee Jae-myung policy.' The core of the basic income policy is to provide all citizens with a certain income regularly and unconditionally (50,000 won every six months in the short term, 500,000 won quarterly in the medium term) to pursue 'economic basic rights.' However, as the primary began, Lee's side shifted to viewing basic income as a 'future agenda' or a means for 'fair growth,' expressing an intention to 'promote it step by step.'

Former leader Lee Nak-yeon, who is closely trailing Lee in the ruling party primary, is also seeking differentiation by setting separate agendas such as constitutional amendments for the three laws on the concept of land and the middle-class economy, rather than concretizing the new welfare concept as a 'countermeasure' to basic income. Former Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun, who has not overcome his polling disadvantage even after unifying with Assemblyman Lee Kwang-jae, seems to be focusing on creating an 'anti-Lee Jae-myung front' instead of the basic asset policy he initially proposed.

Inside and outside the political circle, this 'strategic retreat' is seen as a choice to court the centrist vote. It is said that presidential candidates are reflecting on the experience that policies such as universal disaster relief payments did not have much effect in the April 7 by-elections. Political commentator Lee Jong-hoon analyzed, "There was a fierce debate within the pro-Moon (pro-Moon Jae-in) camp opposing basic income, so Lee might have been conscious not to confront the pro-Moon faction during the primary." He also diagnosed, "Since debates over universal welfare only cause fatigue and have limits in courting votes, each presidential candidate seems to be refraining from related competition." Professor Park Sang-byeong of Inha University said, "'Basic income,' by its nature as an agenda, is more appropriate to be seen as a principle or direction rather than a policy that can be immediately implemented like 'North-South unification.' Especially regarding economic basic rights-related pledges, candidates should not approach them strategically but explain how to concretize them over cycles of 5 or 10 years and undergo policy verification."

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