[Changing Elections](16) Three Young Politicians from Ruling and Opposition Parties "Political Sphere Should Prioritize Community Over Established Interests"

'Political Reform 2050' Yeouido Bipartisan Meeting
Youth Politicians 3-Person Roundtable
"Stop Veto Politics... A Constituency Where the President Works"

The plenary committee discussing the reform of the National Assembly election system concluded four days of intense debate starting from the 11th of this month. The plenary committee, convened for the first time in 20 years, saw a flood of proposals to redraw the constituencies for 100 members of the National Assembly, but failed to produce a unified plan. The redistricting for the 22nd general election next year has already passed the deadline (April 11), but discussions remain sluggish.

Asia Economy has been exploring the problems of the current electoral district system and seeking reasonable improvement measures through 15 interviews with political and academic circles since early this year, triggered by President Yoon Seok-yeol's remarks on introducing a major multi-member district system. The final installment captures the voices of young politicians dreaming of 'politics that can engage in dialogue together' regarding electoral system reform.

Cho Sung-joo, Chairman of the Political Development Institute, Lee Dong-hak, former Supreme Council Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, and Kim Yong-tae, former Supreme Council Member of the People Power Party, are having a discussion on election system reform in the newspaper's conference room on the 26th. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

Kim Yong-tae, former Supreme Council member of the People Power Party, Lee Dong-hak, former Supreme Council member of the Democratic Party, and Cho Sung-joo, former Policy Committee Vice-Chairman of the Justice Party, are key members of 'Political Reform 2050,' a group of young politicians from both ruling and opposition parties who have been discussing major social and political issues monthly since September last year. At a roundtable held on the 26th of last month in the Asia Economy conference room, these three young politicians unanimously agreed on the need for an electoral system that reflects diverse public voices and can end the current 'veto politics.'

The day of the roundtable coincided with the return of former Democratic Party leader Song Young-gil, who was involved in the party's cash envelope scandal, and the decision for independent lawmaker Min Hyung-bae, who had been embroiled in controversy over a 'fake party withdrawal' during last year's 'complete removal of prosecution investigation rights' (Geomsu Wanbak) phase, to rejoin the Democratic Party, so political issues were discussed first.

How do you view the Democratic Party cash envelope scandal?

Election System Reform Debate Kim Yong-tae. Photo by Dongju Yoon doso7@

▲Kim Yong-tae = It is true that it does not align with public sentiment. Regardless, it was an act of buying votes. The invisible hand that operated through vote-buying to ensure a particular person was elected undermines the essence of democracy, so the public finds it reprehensible.

▲Cho Sung-joo = If the cash envelope allegations are clearly true, it is an undeniable wrongdoing. Such practices must disappear. However, as mentioned earlier, the political funding system related to parties and political activities needs to be reviewed. Only then can these wrongful practices be eradicated. It is a problem that can only be solved by changing the structure that allows illegal practices to continue.

▲Lee Dong-hak = Politicians are building prison walls they themselves created and walking on top of them. As a result, they are effectively handing over the leash to judicial institutions and shrinking the political sphere themselves. Both ruling and opposition parties remain trapped in this (illegal election funding) cycle, so it needs to be legalized. At this time, they need to be disciplined, apologize if there are mistakes, and prepare measures to prevent recurrence. After this phase passes, calm discussions should follow.

You mentioned measures to prevent recurrence. Are there institutional improvements needed for the cash envelope scandal and other intra-party or nationwide elections?

▲Cho Sung-joo = To pinpoint the structural problem of the cash envelope scandal, Korea's Political Funds Act prohibits spending money by law. However, politics inherently involves meeting people, so money inevitably flows. If this is blocked, money will be spent illegally. I believe the Political Funds Act, which does not fit reality, paradoxically causes corruption. Most advanced democracies expand political funding but enforce transparent execution.

▲Kim Yong-tae = I agree with the aspect of transparently opening political funds. At the last People Power Party leadership election, other candidates mobilized 20 buses each, but I had no money, so the Cheon Ah-yongin group (Lee Jun-seok faction members Cheon Ha-ram, Heo Eun-ah, Kim Yong-tae, Lee Gi-in) used one bus and voluntary gatherings. I think political culture needs to change going forward. Under current law, party member councils of the People Power Party and Democratic Party regional offices and election offices of non-incumbent chairpersons are not allowed to operate. However, the central party audits offices under the name of party affairs audits if they are not opened. Because of this, non-incumbent chairpersons use loopholes by creating incorporated associations as offices. Although practically illegal, our politics permits such loopholes.

▲Lee Dong-hak = Voluntary election campaigning is necessary, but our politics has only demanded volunteer work, effectively increasing 'bodywork' (doing things physically). Mainly young people are mobilized, often used with false hope and then discarded. It is necessary to expand the structure where young people entering politics are properly treated and work. In election years, fundraising can be doubled, but there are restrictions on using funds for labor costs, so young people spend time and effort working without proper treatment, perpetuating a vicious cycle.

Election System Reform Debate Lee Dong-hak. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

What is your assessment of the election system reform discussions so far?

▲Cho Sung-joo = There are many regrets. I view President Yoon Seok-yeol's mention of the need for election system reform early this year positively. From a governing standpoint, attempting more reforms and addressing social issues is a good effort. However, parties seem to be stuck in their own interests and refuse to transcend factional politics. Fortunately, a public deliberation committee was established, so it seems the process will move to parties promoting the proposals derived from the committee.

▲Lee Dong-hak = The election system discussion process clearly showed the National Assembly's loss of consensus ability. On March 23, Speaker Kim Jin-pyo chaired a meeting where Democratic Party floor leader Park Hong-geun and People Power Party floor leader Joo Ho-young agreed to submit a single election system reform proposal. However, the plenary committee was held afterward, and I hoped consensus would be reached. The result was that 100 members each spoke only their own views. The National Assembly should be a place for coordination, not just individual statements and stopping, but it failed. The hopeful aspect is that the reform proposal moved to the National Public Deliberation Committee. The public will produce a proposal, and there will be an opportunity to pressure the Assembly at that time. If the Assembly again rejects the public proposal and plays with interests and disadvantages, the muddy politics will be judged.

▲Kim Yong-tae = Politics inherently pursues power, so this plenary committee showed such (disappointing) behavior. We should strive and dialogue to determine whether our community fits the current political system, but this plenary seemed like a place just for 'one more election.' If 300 politicians ask themselves why they do politics, they would find answers about what kind of politics to pursue. But since they luckily get nominated and become lawmakers, they pursue systems to maintain vested interests rather than thinking about the community. I regret that the plenary ended as a show.

Why should the current election system be changed?

Election System Reform Debate, Seongju Cho. Photo by Dongju Yoon doso7@

▲Cho Sung-joo = The core is pluralism. I prefer a large multi-member district system that elects 5 to 7 members per district. The reason is the pluralism of interests and demands. The single-member district system emerged in 18th-19th century Britain when regions were homogeneous. But now regions are much larger and demands more diverse. To reflect these diverse demands, electoral districts need to be larger. Various figures and parties reflecting their interests must appear to represent conflicts. No party has a 100% solution. Since problems are solved by combining strengths and weaknesses, districts should be enlarged to multi-member districts. Of course, a mix with single-member districts is also possible.

▲Lee Dong-hak = To add, because regions (districts) are divided very small, lawmakers do the same work as district or city councilors. They claim credit for even installing a traffic light. Lawmakers represent their districts and compete to bring budgets exceeding 600 trillion won to their areas. The future will shift from regional competition to issue-centered politics. Various issues cannot be solved regionally. It is hard to meet citizens asking for national pension reform or climate crisis solutions in districts. Lawmakers should not be consumed for local complaints like building bridges or planting trees in parks, hiking groups, or funerals. Lawmakers need to expand their perspective to see not only their district but the entire country and sometimes even the opposite side of the globe.

▲Kim Yong-tae = To add, electoral districts should be changed to create a structure where the president can work. The current two-party system, especially the ambiguous situation of a ruling minority, prevents the president from doing anything. Recently, the Grain Management Act was passed by opposition power but was nullified by the president's veto request. Many laws, including the Nursing Act, are expected to face sharp conflicts. From the president's perspective, a multi-party system allows negotiation, so it would be good to have electoral districts suitable for a presidential system. Election system reform should not be discussed alone. Candidate nomination and constitutional amendments should be discussed together. No matter how the election system is reformed, if the current nomination system reproduces power, parties will nominate according to power holders' preferences, and diversity will not be respected.

Cho Sung-joo, Chairman of the Political Development Institute, Lee Dong-hak, former Supreme Council Member of the Democratic Party of Korea, and Kim Yong-tae, former Supreme Council Member of the People Power Party, are having a discussion about election system reform on the 26th in the newspaper's conference room. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

What election district system do you prefer?

▲Lee Dong-hak = I think we should increase single-member districts or nationwide proportional representation. Lawmakers should not only look at their own districts. Even with single-member districts, their gaze should be on the opposite side of the globe. The global political system is subtly in a new cold war, dividing into US and China camps but secretly trading behind the scenes. Politicians should understand these hidden issues, but currently, they only look at their districts. Also, they focus only on the next four years and whether they will be nominated again. Politicians should look to the future. Administration is busy stopping immediate problems, and judiciary looks at the past. The super-aged society is rapidly advancing, and healthcare is collapsing from local areas. The National Assembly should discuss these countermeasures overnight, but now it is mudslinging, causing the public to doubt whether politics can protect their lives. If the single-member district system is maintained, the (district) 150 and (proportional) 150 split should be drastically changed.

▲Kim Yong-tae = I believe the large multi-member district system is right. But since it is unlikely to be realized in the plenary committee, realistically, if national primary participation or party member participation nomination systems are established, the single-member district system seems appropriate. However, reducing the number of lawmakers is a distraction. I hope the plenary committee only discusses the election system.

What are your opinions on expanding the number of National Assembly members?

▲Cho Sung-joo = Ideally, expanding proportional representation is good, but since it requires increasing the number of lawmakers, practical difficulties are expected. The ideal plan is to increase the number of lawmakers by 30 to 40 seats to secure proportional seats and add compensatory seats among parties in large multi-member districts. But if not feasible, reducing proportional seats and adopting a large multi-member district system could be a compromise. As Kim Yong-tae pointed out, a recurring problem in Korean politics is that the Blue House and government must work through legislation. Currently, the president cannot work through the National Assembly, so administrative bureaucratic power operates, fostering anti-politics. To enable the president to work, the legislature must be changed. The current structure only allows veto politics.

▲Lee Dong-hak = Who would agree to increase the number of lawmakers when politics causes disillusionment? But the National Assembly deliberates on a super budget exceeding 600 trillion won, and the current number of lawmakers limits oversight. Currently, proportional lawmakers are only 15% in the single-member district system. Increasing proportional seats by 30 (10%) while freezing the total National Assembly budget could be a model to increase public benefit.

▲Cho Sung-joo = Expanding the number of lawmakers is difficult to promote within the National Assembly but could be possible if proposed by the president.

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