A Study on the Factors Affecting Voter Turnout

-Focusing on the Case of the 5th Local Elections-

<Abstract>

I. Current Status and Challenges of Discussions on Enhancing Voter Turnout in Korean Elections

1. Current Status of Discussions on Measures to Increase Voter Turnout in Korea

A decline in voter turnout is a phenomenon occurring not only in Korea but in most countries worldwide. While nearly all countries are making various efforts to prevent declining turnout and increase voter participation, Korea views the issue of declining turnout more seriously than other nations due to the rapid pace and magnitude of the decline. Although there was a partial rebound in turnout in the 17th General Election in 2004 and the 4th Local Elections in 2006 compared to the 16th General Election and the 3rd Local Elections, respectively, the subsequent 17th Presidential Election in 2007 saw a turnout of 63.0%, and the 18th General Election in 2008 recorded a turnout of 46.0%, the lowest figure in history, intensifying the debate over a turnout crisis.

As can be seen in <Table 1>, the sensitivity to declining voter turnout has further increased in recent years, with by-election turnout hovering in the 20-30% range. In the superintendent elections held from 2008 to 2009, turnout figures such as 12.3% in Gyeonggi, 15.3% in Daejeon, 15.5% in Seoul, 17.2% in Chungnam, and 21.0% in Jeonbuk, appear to have doubled the severity of the turnout issue.

<Table 1> Status of Voter Turnout in Past By-Elections (%)

Source: Lee Seong-ryong (2008), National Election Commission <2008-2009 Superintendent Election Information System>

The existing discussions on the causes of this decline in voter turnout are summarized in <Table 2>, and can be broadly categorized into macro-level factors (regime/culture), micro-level factors (individual level), and institutional dimensions.

<Table 2> Analytical Framework and Theoretical Basis for the Decline in Korean Voter Turnout

* Issues subject to theoretical debate in academia regarding their effects

2. Re-establishing Discussions on Enhancing Voter Turnout

However, past discussions contain several significant problems. Above all, there is a tendency to overemphasize the importance of 'voter turnout,' a key indicator of political participation. While it is clear that representatives elected in elections with excessively low turnout may face issues of representation and legitimacy, various counterarguments exist. First, it is argued that the current decline in turnout is a phenomenon resulting from the establishment of an autonomous political culture and the disappearance of mobilization voting from the authoritarian era, and that an increase in simple turnout does not necessarily lead to a greater conveyance of the public will. Second, while agreeing that declining turnout can cause legitimacy issues, it is also argued that 'qualitative representation issues such as inequality in voter turnout or alienation due to the absence of alternatives' cannot be reduced to quantitative turnout problems. Third, there is an active interpretation that 'legally speaking, varying levels of electoral participation when there are no suitable alternatives is a sign of citizens' healthy democratic consciousness, and citizens' responsibility is realized in a passive form of accepting the election results regardless of their participation.' Fourth, from a typical elitist perspective, it is argued that high participation may not be desirable as the masses are slaves to popular enthusiasm or easily led by elite manipulation, and conversely, the politically satisfied masses are passive in their participation. There is also an interpretation that high participation is actually an expression of political dissatisfaction.

Ultimately, voter turnout cannot be an absolute indicator for measuring the level of electoral participation and the maturity of democracy. In some cases, excessive emphasis on the quantitative indicator of collective-level voter turnout leads to the misconception that increasing turnout is the foremost fundamental right. Voter turnout is merely one dimension of electoral participation and is a secondary indicator. The most crucial value in electoral participation is that all voters must be able to freely exercise their suffrage. From the perspective of enhancing electoral participation, not just increasing turnout, it is paramount to equally and substantively guarantee the right to participate for all voters who possess legitimate authority to ensure representation. Therefore, while placing excessive emphasis on increasing turnout itself, careful consideration must be given to whether the recently discussed mandatory voting system or preferential voting system might conflict with the higher value of autonomous and free electoral participation.

Furthermore, whereas existing election management has primarily focused on 'clean elections,' meaning fair elections, and on suppressing factors of 'election overheating,' there is now a need to transition towards fostering fair yet active competition. The Public Official Election Act, first enacted in 1994 after democratization, in Article 1 (Purpose) of Chapter 1 (General Provisions), states: "This Act aims to contribute to the development of democratic politics by ensuring that elections under the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and the Local Autonomy Act are conducted fairly through the free will of the people and democratic procedures, and by preventing election-related irregularities." This confirms that the basic intention lies in fair elections and the prevention of irregularities. Due to such election management aimed at preventing irregularities and maintaining election fairness, the number of violations and the rate of measures taken have decreased in the 5th Local Elections in 2010 compared to the previous election. The overall number of election crackdowns is declining, and particularly, serious election crimes such as interference by public officials in elections and the provision of money or entertainment are on a downward trend.

3. Evaluation and Tasks for Enhancing Electoral Participation

Examining the amendments to the Public Official Election Act made around the May 31, 2006 local elections, the overall content appears to align with the direction of this study, which advocates for expanding the representativeness of political participation and strengthening electoral competitiveness. A breakdown by sector is as follows:

■ Expanding Representation: 1-person-8-vote system: Expansion of directly elected public offices / Adjustment of voting age to 19 and guarantee of voting rights for foreign residents in local elections / Easing of absentee voting requirements / Guarantee of overseas voting rights

■ Strengthening Electoral Competitiveness: Expansion of election campaign period / Expansion of preliminary candidates' campaign activities / Expansion of group campaigning / Cyber campaigning via platforms such as Twitter

Overall, it is evident that recent amendments to election laws and management directions are shifting from merely increasing voter turnout to strengthening the representativeness of voter political participation and electoral competitiveness. However, there are still many provisions that prohibit preliminary candidates from campaigning under the pretext of preventing pre-election activities, and candidates or political parties face difficulties in freely contacting voters through face-to-face, print, or online channels. It can be assessed that the framework of clean elections has not been completely abandoned... (continued)