[EAI Public Opinion Brief No. 88] What Was the Impact of the August 8 Cabinet Reshuffle Confirmation Hearings on the Current Political Situation?

Joint Project by EAI and Korea Research

Briefing Topics

1. What was the impact of the August 8 cabinet reshuffle confirmation hearings on the current political situation?

2. Qualifications for High-Ranking Public Officials: Is Social Consensus Possible?

3. Crisis for the Ruling Party and Government, Opportunity for the Democratic Party?

4. Next Presidential Candidates: Park Geun-hye Leads, Kim Moon-soo and Sohn Hak-kyu Emerge

Notice: This report is based on survey results from August 28 and was distributed before the press conference by Prime Minister nominee Kim Tae-ho announcing his withdrawal (August 29, 10:00 AM).

1. What was the impact of the August 8 cabinet reshuffle on the current political situation?

1) Pouring Cold Water on President Lee Myung-bak's "August 15 Vision (Pro-People, Fair Society Theory)" with Favorable Public Opinion

Most importantly, the government and ruling party's August 15 vision, intended to win back public sentiment that had turned away after the June 2 local elections and to regain control of the political agenda in the latter half of their term, has been disrupted. In fact, given the unexpectedly significant defeat in the June 2 local elections, assessments that the government and ruling party's lame-duck phenomenon had already begun were being raised. However, from July onwards, the government and ruling party succeeded in re-igniting the pro-people, moderate pragmatism line by highlighting chronic societal issues that had not even garnered attention from progressive circles, such as the predatory lending practices of major credit card companies, unfair supplier-buyer relationships, and the social responsibilities of large corporations. Coupled with the complacency and misjudgment shown by the opposition parties after the June 2 local elections, the July 28 by-elections served as a breakthrough for the government and ruling party to turn the political tide. This trend was most intensely manifested in what is known as the Lee Myung-bak administration's vision for the latter half of its term, announced on August 15. It is true that by emphasizing the existing pro-people, moderate pragmatism in the August 15 National Liberation Day address and, as a core policy direction, highlighting the issue of 'fair society,' they began to exert political control by absorbing a significant portion of the centrist voters who had been turning away.

Effectiveness of the August 15 Pro-People/Fair Society Vision

Indeed, in this survey, when asked, "How do you evaluate President Lee Myung-bak's recently emphasized moderate pragmatism?", 50.8% responded positively (8.2% very positive, 42.5% somewhat positive), which exceeded the negative responses of 44.0% (12.9% very negative, 31.1% somewhat negative). Regarding the question, "How do you evaluate the fair society realization proposed as the policy direction for the latter half of your term in President Lee Myung-bak's August 15 National Liberation Day address?", positive responses were 55.2% (10.0% very positive, 45.2% somewhat positive), and negative responses were 37.8% (10.6% very negative, 27.2% somewhat negative), with positive responses significantly outweighing negative ones. This indicates that alongside distrust in its sincerity, there were considerable expectations for the August 15 policy vision.

[Figure 1] Favorable Public Opinion on the August 15 Political Vision: Pro-People Moderate Pragmatism and Fair Society Theory (%)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

The Pro-People/Fair Society Policy Led to a Rise in Support Rates

As shown in [Figure 2], the President's approval rating, which had significantly benefited from the Cheonanham effect and risen to 52.0% before the elections after the August 23 National Address regarding the Cheonanham incident, dropped by 9.0 percentage points to 43.0% in the June 26 survey due to the Grand National Party's heavy defeat in the June 2 local elections. However, as the government successively introduced a series of pro-people, moderate pragmatism issues, the approval rating was prevented from further decline, reaching 44.3% in the July survey conducted two days before the July 28 by-elections. Following the August 15 National Liberation Day address, which highlighted the 'fair society' agenda, the approval rating continued to rise, reaching 48.7% in the survey conducted by Seoul Shinmun and Korea Research.

[Figure 2] Changes in Presidential Approval Rating (%)

* The August 21 survey was conducted among 1,000 respondents by Seoul Shinmun and Korea Research; the rest were conducted among 800 respondents for the EAI-Korea Research regular public opinion barometer.

2) Confirmation Hearings Triggered a Sharp Political Reversal: MB's Approval Rating Declined Before and After,

Political Reversal Due to Widely Watched Confirmation Hearings: 84.8% Watched Hearings or Related News

Changes in MB's Approval Rating: August 21 (Early Hearings) 48.7% → August 28 (Immediately After Hearings) 43.7%

However, the situation took a sharp turn with the confirmation hearings for the nine nominees for Prime Minister and ministers, which began on August 20 and concluded on August 26. The confirmation hearings for Minister of Knowledge Economy nominee Lee Jae-hoon and Minister of Employment and Labor nominee Park Jae-wan on August 20 were somewhat anticlimactic. However, the confirmation hearings for National Police Agency Commissioner nominee Cho Hyun-oh, Minister for Special Affairs nominee Lee Jae-oh, Minister of Health and Welfare nominee Jin Soo-hee, and Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism nominee Shin Jae-min on August 23, and for Prime Minister nominee Kim Tae-ho on August 24-25, became the focus of national attention as various allegations of corruption emerged towards the end of the hearings. In this survey, 84.8% of respondents stated they had watched the confirmation hearings directly or encountered related news, while only 15.2% had not. During this period, President Lee Myung-bak's approval rating, which had approached 50% at 48.7% in the July survey, declined to 43.7% in this survey, posing a significant burden for the government and ruling party, which aimed to seize political initiative in the latter half of their term.

Nominee for Prime Minister Kim Tae-ho, in his 40s, "Inappropriate Appointment" 46.9% (21st) → Sharply Increased to 66.0% (28th)

President Lee Myung-bak's strategy for the latter half of his term was characterized by the emphasis on the pro-people/fair society policy direction and the August 8 cabinet reshuffle, which included the appointment of Kim Tae-ho, in his 40s, as Prime Minister and the selection of pro-MB figures. While the policy domain received positive public support, the August 8 cabinet reshuffle, represented by the Kim Tae-ho administration, ended in failure with the voluntary withdrawal of nominees Kim Tae-ho, Shin Jae-min, and Lee Jae-hoon. When asked, "What do you think about the appointment of former governor Kim Tae-ho, in his 40s, as Prime Minister?", in the survey conducted on the 21st before the confirmation hearings, 30.3% considered it an appropriate appointment, while 46.9% considered it inappropriate. Those who responded 'don't know' were 22.8%, indicating a fluid situation. However, in the survey conducted on the 28th, after the confirmation hearings for Prime Minister nominee Kim (August 24-25), the proportion of those who considered it an appropriate appointment decreased by 10.4 percentage points to 19.9%, while the proportion who considered it inappropriate sharply increased by 19.1 percentage points from the previous week to a significant 66.0%.

Effect of Confirmation Hearings: Those Who Encountered Hearings Had More Negative Evaluations

Among those who watched/heard about the confirmation hearings, 71.0% considered it inappropriate; among those who did not encounter the hearings, only 53.1% held negative views.

This survey shows that those who directly watched the confirmation hearings or encountered related news tended to have a stronger negative view of Prime Minister nominee Kim Tae-ho. Among the 113 respondents who did not watch the hearings or encounter related news, 18.6% considered the nomination appropriate and 53.1% considered it inappropriate, with a majority holding negative views, but 28.3% responded 'don't know/no answer.' However, among the 687 respondents who watched the hearings or encountered related news, the proportion who considered it appropriate was 20.2%, showing little difference, but the proportion who considered it inappropriate was a significant 71.0%, which is 17.9 percentage points higher than those who did not watch or hear about the hearings. The proportion of 'don't know/no answer' among those who watched or encountered related information was also relatively low at 8.7%. Ultimately, this demonstrates that the confirmation hearings significantly contributed to voters' judgments of public office candidates and, in the case of Prime Minister nominee Kim Tae-ho, strengthened negative perceptions and greatly contributed to increasing pressure for his resignation.

[Figure 3] Evaluation of Kim Tae-ho's Appointment as Prime Minister (%)

[Figure 4] Evaluation of Kim Tae-ho's Appointment as Prime Minister, by Age Group (%)

2. Qualifications of Prime Minister and Ministers as Viewed by the Public: Is Social Consensus Possible?

Since the enactment of the Act on the Confirmation Hearing of the Prime Minister and Members of the Cabinet, there have been significant controversies surrounding confirmation hearings during the appointment process for key positions such as Prime Minister and ministers. The problems revealed in this process are threefold: First, nominees for Prime Minister and ministers often fail to meet the minimum ethical standards, such as allegations of tax evasion and speculation, and fraudulent residency, which are the main verification targets during confirmation hearings. Second, regarding policy capabilities and expertise required for high-ranking officials such as Prime Ministers and ministers, these are not adequately verified through confirmation hearings, and in some cases, individuals are found to be lacking in competence. Third, the content of these personnel verifications is inconsistently applied in the actual confirmation process. For instance, real estate speculation or plagiarism may lead to the downfall of a particular government official or be considered a non-critical flaw for another.

Some in the political sphere have faced public backlash for suggesting the need for social consensus to relax the first criterion, given that many individuals do not meet it. However, it can be argued that political and social consensus is necessary to establish consistent standards for the appointment of high-ranking officials such as Prime Ministers and ministers, as mentioned in the third point above.

[Figure 5] Disqualifying Reasons for Prime Ministers and Ministers as Viewed by the Public (%)

We examined what the public considers to be the qualifications for high-ranking public officials and the level of social consensus on these perceptions. We presented criteria frequently raised in the current confirmation hearing process and asked whether each constitutes a decisive flaw for a public official. From the public's perspective, the prevailing view was that the various allegations revealed in the recent confirmation hearings generally constitute decisive flaws for public officials. However, there were significant differences in the intensity of consensus. From the public's viewpoint, 90.3% considered tax evasion, 79.1% real estate speculation, 77.7% plagiarism, and 73.4% speculative fraudulent residency as decisive flaws for public officials. In contrast, 62.9% responded that fraudulent residency for educational purposes was a decisive flaw, indicating a more flexible view compared to speculative fraudulent residency. However, policy-related factors, which are as important as ethical standards in national governance, such as the lack of policy and vision presentation ability and expertise, were considered decisive flaws by only around 61.9% of respondents, indicating that a considerable number of people hold a more lenient attitude compared to other ethical standards. Notably, among the ethical standards, the issue of children acquiring foreign nationality was relatively the lowest among the surveyed items, at 57.4%.

One point worthy of attention is that public opinion regarding these criteria shows a high level of consensus. For most allegations, there are no significant differences in perceptions across social strata regarding whether such allegations, if proven true, would be considered appropriate or inappropriate. There were no significant differences in perceptions based on ideology, age, occupation, or party affiliation. Therefore, it can be concluded that a strong social consensus exists among voters emphasizing strict ethical standards for public officials. The problem, ultimately, lies in the continued emergence of candidates who do not meet these standards. This is because it is difficult for the political sphere to find individuals who meet the strict criteria demanded by the public.

3. Confirmation Hearing Political Situation: Crisis for the Grand National Party? Opportunity for the Democratic Party?

The Grand National Party's support base is consolidated, with only a small drop in approval ratings during the confirmation hearing period.

In contrast, the Democratic Party's support dropped by 6.8 percentage points from the previous month, significantly impacted by the July 28 by-election defeat.

How do the current confirmation hearing political dynamics translate into gains and losses for each party? Logically, given the significant damage incurred during the current administration's personnel verification process, it should be a crisis for the Grand National Party and an opportunity for the Democratic Party. However, examining the recent trends in party support ratings reveals a considerable gap between this logic and reality. Over the past four months, the Grand National Party has consistently maintained support ratings in the low 30% range, while the Democratic Party's support ratings have fluctuated. Despite facing crisis factors in the current confirmation hearing political situation, the Grand National Party has maintained its party support ratings without a significant decline. Conversely, the Democratic Party, after its strong performance in the June 2 local elections, saw its support rise to 27.1% and then to 30.7% in the July survey before the July 28 by-elections, but it dropped to 23.9% in the August survey.

Despite losing the June 2 local elections and winning the July 28 by-elections, the Grand National Party, which faces significant political burdens in the current confirmation hearing political situation, maintains stable support ratings. This appears to reflect the high level of support consolidation and loyalty from the Yeongnam region and conservative base. Furthermore, while the current confirmation hearing political situation poses a burden to the government and ruling party, the existence of favorable public opinion regarding the August 15 political vision of pro-people moderate pragmatism and fair society realization also acts as a factor preventing a sharp decline in support ratings.

In contrast, the Democratic Party's regional support base is weaker than that of the Grand National Party, as the population of Honam, where the Democratic Party has strong support consolidation, is less than half that of Yeongnam. Since the current administration took office, fluctuations in the Democratic Party's support ratings have been significant due to external factors such as the commemoration of former President Roh Moo-hyun and the public's desire to check the Grand National Party's unilateral political operations. The division within the opposition parties also plays a role. While conditions for unified action and alliances with parties having anti-Grand National Party sentiments were ripe for the June 2 local elections and July 28 by-elections, the Democratic Party's centripetal force within the opposition in normal political phases like the present is relatively weak, contributing to frequent fluctuations in its support ratings. The key issues expected to emerge are how the party will address the dual challenges of achieving party identity and consolidating its core support base while simultaneously expanding its support base in the upcoming party convention to elect new leadership in October.

[Figure 6] Changes in Support Ratings for the Top Two Parties and the Unaffiliated Percentage: May-August (%)

However, following the June survey, the Democratic Party maintained its lead in the August survey not only among the 20s and 30s, who are strong supporters of the Democratic Party, but also among the 40s. In the 20s, the Grand National Party's support rating was 25.9% and the Democratic Party's was 29.5%, with the gap widening. In the 30s, the Grand National Party had 17.1% and the Democratic Party had 23.8%. In the 40s, the Grand National Party recorded 25.2% and the Democratic Party 32.3%. The Grand National Party received high support of 49.8% from those aged 50 and above, while the Democratic Party received only 15.9%. The shift of the 40s, who were previously in favor of the Grand National Party, towards the Democratic Party following the June local elections narrowed the gap in support ratings with the Grand National Party. However, the decline in the Democratic Party's support among young people in this survey is also a point to watch closely in the future.

[Table 1] Changes in Party Support by Age Group (%)

[Table 2] Changes in Party Support (January-July 2010) (%)

* First asked in the December 2009 survey.

** Combined value of 'No party affiliation,' 'Don't know/No answer'.

*** The January 14 survey results are from a joint political issue survey by EAI and Maeil Business Newspaper (1,002 respondents), not a regular survey.

**** The Pro-Park Geun-hye Alliance was renamed Future Hope Alliance in February 2010. On April 2, the Future Hope Alliance resolved to merge with the Grand National Party. Defectors formed the Future Alliance on April 18 (Lee Gyu-taek).

***** From March to May 2010, Han Hwa-gap's new party (Peace Democratic Party) and Shim Dae-pyung's new party (People's Central Union) were included as options and categorized under 'Other'.

4. Next Presidential Election: Park Geun-hye Leads, Kim Moon-soo Rises to Second Place at 8.6%, Sohn Hak-kyu at 6.5% for Fifth Place

Park Geun-hye 23.8% > Kim Moon-soo 8.6% > Yoo Si-min 7.6% > Han Myeong-sook 7.1% > Sohn Hak-kyu 6.5% in order

In the August survey of potential presidential candidates' support, former representative Park Geun-hye maintained her lead with 23.8% support. Overall, within the ruling camp, Governor Kim Moon-soo, who has been openly critical of the Blue House and President Lee Myung-bak, is emerging, while Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who is grappling with Seoul's financial issues and conflicts with the city council, appears to be faltering. Governor Kim Moon-soo has risen to second place, following Representative Park Geun-hye, for the first time in this regular survey. Among the opposition, former minister Yoo Si-min and former prime minister Han Myeong-sook, who received around 10% support before and after the June 2 local elections, have seen their support stagnate as they have moved away from the center of political discourse. In contrast, former representative Sohn Hak-kyu, who has ended his two-year hiatus and declared his return to politics, shows a noticeable upward trend. This is likely influenced by his current leading position in recent polls for the next Democratic Party leadership election.

[Table 3] Support for Next Presidential Candidates (%)

* The May survey was not conducted due to the local elections and security perception survey.

** Added Kim Tae-ho as a potential prime minister in the August survey.

Following Representative Park Geun-hye, Governor Kim Moon-soo (8.6%), former Minister Yoo Si-min (7.6%), and former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook (7.1%) followed. Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who ranked 4th with 8.5% support in the July survey, dropped to 6th place with 5.5% support in this survey, behind former representative Sohn Hak-kyu who garnered 6.5%. Support for other candidates remained largely unchanged from previous surveys. Former Governor Kim Tae-ho, who was included in the survey for the first time, received only 1.0% support. This is likely due to the damage sustained during the confirmation hearing process and his still low public recognition.

By party support, former representative Park Geun-hye showed overwhelming dominance among Grand National Party supporters and unaffiliated voters, with 40.1% and 16.9% support, respectively. In the previous month's survey, she received 32.3% support from GNP supporters and 21.5% from unaffiliated voters. This month, her support increased among GNP supporters while weakening among unaffiliated voters. Among GNP supporters, Governor Kim Moon-soo ranked second with 17.5% support (up from 10.3% and 3rd place in July), and Mayor Oh Se-hoon ranked third with 12.2% (down from 18.4% and 2nd place in July), reversing the previous month's order. In contrast, it is noteworthy to examine the preferences of supporters of the main opposition Democratic Party. In the July survey, 21.0% of Democratic Party supporters backed former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook, making her first, followed by former representative Park Geun-hye with 17.2% support in second place, and former minister Yoo Si-min in third place with 13.6%. However, in the current survey, former representative Park Geun-hye rose to first place among Democratic Party supporters with 16.9% support, followed by former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook in second place with 14.7%, former representative Sohn Hak-kyu in third place with 13.1% support, and former minister Yoo Si-min in fourth place with 12.5%.