Does the President's Popularity Matter in Korea's Local Elections?

Abstract

Abolished by the military regime in 1961, local self-government in Korea was reestablished in 1991. Since 1995, local officials (governors, mayors and local council members), who were previously appointed by the central government, have been elected by the local populace. These institutional changes were expected to increase the autonomy of local government and transfer power from central to local governments.1 Contrary to this expectation, however, Korea's local elections have been characterized by an excessive focus on national concerns, not local ones. The opposition parties have been claiming that voters should punish the incumbent president's party in local elections and, so far, the voters seem to be complying with this request. As a result, the president's party has failed to achieve success in local elections. The debacle, in the 2006 local election was one reason the then president's party, Our Open Party, dissolved. To sum up, national issues have exerted a significant influence on both the process and the results of local elections. These influences have been detrimental to the incumbent president's party, resulting in its electoral failures. Election results, however, have not always been disastrous for the president's party. In the 1998 local elections, which were held during the first year of President Kim Dae Jung (Kim Taejung)'s term, the president's party fared pretty well. Even though it failed to win a majority of the popular vote, it succeeded in gaining a majority of the seats in the local council as well as executive office. On the other hand, in the 2002 local elections, which were held in the fifth year of President Kim Dae Jung (Kim Taejung) 's term, the president's party lost to the opposition parties in a landslide. These results suggest that in local elections, the context matters when it comes to the fortunes, or misfortunes, of the president's party. Two