Election watchdog blocking public`s right to know

In early April, the Strategy and Finance Ministry estimated that it cost at least 268 trillion won (239.8 billion U.S. dollars) over five years to keep the 266 welfare pledges made by the ruling Saenuri Party and main opposition Democratic United Party for the general elections. The amount is more than three times this year’s government budget for welfare (92.6 trillion won or 82.8 billion dollars) and larger than pledged by Saenuri (75 trillion won or 67.1 billion dollars) and the main opposition party (165 trillion won or 147.6 billion dollars). The ministry’s analysis helped voters learn that welfare means more taxes instead of being tempted by welfare pledges. The National Election Commission warned, however, that government officials should be neutral in elections vis-a-vis the ministry’s analysis and announcement.

Rep. Park Won-seok, who bolted from the minor United Progressive Party Friday, asked the ministry to release the costs of welfare pledges by both the ruling and opposition parties last month. When the ministry asked the election commission, the latter advised it not to release the figures. The ministry, however, should inform the people of the welfare pledge costs because they have the right to know to make the right choice. A responsible government has an obligation to screen pledges that could potentially impact national interests and to report the results to the people.

There is no free lunch. The people will eventually pay for welfare. The costs are taxes, weak financial conditions, and a heavier burden for future generations. The people need to know both the advantages and costs of welfare to make the correct assessment of welfare policies. Making pledges without explaining how much it will cost is like what certain salespeople do: force customers to buy goods without letting them know the price.

The government and state-run agencies must remain politically neutral in elections. Calculating the costs of pledges, however, is not political intervention but information that helps the people make the right choice. Both the ruling and opposition parties are obsessed with populism, which is giving away taxpayers’ money. If the Finance Ministry offers a balanced critique to both the ruling and opposition parties, no controversy over intervention in elections will result. Screening policy is the core of an advanced democracy. Policy screening is necessary to spread of policy-based elections, a key task selected by the National Election Commission. The election watchdog`s task is to ensure democratic elections. It seems suspicious that the commission wants to avoid criticism of election intervention by discouraging screening policies.

Voters need to exert their democratic reason in consideration of their generation and even those of their children and grandchildren. The commission should not interfere with the effort to allow the people’s right to know.