Home > Opinion > Columns

Reflections on the nomination of Lee Hye-hoon

Published: 31 Dec. 2025, 00:02

Ko Jung-ae

The author is the editor-in-chief at JoongAng Sunday.

This piece may feel unsettled, as my thoughts are running in several directions. President Lee Jae Myung’s decision to nominate Lee Hye-hoon as minister of the Ministry of Planning and Budget is layered with multiple meanings.

Firstly, the nominee herself. Ahead of the 2002 presidential election, a new type of female politician emerged within the then-Grand National Party. Alongside legal professionals such as Na Kyung-won and Cho Yoon-sun, Lee Hye-hoon stood out as an economist with a doctorate. Earlier generations of female politicians in conservative parties tended to be close to the party’s top leader or his spouse, a pattern often described as derivative “patronage-based politics.” With this cohort, something changed.

Lee Hye-hoon, a former People Power Party lawmaker nominated as the first minister of the Ministry of Planning and Budget, speaks to reporters as she arrives at her confirmation hearing preparation office at the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation building in central Seoul on the morning of Dec. 30. [NEWS1]

About five years later, as a general election approached, figures aligned with former President Park Geun-hye identified five candidates they would support from the camp of then-President Lee Myung-bak: Kim Moo-sung, Huh Tae-yul, Yoo Seung-min, Yoo Jeong-bok and Lee Hye-hoon. Yet early in the Park administration, Lee Hye-hoon failed to secure a nomination. The explanation offered was that she was already a three-term lawmaker from Seoul's Gangnam District, though critics noted that many who raised objections were also senior lawmakers from the Yeongnam region. Lee Hye-hoon's close political alignment with Yoo Seung-min likely played a role. At some point, she shifted to support former President Yoon Suk Yeol.

Unlike Na and Cho, who served as a floor leader or cabinet minister, Lee Hye-hoon remained largely in place. Now she has accepted an offer from a president she once openly criticized. Doing so required her to disavow much of her political career over the past two decades. After leaving the Cabinet, she is unlikely to fully belong to any political party. Even so, she chose to cross the line. The desire and resolve to “erase the past” and move forward is striking. One American once likened such a rush toward power to a vortex, saying that when it forms, its pull is so strong that it draws in even the smallest political actors and paralyzes rational reflection.

Secondly, the question of unity, which is the Blue House’s stated explanation. But unity requires the other side to feel it as well, and the reaction has been the opposite. The People Power Party may be insular, but there were ample reasons for it to be uncomfortable with the nomination. Previous defections by conservative figures followed a discernible context and were preceded by signs. This nomination came abruptly.

President Lee can act this way largely because of confidence. His approval ratings are high, and the opposition is in disarray. Confirmation hearings appear unlikely to change outcomes. The Cabinet already includes several figures who survived allegations that would once have derailed nominations. That lowers the risk of an awkward scenario in which a high-profile defector fails confirmation. As the People Power Party looks inward, invoking party loyalty rather than renewal, the temptation for the president will only increase. The rhetoric will still be “unity,” but the reality is political calculation.

Thirdly, gender. The current Cabinet resembles a quasi-parliamentary system, prominently comprising current and former lawmakers. Of the 19 ministers, seven are sitting lawmakers, and one is a former member. Lee Hye-hoon’s nomination adds another. Notably, all sitting lawmakers in the cabinet are men from the Democratic Party. While the withdrawal of Rep. Kang Sun-woo had an impact, it remains striking that not a single Democratic Party woman lawmaker, out of 29 among 166, is represented. How do female lawmakers view this situation?

Fourthly, the Ministry of Planning and Budget itself. President Lee has said that even people with differing views can, through intense debate, find common ground, and that the process can produce new and rational policy. This would be welcome.

Ryu Deok-hyun, senior presidential secretary for fiscal planning, speaks during a press briefing at the presidential office in Yongsan, Seoul, on Sept. 4. [NEWS1]

History, however, reminds us to to be careful. Under the Moon Jae-in administration, Deputy Prime Minister Kim Dong-yeon, a traditional budget expert who believed in fiscal discipline, clashed with the Blue House and the ruling party over issues including minimum wage and hikes in corporate and income tax rates. He was eventually sidelined, particularly amid deep conflict with Jang Ha-sung, who was the policy chief at the time. During the Park Geun-hye administration, Welfare Minister Jin Young, widely seen as a powerful politician, abruptly resigned, citing his frustration with his position's limits. There were also reports that a senior Blue House official with a welfare background bypassed the minister and summoned ministry officials directly.

The current setup goes even further. Policy chief Kim Yong-beom wields influence akin to that of a deputy prime minister, and Ryu Deok-hyun, an unusually powerful senior aide for fiscal planning, is another factor. Ryu is a fiscal specialist, unlike Lee Hye-hoon, who is trained in econometrics. The question is whether Lee Hye-hoon will be able to articulate genuinely different views. One can only hope that the president sought more than the symbolism behind appointing a “conservative woman politician.”

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.