President Lee Jae Myung takes questions from reporters during a press conference marking his first year in office at the Blue House on June 8.JOINT PRESS CORPS
Yeh Young-june
The author is the head of the editorial board at the JoongAng Ilbo.
President Lee Jae Myung’s approval rating, once close to 70 percent, has fallen by half. More serious is its speed and steady downward trajectory. The government and Democratic Party (DP) are fortunate no election is imminent.
Lee is said to have lost both “rabbits in the field” and “rabbits at home” — swing voters and core supporters. Moderate conservatives have long departed, while DP supporters associated with former Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in and hard-line supporters are also drifting away. As ratings fall, infighting has intensified. Lee eventually intervened, saying, “The obstacle to reform is obstructing reform in the name of reform.”
But this debate, focused mainly on the party faithful, sees only one side of the decline. Many people are unconvinced that what the government and DP have pursued under the banner of reform is reform at all.
Lee’s ratings were highest when he proclaimed pragmatism and translated it into policy. Early in his presidency, he adopted more flexible positions than previous DP administrations on major issues including nuclear power and relations with Japan, drawing moderate voters. His reputation as a president who got things done spread, and so-called “New Lee Jae Myung” supporters grew. It did not last.
In retrospect, the turning point came when Lee said, “No market can beat the government.” A market is the mechanism through which the economic activities of government, companies and citizens operate. Since citizens are its most important participants, saying no market can defeat the government sounds little different from saying no citizen can.
Subsequent social media posts and tax proposals showed this was more than rhetoric. The slogan that a home is a place to live in, not an investment, sounds harmless but implies that buying and selling homes is suspect.
Economics recognizes expectations of upward mobility not as greed but as a rational aspiration and driver of growth. Housing is no different. People aspire to move to better neighborhoods and homes. Treating that desire as potential speculation and suppressing it, particularly through taxes, inevitably creates backlash.
That was the first wave of today’s collapse in support. Opposition extends beyond owners of ultra-expensive homes targeted by punitive taxes because the policy runs against aspirations for upward mobility. Seoul’s approval rating falling below that of Daegu and North Gyeongsang, traditional strongholds of the opposition, is difficult to explain without housing.
On Friday, I hope Lee says: “The Lee Jae Myung administration is not trying to defeat the market. Why should the market and government fight?” Policy can then be reconsidered accordingly.
I also want an unequivocal position on a constitutional revision allowing consecutive presidential terms.
During his recent visit to France, Lee said, “My term is clearly limited under the Constitution.” Yet suspicions persist because he has never explicitly said, “I will not run again.”
Article 128, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution says an amendment extending a presidential term or changing term limits does not apply to the president in office when the amendment is proposed. But theoretically, a president could resign near the end of a term, leaving an acting president. The National Assembly could then amend the Constitution and hold an election under the new system, potentially creating an argument that the former president was eligible. Transitional provisions could make the intent clearer.
Lee has previously mentioned shortening his term. Such scenarios appear unrealistic now. But if the broader governing bloc secured enough seats to amend the Constitution in the next parliamentary election, suspicions would intensify. Another theoretically conceivable, though extremely difficult, route would be constitutional revision in stages.
National Assembly Speaker Cho Jeong-sik stirred controversy in late July when he said the issue was ultimately a matter of public opinion and choice, though he later clarified that another term for the incumbent president was not up for discussion.
Tomorrow’s press conference offers Lee a chance to settle the matter himself. He should say clearly, “Even if the Constitution is amended to permit two consecutive four-year terms, I will not run.” That would clear the way for constitutional debate. If he leaves ambiguity again, suspicions will only deepen.
Those are hardly the only words I would like to hear. Would it be asking too much for Lee to declare that he will not pursue cancellation of the criminal cases against him — and even that after leaving office, he will confidently face the trials that have been suspended?
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.
