[Noh Dong-Il Column] Minister-Nominee Lee Hye-hoon and the ‘President for All’

Everyone was taken aback. It was the decision to nominate former lawmaker Lee Hye-hoon as the first Minister of Planning and Budget in the Lee Jae-myung administration. When news first broke that the budget function would be separated from the Ministry of Economy and Finance and a new budget ministry would be created under the direct control of the president or prime minister, many voiced concern. They understood what such a reorganization of the budget function would mean. President Lee Jae-myung harbors resentment toward orthodox bureaucrats who emphasize fiscal soundness, believing they kept him from freely implementing his policies. As Governor of Gyeonggi Province, he clashed with then Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs Hong Nam-ki over disaster relief payments and local currency. Kim Dong-yeon, now Governor of Gyeonggi Province and a former Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs, also attacked Lee’s signature brand during his 2021 presidential bid, saying he seemed not to understand the philosophy behind basic income.
The creation of a Ministry of Planning and Budget can be called one of President Lee’s long-cherished ambitions. The expectation that he would appoint a politician, not a career bureaucrat, as minister follows from that. A ruling-party politician who, as they say, “fully understands the president’s governing philosophy” would naturally reflect the president’s preference for expansionary fiscal policy. Nor is the ruling party short of such potential candidates. It is therefore no surprise that the shock was even greater among the ruling camp’s hard-core supporters when this nomination was announced.
The political intent embedded in the idea of “Minister of Planning and Budget Lee Hye-hoon” is clear. Many see it as a move aimed at driving a wedge into the conservative camp. Some interpret it as preparation for the Seoul Metropolitan City Mayor race. If the budget is drawn up by “Minister Lee,” who stresses fiscal soundness, it would be awkward for the opposition to simply dismiss it as a “Lee Jae-myung-branded” budget.
That is not all. The nomination of Lee is producing effects beyond expectations. Lee has been a leading figure in the so-called “Yoon Again,” “anti-impeachment,” and “rigged election” currents. Yet at a single word from President Lee, she read out a public letter of repentance. She explicitly referred to what had long been taboo as “Martial Law is insurrection.” On top of her coarse remarks and abuse of power, it was also revealed that she delayed filing her married son’s marriage registration in order to win an apartment allocation through a scheme of “fake single status” (not a fake divorce). The more revelations emerge about Lee, the more the backlash ironically turns toward the opposition. People are asking: was it not the People Power Party that nominated such a person five times?
It is unclear whether Lee will even make it to the confirmation hearing on the 19th. If she ultimately becomes minister, that works to the administration’s advantage; even if she falls due to personal flaws, the progressive camp will not be the one to take the blame. President Lee, who has earned points for unity, pragmatism, and inclusiveness, has little to lose. It is not something to criticize that a politician’s moves are driven by political calculation. Nor is there any need to view his talk of unity and pragmatism in a negative light. At the State Council meeting on December 30 last year, President Lee explained why he nominated Lee. “Until you become president, you represent a particular camp, but the moment you become president, you must represent everyone.” “Our society is like a rainbow of seven colors. Just because those who like blue hold power does not mean they can turn the entire society blue.” “Those who like red are still citizens of the Republic of Korea and sovereigns of this nation.”
These remarks amount to saying that “the president must be a president for all.” Were it not for space constraints, one would want to quote his entire statement; each and every line is on point. During the presidential race, President Lee declared that the Democratic Party was a “centrist-conservative” party. The explanation by Cheong Wa Dae Chief of Staff to the President of the Republic of Korea Kang Hoon-sik—that national unity has long been President Lee’s dream—fits in the same context. If the president and Cheong Wa Dae truly wish to prove their sincerity about unity, pragmatism, and inclusiveness, what is the first thing they should do right now?
First, he should order an end to the ongoing special counsel-driven political standoff and the constant accusations of insurrection. If it is difficult to issue such an order to the party, he should at least state it publicly to the people. The activities of the Insurrection Settlement Task Force should now themselves be brought to an end. The timing is apt. The ruling party has just formed a new lineup, including parliamentary leader Han Byeongdo. The criminal proceedings against Former President Yoon Suk Yeol are also about to reach a turning point, with the first-instance trial expected to conclude today or at the next hearing. Once the first-instance trial is over, a safeguard has already been put in place in the form of a Special Panel for Insurrection Cases to be constituted from the appeals stage. The relationship between the president and his ministers also needs to be reset. That is, unless the idea is to use “Minister Lee Hye-hoon” merely as a shield to ram through his own convictions on expansionary fiscal policy. The president must be prepared to harmonize his expansionary fiscal stance in a healthy way with the conservative minister’s commitment to fiscal soundness.
The Lee Jae-myung administration was able to shift blame for last year’s difficult economic conditions onto the previous government. It is also true that Martial Law and the ensuing political turmoil played a major role. But from now on, responsibility rests squarely with the current administration. Competence will translate directly into performance. To move beyond the primitive state in which competition between the ruling and opposition parties “turns politics into war,” presidential leadership is the single most important factor.
dinoh7869@fnnews.com Reporter