ID :
197416
Wed, 07/27/2011 - 02:02
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://oananews.org//node/197416
The shortlink copeid
Voting on free school meals
The Korea Times on July 27
(Yonhap) - Seoul residents will likely vote on Aug. 24 to set the scope of the beneficiaries of the free school lunches. The final voting date will be subject to change in accordance with the pending court rulings. The unprecedented referendum is a litmus test for whether Seoulites or Koreans in general favor either a selective welfare program or a universal one.
Voters will choose one of the two proposals. One option is Mayor Oh Se-hoon's selective and gradual free lunch program over the next three years to 2014. This proposal will benefit only students whose parents earn less than half of the average household income.
The other alternative proposed by the opposition Democratic Party is an immediate implementation of the free lunches for all elementary school students this year and middle school pupils next year.
The referendum will be valid and vote-counting will start, only when more than 33.3 percent of the 8.36 million eligible voters cast ballots.
The liberal DP favors the universal welfare program benefiting all students across the board. The ruling Grand National Party still wavers between the selective program and the universal one in its desperate attempt to better the DP in the two crucial elections next year.
The DP, which controls a majority in the Seoul Metropolitan Council, will campaign against the referendum in order to kill the mayor's initiative. It argues that the party advocates the free meal service in keeping with its people-oriented budget spending. It claims that Oh has spent the city's budget more for building projects rather than for the poor and the underprivileged.
Parties face unintended political pitfalls through the referendum. The liberal party???s defeat will have negative implications for implementing its free welfare programs, including a free nursery and free medical service, as well as the halving of college tuition fees.
The governing conservative party is airing concerns that Oh???s defeat over the vote will deal a double blow to the party which did poorly in the past two elections.
The results of the vote will also have an implication for the political future of Oh. The lawyer-turned mayor is struggling to utilize the vote as a springboard for his presidential ambition next year.
Opponents of the vote contend that it is a waste of taxpayers' money. The progressive superintendent of the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education argues that Oh is infringing upon his authority. Kwak No-hyun says he has the final say over the school meal program.
Recent surveys indicate that more than one-third of voters in Seoul show willingness to go to the polls. Surveys conducted both by conservative and liberal media indicate that voters are having second thoughts over the indiscriminate expansion of the welfare program. An opinion survey is one thing, and the results may well be another. The outcome should be an occasion for parties to polish their welfare programs. Seoul, and for that matter Korea, badly needs to expand welfare programs but within fiscal responsibility.
(Yonhap) - Seoul residents will likely vote on Aug. 24 to set the scope of the beneficiaries of the free school lunches. The final voting date will be subject to change in accordance with the pending court rulings. The unprecedented referendum is a litmus test for whether Seoulites or Koreans in general favor either a selective welfare program or a universal one.
Voters will choose one of the two proposals. One option is Mayor Oh Se-hoon's selective and gradual free lunch program over the next three years to 2014. This proposal will benefit only students whose parents earn less than half of the average household income.
The other alternative proposed by the opposition Democratic Party is an immediate implementation of the free lunches for all elementary school students this year and middle school pupils next year.
The referendum will be valid and vote-counting will start, only when more than 33.3 percent of the 8.36 million eligible voters cast ballots.
The liberal DP favors the universal welfare program benefiting all students across the board. The ruling Grand National Party still wavers between the selective program and the universal one in its desperate attempt to better the DP in the two crucial elections next year.
The DP, which controls a majority in the Seoul Metropolitan Council, will campaign against the referendum in order to kill the mayor's initiative. It argues that the party advocates the free meal service in keeping with its people-oriented budget spending. It claims that Oh has spent the city's budget more for building projects rather than for the poor and the underprivileged.
Parties face unintended political pitfalls through the referendum. The liberal party???s defeat will have negative implications for implementing its free welfare programs, including a free nursery and free medical service, as well as the halving of college tuition fees.
The governing conservative party is airing concerns that Oh???s defeat over the vote will deal a double blow to the party which did poorly in the past two elections.
The results of the vote will also have an implication for the political future of Oh. The lawyer-turned mayor is struggling to utilize the vote as a springboard for his presidential ambition next year.
Opponents of the vote contend that it is a waste of taxpayers' money. The progressive superintendent of the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education argues that Oh is infringing upon his authority. Kwak No-hyun says he has the final say over the school meal program.
Recent surveys indicate that more than one-third of voters in Seoul show willingness to go to the polls. Surveys conducted both by conservative and liberal media indicate that voters are having second thoughts over the indiscriminate expansion of the welfare program. An opinion survey is one thing, and the results may well be another. The outcome should be an occasion for parties to polish their welfare programs. Seoul, and for that matter Korea, badly needs to expand welfare programs but within fiscal responsibility.
