Bitter squabbles between the ruling and opposition parties over the Free School Lunch Program (FSLP) did not disappoint the nation in showing another example of Korea’s distorted politics. The problem which need not have been brought under the spotlight is now causing turbulence not only in politics, but also throughout the nation. The issue officially started on January 6, 2011 when Kwak No-hyun, superintendent of the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, and the Seoul Metropolitan Council passed the Free School Lunch Ordinance despite opposition from the now resigned Mayor of Seoul, Oh Se-hoon, and the Grand National Party. The Democratic Party’s position was to provide all students with free school lunch while Oh stated that he could not spend more money than that allocated for low-income students. Consequently, Oh Se-hoon filed a lawsuit against the claim. As the fissure deepened, however, a referendum was held to address it.

Closely observing the problem, the FSLP could possibly be the prelude to a political problem, namely, socialism. Though some say that this policy is a different matter from free welfare and that Korea will not enter a phase of fiscal bankruptcy, setting a precedent which may lead to universal welfare is dangerous. Data from welfare states such as Sweden seem to indicate that Koreans should be ready to give up some 50% of their income if they decide to start the FSLP. Thinking back to the Reunification Fee, which hit the news in 2010 and is still coming up as a debate topic, Koreans are not ready for these kinds of “additional payments” and neither is the Korean government. In fact, the national debt has been rising since 2008 and is expected to swell to 620 trillion won by 2014. To add to the chaos, the immature Democratic Party controlled public opinion by billing the referendum a “malicious vote.” It seems that the Democratic Party, despite its name, has a socialist ideology. Urging people not to vote simply because they want to win the referendum was unwise. Thanks to the Democratic Party, many people gave up their right to vote.

As for the referendum itself, there were only two very similar options to choose from, making the vote clearly politically motivated. Plus, even though the parties found out on January 17 that 62.3% of the nation support a selective free school lunch while 34.5% want free school lunch for all students, they should have still included the option of being completely against the policy. Cleary, the issue itself was not for the well-being of citizens but served only as a veil for crude political ambitions. Though at first glance, welfare may look attractive, it becomes self-evident that nothing in the world is free. For instance, the Democratic Party presented their magnificent 3+1 item which includes free school lunch for elementary students, free daycare for babies, free healthcare for all and half-price tuition for university students, despite knowing that they were committing fraud by selling an item with a disastrous aftermath for the nation. Unsurprisingly, many Koreans were aware of the parties’ real motives. Whether or not people were coaxed by the liberals, some people simply decided to become spectators of the parties’ meaningless fight over political power. Amid all this confusion, people lost trust in politicians again.

The politicians jeopardized Korea’s future in order to achieve their own political ambitions. How is this any less shameful than allegations of bribery against Kwak No-hyun? Politics should not be a slight of hand, a shuffling of identical cards to trick people out of their tax money and hard-earned benefits. Yet, politicians are often blinded by their sheer greed to take advantage of the moment, failing to consider the possible consequences of their decisions. They must overcome their selfishness which tempts them not to communicate with the people truthfully. Once they do so, they will be able to truly communicate with the nation and hopefully understand what the real problem is. If that had happened, the Free School Lunch Program could have been approached in a more meaningful and effective way.