The Significance of Lower House Elections and the Future of Japanese Politics The LDP Should Invest its Political Capital in Sustaining Social Security
TAKENAKA Harukata / Professor, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies
December 8, 2017
The October elections for the House of Representatives ended in a landslide victory for the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), giving it a comfortable two-thirds majority of 313 seats. The opposition was battered, and the parties on the left were the worst hit, with only a few seats remaining among them in the aftermath.
There are two factors that affected the election results. First, there was voter approval for what the Abe administration had accomplished over the past five years. Second, the opposition had more or less self-destructed, and failing to put up an organized front, had fought the election in a divided state.
The Abe administration had achieved results such as strengthening Japan’s relationship with the United States and reaching an overall agreement with the European Union on the Economic Partnership Agreement. It also managed to break away from deflation and had other successes that included deregulating the electric power market, pushing through reforms on corporate governance and raising the number of foreign visitors to Japan.
As for the opposition, a closer look at the voting results for the proportional district reveals that the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ) and the Party of Hope had captured more votes than the LDP. The protest votes against the LDP indicate an enduring criticism of the way it runs the government, as symbolized by the Moritomo Gakuen and Kake Gakuen favoritism scandals.
Nevertheless, in many electoral districts the votes were split among the CDPJ, the Party of Hope and the Japanese Communist Party, which ultimately benefited the LDP.
It has been pointed out that the Party of Hope lost its momentum due to comments made by its leader, Yuriko Koike, of “eliminating” unwanted candidates from party membership. However, even without her blunder, it was clear that the party’s policies were hastily put together, and what with all the parachute candidates and first-time candidates, it is doubtful whether it could have won as many seats as to pose a threat to the LDP.
The Democratic Party decided to merge with the Party of Hope in a haste without holding sufficient consultations with the latter, which had not yet come up with clear policies.
On the other hand, CDPJ put up a good fight. Yet, the party clearly lacked preparation, as evidenced by its having to surrender a seat to the LDP due to its lack of candidates in the proportionate district in the Tokai regional block.
Voter turnout, at 53.68%, was the second lowest in the post-World War II period. In addition to the bad weather, it seems that a considerable number of voters couldn’t make up their minds in the wake of the virtual disintegration of the Democratic Party.
What will now happen in Japanese politics? The opposition thus divided, the Abe administration will continue to enjoy an advantage in terms of sheer numbers. However, the election results also indicated persistent criticism against the Abe administration. The Prime Minister must therefore pay utmost care to prevent a recurrence of scandals similar to the Moritomo and Kake scandals.
Prime Minister Abe is likely to advance the debate on Constitutional reform. While agreeing to a discussion, the Democratic Party had been less enthusiastic about an actual revision. Meanwhile, the Party of Hope and the Japan Innovation Party have taken a more positive stance, and this is expected to result in a more realistic discussion on the issue.
However, it is not clear whether this will lead to a revision of Article 9, as declared by Prime Minister Abe in May. That is because the CDPJ and the Communist Party are certain to vehemently oppose such a move, while the Komeito and the Party of Hope have taken a more cautious approach.
In the meantime, the Abe administration is likely to formulate concrete measures for realizing its campaign pledge of developing a social security system that addresses the needs of all generations, including free preschool education. Social security in Japan is biased towards the elderly, so placing more emphasis on the working generation would be a move in the right direction. Yet, much consideration is necessary on how to finance such a policy.
Prime Minister Abe intends to use part of the increased revenues from the scheduled hike in the consumption tax rate in 2019. Considering that the budget deficit was expected to grow even after raising the tax rate, the government will have to rely on debts to cover any new expenditures.
Revising the Constitution is certainly an important issue. But since the security-related bills were passed in 2015, there is now less need for a revision from the standpoint of national security, and it is questionable whether the issue is a matter of urgency.
Constitutional amendment would require considerable political capital. Investing the same amount of political capital would probably allow the government to reform the social security system, achieve fiscal soundness and implement various deregulatory measures. Why not invest political capital to ensure the sustainability of “social security for all generations,” including improving fiscal condition?
The Japanese people – including the younger generation – harbor concerns about the future of their economy and society. Prime Minister Abe should seek to resolve such concerns by using the political capital he has newly gained in the latest general elections.
Harukata Takenaka is Professor at Japan’s National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies. This article was originally published in the Shinano Mainichi Shimbun newspaper on October 24, 2017.
There are two factors that affected the election results. First, there was voter approval for what the Abe administration had accomplished over the past five years. Second, the opposition had more or less self-destructed, and failing to put up an organized front, had fought the election in a divided state.
The Abe administration had achieved results such as strengthening Japan’s relationship with the United States and reaching an overall agreement with the European Union on the Economic Partnership Agreement. It also managed to break away from deflation and had other successes that included deregulating the electric power market, pushing through reforms on corporate governance and raising the number of foreign visitors to Japan.
As for the opposition, a closer look at the voting results for the proportional district reveals that the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ) and the Party of Hope had captured more votes than the LDP. The protest votes against the LDP indicate an enduring criticism of the way it runs the government, as symbolized by the Moritomo Gakuen and Kake Gakuen favoritism scandals.
Nevertheless, in many electoral districts the votes were split among the CDPJ, the Party of Hope and the Japanese Communist Party, which ultimately benefited the LDP.
It has been pointed out that the Party of Hope lost its momentum due to comments made by its leader, Yuriko Koike, of “eliminating” unwanted candidates from party membership. However, even without her blunder, it was clear that the party’s policies were hastily put together, and what with all the parachute candidates and first-time candidates, it is doubtful whether it could have won as many seats as to pose a threat to the LDP.
The Democratic Party decided to merge with the Party of Hope in a haste without holding sufficient consultations with the latter, which had not yet come up with clear policies.
On the other hand, CDPJ put up a good fight. Yet, the party clearly lacked preparation, as evidenced by its having to surrender a seat to the LDP due to its lack of candidates in the proportionate district in the Tokai regional block.
Voter turnout, at 53.68%, was the second lowest in the post-World War II period. In addition to the bad weather, it seems that a considerable number of voters couldn’t make up their minds in the wake of the virtual disintegration of the Democratic Party.
What will now happen in Japanese politics? The opposition thus divided, the Abe administration will continue to enjoy an advantage in terms of sheer numbers. However, the election results also indicated persistent criticism against the Abe administration. The Prime Minister must therefore pay utmost care to prevent a recurrence of scandals similar to the Moritomo and Kake scandals.
Prime Minister Abe is likely to advance the debate on Constitutional reform. While agreeing to a discussion, the Democratic Party had been less enthusiastic about an actual revision. Meanwhile, the Party of Hope and the Japan Innovation Party have taken a more positive stance, and this is expected to result in a more realistic discussion on the issue.
However, it is not clear whether this will lead to a revision of Article 9, as declared by Prime Minister Abe in May. That is because the CDPJ and the Communist Party are certain to vehemently oppose such a move, while the Komeito and the Party of Hope have taken a more cautious approach.
In the meantime, the Abe administration is likely to formulate concrete measures for realizing its campaign pledge of developing a social security system that addresses the needs of all generations, including free preschool education. Social security in Japan is biased towards the elderly, so placing more emphasis on the working generation would be a move in the right direction. Yet, much consideration is necessary on how to finance such a policy.
Prime Minister Abe intends to use part of the increased revenues from the scheduled hike in the consumption tax rate in 2019. Considering that the budget deficit was expected to grow even after raising the tax rate, the government will have to rely on debts to cover any new expenditures.
Revising the Constitution is certainly an important issue. But since the security-related bills were passed in 2015, there is now less need for a revision from the standpoint of national security, and it is questionable whether the issue is a matter of urgency.
Constitutional amendment would require considerable political capital. Investing the same amount of political capital would probably allow the government to reform the social security system, achieve fiscal soundness and implement various deregulatory measures. Why not invest political capital to ensure the sustainability of “social security for all generations,” including improving fiscal condition?
The Japanese people – including the younger generation – harbor concerns about the future of their economy and society. Prime Minister Abe should seek to resolve such concerns by using the political capital he has newly gained in the latest general elections.
Harukata Takenaka is Professor at Japan’s National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies. This article was originally published in the Shinano Mainichi Shimbun newspaper on October 24, 2017.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
衆院選の意味と今後の政治 政治資本、社会保障の持続に
竹中治堅 / 政策研究大学院大学教授
2017年 12月 8日
与党が追加公認を含めて衆院の３分の２を超える３１３議席を獲得し、大勝した。野党は敗北、特に左派勢力の議席はわずかとなった。
選挙結果の要因は二つある。一つは安倍政権のこれまで５年の実績が評価されたこと。もう一つは野党が自爆したも同然で態勢が整わず、分裂した状態で戦ったことだ。
安倍政権は日米関係の強化、日本と欧州連合（ＥＵ）の経済連携協定大枠合意などの実績を残した。デフレ状態の解消にこぎ着けたほか、電力自由化、コーポレートガバナンス（企業統治）改革、外国人訪問客増大などの成果も上げている。
野党について触れたい。比例区の得票数に注目すると立憲民主党と希望の党の得票数は自民党のそれを上回る。自民党への批判票が多かったのは、やはり森友学園や加計（かけ）学園問題に象徴されるように政権運営方法に根強い批判があることを示している。
しかし、多くの選挙区で立憲民主党、希望の党、共産党の間で票が割れ、与党を利することになった。
希望の党については小池代表の「排除」発言で失速したと指摘される。だが、発言がなくとも、政策が十分準備されたものでなかったことは明らかであり、落下傘候補や新人候補も多く、自民党を脅かすほどの議席が取れたのか疑問である。
希望の党の政策が明らかでないうちに、協議も十分行わず、合流を決断した民進党の判断は拙速であった。
一方、立憲民主党は善戦した。だが、比例東海ブロックの議席譲渡に象徴されるように準備不足は明らかだった。
投票率は５３・６８％と戦後２番目に低い記録となった。悪天候に加え、民進党の事実上の崩壊により判断に困る有権者が多かったと考えられる。
今後の政治はどう展開するのか。野党は分裂しており、数の上では安倍政権にとって有利な環境が続く。ただ選挙結果は、安倍政権に根強い批判があることを示している。従って安倍首相は政権運営に細心に配慮し、森友・加計学園のような問題の再発を防止せねばならない。
政策課題としては、安倍首相は憲法改正の議論を進めようとするだろう。民進党は議論は容認したものの、改正自体に消極的だった。希望の党や維新は改憲に前向きである。このため以前に比べ、実質的議論が進むと予想される。
ただ、安倍首相が５月に表明した９条改正が実現するかどうかは定かでない。立憲民主党や共産党からの強い反対が必至な上、公明党や希望の党も慎重姿勢を示しているからである。
また、安倍政権は公約として掲げた、幼児教育の無償化など「全世代型社会保障」を実現するための具体案の策定を進めるだろう。日本の社会保障は高齢者向けに偏重しており、現役世代も重視する政策の方向性は正しい。ただ、財源の検討は不十分である。
安倍首相は２０１９年に予定する消費増税の増収分の一部を「財源」とする考えである。だが、もともと増税後も財政赤字の拡大は続くと予想されていた。従って「財源」としてさらに借金を重ねて新たな支出を賄うことになる。
憲法改正は重要な課題であることはもちろんである。だが、１５年に安保関連法制が成立し、安全保障上の理由からの改正は必要性が薄れており、喫緊の課題なのか疑問である。
改憲には多くの政治資本を投下する必要がある。それだけの政治資本を費消すれば、社会保障改革、財政健全化、さらにはさまざまな規制緩和なども実現できると考えられる。財政健全化を含め「全世代型社会保障」の持続性確保のために政治資本を投下してはどうか。
若者を含めわれわれ国民は日本の経済・社会の将来に不安を抱えており、安倍首相にはこの解消にこそ今回の総選挙で新たに得た政治資本を投入することが求められる。
（筆者は政策研究大学院大学教授。本稿は２０１７年１０月２４日付き信濃毎日新聞に掲載された。）
選挙結果の要因は二つある。一つは安倍政権のこれまで５年の実績が評価されたこと。もう一つは野党が自爆したも同然で態勢が整わず、分裂した状態で戦ったことだ。
安倍政権は日米関係の強化、日本と欧州連合（ＥＵ）の経済連携協定大枠合意などの実績を残した。デフレ状態の解消にこぎ着けたほか、電力自由化、コーポレートガバナンス（企業統治）改革、外国人訪問客増大などの成果も上げている。
野党について触れたい。比例区の得票数に注目すると立憲民主党と希望の党の得票数は自民党のそれを上回る。自民党への批判票が多かったのは、やはり森友学園や加計（かけ）学園問題に象徴されるように政権運営方法に根強い批判があることを示している。
しかし、多くの選挙区で立憲民主党、希望の党、共産党の間で票が割れ、与党を利することになった。
希望の党については小池代表の「排除」発言で失速したと指摘される。だが、発言がなくとも、政策が十分準備されたものでなかったことは明らかであり、落下傘候補や新人候補も多く、自民党を脅かすほどの議席が取れたのか疑問である。
希望の党の政策が明らかでないうちに、協議も十分行わず、合流を決断した民進党の判断は拙速であった。
一方、立憲民主党は善戦した。だが、比例東海ブロックの議席譲渡に象徴されるように準備不足は明らかだった。
投票率は５３・６８％と戦後２番目に低い記録となった。悪天候に加え、民進党の事実上の崩壊により判断に困る有権者が多かったと考えられる。
今後の政治はどう展開するのか。野党は分裂しており、数の上では安倍政権にとって有利な環境が続く。ただ選挙結果は、安倍政権に根強い批判があることを示している。従って安倍首相は政権運営に細心に配慮し、森友・加計学園のような問題の再発を防止せねばならない。
政策課題としては、安倍首相は憲法改正の議論を進めようとするだろう。民進党は議論は容認したものの、改正自体に消極的だった。希望の党や維新は改憲に前向きである。このため以前に比べ、実質的議論が進むと予想される。
ただ、安倍首相が５月に表明した９条改正が実現するかどうかは定かでない。立憲民主党や共産党からの強い反対が必至な上、公明党や希望の党も慎重姿勢を示しているからである。
また、安倍政権は公約として掲げた、幼児教育の無償化など「全世代型社会保障」を実現するための具体案の策定を進めるだろう。日本の社会保障は高齢者向けに偏重しており、現役世代も重視する政策の方向性は正しい。ただ、財源の検討は不十分である。
安倍首相は２０１９年に予定する消費増税の増収分の一部を「財源」とする考えである。だが、もともと増税後も財政赤字の拡大は続くと予想されていた。従って「財源」としてさらに借金を重ねて新たな支出を賄うことになる。
憲法改正は重要な課題であることはもちろんである。だが、１５年に安保関連法制が成立し、安全保障上の理由からの改正は必要性が薄れており、喫緊の課題なのか疑問である。
改憲には多くの政治資本を投下する必要がある。それだけの政治資本を費消すれば、社会保障改革、財政健全化、さらにはさまざまな規制緩和なども実現できると考えられる。財政健全化を含め「全世代型社会保障」の持続性確保のために政治資本を投下してはどうか。
若者を含めわれわれ国民は日本の経済・社会の将来に不安を抱えており、安倍首相にはこの解消にこそ今回の総選挙で新たに得た政治資本を投入することが求められる。
（筆者は政策研究大学院大学教授。本稿は２０１７年１０月２４日付き信濃毎日新聞に掲載された。）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟