National Assembly Data Analysis: Democratic Party Maintains 100% Cohesion, People Power Party Sees Slight Decline

Quantitative Analysis of Lawmakers' Tendencies: Voting Cohesion Trends by Party Revealed

A quantitative analysis of parliamentary legislative activities has revealed noteworthy shifts in voting cohesion across political parties. While the Democratic Party of Korea and the Cho Kuk Innovation Party demonstrated strong cohesion, solidifying their political standing, the People Power Party and independent lawmakers showed minor fluctuations in their unity. This analysis is based on quantitative indicators derived from actual legislative proposals and voting records of National Assembly members, aiming to objectively illuminate their tendencies through publicly available data.

According to the data analysis, the Democratic Party of Korea consistently maintained a voting cohesion close to 100% over the five months from February to June 2026. Starting at 100.0% in February, it dipped slightly to 99.3% in March, but then recovered to 99.7% in April, 99.9% in May, and back to 100.0% in June, demonstrating high consistency. This suggests unified voting in line with party directives. The Cho Kuk Innovation Party also boasted strong cohesion, rising from 98.6% in February to 100.0% in May, but showed some variability by dropping to 97.9% in June. This indicates a potential for dissenting votes based on recent political developments or specific issues.

The People Power Party began at 100.0% in February but showed relatively lower cohesion, declining to 98.4% in March and 97.3% in April. Although it showed signs of recovery at 99.5% in May, it fell back to 98.4% in June, indicating the presence of differing opinions within the party during consensus-building and voting processes. Independent lawmakers maintained 100.0% cohesion from January to April but saw a drop to 97.5% in June, suggesting a tendency for votes to be cast based on individual judgment rather than a unified bloc. These figures can be interpreted as indicators of how consistently each party and independent lawmakers reflect their shared policy stances or ideological leanings in the voting process.

Political Implications of Economic and Social Tendency Coordinates

Each lawmaker's ideological coordinate is calculated as a weighted average of an LLM's (Large Language Model) judgment on legislative contents, ranging from -1 (far-left/progressive) to +1 (far-right/conservative) on economic and social scales. A '0' on this scale signifies the center. The relative positions are calibrated using the average values of the two major parties, the Democratic Party and the People Power Party, as the origin. Since the ideological coordinate values themselves are not intuitive for general readers, it is crucial to interpret and convey them in natural language, such as 'distinctly left-leaning,' 'close to the center,' or 'significantly to the left of the Democratic Party average.'

According to this analysis, the difference in economic tendencies among lawmakers tended to be more pronounced than the difference in social tendencies. This suggests that the key issues in current Korean society are concentrated on economic policies, particularly distribution versus growth, and deregulation versus market intervention. Lawmakers from the Democratic Party generally exhibited progressive tendencies in both economic and social spheres, with some positioned on the 'left-leaning' spectrum. Lawmakers from the People Power Party showed relatively conservative tendencies, but a considerable number were observed to be closer to the center in the economic field.

Notably, the tendencies within specific parties are not uniform. Within the Democratic Party, lawmakers leaning towards the center economically coexisted with those holding strong progressive views, and the same applied to social tendencies. Similarly, the People Power Party, while generally holding conservative economic stances, included lawmakers who adopted relatively progressive positions on certain social issues. This indicates that individual lawmakers may take stances different from party directives or vote based on personal convictions. Furthermore, independent lawmakers were broadly distributed across the ideological spectrum, forming individual political profiles.

These quantitative analyses, based on actual legislative activities like proposing and voting, help in understanding the substantive tendencies of lawmakers, which are difficult to grasp through public image or political rhetoric alone. However, like all analytical metrics, they have limitations; proposing frequency or voting records alone do not fully represent a lawmaker's political ideals or all activities. For instance, a lawmaker might exert influence through questions or debates even if not active in proposing legislation, and conversely, might propose many bills but not participate in actual votes.

Points Diverging from Conventional Wisdom: Cross-Pressures and Unexpected Figures

This analysis uncovered several intriguing points that diverge from conventional wisdom. The most prominent are the lawmakers acting under 'cross-pressures.' Some lawmakers exhibit moderate or slightly progressive economic tendencies but relatively conservative social tendencies. The opposite case—economically conservative yet socially progressive lawmakers—was also identified. Such individuals can serve to balance the extremes of the ideological spectrum in specific policy areas or build their own political niches while facing criticism from both sides.

Furthermore, among lawmakers perceived as 'non-mainstream' or 'centrist,' some were found to be significantly to the left or right of their party's average, particularly in economic policies. These individuals may represent minority voices within their parties or pursue independent policy lines, holding potential to influence future political landscapes. For example, a lawmaker belonging to a conservative party who is active in proposing legislation for worker protection or reducing income inequality could spark internal debate within that party's economic policy direction.

Conversely, a considerable number of lawmakers were identified as adopting relatively moderate stances compared to their party's overall tendency. These individuals can play a role in facilitating dialogue and compromise amidst complex and sharp political conflicts, potentially bridging divides between the ruling and opposition parties. Their existence also serves as evidence that a political party is not monolithic in its ideology but embraces a diverse spectrum of voices. Cases of unexpected figures challenging existing orders or creating new trends can only be concretely revealed through data analysis, offering significant clues to understanding the dynamism of the political scene.

Potential Conflicts of Interest and Impact on Markets/Industries

During the quantitative analysis, points where some lawmakers' voting behavior might conflict with their interests were also identified. These instances occurred when a lawmaker received substantial donations from companies related to industries overseen by their standing committee or held significant stock in those industries. This suggests the potential for legislative activities to be linked to personal financial interests. For example, if a lawmaker proposing or supporting deregulation for a specific industry receives donations from related companies, it raises questions about the fairness of policy-making processes.

However, it is important to clarify that these findings alone do not constitute proof of illegal activity. While conflict-of-interest prevention regulations exist under current law, many instances involve legal political donations or investments. Therefore, the key is to transparently present these 'possibilities' through publicly available data, thereby encouraging public scrutiny and critical examination. Transparent disclosure of lawmakers' assets and donation records is essential for resolving potential conflicts of interest and building trust.

The tendencies and activities of these lawmakers can directly impact specific markets and industries. For instance, if economic deregulation bills are passed by a standing committee with a majority of pro-business lawmakers, companies in those industries may gain opportunities for increased investment or business expansion. Conversely, if lawmakers who support strengthening labor rights or environmental regulations are numerous, related industries may need to prepare for increased labor costs or environmental burdens. The voting cohesion of lawmakers shows how strongly party policy directives can be implemented, serving as crucial reference material for market participants predicting future policy directions.

Analyzing the ideological tendencies and voting patterns of National Assembly members goes beyond merely understanding the political landscape; it offers significant insights into predicting the direction of future economic policies and changes in industrial ecosystems. Notably, the greater divergence in economic rather than social tendencies between parties suggests that future policy discussions will increasingly focus on economic values and distribution issues. Such data-driven analysis is expected to contribute to the public's deeper understanding of lawmakers' legislative activities and facilitate rational political decision-making.