少數政府在國會的困境

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "少數政府在國會的困境"

筑巅车
7 years ago
Views:

2 /12

3 50.5% 2 2

4 /12 Mezey 1985; Heywood 2002,

5 1973 Fiorin 1980 Jacobson 1992 Schroedel Sko

6 /12 Schroedel Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt Roosevelt Wilson Schroedel 1994 Neustadt 1990; Peterson 1990; Schroedel 1994

7 Sinclair Gingrich 1995 Sinclair 1999, Gingrich 434 Gingrich Gingrich

8 / , ,

9 6 6 堃

10 / ; Sundguist 1988; Mayhew 1991a; 1991b; McCubbins 1991; Howell et al Sundquist 1988

11 Mayhew 1991a, 638 Sundguist b Mayhew

12 /12 Jacobson 1991 Fiorina 1996, chap. 6 Krehbiel 1996; 1998 filibuster Cox Kernell 1991 McCubbins 1991 Kelly

13 1993 Mayhew Mayhew Edwards 1997 Howell landmark legislation Binder 1999;

14 /12 Cooper 2001

15 1997; Binder 2001 Kelly 1993; Howell et al ; 1995; 2000; ; 2001

16 / ; 2001; 2002;

17 98.3% 33.3% 2002,

18 /12 Bachrach and Baratz 1962; %

19 b / /2-1976/ % /2-1981/1 a % /2-1984/ % /2-1987/ % /2-1990/ % /2-1993/ % /2-1996/ % /2-1999/ % /2-2002/ % /2-2003/ % 5.57 a b. ( 1975 ) % 22.9%

20 / ,

21 %

22 /

23 51.8% %

24 / % 31.1% 4.9% 50.5% 29.8% 3.7

25 2,3071, / /2-2000/ % /5-2002/ %

26 /12 Krehbiel 1996 Epstein 1980; 1998, 80-81

27 9 9

28 /12

29 10 10 Washington New York Times Post Congressional Quarterly Howell et al. 2000

30 / A %

31 11 B 62.4% 72.3% 26.7% 9.6% 22.4% 5.5% 11

32 /12 N % N % N % N % N %

33 61.5%

34 /12 N % N % N % N % N %

35 % 60.0%

36 / % % 164 N % % 146 N % % 212 N % % 160 N % % 173 N % 50.5%

37 % 2002

38 /

39 10.0% 18.3% 52.0% 48.0%

40 /12

41 38.7%

42 /12 A

44 / B

46 /12

48 /

49 Bachrach, Peter, and Morton S. Baratz Two Faces of Power. American Political Science Review 56: Bachrach, Peter, and Morton S Baratz Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework. American Political Science Review 57: Binder, Sarah A The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, American Political Science Review 93 (3): Binder, Sarah A Congress, The Executive, and the Production of Public Policy: United We Govern? In

50 /12 Congress Reconsidered, eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, DC: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. Cooper, Joseph The Twentieth-Century Congress. In Congress Reconsidered, eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, DC: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. Cox, Gary W., and Samuel Kernell Introduction: Governing a Divided Era. In The Politics of Divided Government, eds. Gary W. Cox and Samuel Kernell Boulder. CO: Westview Press. Edwards, George C., III Presidential Influence in the House: Presidential Prestige as a Source of Presidential Power. American Political Science Review 70 (1): Edwards, George C., III, Andrew Barrett, and Jeffrey Peake The Legislative Impact of Divided Government. American Journal of Political Science 41 (2): Epstein, Leon D Political Parties in Western Democracies. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Fiorina, Morris P The Decline of Collective Responsibility in American Politics. Daedalus 109: Fiorina, Morris P Divided Government. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

51 101 Heywood, Andrew Politics. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Foundation. Howell, William, Scott Adler, Charles Cameron, and Charles Riemann Divided Government and the Legislative Productivity of Congress, Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (2): Huntington, Samuel P Congressional Responses to the Twentieth Century. In The Congress and America s Future, ed. David Truman. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall. Jacobson, Gary C Explaining Divided Government: Why Can t the Republicans Win the House? PS: Political Science and Politics 24 (4): Jacobson, Gary C The Politics of Congressional Elections. NY: Harper Collins Publishers. Kelly, Sean Q Divided We Govern: A Reassessment. Polity 25 (1): Krehbiel, Keith Institutional and Partisan Sources of Gridlock: A Theory of Divided and Unified Government. Journal of Theoretical Politics 8 (1): Krehbiel, Keith Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mayhew, David R. 1991a. Divided Party Control: Does It Make a Difference? PS: Political Science and Politics 24 (4):

52 / Mayhew, David R. 1991b. Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, New Haven: Yale University Press. McCubbins, Mathew D Government on Lay-Away: Federal Spending and Deficits under Divided Party Control. In The Politics of Divided Government, eds. Gary W. Cox and Samuel Kernell. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Mezey, Michael The Function of Legislatures in the Third World. In Handbook of Legislative Research, eds. Gerhard Loewenberg, Samuel C. Patterson and Malcolm E. Jewell. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Neustadt, Richard E Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents. NY: The Free Press. Peterson, Mark Legislating Together. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Schroedel, Jean Reith Congress, the President, and Policy-Making: A Historical Analysis. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. Sinclair, Barbara Transformational Leader or Faithful Agent? Principal-Agent Theory and House Majority Party Leadership. Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (3): Skowronek, Stephen Presidential Leadership in Political

53 103 Time. In The Presidency and the Political System, ed. Michael Nelson. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press. Sundquist, James L Needed: A Political Theory for the New Era of Coalition Government in the United States. Political Science Quarterly 103 (4):

54 /12 The Influence of the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch in the Process of Lawmaking: A Comparison of the Unified and Divided Governments Shing-Yuan Sheng Department of Political Science National Chengchi University Abstract The purpose of this article is to examine the relative influence of the legislative branch and executive branch in the process of lawmaking, under different periods of time of the unified and divided government. This research focuses on the fourth term of the Legislative Yuan. The research period of time ranges from 1999 February to 2002 January, divided into two periods: the first begins from February 1999 to May 2000, in which the KMT dominates the executive and the legislative branches. The second period of time begins from May 2000 to January 2002, in which the DPP dominates the executive branch and the KMT dominates the legislative branch. The research focuses on all initiations in the fourth term of the Legislative Yuan. The research findings show: First, the executive branch plays an important role in the process of lawmaking. However, the influence of the executive branch is quite different in the unified and divided governments. The initiation of the executive branch can be passed much easier and faster in the unified government than in the divided government. This finding shows that if the party of the executive branch cannot get a majority of seats in the legislative branch, it is more difficult for it to lead in the policy-making process. Secondly, The KMT and DPP legislators play quite different roles in the legislative process. In the unified government, the DPP legislators are much more aggressive in the legislative process. However,

55 105 the DPP legislators are much more inactive in the legislative process since the DPP gets the executive power. On the contrary, the KMT legislators are much more aggressive in the legislative process in the divided government since the KMT loses the executive power. Keywords: legislative branch, executive branch, legislation initiation, divided government, unified government, party politics

J. D. 17 Daniel J. Elazar, American Federalism: A View From the States (New York: Happer & Row, Publishers, 1984), p

20 20 70 80 1 20 90 20 90 J. D. 17 Daniel J. Elazar, American Federalism: A View From the States (New York: Happer & Row, Publishers, 1984), p.41-42. 2 19 1985 80 Gerald D. Nash, State and Local Governments,